How American Christians can stop being bullies and start winning converts

[JarlWolf]

South Vietnam?

Have you been in any "clean" conflicts?

I was an instructor to the NVA at one point for field engineering. At one point I was a captive to SVA forces for a period of 3 months, and it took me about a month to sneak past the frontlines of Hanoi. I'd rather not speak of it, I believe I spoke to you and others here once about it before, might take a bit of digging.

And BUncle, there is no such thing as a "clean" conflict. No, I have not been part of anything "clean" or nice. Afghanistan and Vietnam were the two conflicts I was involved in as military personnel.

[Buster's Uncle]

Some were dirtier fights than others - you were at Stalingrad, and no wonder you don't get along with God...

[JarlWolf]

Some were dirtier fights than others - you were at Stalingrad, and no wonder you don't get along with God...

As a child, I had no idea of god, I didn't understand it properly back then. Be thankful it wasn't really taught to me back then because if I was I'd probably be a lot more scornful of things, and intolerant of religion in its entirety. The only love that matters is the real physical world and the people in it that give love and care to you. An imaginary thing that was never there for me is not going to work. That might be offencive to some people here but its the "truth" for me. Even the most rejected outcasts need some sort of care and attention, and I'll quote a rather wise, RELIGIOUS person, Mother Teresa. "The worst disease isn't tuberculosis or cholera, but the feeling of being unwanted." And I guess some would argue this "god" offers that. Perhaps. But for me? In that environment, it wasn't a higher being that made me find love. It was the people I was enduring it with, and that's a fact that never changed throughout my life. Its why I am so passionate over this subject and the implications of it, I suppose. And its funny how even after all of it I still hold onto those values that formed so many years ago... you do change as you grow older, but you also grow more stubborn and resilient to change... an old dog can learn new tricks but he never forgets who his caretaker is or who he is.

[Yitzi]

Proof that the bible and Torah was edited by other groups? The fact different sects exist of different religions with different words is proof enough.

That proves that groups edited it after splitting from Judaism; it doesn't prove anything about the version I follow.

As for the whole disciples argument... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Testament_apocrypha

I'm not even challenging your claims about the Christian stuff.

The fact is religious texts differed even back then, were destroyed, omitted and distorted. If you compare a Catholic and a Protestant bible, there is distinct differences.

And if you compare a Ashkenazic and Sephardic Torah, the biggest difference is the spelling of one word (it has the same pronunciation and meaning either way.)

As for my morality to be imposed on others? I never stated my morality needs to be opposed on others. The only time I'd intervene with another society in my eyes is if they are committing genocide or harmful practices that endangers the stability of the region which in turn causes danger for me and other neighbours, is a direct threat to me, etc.

Okay...I disagree and believe that some things can be imposed on others even without personal threat, but at least your position is self-consistent.

And even if I did want to: I am going off of fairly universally accepted moralities established by the UN humanitarian code and Geneva convention, as well as some regarding to my ideals. The former two are INTERNATIONAL LAW agreed upon by hundreds of nations. If that is not jurisdiction enough done by consensus of nations where many of these religions make home, then one is an extremist who is rogue.

Actually, it proves that one is rogue (by flouting the consensus of nations), but not necessarily an extremist (though they're probably that too.)

But why should being rogue, or even extremist, matter?

As for myself, how many religious groups I've fought against, or have been alive to witness? I've known of militant christian extremists in Uganda and Congo; the Lords Resistance Army. I've known of Christian and Muslim deathsquads both of Bosnian civil war, where people killed each other in massive droves and swarms, the Croatian and Bosnian, and Serbian led genocides of each other using religion and ethnicity as their reasons.

Afghani Mujahideen who I have fought against personally, who persistently wiped out other rival Islamic sects and constantly gunned down Christian and Jewish minorities and did other things that frankly hurts me to talk about. It was that bad.

I've dealt with Christian missionaries while under the status of a POW in a South Vietnamese camp, who used to order us to be beaten and slapped if they deemed us out of order/sinning, and I witnessed them many times sexually harassing female prisoners and I wouldn't put it past those specific priests having done worse then that to some of the prisoners.

