Happy Holidays

[Jenner]

Long story short, the Romans can call themselves Christian until they're blue in the face, it is arguable if they really were or meant it (just like any other person who espouses a faith) or if they were just using it as a tool. (just like any other person might.)

Ok, most of that really didn't have any point. How is any of this subject related to the fall of the Roman Empire? I said that Christianity received the biggest boost due to Constantine. That's not negated by the fact that Christianity was already becoming more prominent in the empire--actually, that more supports my point, since Christianity's early spread wasn't through violence but through enduring persecution.

Let me clarify what I'm getting at: Christianity rose to prominence in its early history not due to being spread through violence, but because of the natural course of how things worked in the Roman Empire. That wasn't any more or less violent than the periods of history before or after (er, well, compared to Nero and the year of the four emperors, maybe it was less violent). What you're saying is supporting my point.

To an extent, it was picked up because it was popular, they could either adopt it and go with the flow or be brushed under the waves, that did not make them Christian, but I am not one to judge what is or isn't Christian anymore, and I don't care to. What I am judging is actions which, in accordance to some scriptures, is very unchristian. But, scripture is very unreliable. I know, let's just add another section to the bible like King James did, and in this version, Jesus can hang out with Vin Diesel and Chuck Norris and he can ride in a Corvette fueled by faith and shoot Salvation Lazers out of his Penis. We'll call it the Micheal Bay Version. It will be awesome

You should introduce me to some of them. No one is perfect and we all have double-standards, but I've drawn the line, and maybe my line was laid down a little too close but, oh well, the fact remains that I've yet to met a Catholic that hasn't behaved like they were Gods Gift To Everything. Who made one statement damning of a sin then days later would do the same thing.

I don't keep a tally of the religions of the people I meet. What you're saying is convincing me more that you don't see someone as Catholic until they do something to upset you; but if they're generally good people, you pay no mind to their religion. I generally meet people from different backgrounds in the normal course of my life; most of these have been good people, and some of them have been Catholic.

I mean, consider, if it wasn't for me, you could easily say the same thing about Muslims, no? Actually, you didn't even know I was Muslim for the longest time--it wasn't until it specifically came up in conversation.

And did I treat you any differently? I didn't, because contrary to what I'm thinking you believe about me, I judge people on their actions and faults, not on their religions. I also am notorious for giving people chance after chance after chance to dick me over, as you well know. Regardless, you being Muslim didn't change who you were, discovering it didn't change my perception of you because you're a good person and a good, IMHO Muslim. When a person is an -Albino Baboon-, they're an -Albino Baboon-, and I loathe them as an -Albino Baboon-. When someone is Catholic and an -Albino Baboon-, anymore, I just sigh in resignation and chock it up as another self-righteous hypocrite to add to my ignore list.

It's the big hypocritical backwards double-standard asshattery that rings out false to me, and it is those faults that I disapprove of. And THEN I berate their bad Catholicness, as if they are separate entities (and perhaps they are, I am investigating into that.) Thus far these mega-faults and epic fails of said person are, not only in direct correlation to their -Dragon Diamond- Catholicness, but also emboldened by it.

You say one thing and you're doing another. You claim you're evaluating people as individuals and religion as a whole separately, but then you're using your experience with specific individuals to judge an entire billion people who have the same religion.

Consider this for a moment... Do people who do bad things genuinely believe they're wrong? Most people who have a habit of doing something that we'd consider wrong has some justification for it--and it's not uncommon for that justification to come from whatever philosophy or belief they have. It's why not just religion is used as a justification, but also: history, socialism and communism, nationalism, and science, to name a few. And if you want to make the claim that it's because of religion that so many people are killed, I can easily cite ten times the amount of people killed due to any of those other philosophies.

The difference is, I don't claim that it's the philosophy that causes bad acts.

I don't care if they don't realize they're wrong, they are still wrong. A kid who tortures animals in his youth doesn't realize he's being cruel but it's still cruel. I think that all philosophies can be used to kill, I just think that using religion to kill and be a douche is just rubbish. But hey, all religions and faiths have a long history of bloody horrible death and torture so, I guess it's too idealistic to hope that'll change. But, it doesn't mean that I can take the moral highroad and loudly disapprove and wag my finger at them and not participate in the -Dung Beetle-.

If you "Good Christians/Catholics" truly outnumber the asshats, than CALL THEM OUT take some -Fatal Hopper- responsibility for how your faith is being presented. I did, it changed nothing, and rather than be part of a faith that preaches hate and intolerance, I left it. I bet those preachers would listen the second the freaking collection plates stopped coming in.

They do, you just don't notice whenever someone does something good as a result of their religion. Besides, why is it incumbent upon them to prove something to you? You said so yourself:

No, Kizyr, you don't need to prove -Dragon Diamond- to me, they need to prove -Dragon Diamond- to the MILLIONS of angry and confused Catholics, Christians and ex of both who are all becoming increasingly DISSATISFIED and WEARY of their faith.

