The 10 main Issues with Religion

[Helz]

This will hopefully hammer out some of my largest issues with religion and encourage some discussion. I hope people can stay civil and explore some of the concepts here. I will say I personally believe there is more after death and some form of God exists. I would even argue people who do not think God exists or think there is anything after this life should practice aspects of religion because they are healthy; but I also acknowledge its just a belief and I do not 'know;' which is my first issue:

1- People reframe their belief as a certainty citing faith.
I feel like that is ignorant and absurd. It also justifies the worst parts of religions making mass murder or genocide ethical by establishing an unquestionable baseline from which others can be judged by your beliefs. It also justifies the thing most people take issues with which is 'forcing your beliefs on others.' Just a whole lot of bad there when simply saying "Yeah, I don't know but I believe this" would go a long way to make religions less polarizing and toxic.

2- Religions work to trap people within their belief structure.
I have studied every major religion and many small ones but one thing all the formal major religions have in common is they work to isolate people. I have never in my life encountered a religious structure that encourages its members to go out and experience other religions. Instead they work to undermine faith in other religions. Christian preachers will mock a Muslim belief joking about virgins on a couch and a Muslim Imam will push that its the 'unforgivable sin' to believe God had a child. There is no justifiable reason for this past growing 'your group' and preventing 'their group' from growing.

3- Religious leaders advocate you should not focus on 'worldly things' (like money, power and material objects,) while thats all they seem to do.
There is this weird thing where they push 'Give to God' and somehow that translates to going in their pocket. Ask them about it and they will say "God has blessed me with that 500,000$ house and a BMW." So they know what God wants? Why did my Mom die? "The lord works in mysterious ways we could not understand." Oh.. So you know Gods will but only when its profitable to you?
Then you see things pushed like "Gods 10%." What mental gymnastics is required to suggest "You should give this amount to God, and by God I mean me." I remember the last time I went to a Catholic Church seeing their breakdown of spending and it came down to like 15% going to actually help people. The rest was all towards growing the religion and giving people within it money. That bothered me less than them having 3 separate offerings and the priest cracking jokes about how they are not cheep but a whole lot of greed there for structures that argue not to care about money but there is a reason the Vatican is one of the largest real-estate holders in the world. And I somehow doubt its just because they were 'blessed'

4- People have trouble separating the 'power structure' from the religion
Pretty simple concept but its like pulling teeth unless you call it out directly. If I say I think the Preacher of some Christian church is a racist nuttjob pushing his personal beliefs as 'Gods will' people in that church will probably take it as an attack on the religion itself instead of the individual.

5- Translation of religious text
Most religious texts are translated multiple times, for an example the Christian Bible has the largest issue with this. Its a book with over 780,000 words that were taken from (mostly) Hebrew and translated into old English and then either interpreted by people that do not understand old English or translated into new age English. Then its broken into 'verses' that can be taken drastically out of context. I am pretty sure any intelligent person can make an argument for anything they want with that much wiggle room and its why pretty much every respectable theological degree requires learning Hebrew for Christianity.
Think of the word "Cute." We consider it on par now with 'Adorable' while 100 years back it meant 'small.' Then think about how much more English has changed in thousands of years. Then think about how translations loose meaning (easier if you speak multiple languages.) Then think about how taking things out of context can change its meaning in news stories. When you combine all that you get the train wreck that is 'text based preaching' that looses accuracy at each application of ignorance.

6- The text is infallible
This is a truly absurd and untenable position to me. Even if you ignore all the above stated issues in translation and context there are extremely overt contradictions in text that can not exist if everything in it is infallible. Look into the issues with "Seeing God" / "Gods Face" and there is no level of translation issues that can justify it in the Bible. Some verses say 'Nobody can see god and anyone who does would die' while others state 'A bunch of elders saw God' or 'A person got a blessing from looking at God.' Its inconsistent within itself and totally untenable but for some reason people will argue this to the death. That is without even digging into how some texts were included and others were excluded by men. So why is it such a big deal to admit documented history may be out of line with intention over thousands of years? Its a bullshit norm imo that is not justified and somehow survives the existence of extreme overt evidence against the position.