I've known men who fought against Israeli forces, and know full well that HAMAS and other fanatical Islamic groups are killing Israeli citizens as much as Israeli soldiers are butchering/butchered Palestinian civilians and people systematically at times.

I'd like a source for that claim about "systematic butchering".

And this is in the MODERN world. As in, the last 40 years... some of this stuff is still ongoing, may I mention ISIS in Syria? May I mention the LRA is still active and at large? How about all those Congolese Christian pogromists? Tribal religions in Africa, like in Sierra Leone at one point or Liberia who cannibalized people, wiped out villages and towns and butchered several thousands?

And if were going back to early 20th century, what about all the Orthodox Christians who killed Jews for being sinners and betrayers to Christ? Who killed Communists for being heathens? What of the residential schools and other religious institutions run by Christian churches who converted through brainwashing and torture or even killed young children in many European colonies? (and this was going on in nations such as Australia and Canada up until the late 90's, though the worst of it was prior 1960.)

Or how about the conflict between Protestant Christian and Catholics in Northern Ireland? Which is still tense and venturing into sections where you don't belong results in beatens so bad you bleed to death?
This is just in the last 40 year and last century. The amount of religious wars fought over the last thousands of years, hundreds even, is staggering. The Spanish Inquisition, the Noche Triste of the Aztecs, the Aztecs themselves on a monthly basis, the countless jihads and crusades against other religions and "heretics," the Hussite wars, the numerous Jewish revolts where they tried to kill all Roman sympathizers and their communities. The Martin Lutheran reformation itself brought years of warfare, especially in England where a theocracy under Oliver Cromwell and other puritans like himself reigned and stifled culture for years, imprisoning and torturing those who disagreed with the faith?

Too many to count, most wars in history have been caused or propagated/continued under the premise of religion.

You've got something like a dozen sub-sects there.  Out of hundreds if not thousands, that's not such a large number.

As for Jews painting other groups outside their own as bad, what of the city of Jericho? A rather small walled town in reality that simply did not have the means to support nor want  to support such a large group of nomads and play host to them, and tried to defend itself and its families? Marching around the "sinners" walls 3 days and 3 nights, beating drums to terrify them and then rushing in to slaughter them all? Are they sinners because they fought against the chosen people?

No, they were sinners because they engaged in the perversions of Canaan, which, in additions to things that I can't explain why God considers them so bad, included child sacrifice.

[JarlWolf]

I do not know the version of the Torah you follow- and the fact is it was edited from its original from. Otherwise we'd be stuck on one single account and nothing new would be added over the centuries. If anything I see the bible and torah less as a spiritual document and more of a compilation of poetic historical accounts from the eyes of Hebrews: Which has lots of value just with that, let alone whatever spiritual and moral attachments someone may have to it.

As for things being imposed on other people without personal threat, it entirely depends whats being imposed in my eyes, and the reasoning for it.

As for being rogue or extremist, and why its bad in this context, if you're generally against the established human code of ethics that UN and Geneva conventions have set you are generally going against them and causing massive harm. It may not always mean that, but given its very specific in how to defy these conventions and humanitarian laws it usually ends up in someone seriously harming another.

And the thing is about those sub sects Yitzi, is that they still had fairly large powerbases and followers, and were tremendous in their impact in their respective conflicts and regions. And major world religions like the Catholic Church and others have done cruel, horrible things as well in the past- like inquisitions and witch hunts. Even though the LRA is a twisted subsect of Christianity not representing the entire religion, or HAMAS or ISIS for Islam, the fact is they kill large amounts of people and traumatize even more numbers of  people, and they are a significant threat and source of genocide and cruelty. It does not matter how many sects there are- its the fact that there is so many groups that base their conflicts ON religion that I make my point. There is numerous groups, some of them very large organizations or even original organizations that do these or done these horrible things.

The thing about Jericho is that, while the perversions of their worship can be debated to be outright horrible, such as child sacrifice: The Israelites spared no one in that city. Children included, the digsites showed infants and small children had endured horrible fractures and other injuries most likely being caused by being thrown off the walls. I'm not trying to demonize the Israelites as much as I am trying make a point that people are biased and will bend the perspective of things to make it seem like they are in the right. And absolutely everyone does this- the extremists of religious organizations are just infamous for it and use their gods and divinity as an excuse to commit horrible acts.