Oh, and there's also the fact that humility is one of the things encouraged by several different faiths, Christianity included. It sort of discourages bragging about how much good you've done when you've done it.

Also, clarify: who is "they" in your sentence? You're using ambiguous pronouns there.

They're not proving it to me, they're proving it to EVERYONE, I'm just a bonus since everyone should be seeking my approval. xD

And They, in the negative, are the Jack Chicks of the world. They, in the positive, are the hypothetical "good Christians/Catholics" who need to be a lot louder. I approve greatly of the community things they do but it would be way more awesome if you guys took a page from my playbook and started loudly correcting douchebags who are Doing It Wrong. <3

What was China founded on? What was Japan founded on? How old are these counties? How old is their culture? Could I not argue that this current trend of uber-conservative, neo-fundy, bible humping, Flag-Lapel-Pin-Wearing Bigotry is a form of upcoming ultra-nationalism?

...yes? But what's your point? I do think it's tied to nationalism--and more generally it's tied to wanting to identify oneself as superior to other people. It doesn't matter what the philosophy or label is, even if it contradicts the notion of superiority (since you can find creative ways of justifying it). Again, you're supporting my point here: what you're seeing isn't an intrinsic quality of any one religion, including Christianity.
Your other questions make no sense. I can get into what all different incarnations of China were founded upon, or how Japan has defined and redefined itself, but that isn't relevant any more. My point was that Buddhism and other religions (and philosophies) have been used to justify horrible things. Just because you aren't aware of them doesn't mean it hasn't happened. And, by extension, just because you're overly aware of situations when it's perpetuated by Christians doesn't mean that Christianity is unique in this respect.

So true, I should start hating all religions, yo, this is a big enlightenment for me. I'll just like people for who they are, or hate them for who they are and -Fatal Hopper- their faith. Wow, I feel liberated.

All religions totally suck balls and all popular, and even unpopular philosophies have been used by unsavory, and/or misinformed well meaning individuals to cause grief and rubbish.

And again, you're only looking at situations when people use religion as a justification to do awful things (usually with creative and faulty reasoning), while ignoring whenever it's been a cause of good things.

I repeat, keep up the good things, and start correcting the -Albino Baboon- publicly too. It will be Epic Win.

Yes, I do. At least my misconceptions, whether they are or aren't misconceptions, are grounded in a real world experience and recurring events that are relevant to the world as they happen now. Instead of based on a the words of a continually re-translated book that has never been updated with the times, and that has never accounted for it's own imperfections, and that books interpretation by any bright-eyed douche who can gather an audience.

Why assume that everyone else's conceptions aren't also based on experience? Mine certainly are, since I've seen plenty more examples of religion being a force of good than evil. Then again, I also account for the fact that evil acts are way more noticeable, and I don't ignore or gloss over examples that don't mesh with my world view.

My faulty logic has made me a pretty decent person, the asshats? Well, I guess we can't all be as cool as me.

It might seem weird that as a Muslim I'm sitting here defending Christianity, particularly since I do have some criticisms of Christianity, its history, and various major churches. But, my problem isn't with what religion you're heaping criticism upon. It's with your method altogether. That is, it's based on selective reasoning and confirmation/negation bias. Your same rationale can be (and is) used to justify antagonism towards a lot of different groups, so whether or not you picked a group that I actually belong do isn't my concern. KF

And that's why you're a good person.

[Kizyr]

Ok for starters, when I quote you, I'm only going to quote the non-silly parts. You have this habit of veering off into ridiculous hyperbolic statements (with a bunch of arbitrary pop-culture insertions) whenever you encounter something you have difficulty explaining (due to not knowing all the necessary facts or backgrounds, or not being able to verbalize it).

To an extent, it was picked up because it was popular, they could either adopt it and go with the flow or be brushed under the waves, that did not make them Christian, but I am not one to judge what is or isn't Christian anymore, and I don't care to. What I am judging is actions which, in accordance to some scriptures, is very unchristian. But, scripture is very unreliable.

That's all fine. But you've since dropped my original point that the rise in Christianity wasn't related to, or inherently due to, violence in the late Roman Empire. There were actions during, before, after, that could be labeled unchristian. But the error that you're making is when you assume that those unchristian acts are representative of the religion. The only way you can make that claim is to show that, somehow, Christianity's rise in the late Roman Empire was violent and that it was violent due to the intent to spread the religion.

I don't keep a tally of the religions of the people I meet. What you're saying is convincing me more that you don't see someone as Catholic until they do something to upset you; but if they're generally good people, you pay no mind to their religion. I generally meet people from different backgrounds in the normal course of my life; most of these have been good people, and some of them have been Catholic.

I mean, consider, if it wasn't for me, you could easily say the same thing about Muslims, no? Actually, you didn't even know I was Muslim for the longest time--it wasn't until it specifically came up in conversation.

