Maybe later, but first I need to win a bet
-
This post did not contain any content.
-
C [email protected] shared this topic
-
This post did not contain any content.
-
This post did not contain any content.
-
This post did not contain any content.
-
Yup. That too.
The morals of it are fully borked. Just don't "at" it on the faith angle.
-
The most important part of the story (to me) is when his friends come and tell Job that he must be evil to deserve misfortune. Job knows he has been good and faithful and he is strong in that belief, so he goes to ask God for an explanation.
(This actually shows his belief in his own faithfulness is stronger than his belief that God will be good to the faithful and he is justified by the next part.)
After much begging and pleading, God gives him an explanation, but it is "sorry bro, Gods don't really care about mortal suffering".
Then after God proved his point, he rewards Job after all, but it's honestly a cop-out to let the story have some other ending than just "and then Job fucking died". I think the story is older than the idea of heaven or Job could have had his reward there. Might have gelled better with the New Testament.
-
Capitalist myth that working makes you a more pious person, no, being pious makes you a more pious person
-
I think, and it's hard for me as an agno-atheist to really put myself in a devout person's shoes, making the religuosity too reward based.
Actually devout people aren't that for an afterlife reward, they're religious because of actual faith that it's better for the world.
If anyone only holds to their faith for whatever it's purported benefits are, they're not pious, simply herd followers who would cling to whatever creed they were raised under.
-
This. ALL of this. I hate the story of Job because it just encourages people to accept abuse.
Unfortunately, this plays into why Christianity spread so far to start with. Storues like this reinforce class dynamics, which means ruling classes around the world want to implement them, and since they have more political power they have that ability.
This is a large part of why the vikings moved away from paganism to Christianity. It simply benefitted the rulers, from chiefs to kings. So they eventually forced their people to switch under threat of execution.
-
I think, and it's hard for me as an agno-atheist to really put myself in a devout person's shoes, making the religuosity too reward based.
Actually devout people aren't that for an afterlife reward, they're religious because of actual faith that it's better for the world.
If anyone only holds to their faith for whatever it's purported benefits are, they're not pious, simply herd followers who would cling to whatever creed they were raised under.
I doubt this. Atheists (myself included) often get the frustrating question of "what stops you from harming people if you don't believe in Hell?" when people learn about our lack of faith.
Many of them think that promises of reward and punishment are the only thing ensuring that people act morally.
If you've ever talked to a religious conservative American, many of them believe that religion, particularly Christianity, has a monopoly of defining what morality is.
-
I think, and it's hard for me as an agno-atheist to really put myself in a devout person's shoes, making the religuosity too reward based.
Actually devout people aren't that for an afterlife reward, they're religious because of actual faith that it's better for the world.
If anyone only holds to their faith for whatever it's purported benefits are, they're not pious, simply herd followers who would cling to whatever creed they were raised under.
You just described every religious person. Christians especially, waiting for the kingdom in heaven.
-
I doubt this. Atheists (myself included) often get the frustrating question of "what stops you from harming people if you don't believe in Hell?" when people learn about our lack of faith.
Many of them think that promises of reward and punishment are the only thing ensuring that people act morally.
If you've ever talked to a religious conservative American, many of them believe that religion, particularly Christianity, has a monopoly of defining what morality is.
Yes, and those are the people that I think are herd-followers and not actually devout.
Anyone who asks "why don't you become a murder hobo if you don't think there's a hell?" is probably not a very functional being.
Their need for a patriarch figure to impose external order and validation on them explains a whole lot about US nuttiness.
-
You just described every religious person. Christians especially, waiting for the kingdom in heaven.
Not all of them, though sure you Yanks probably have a much larger percentage of the nutty ones who need The Patriarch to impose order and morality^tm^ on Earth due to their own inability to do morality.
-
You have one horrifically vile being ruining someone's life even though the victim worships them. The victim continues to worship them in spite of their atrocities just because they're powerful.
You literally just perfectly described the entire MAGA movement.
-
Yes, and those are the people that I think are herd-followers and not actually devout.
Anyone who asks "why don't you become a murder hobo if you don't think there's a hell?" is probably not a very functional being.
Their need for a patriarch figure to impose external order and validation on them explains a whole lot about US nuttiness.
Anyone who asks "why don't you become a murder hobo if you don't think there's a hell?" is probably not a very functional being.
Funnily enough, this plays into a comment I made in a different thread that some people actually do behave like NPC's