Of course, looking on the flip side of the coin the Israelites did not get a warm welcome to the place either when you look on it from a regional level. But that's why its important to look at history from multiple sides, so we can understand what actually happened and truly know who we are.

[Buster's Uncle]

[ninja'd]

I think it's important to note that organized religion has important effects far beyond fanatasism and violence - we owe an unspeakable debt in art, science, and indeed, social unity to organized religion.  The Bible/Q'aran is an essential foundational document opf western culture, after all - as history and literature, if nothing else.

I have a lot of sympathy for church people - whether it's a church they go to or not.  Most religions teach values, good ones, notwithstanding the human capacity to pervert anything.  I do wish them there church people would stop voting, 'cause they tend to have stupid politics -and I say that as an essentially conservative person (who thinks the political conservatives these days have more in common with Rand than Christ)- but I'd rather be on the road with church people.  They're a little less likely to be speeding.  I'd rather live next to church people.  They're just that little bit more likely to be good citizens and considerate of friends and strangers alike.  As one of those articles I posted recently so fondly pointed out, ebola is in the news largely because some missionaries loved their fellow man enough to risk living in west Africa - they didn't know about the ebola, but they DID know they were going to west Africa, a diseased, poor, cesspool where people were hacking off limbs with machetes en mass not too many years ago (and not for religious reasons, AFAIK).

Again, the fault lays not in God, but in man - show me any given group of violent religious fantics, and I assert that a non-trival percentage would be evil fanatics about SOMEthing, religion or not.

[Yitzi]

I do not know the version of the Torah you follow

The Jewish one, of course.

and the fact is it was edited from its original from. Otherwise we'd be stuck on one single account and nothing new would be added over the centuries.

And I believe that indeed nothing new was added to the Pentateuch over the centuries.  You have evidence otherwise?

As for things being imposed on other people without personal threat, it entirely depends whats being imposed in my eyes, and the reasoning for it.

Okay...in what cases would you consider it okay to impose something without personal threat.

And in those cases, do you believe the thing being imposed to be a matter of opinion?  Or are those things actual moral facts?

As for being rogue or extremist, and why its bad in this context, if you're generally against the established human code of ethics that UN and Geneva conventions have set you are generally going against them and causing massive harm.

Generally, but not universally.

It may not always mean that, but given its very specific in how to defy these conventions and humanitarian laws it usually ends up in someone seriously harming another.

Usually.  But in those cases, you can argue directly from said harm, without invoking international law at all.  Well, if you consider the wrongness of said harm to be a moral fact and not mere opinion...

And the thing is about those sub sects Yitzi, is that they still had fairly large powerbases and followers, and were tremendous in their impact in their respective conflicts and regions.

The same is true of the subsects that don't behave in that manner.  Wouldn't it be more sense to distinguish between the two types?

The thing about Jericho is that, while the perversions of their worship can be debated to be outright horrible, such as child sacrifice: The Israelites spared no one in that city. Children included, the digsites showed infants and small children had endured horrible fractures and other injuries most likely being caused by being thrown off the walls. I'm not trying to demonize the Israelites as much as I am trying make a point that people are biased and will bend the perspective of things to make it seem like they are in the right. And absolutely everyone does this- the religious are just infamous for it.

Unfortunately, if they hadn't done that, then it would likely have allowed Canaanite cultural practices (including child sacrifice) to gain even more influence among the Israelites than they actually did...

[JarlWolf]

(ninja'd)

A fair point, BUncle. My problem is is just how much of it there is, and while there is morals and societal upbringing to make a hospitable person out of religion, just the opposite can happen as well.

I could say the same where I'd rather live besides communists then capitalists, as we'd share our goods and help each other out with the workload much more amicably then someone out for their own gain.

I think one of my biggest issues with religious extremists is that, unlike ideological ones they do not apologize or try to make repairs to the damage they caused. Radical Communist idealists who went far lengths and measures that caused great harm more then good faced their consequences and the majority of Communist and Socialist adhering people all agree that what they did was wrong and we must remember why, and not to repeat the same mistakes. Just the same even as Capitalists who looked back on the industrial revolution, making orphans work in coal factories and the like and adopting progressive politics to try and appease the masses, and keep the socialists at bay. Even fascists to a degree have made reparations (though there is still many toxic individuals with that lot.)