7- Norms are unquestionable
'Saying God-Damnit is wrong'
'Why?' (some can not answer even that)
''The text says taking the Lords name in vanity is wrong'
Ok, God is not the Lords name. Most attribute it to "Yahweh." Ever herd someone get pissy about someone saying that name? I doubt it..
Then, if its wrong to say 'God' its not wrong to just say it in negativity. It should equally be wrong to say in positivity such as 'God bless you.' You can not have it both ways. Its either both wrong or both ok. Speak logic to people though and because its a norm its unquestionable with a stamp of morality and entitlement. Even if I trace cursing to an absurd belief structure that argued it would literally hurt (which destroys the argument of an all powerful God) its still argued as a social norm in America. Then try to address that within society outside of religion and you will be slapped in the face with religious norms.

8- They dress up like wizards and shit
Like seriously. I get that 2000 years ago people dressed like that but it does not excuse you doing so. There is no other function within society where its considered acceptable and I do not think it should be for religion. Its ridiculous to me people even accept it as normal.

9- Preaching subject matter
Kind of two issues here. For the most part the nature of God or the universe are not even talked about while preached messages focus on 'God loves and forgives' while ignoring documented genocide (sometimes encouraging it.) Then theres issues within common beliefs that make no sense.

Logically "If"
-God is all Powerful
-God is all knowing
"Then"
-God would know every decision that an individual would take (because God can see through time) and God would also know how changing a single Atom would change all those decisions.
"So"
In such a world free will can not exist. But it also makes God a monster who knowingly creates entities to be tormented for eternity under most religions.

You have to sacrifice 1 of those 3. "All knowing," "All Powerful," "Free will."

Then there is individual issues like "Could God create an object so heavy he could not lift it" which requires either defaulting to 'Our minds can not understand' or re-defining the terms of what "All powerful" means.

So why isn't this stuff talked about in a structure that exists to educate on religion if there is an entire field of theology built on the subject? Shouldn't religious leaders spend a bit more time actually talking about the structure of reality and have some ontological discussion on the matter if their purpose is to inform the people they are teaching?

10- Violence is not demonized.
This ties into my first point and is not exclusive to Muslims but they would be the group I have seen it perpetuated the most in.
If I say 'That Muslim blowing up people was awful' other people within the religion sidestep the issue. They will bring up points such as 'It was not our group' or 'Its a tiny percentage of Muslims who are terrorists' side stepping the issue instead of acknowledging that the murder of a bunch of innocent people was bad. Be direct and its sometimes hard to get a straight up statement that its bad. Its like a passive way of 'not opposing but not supporting' but in a context of mass murder.

Anyways, I am curious as to what other issues I missed or how others view these issues. Kinda testing the waters on some stuff I feel like people should take into account and some things religious people would also benefit from digging into but this is the top 10 list I rambled up : )

[Doctor X]

First.

– J.D.

[Doctor X]

https://www.sunsigns.org/wp-content/upl ... inanna.jpg

– J.D.

[robinson]

Good topic, but you pulled your punches.

[Helz]

Good topic, but you pulled your punches.

I am not just out to make religion look bad. Even those who do not believe in anything could benefit from a recursive process of identifying your values and reconciling how you live to them. The fact some greedy pigs manipulate systems for their benefit does not invalidate the good that comes from spiritual leadership. Although its objectively odd the world has normalized the idea of men getting rich dressing up like a wizard and diddling little kids.

I could hammer on specifics within each major religion but I doubt its a 'hot take' to say religions have done evil things. The bad application of a concept does not invalidate the concept itself.

[Anaxagoras]

Am I the only one who misread it as “The 10 main Issues with Railgun”?

[ed]

I still like the notion of a sniff test that reduces complex things to bare, either/or, essentials.

Examples:
is Obama a Kenyan? Too complex to personally explore. Did Hillary find anything/make anything up? No? then NOT A KENYAN

Is homeopathy real? Is there Homeopathic Oxy? Meth? Heroin? No? Then it's is BS.

Clairvoyance/precognition? Casinos? if yes then BS.

I don't need details, I don't need arm waving. If any of those things were real, then certin things would ineluctably follow. They don't. There is no excuse.

And so it goes.

