3 ms·

> Granted, but even broken clocks are right twice a day. I doubt most Christians think the bible is a broken clock > Just because someone wrote a pre-scientif

> Granted, but even broken clocks are right twice a day. I doubt most Christians think the bible is a broken clock > Just because someone wrote a pre-scientific text which, today, supports antiauthoritarianism ... does not mean that antiauthoritarianism lacks its many other merits. Most of our culture and philosophy comes from pre-scientific texts. Authoritarianism didn't need science and the ability to stop certain people from participating in commerce doesn't require computers. > (Not to mention how even some Christians think that Revelation is the writings of a hallucinating madman.) A small number, while other groups have different interpretations of what the text means or how literal it is.

mmirate 8y ago
> I doubt most Christians think the bible is a broken clock Their choice, and I'm sure it must be good for their pretty little stained-glass filter that they keep in-place between their eyes and reality. > Authoritarianism didn't need science and the ability to stop certain people from participating in commerce doesn't require computers. All the more reason to oppose the general centralization and empowerment of authority, on principle, not just on the topic of this HN article. > A small number No doubt, and I feel that my phrasing conveyed that appropriately: "some Christians". > while other groups have different interpretations of what the text means or how literal it is. No doubt of that either; as we all know, Christianity is very diverse in the precise natures of its adherents' fantasies; be they Revelations-enhanced or otherwise. It's still all fantasy, though, which, I suppose, is what really matters in the end. But, my point here in all of this, is that some of the things their Bible says, do happen to be inherently wise, when extracted from the original context. The "Mark of the Beast", I daresay, is one of them. And like any piece of the Bible that is actually of-use, its wisdom is best put into our own words and then the Biblical association discarded lest it cause weakness. * * * * * While I do focus on Christianity specifically, since that is the immediate topic, I should make it clear that I do not discriminate: Religion sucks. All of it. And I pity those who need it, and those who only think they need it. http://harmful.cat-v.org/society/religion/ http://harmful.cat-v.org/society/religion/
- angry_octet 8y ago
  If you've going to display your disdain for sky fairies on HN, best to pick on a small religion, unpopular with HN readers. Bahá'í perhaps, which preaches mutual love and the inherent value of all religion, yet its adherents are mercilessly persecuted by co-religionists.
  - mmirate 8y ago
    Just because a particular brand of sky-fairy is popular, does not make it any better; on the contrary, the damage that a religion does is correlated positively with the number of its adherents.
    - angry_octet 8y ago
      To be sure, but the religionists will retaliate, thinking 'you have personally offended me, and punishing you is God's Work'. But if you disparage belief systems they disagree with they will tend to ignore you. And yet, the people who can understand your message will understand it applies to all religions. Perhaps, attack the beliefs of the Noodlers and their belief that wearing the Holy Collander protects against credit card fraud.

mmirate 8y ago

> I doubt most Christians think the bible is a broken clock Their choice, and I'm sure it must be good for their pretty little stained-glass filter that they keep in-place between their eyes and reality. > Authoritarianism didn't need science and the ability to stop certain people from participating in commerce doesn't require computers. All the more reason to oppose the general centralization and empowerment of authority, on principle, not just on the topic of this HN article. > A small number No doubt, and I feel that my phrasing conveyed that appropriately: "some Christians". > while other groups have different interpretations of what the text means or how literal it is. No doubt of that either; as we all know, Christianity is very diverse in the precise natures of its adherents' fantasies; be they Revelations-enhanced or otherwise. It's still all fantasy, though, which, I suppose, is what really matters in the end. But, my point here in all of this, is that some of the things their Bible says, do happen to be inherently wise, when extracted from the original context. The "Mark of the Beast", I daresay, is one of them. And like any piece of the Bible that is actually of-use, its wisdom is best put into our own words and then the Biblical association discarded lest it cause weakness. * * * * * While I do focus on Christianity specifically, since that is the immediate topic, I should make it clear that I do not discriminate: Religion sucks. All of it. And I pity those who need it, and those who only think they need it. http://harmful.cat-v.org/society/religion/ http://harmful.cat-v.org/society/religion/

angry_octet 8y ago
If you've going to display your disdain for sky fairies on HN, best to pick on a small religion, unpopular with HN readers. Bahá'í perhaps, which preaches mutual love and the inherent value of all religion, yet its adherents are mercilessly persecuted by co-religionists.
- mmirate 8y ago
  Just because a particular brand of sky-fairy is popular, does not make it any better; on the contrary, the damage that a religion does is correlated positively with the number of its adherents.
  - angry_octet 8y ago
    To be sure, but the religionists will retaliate, thinking 'you have personally offended me, and punishing you is God's Work'. But if you disparage belief systems they disagree with they will tend to ignore you. And yet, the people who can understand your message will understand it applies to all religions. Perhaps, attack the beliefs of the Noodlers and their belief that wearing the Holy Collander protects against credit card fraud.