I have a lot of reasons why I can't trust religious organizations and to some extent, religious people in general. I do not hate religious people, but I have a great fear and disappointment associated with it. When you grow up and you have memories of people praying to a god that never answered them as their friends were dying or they themselve were dying, snuffed out or slowly burning out without any mercy or care given to them, you can't believe in something like a god. Not after that, I don't want to believe in a god that is that ignorant of suffering.


Yitzi- when I meant added I meant as in the whole Old testament would be nothing more then Genesis/Abraham. Its a built up compilation of historical accounts, added on throughout the ancient centuries is what I meant- so technically, it has changed.

As for imposing something that isn't a personal threat? Parenting your child to make them not harm themselves, or to impose education on them so they can be self sufficient. And at most, impose your ideals so that maybe they might see your perspective, or take it into account and develop their own. Of course a religion could be part of that; I just don't want to see it forced with no choice when it comes to ideals and religion, I didn't force my daughters to be communist. I just gave them a lot of encouragement in that field, and let them explore other stuff for themselves.

As for harm, its not a moral fact if you are harming someone its simply a fact. If  you're a prisoner and I gouge your eye out with a hot poker, I am factually harming you and torturing you. Which is against the Geneva conventions. Morals is what an opinion is, and in my morality/opinion, that is a horrible thing to do.

Generally=Universally in this instance. As for the subsects, I stated clearly that HAMAS and the LRA do not represent the entirety or even majority of their religions- but the fact is they are a significant part of it and they have a significant impact either way.


As for the Israelites killing them all: They could have just taken the children and brought them up as their own. Children are easy to mold and form, and it would've been better then brutally murdering them and snuffing out their chance at life. And that's my opinion speaking there.

[Buster's Uncle]

Well - the Middle Eastern terrorist types TALK about Islam -and I have no reason to find them insincere- but what they're really about, far more than anything else, is Arab nationalism.  I expect that was the case in Afghanistan, too, bar the Arab part.  Allah may make for a convenient and potent rallying cry, but the bottom line is that Afghans are mean and tough and bad people to cross - and they already were before the Jihad swept through 1,400 years or so ago.

[Yitzi]

I think one of my biggest issues with religious extremists is that, unlike ideological ones they do not apologize or try to make repairs to the damage they caused. Radical Communist idealists who went far lengths and measures that caused great harm more then good faced their consequences and the majority of Communist and Socialist adhering people all agree that what they did was wrong and we must remember why, and not to repeat the same mistakes. Just the same even as Capitalists who looked back on the industrial revolution, making orphans work in coal factories and the like and adopting progressive politics to try and appease the masses, and keep the socialists at bay. Even fascists to a degree have made reparations (though there is still many toxic individuals with that lot.)

Any particular cases of repairs that you feel that should be made and aren't?  (IIRC, there are occasional apologies.)

Yitzi- when I meant added I meant as in the whole Old testament would be nothing more then Genesis/Abraham. Its a built up compilation of historical accounts, added on throughout the ancient centuries is what I meant- so technically, it has changed.

Actually, in Abraham's time it probably wouldn't even be that; most likely, the entire text (excluding quotations, of course) wasn't in that form until Moses' time.  However, I believe that it didn't change significantly after that.

As for imposing something that isn't a personal threat? Parenting your child to make them not harm themselves, or to impose education on them so they can be self sufficient. And at most, impose your ideals so that maybe they might see your perspective, or take it into account and develop their own.

Okay, so personal threats and one's own child, and that's it when it comes to imposing on others?

Generally=Universally in this instance.

I don't think so; I think there can be times when international law is violated and the harm done is, if not nonexistent, at least less than the harm prevented.

As for the subsects, I stated clearly that HAMAS and the LRA do not represent the entirety or even majority of their religions- but the fact is they are a significant part of it and they have a significant impact either way.

Granted.  However, is that a reason to distrust even the other subsects of the same religions?