The most telling thing about religion is that there is nothing in any religious writing, concerning any deity, anywhere at any time that contains one scintilla of something that would not be known to the idiots of the time. Nothing, zero, nada, zilch. Ergo entirely human.

Try this ... during a conversation try to exclude any reference to any thing/concept/development/tech/vocabulary word that would be unknown to a listener of any previous time. Keep it simple, lets say you are speaking to an educated Edwardian. Try. You cannot.

Of course, there are explanations. Contorted ones. Explanations that are patronizing and absurd. Just like the "rules" that are invoked when one confronts a proponent of the paranormal. "But, you see, (he says suavely, twirling his moustache) ghosts won't make their presence known if there in a non-believer in the room".

"well, you see (he says as he hikes up his toga) God went to special pains in his communications with these desert tribesmen in order to not frighten them with any sort of future knowledge."

damnation, hellfire, eternal torment, separated red seas, burning bushes not withstanding. Those are "different".

[robinson]

Religion is a fraud

Religion involves child raping and torture

Religion is about getting money with out working for it

Religion judges and condemns and then might murder you

Religion is insane

Religion is dangerous

Religion gives false hope and creates mental illness

Religion is narcissistic

Religion is lies

If there were no death there would be no religion

Religion promotes ignorance and unhappiness

Religion is almost always child abuse

Religions are not all the same

[Doctor X]

Am I the only one who misread it as “The 10 main Issues with Railgun”?

https://c.tenor.com/8onaQkVl2eQAAAAC/an ... d-bang.gif

– J.D.

[Hotarubi]

https://www.sunsigns.org/wp-content/upl ... inanna.jpg

– J.D.

Totally my favorite. Goddess of beer and sex with looks to die for.

[Hotarubi]

I still like the notion of a sniff test that reduces complex things to bare, either/or, essentials.

Examples:
is Obama a Kenyan? Too complex to personally explore. Did Hillary find anything/make anything up? No? then NOT A KENYAN

Is homeopathy real? Is there Homeopathic Oxy? Meth? Heroin? No? Then it's is BS.

Clairvoyance/precognition? Casinos? if yes then BS.

I don't need details, I don't need arm waving. If any of those things were real, then certin things would ineluctably follow. They don't. There is no excuse.

And so it goes.

The most telling thing about religion is that there is nothing in any religious writing, concerning any deity, anywhere at any time that contains one scintilla of something that would not be known to the idiots of the time. Nothing, zero, nada, zilch. Ergo entirely human.

Try this ... during a conversation try to exclude any reference to any thing/concept/development/tech/vocabulary word that would be unknown to a listener of any previous time. Keep it simple, lets say you are speaking to an educated Edwardian. Try. You cannot.

Of course, there are explanations. Contorted ones. Explanations that are patronizing and absurd. Just like the "rules" that are invoked when one confronts a proponent of the paranormal. "But, you see, (he says suavely, twirling his moustache) ghosts won't make their presence known if there in a non-believer in the room".

"well, you see (he says as he hikes up his toga) God went to special pains in his communications with these desert tribesmen in order to not frighten them with any sort of future knowledge."

damnation, hellfire, eternal torment, separated red seas, burning bushes not withstanding. Those are "different".

I know lots of religions practised infanticide.

Look it up if you don't know what it means.

[ed]

Idiot

[ed]

Idiot

[ed]

Worth repeating

[Hotarubi]

Idiot

Don't think you've looked that one up either.

[Hotarubi]

Idiot

Don't think you've looked that one up either.

[Hotarubi]

Worth repeating.

[ed]

<sigh>

Abdul is making more sense to me now.

[Pyrrho]

The fundamental problem with religions is that they tend to promise miraculous happiness in a mythical paradise in order to rationalize abject misery of good people, with an equally mythical promise of torment for bad people. In exchange for money and slavish devotion.

[robinson]

That’s just one of the things

[Pyrrho]

"Sure you'll be tortured and burned alive and die screaming but you'll be so happy in one of the mansions reserved for you in perpetuity."

[Pyrrho]

Oh, and the rather specious "lifting up in thoughts and prayers." So the "lifters" can feel good and go back to self-indulgence ASAP.