And did I treat you any differently? I didn't, because contrary to what I'm thinking you believe about me, I judge people on their actions and faults, not on their religions.

You're missing my point. It's ridiculous to ask me to introduce you to some of these good people I mention, because I don't keep a running tally of people I know based on their religion. It's just as arbitrary to do that as to keep black friends just so you can bring them up in conversation ("But I got black friends!").

You didn't treat me any differently because I happened to be a religion with which you had no previous interaction. If I were Catholic, I have no reason to believe that you wouldn't judge me more harshly because of that. What I said earlier still stands: "You say one thing and you're doing another. You claim you're evaluating people as individuals and religion as a whole separately, but then you're using your experience with specific individuals to judge an entire billion people who have the same religion."

I don't care if they don't realize they're wrong, they are still wrong. A kid who tortures animals in his youth doesn't realize he's being cruel but it's still cruel. I think that all philosophies can be used to kill, I just think that using religion to kill and be a douche is just rubbish. But hey, all religions and faiths have a long history of bloody horrible death and torture so, I guess it's too idealistic to hope that'll change. But, it doesn't mean that I can take the moral highroad and loudly disapprove and wag my finger at them and not participate in the -Dung Beetle-.

You missed my point again with this. The point isn't that they don't realize they're wrong. The point is that people do things they can justify--if there's something "wrong" about it, then they'll look for justification in whatever is handy. That's sometimes religion, but just as often it's philosophy, science, nationalism, or a host of other ideas.

It's good to point out when hypocrisy occurs. But your problem is that you're taking a few specific examples (that you're seeking out--since I doubt you notice as much when people are being consistent instead of hypocritical) and extending them pretty widely to judge everyone by a particular religion, and a religion as a whole, a certain way. Also, sometimes people just make mistakes; it's not always hypocrisy.

They're not proving it to me, they're proving it to EVERYONE, I'm just a bonus since everyone should be seeking my approval. xD

And They, in the negative, are the Jack Chicks of the world. They, in the positive, are the hypothetical "good Christians/Catholics" who need to be a lot louder. I approve greatly of the community things they do but it would be way more awesome if you guys took a page from my playbook and started loudly correcting douchebags who are Doing It Wrong. <3

Just to reiterate my point: they do. We do. Do you expect us to go door-to-door? There are a lot of things you haven't heard about, and just because you haven't heard about it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

It's a lot easier to get noticed when you're intolerant and hateful. It's why Fred Phelps' church is so widely known, despite the fact that it has less than 30 members. When one guy's tiny little church gets attention by being hateful, when the hundreds if not thousands of other churches that focus on community service and charitable acts get very little attention, the deck is stacked. To get noticed for doing something good takes way more effort than getting noticed for doing something bad.

So true, I should start hating all religions, yo, this is a big enlightenment for me. I'll just like people for who they are, or hate them for who they are and -Fatal Hopper- their faith. Wow, I feel liberated.

You're still missing my point! Let me simplify it for you...

You said: Christianity is unique in how evil it's people are. You don't hear about how other religions like Buddhism have been used to kill people?
I said: Here are some examples of how Buddhism has been used as a justification to kill people. Your premise (that Christianity in particular has done far worse things) is incorrect.
You said: Those are examples from older civilizations. It could be tied to nationalism.
I said: ...yes, but neither of those points are relevant.

You completely missed the point after my first response. This is my point: Any philosophy can (and most major ones have) been used to justify violence. This is not unique to any one philosophy or religion. Furthermore:
a) That does not mean that every religion, or every philosophy, is bad,
b) That usually means it's the individual person seeking out justification that's in the wrong, not whatever philosophy they're using*, and
c) That does mean that people should be treated as individuals.

You finally got around to the second part, but missed the point on just about everything else.

* Some philosophies are inherently bad and rarely, if ever, lead to good things. You've yet to prove this for any of your examples with religion, though. Conversely, some philosophies generally lead to very good things, and rarely lead to bad things.

And again, you're only looking at situations when people use religion as a justification to do awful things (usually with creative and faulty reasoning), while ignoring whenever it's been a cause of good things.

I repeat, keep up the good things, and start correcting the -Albino Baboon- publicly too. It will be Epic Win.

I repeat: We do. Just not everyone listens, and not everyone wants to listen.

Why assume that everyone else's conceptions aren't also based on experience? Mine certainly are, since I've seen plenty more examples of religion being a force of good than evil. Then again, I also account for the fact that evil acts are way more noticeable, and I don't ignore or gloss over examples that don't mesh with my world view.

My faulty logic has made me a pretty decent person, the asshats? Well, I guess we can't all be as cool as me.

You're okay in spite of your faulty logic, not because of it. It hasn't "made" you any positive contrubutions. I was under the impression that this was something you wanted to improve upon, not something you wanted to glorify. KF