As for the Israelites killing them all: They could have just taken the children and brought them up as their own. Children are easy to mold and form, and it would've been better then brutally murdering them and snuffing out their chance at life. And that's my opinion speaking there.

And they were allowed to bring up the children as their own, would they have then still killed the adults (including the women) instead of taking them as slaves and being influenced by them?

[JarlWolf]

Apologies and reparations I'd like to see?
I'd like to see Israel and Palestine consolidate their differences, apologize for the ceaseless bloodshed and just share the holy city of Jerusalem and act diplomatically, and prove that their religions isn't just an excuse to grab land and hold political dominance, and to put behind their bloody past and reconcile.

I'd like to see all the Afghan warlords hanged for their crimes against humanity, and proper, stable leaders not merely interested in wiping the next door neighbor out take prominence and have a strong, stable government.

I'd like the Catholic church to apologize for everything it has done. Period. Everything, and pay money to found secular schools where they had brainwashing residential ones.

I'd like the priests who were responsible for all the beatings and torture I and others endured during the Vietnam war to be trialed for war crimes and shot- but this probably already happened after the NVA took over. Serves them right for all of the evil they did...

I'd like to see the Orthodox church to acknowledge the fact it did genocide and pogroms during the civil war.

I'd like to see Yugoslavia reborn again, even if not socialist, and to ensure its government and military is completely secular and to make memorials to all of the victims of the Bosnian civil war.

And most of all, I'd like every single faith's god, gods or goddesses to apologize on behalf of all of the forgotten and ignored prayers of people who died horribly faithfully worshipping them, just to rot into the ground and find out the horrible truth that they don't exist, or even worse, are uncaring and cold.

There is honestly too many things to list. But that's just some starters that are never going to happen.

There is other examples then just your own child where you can impose things on other people- keeping them from harm, education, etc. Its the reasoning, how you impose it and so forth. If you are forcing it, then you there should be a very solid reason: Forcing communism, in my eyes is less so then converting people to an ideal and more so about preserving humanity through an economic system of which I believe is the most beneficial system we can thus think so far. Do I expect everyone to become full hearted with the ideal overnight? No. There is lot of subject and examples in this case, and of course you'd disagree with me on that front as much as I'd disagree with you that people need religious faith and in particular, Jewish faith.

As for the subsects, again I don't hate subsects just because they are subsects- I am only stating that the violent, extremist subsects are significant in how they impact things, which you cannot deny. I have never once stated I hated a religious subsect just because its a subsect or because there is subsects that make them look bad. No, I hate religious extremists for reasons already stated.

BUncle, as for Arabs and Afghans tying faith to ethnicity/nationalism- that's part of why lots of these Muslim extremists are so violent, yes. But the other part is due to the fact that Islam was founded on conquest to a marginal extent, and the other is the fact these people are using faith as a means to power as they are a political organization: That just happens to meet its political aims through fear, terror and bloodshed.

The thing is there is more then just Muslims doing it even till this day, as already mentioned. And not all of their motives is ethnic nationalist tendency, some of them are purely religious.

As for cases where international law can be violated to serve a greater good- this isn't the case with most religious extremists, and to be frank such cases are rare to begin with.

As for the women, that whole subject is ugly- but yes. They are both adults, and if the Israelites intended to eradicate their culture, they have to get rid of the adults, period. They don't need to kill the children. I believe in equality and women are just as capable as men when it comes to social settings and intelligence; so they'd be as much an influence as men would be and its no lesser of a crime to kill a man than it is to kill a woman in my eyes.

Ugly ugly business but that's the ancient world for you and the motives of ancient religions.

Overall, as stated I do NOT hate people who are religious. I just hate religious political groups and I highly distrust religion as a concept.

[Green1]

Do not worry Jarl, there is nothing wrong with not believing in fairy tails.

Maybe I should just leave this here for our religious friends:'

[Green1]

I personally think the two ladies should get together for tea. They seem to have a lot in common.

[Yitzi]

Apologies and reparations I'd like to see?
I'd like to see Israel and Palestine consolidate their differences, apologize for the ceaseless bloodshed and just share the holy city of Jerusalem and act diplomatically, and prove that their religions isn't just an excuse to grab land and hold political dominance, and to put behind their bloody past and reconcile.

