6 ms·

Unfortunately, it's not. I couldn't find the comments you mentioned, but the unfortunate fact is that many religious people are (at best) a shadow of what their

Unfortunately, it's not. I couldn't find the comments you mentioned, but the unfortunate fact is that many religious people are (at best) a shadow of what their beliefs are based on. I say this as a devout (but not fundamentalist) Christian. This entire article grieves me–including his descriptions of how his father treated him. No matter what choices my kids make, I could never treat them that way.

javert 16y ago
I mean no personal disrespect towards you, but you're implying that religions are themselves tolerant and respectful, and that people are flawed for not being able to "live up" to them. In reality, religions tend not to be tolerant and respectful, and criticizing people in general for not being "good enough" to live up to a religious standard is unfair.
- burgerbrain 16y ago
  implying that religions are themselves I take issue with even that much of the concept. Religions are not entities, only the people that make them up are. And it seems the unfortunately vast majority of the time, those people are hateful, ignorant, or just plain dulled.
  - baguasquirrel 16y ago
    "I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." -Gandhi
  - javert 16y ago
    Religions are not entities, only the people that make them up are. I could have phrased what I said better, but I stand by the essential meaning of what I said, and I disagree with you. A "religion" as a particular body of ideas, is distinct from the adherents to that religion. Which is why it's perfectly reasonable to say something like, "Most Christians don't actually live up to the teachings of Christianity." For example, nobody can reasonably deny that Christianity involves (1) belief in Christ; (2) a large helping of faith instead of reason; (3) a significant element of self-sacrifice. Or for Islam: (1) belief in the teachings of Muhammad, and in Allah; (2) a large helping of faith instead of reason; (3) a significant element of self-sacrifice (this time posited as "submission"). Buddhism, arguably, might only be (2), depending on your interpretation; I think Buddhism is probably "less well-defined," so to speak, but maybe I just no less about it. Still, there are clearly certain concepts that define and/or are implied by any particular religion.
    - cookiecaper 16y ago
      These religions are often much more different than their common manifestations, but their peddlers simplify and adulterate the teachings to make them more palatable. It involves serious work to become either a real Christian or a real Muslim, and people prefer "drive-through religion", as it were. I suggest you explore religion, especially religion that exists outside of the spotlight, more deeply to gain an appropriate understanding of how these things work. For instance, religion does not emphasize faith over reason, but faith in tandem with reason; faith on a basic level is merely sufficient trust to give something an earnest try (or, in more religious terms, "things hoped for but not seen", which is to say, a belief in potential), which is a principle necessary in the acquisition of all meaningful knowledge.
      - javert 16y ago
        faith in tandem with reason That's a contradiction. faith.. is necessary in the acquisition of all meaningful knowledge. I strongly disagree. Believe me, I've looked into it.
        cookiecaper 16y ago
        It's not a contradiction, you don't understand. Faith is the serious belief that something can happen or is real. When a scientist embarks upon a hypothesis, he does so because he has faith that something valuable may come from experimenting on that hypothesis, which is a hope for value not yet seen. Faith is not just a belief or hope, but it is a set of works accomplished in the attitude of that hope, so the scientist, by faith, continues his experiments on a hypothesis. The same process occurs in the spiritual and religious realm with regard to faith. Religious people hear that certain information and/or manifestations are available to them, and they have faith sufficient to follow the path outlined. As they do so, they find their initial faith validated, and then they continue to have faith on the next point outlined in the scriptures, and find that faith validated, and so on. Faith is not knowledge; faith is a stopgap on the way to knowledge, and it's a principle necessary for healthy or reasonable conduct in all forms, which is part of why religion requires such an emphasis of faith. If a man obtains all knowledge, there is no more need for faith, because he knows everything of himself and has no need to believe something without a formal proof, as he has already received a formal proof of every true thing, which can only happen as that man has sufficient faith in true things to experiment and learn of their truth with help from God. He has no faith because he no more has a mere hope in things not seen; he now sees all things.
  - kalasa 16y ago
    I would suggest that if it seems like three-quarters of humanity is hateful, ignorant, or dulled you might want to consider the possibility of selection bias in your data.
- callmeed 16y ago
  Sorry, I didn't phrase it well and that's definitely not what I was implying. I should really isolate my statement to Christianity. Jesus spent time with prostitutes, thieves and the marginalized. He likely drank alcohol. He wasn't concerned with wealth (other than warning against it's trappings). And, ironically, the people he was least respectful to were the religious leaders of the time. Contrast that with the descriptions of Mr. Zeller's father and you can (hopefully) see the point I'm trying to make. His type are the only people I criticize—not because they don't live up to a standard but because (just like the leaders in Jesus' time)they create unnecessary standards for the purpose of controlling people or satisfying their own pride. I hope that explains it better. As a side, I appreciate your approach. Religion can be a hot topic and I generally avoid it on HN. When it does come up, it's nice to share views in a respectful manner.
- bad_user 16y ago
  If you'll read the New Testament, you'll see nobody was more tolerant and respectful than Jesus. And I don't know what' the fuck these extremist Christians are smoking, but they sure as hell haven't read their own bible.

