by kid-A 29 Replies latest jw friends
I'll conclude by asking you when you intend leaving the JW-style black and white thinking behind...
LT, I figured you of all people would understand to whom this thread was directed, obviously it wasnt towards you and you know that....now come here and give me a hug you sexy scotsman!! LOL
I wouldn't mind the conquest of the moslem world for the sole purpose of meaningfully preaching the gospel among them because as it is now any one leaving Islam will be beheaded.
Its exactly attitudes like this which have caused the majority of wars and conflicts in the world. "WE KNOW BETTER, LET US GO TEACH THEM HOW TO BE CIVILISED". The audacity!!!!! The cheek!!!!!... What one does by carrying this out, is cancel out ones own "civilisation" by commiting such a crime, so inciting them to yet more violence, further "proving" one's claims of moral superiority... Was the thinking of audacious colonialists any different?
Granted colonialism did bring about some positive results, (literacy to many african tribes, technological advancements etc...) but was it moral? Did the "benefits" outweight the great number of negative things that happened (slavery, massacres, wars, post-colonial divided Africa)?
The Christian religion doesn't preach hate but love so if some talk of hate that's their wrong interpretation.
That's exactly what all my Muslim friends say about Islam. In fact, they could be right, because I don't know of any violent Muslims myself. In the area where I go to university, the majority of the population is Muslim, and they are not violent, and in the last 4 years, a couple muslim friends have attempted to convert me by peacefully "reasoning" with me, and even backed off when i've made it clear that i don't believe in their religion. I even know a handful of whites who have converted to Islam. There are large Muslim communities throughout the UK, and they are not all hateful, in fact many mixed white-asian areas in the north of the country, have whites carry out unprovoked attacks on asian muslims. In my opinion, all religion and all ideologies, when they are taken too far will bring about breakdowns in civilisation.
I'm sure that to you, the Christian Inquisitions, the Crusades and the like, as well as the Watchtower cult are not indications of Christianity's failure as a religion, but merely the individuals who do not follow the religions percepts. Why should you treat Islam or any other ideology any differently?
You are right they don't practice it, and right now nobody knows if they ever will, on the other hand Christianity has marked deeply the western world and finally produced a better more civilised society than Islam, though far from perfect.
Christianity was not the main reason for our civilised attitude, it did not produce "civilisation", in fact Christianity brought about many negative things, (such as the Dark-Ages, and Crusades) as well as good things (heightened sensitivity to morals). You have to be balanced. Pagans could claim that their religion was the source of the "civilisation" of Greeks and Romans. What DID bring about our "civilisation" was individuals, people who could think for themselves, people who could think out of the box, Christian and non-Christian. Newton believed in Christianity, Da Vinci fought clandestinly against the Church, Galileo was violently persectuted by the Church for his brilliant discoveries. All three had a different relationship to Christianity, but all three were brilliant minds who changed our view of the world.
(You notice i often use the word "civilisation" in inverted commas. I believe that countries who are called "civilised" can often be a source of the worst forms of uncivilised behavior.)
You cannot mark Islam as a worse religion than Christianity. While "Islamic" nations were perfecting mathematics, medecine, engineering, paper, printing, algorithms (al-Khwarizmi) chemistry (a word, derived from alchemy, which itself was from Arabic al-Kimiya) algegra (from Arabic al-Jabr) and other sciences, Christendom was in the Dark Ages warring among themselves. The very numbers that we use (1234567890) are Arabic, the clumsy Roman system (I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X) being abanndonned.
All kinds of nations have brought about contributions to the "civilision" of modern Western society, not just Christian whites. If it were up to one race or religion to bring about civilisation, we would still be far far behind in our present-day accomplishments.
True, western civilisation (nominaly "Christian" countries) have brought about microbiology, modern medicine and the majority of modern inventions that make our lives easier, and they have equally heightened our moral sensitivity, but what could have been done if the European nations hadn't gone out, invaded other territories, and taken their ideas back to Europe to combine them, improve them and propagate them??
It is obviously not a black and white world, BUT, the peaceful Christianity of today is a result of civilisation and NOT the other way around. In my humble opinion, Christianity, if left on its own, and not under the "civilising" influence of the West, would be no different from the other religions. All claim to be peaceful, all have fanatic minorities... the fanaticism just manifests itself differently in different countries, in different levels of "civilisation". In conclusion, one has to be extremely balanced in one's judgements and not blame just one group for all the woes in the world, while putting the other on an untouchable pedestal just because you happen to believe in its precepts. *One must always question one's self and ones own motives. *One must always analyse the reasons and causes for other people's actions and never see black-and-white, right-and-wrong. *One must always criticise one's self before criticising others.
Dori.
I think you and your friends are making the mistake of confusing Christianity with institutional Christianity. Nowhere in the the Bible will you find Jesus telling his followers to go out and torture or kill those they disagree with. However, institutional religions almost always do that to others! Buddhists follow a man who taught values much like those Jesus taught, but look at the history in lands where Buddhism became the state religion.
After Ieyasu Tokugawa became the Shogun of Japan, he tossed the Catholic missionaries out of Japan and massacred Christians by the thousand. In just one episode Christians were tossed over a cliff by the hundreds to their deaths in the boiling water of a hotspring! And that is just one example among many. Are you going to infer from that that Buddhism is evil? Isn't that pretty much what is going on here with Chritianity?