Yeah, that would be nice.  Of course, what's preventing it is more nationalism than religion.

I'd like to see all the Afghan warlords hanged for their crimes against humanity, and proper, stable leaders not merely interested in wiping the next door neighbor out take prominence and have a strong, stable government.

I'd like the Catholic church to apologize for everything it has done. Period. Everything, and pay money to found secular schools where they had brainwashing residential ones.

I'd like the priests who were responsible for all the beatings and torture I and others endured during the Vietnam war to be trialed for war crimes and shot- but this probably already happened after the NVA took over. Serves them right for all of the evil they did...

I'd like to see the Orthodox church to acknowledge the fact it did genocide and pogroms during the civil war.

I'd like to see Yugoslavia reborn again, even if not socialist, and to ensure its government and military is completely secular and to make memorials to all of the victims of the Bosnian civil war.

Some of those (e.g. Afghanistan) really don't have much to do with religion (there's some, but I think most of it would happen anyway).  Some (e.g. a secular government) have nothing to do with apologies and reparations.  But some (such as the Orthodox Church apologizing for genocide and pogroms, assuming the charge is true (which I can entirely believe)) are good examples...and who knows, maybe they'll happen in a few centuries.

And most of all, I'd like every single faith's god, gods or goddesses to apologize on behalf of all of the forgotten and ignored prayers of people who died horribly faithfully worshipping them, just to rot into the ground and find out the horrible truth that they don't exist, or even worse, are uncaring and cold.

Well, the ones that don't actually exist can't apologize for obvious reasons.  Those that are not uncaring, but merely have larger concerns that preclude showing that care in a particular way may have nothing to apologize for.  That leaves the ones that exist but are uncaring and cold, and I believe there aren't any of those.

There is other examples then just your own child where you can impose things on other people- keeping them from harm, education, etc. Its the reasoning, how you impose it and so forth. If you are forcing it, then you there should be a very solid reason: Forcing communism, in my eyes is less so then converting people to an ideal and more so about preserving humanity through an economic system of which I believe is the most beneficial system we can thus think so far. Do I expect everyone to become full hearted with the ideal overnight? No. There is lot of subject and examples in this case, and of course you'd disagree with me on that front as much as I'd disagree with you that people need religious faith and in particular, Jewish faith.

So now we're getting somewhere...you apparently understand that some people think about forcing their religion in the same manner that you think about forcing communism.

So in that case, I take it that your objections are:
A: That you don't think they are right about the importance of their religion, and
B: That you don't think their methods give the best net benefit even for a worthwhile cause (benefit of doing it quickly minus cost of doing it violently).

Is that an accurate assessment?

As for the subsects, again I don't hate subsects just because they are subsects- I am only stating that the violent, extremist subsects are significant in how they impact things, which you cannot deny. I have never once stated I hated a religious subsect just because its a subsect or because there is subsects that make them look bad. No, I hate religious extremists for reasons already stated.

So you don't hate religious extremists that don't fit those reasons (e.g. quakers)?

As for cases where international law can be violated to serve a greater good- this isn't the case with most religious extremists, and to be frank such cases are rare to begin with.

True, but it's important to realize that they can exist, i.e. international law is an often-useful indicator of what should be but has no moral power of its own.

As for the women, that whole subject is ugly- but yes. They are both adults, and if the Israelites intended to eradicate their culture, they have to get rid of the adults, period. They don't need to kill the children.

Unfortunately, I don't think "kill the adults, adopt the children" was culturally an option at that time.

[Rusty Edge]

There is a restriction that cohanim (members of the priestly caste) are not permitted to marry converts or people with no non-convert ancestry, but that's more a restriction on cohanim (who have other restrictions also) than on converts.

Well, while we're at it, you can set me straight on this point.
Cohanim- Are these people descendants of Levites on the paternal side, or are they descendants of Judah or Benjamin who have assumed that role?

The family surnames of Cohen and Cohn would have originated with this group?

I was told the people working in Kosher poultry plants, dairies and slaughterhouses saying the blessings/prayers and condemning the food when anyone swore or spit, etc.  were Rabbis, but it now occurs to me that they could have been Cohanim ...or should have been.