[Hotarubi]

<sigh>

Abdul is making more sense to me now.

I know. You were shown to be wrong and can't handle it.

Still time for you to grow up, ed

[izittrue]

Worth repeating

Boy you said it.

[Elmer Gantry]

Great John God! Now you just take your 1 Thessalonians 3:1! Says all a good Christian needs to know right there! Say, we'll be having a blessed time at dear old Wellspring Church! Ladies Auxiliary having a rummage sale--bake sale--fun games for the little tykes--snake handling--speaking in tongues--just a rousing good time! Bring a covered dish and don't forget your tithes.

[Pyrrho]

Twit: https://twitter.com/Eric_Erins/status/1596917329010446336

[Doctor X]

I know, right, the Historical Junior would have totally used a matched grip!

– J.D.

[Doctor X]

Meanwhile, I had not bothered to discern how tragically inaccurate that opening post was. I employ "tragic" since such sloppiness only serves those he sought to denigrate. How can one dare to convince when one's arguments are incorrect?

There is some irony in that. Nevertheless, since I am cooling down after the conclusion to "Rock and Roll":

Most religious texts are translated multiple times, . . .

In the case of the Qur'an, it is in the Japanese Arabic original, so FAIL right there.

Jews tend to eschew translations of the Hebrew Bible. Sadly, one could have considered whether or not the current witnesses to the Hebrew Bible are accurate.

. . . for an example the Christian Bible has the largest issue with this.

FAIL.

The vast overwhelming majority of textual criticism of the NT text involve the Greek witnesses. Sure, you can check a few translations here and there to see if they preserve a better vorlage, but basically you are dealing with Greek.

Its a book with over 780,000 words that were taken from (mostly) Hebrew

The "Christian Bible" is mainly Greek. It appears the individual wishes to include the Hebrew Bible in that. Fine, but the Jews would have something to say about that.

The Jews.

The Jews always have something to say about it.

Where was I?

Right, the issues with the Hebrew Bible [HB – Ed.] carry over to that section of the "Christian Bible." The individual should have recognized that, for the Proto-, Pseudo-, and even Embryonic Christians [Tm. – Ed.] as in the writers of the texts, the Greek Septuagint was the "Hebrew Bible" and had been for centuries. Thus, when authors in the NT texts quote "law," they quote the LXX. Interestingly, the LXX sometimes preserves better witnesses than the extant Hebrew.

. . . and translated into old English and then either interpreted by people that do not understand old English or translated into new age English.

Really not a problem.

At . . . all.

Wish to raise theologic translations which are known to be incorrect? Should have, but did not.

Then its broken into 'verses'

Versification occurred long before that. The Massoretic Text of the HB, which is mainly what we have now, has a system of versification in it. I forget of the top off my head what guy decided to divide up everything including the Greek texts. Either way, verses are not the problem.

FAIL.

I am pretty sure any intelligent person can make an argument for anything they want with that much wiggle room and its why pretty much every respectable theological degree requires learning Hebrew for Christianity.

EPIC FAIL.

Most do not require it for theology. Some select graduate schools that also produce Ph.D.s will require languages, but for "Christianity," the language to learn is, Heavens to Betsy, Greek! Even then, it is a short, maybe a year of basic koine. If the person becomes a "preacher man," he probably will never, ever, read the Greek text again. He will also not study issues such as textual criticism.

The rest is irrelevant. Moving on:

6- The text is infallible
This is a truly absurd and untenable position to me.

Would have been better to have researched and presented the origin of "infallibility." Actually, it is not "infallible," it is "inerrant" to use the actual term contained in the "fundamentals" from which we get "fundamentalism." It was a reaction to Higher Criticism [Tm. – Ed.] plus a lot else happening in the later 19th century. Better textual witnesses were found. I would say, "the best" that we have currently. You add in what was happening in SCIENCE [! – Ed.] and religious groups became reactionary.

Look into the issues with "Seeing God" / "Gods Face" and there is no level of translation issues that can justify it in the Bible.

FAIL.

Some verses say 'Nobody can see god and anyone who does would die'. . . .

Yet he does not cite one.

I have wasted enough time cooling down. Off to scare the neighborhood children.

– J.D.