The problem is with institutional religions. They tend to turn their backs on the teachings of their founders in the name of control and power. The pictures from the Catholic inquisition demonstrate that. But then, most Catholics I've known tell me that the traditions of the Church are more important than scripture, at least they are honest about it. And that's the point! Institutional religions like the Catholics, the Witnesses, certain Evangelicals, Buddhists in some lands, all institutionalised groups put the institutional need for power and control ahead of the founders they pay lip-service to. That is the whole problem in a nutshell!
Forscher
Dori:
You seem to miss the point that you can't divorce religion from civilization. Civilization is a mixture of all the componets that make it what it is, including history and belief.
Removing Christianity wouldn't reduce war, for example, but rather would demonstrate another intolerant episode in history.
As ever, to use broad brushstrokes is detrimental. The finer points of reality show that this planet is teeming with diversity.
Kida:
No harm no foul
Ironically your intended victims are nowhere to be seen...
Forscher and LittleToe, is this not the point that i've made? I don't think we disagree at all... I was just pointing out the negative and positive aspects of both religions. In todays terrorist-filled world, many often forget that Islam was once regarded a "civilising" force. Therefore, contrary to greendawn's claim that "Christianity has marked deeply the western world and finally produced a better more civilised society than Islam" it must be pointed out that Christianity did not bring about civilisation, Christianity was merely one rung on the ladder of human beings trying to find the best way... Islam was another rung... and both of them were often not the best way.
Religion and civilisation cannot be divorced, yet they are distinct parts of the whole. Religion does not equal civilisation, but they add and subtract from one another. When religion is taken too far, whether on a macro or micro level, it will cause pain and distress. When it remains a personal thing, it remains harmless. In the case of the distinction of "real Christianity" from "institutional Christianity", i stick with my claim:
myself: In my opinion, all religion and all ideologies, when they are taken too far will bring about breakdowns in civilisation.
The "real Christianity" would be a personal, non-intrusive version, whereas the "institutionalised Christianity" would be the version that is imposed on others and that is tied up with ritual and dogmatic, unwavering doctrine... To me, even the notion of a "family religion" is at its core, the start of institutionalisation.
If i was to come up with a wonderful new religion to eliminate war in the world, then to go about forcing this new ideology on the world, i would in fact not be the cure, but the cause of an even bigger problem...
LittleToe: Removing Christianity wouldn't reduce war, for example, but rather would demonstrate another intolerant episode in history.
This is exactly what i have been saying. Note 3 of my comments in this regard...
myself: "WE KNOW BETTER, LET US GO TEACH THEM HOW TO BE CIVILISED". The audacity!!!!! The cheek!!!!!... What one does by carrying this out, is cancel out ones own "civilisation" by commiting such a crime, so inciting them to yet more violence, further "proving" one's claims of moral superiority.
myself: What DID bring about our "civilisation" was individuals, people who could think for themselves, people who could think out of the box, Christian and non-Christian.
myself: one has to be extremely balanced in one's judgements and not blame just one group for all the woes in the world, while putting the other on an untouchable pedestal just because you happen to believe in its precepts.
In the same way as greendawn going to the Muslim world and conquering them would demonstrate his lack of "civilisation", removing Christianity would also produce cancel out my own claim to being a civilised person. All I'm saying, is that both good and bad have come out of all religions, and thats its morally wrong to try and suppress the Muslim world. Anyone who thinks inside-the-box, inside pre-determined parameters, is in danger of becoming a bigot and a hinderance to civilisation.
I stick with my original claim that "Christianity was not the main reason for our "civilised" attitude". An advancement toward free thinking and breaking the status quo was. I also stick with my claim that the "civilised Christianity" of today, is a direct result of the civilising effects of this thinking outside-the-box.
Forscher: Institutional religions like the Catholics, the Witnesses, certain Evangelicals, Buddhists in some lands, all institutionalised groups put the institutional need for power and control ahead of the founders they pay lip-service to. That is the whole problem in a nutshell!
Indeed. This is why greendawn's theoretical Christian conquest of the "immoral" Islamic world, yet dogged claim that Christianity is a religion that preaches love and prodused a more civilised world, is so imbalanced...... If he hates "insititutional Islam", what about "institutional Christianity"? If he thinks "real Christianity" is a better solution, what about "real Islam"?...... What I want to know is, what makes his ideals soooo good that he wouldn't mind conquering not just one nation, but a whole collection of nations to convert them?
oooops how did that happen.
Meanwhile, I just want you all to know that God loves the world - He created it. What God hates is sin not "you" as the picture shows. That statement is true. God really loves us. He loves the siner as a person but He hates the sin. Just like a father who would correct his child so does God.
BlessedStar.
That statement is true
Sorry I meant That statement is untrue!
Blessedstar
I don't think the religion itself is the main problem but the involvement with politics . The way I read the bible is that christians were hated and murdered by the pagans and jews but that was the accepted outcome . The call to force beliefs on others has nothing to do with the bible , there is no reason to take a human life in the bible or to cause injury . It just turns my stomach to watch people try to justify their evil ways using a christian premise when there isn't one .