javert 16y ago

I mean no personal disrespect towards you, but you're implying that religions are themselves tolerant and respectful, and that people are flawed for not being able to "live up" to them. In reality, religions tend not to be tolerant and respectful, and criticizing people in general for not being "good enough" to live up to a religious standard is unfair.

burgerbrain 16y ago
implying that religions are themselves I take issue with even that much of the concept. Religions are not entities, only the people that make them up are. And it seems the unfortunately vast majority of the time, those people are hateful, ignorant, or just plain dulled.
- baguasquirrel 16y ago
  "I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." -Gandhi
- javert 16y ago
  Religions are not entities, only the people that make them up are. I could have phrased what I said better, but I stand by the essential meaning of what I said, and I disagree with you. A "religion" as a particular body of ideas, is distinct from the adherents to that religion. Which is why it's perfectly reasonable to say something like, "Most Christians don't actually live up to the teachings of Christianity." For example, nobody can reasonably deny that Christianity involves (1) belief in Christ; (2) a large helping of faith instead of reason; (3) a significant element of self-sacrifice. Or for Islam: (1) belief in the teachings of Muhammad, and in Allah; (2) a large helping of faith instead of reason; (3) a significant element of self-sacrifice (this time posited as "submission"). Buddhism, arguably, might only be (2), depending on your interpretation; I think Buddhism is probably "less well-defined," so to speak, but maybe I just no less about it. Still, there are clearly certain concepts that define and/or are implied by any particular religion.
  - cookiecaper 16y ago
    These religions are often much more different than their common manifestations, but their peddlers simplify and adulterate the teachings to make them more palatable. It involves serious work to become either a real Christian or a real Muslim, and people prefer "drive-through religion", as it were. I suggest you explore religion, especially religion that exists outside of the spotlight, more deeply to gain an appropriate understanding of how these things work. For instance, religion does not emphasize faith over reason, but faith in tandem with reason; faith on a basic level is merely sufficient trust to give something an earnest try (or, in more religious terms, "things hoped for but not seen", which is to say, a belief in potential), which is a principle necessary in the acquisition of all meaningful knowledge.
    - javert 16y ago
      faith in tandem with reason That's a contradiction. faith.. is necessary in the acquisition of all meaningful knowledge. I strongly disagree. Believe me, I've looked into it.
      - cookiecaper 16y ago
        It's not a contradiction, you don't understand. Faith is the serious belief that something can happen or is real. When a scientist embarks upon a hypothesis, he does so because he has faith that something valuable may come from experimenting on that hypothesis, which is a hope for value not yet seen. Faith is not just a belief or hope, but it is a set of works accomplished in the attitude of that hope, so the scientist, by faith, continues his experiments on a hypothesis. The same process occurs in the spiritual and religious realm with regard to faith. Religious people hear that certain information and/or manifestations are available to them, and they have faith sufficient to follow the path outlined. As they do so, they find their initial faith validated, and then they continue to have faith on the next point outlined in the scriptures, and find that faith validated, and so on. Faith is not knowledge; faith is a stopgap on the way to knowledge, and it's a principle necessary for healthy or reasonable conduct in all forms, which is part of why religion requires such an emphasis of faith. If a man obtains all knowledge, there is no more need for faith, because he knows everything of himself and has no need to believe something without a formal proof, as he has already received a formal proof of every true thing, which can only happen as that man has sufficient faith in true things to experiment and learn of their truth with help from God. He has no faith because he no more has a mere hope in things not seen; he now sees all things.
- kalasa 16y ago
  I would suggest that if it seems like three-quarters of humanity is hateful, ignorant, or dulled you might want to consider the possibility of selection bias in your data.
callmeed 16y ago
Sorry, I didn't phrase it well and that's definitely not what I was implying. I should really isolate my statement to Christianity. Jesus spent time with prostitutes, thieves and the marginalized. He likely drank alcohol. He wasn't concerned with wealth (other than warning against it's trappings). And, ironically, the people he was least respectful to were the religious leaders of the time. Contrast that with the descriptions of Mr. Zeller's father and you can (hopefully) see the point I'm trying to make. His type are the only people I criticize—not because they don't live up to a standard but because (just like the leaders in Jesus' time)they create unnecessary standards for the purpose of controlling people or satisfying their own pride. I hope that explains it better. As a side, I appreciate your approach. Religion can be a hot topic and I generally avoid it on HN. When it does come up, it's nice to share views in a respectful manner.
bad_user 16y ago
If you'll read the New Testament, you'll see nobody was more tolerant and respectful than Jesus. And I don't know what' the fuck these extremist Christians are smoking, but they sure as hell haven't read their own bible.