Where you are in error is looking at the vast majority of the churches in the western hemisphere and elsewhere in the world as the example of what the bible calls the church. It is not.
While you may call my position an "error", I do not see it as such. I must be guided based on practical terms, this means that what most churches preach, (knowingly or not), is much based on the bible, again, the practical result, by far and in summarizing, has been the limitation of free thinking, by perfectly capable men and women, simply because to different degrees, they disagreed with what either the bible dictates, or the "in vogue" representation at the specific time was made to represent the same scripture.
What your comment does tell me is that the bible is in effect irrelevant, as by your own acknowledgement churches have not followed the scripture. I must base my decisions on actual evidence, whether the churches "did it or not" (based on your book), becomes irrelevant, what matters is that they "did it".
Once again, you are arrogant by calling my position and opinion an "error" in spite that the facts are behind me, based on actual events, regardless of what the actual scripture may say, or not. In the end it is a matter of representation, indeed, representation by humans as capable of either brilliance or mistakes as I am. Moreover, deeds are what really matter, what you say the book meant has no meaning in the face of the deeds performed.
The bible as a book written by a number of people who were very human, is subject to misconception and differing points of view amongst the different authors. These authors may subscribe to basic principles that are equal to current principles accepted as "common decency, common honesty, and common sense", so far so good.
However, this book also expresses the idea of a supernatural and an all mighty being which is portrayed as the creator of everything and that one day the world will end and we all will face him and be "judged" by this deity. This also assumes that there is "life after death".
The concepts in the above paragraph are sufficient for me to discredit this book and most of what is contains, not only because I disagree with the above, but because I have seen the deeds of the churches who claim this book as their official guide.
You may now claim (at least to me), that this book says one thing and the majority of churches do differently, indeed in disagreement to its scripture. I call such double standard to be at best, that the leaders of the churches are frauds because either they do not know the book well, or they follow a practice of deceit. At worst, I call this conduct that of a hypocrite.
Look at what you oppose (the bible) has to say on the subject of forbidding people from getting married and a couple of other items I'm sure you will recognize...
So what ? I can think and determine by myself and based on my own reasoning, ethics, and morals to determine what is right/wrong etc. I do not need an old book to use as guide.
Further, I can read other books that are far more up to date and address the problems of the current world far better than your old book with archaic prose and outdated language, would even begin to define and understand today's world. Again, I bet you that more than half of the people that claim they follow such book can not even understand it, and the rest who do have spent so much time studying it (of which a good percentage of such time is spent attempting to decipher its antiquated style), by the time they are reasonable done with it (if ever at all), they must be raving mad, or the die of old age!
To take a small and simple example, I can read an issue of The Economist, obviously using my own reason and thinking capabilities and understand more about the problems that affect the world of today and the twenty first century, than reading fifty times old prose from a decaying book, which subscribes to an ideology of terror, death, wars, suffering and deceit, in spite of what you tell me, because I can see the real life deeds of those who claim to be guided by it.
The atrocities committed spanning a number of centuries, I have read exceeded 66 million lives lost and the wealth of those victims going to a "church" but not the church depicted in the bible. We know that history has a habit of repeating itself.
Wow ! that really makes me fell better ..... NOT !!
So what you mean by "history repeats" itself, you mean to tell me that these "churches" (as you describe them), are rogues, do not follow the bible, and in essence, they will do it again ??!!
Excuse me, but I do not believe your statistics, as it is impossible for you to quote such figures as I doubt very much that such statistics were ever even kept, let alone have the church DISCLOSE any of said statistics, assuming the church kept them.
Your attempt to put a specific figure is ridiculous as you know very well that such is impossible, and while indeed substantial it is, it does not matter whether it was 10, 20, 66 or 100 million, the point of all this is (as with the bible), and regardless if church a, b, c, or x, acted according to what an old book says or not, is the fact that the church DID IT !! it is their deeds that count, based on a corrupt code of ethics and an irrational attitude that if they were allowed to continue doing it they would still do it !!
You really must think I am an absolute idiot, you insult me, and you just crossed the line in which I can not hold any respect for you.
Let me illustrate a little:
In a book called: "Against the Gods" (The name, although quite appropriate for this current post, it really deals with the history of risk and risk management, and primarily deals with mundane (and hence rational and logical), subject matters related to investment and how risk management from its origins, has evolved. However, the parallel one can draw, making the reference relevant to this discussion is that risk is directly proportionate to the level of knowledge one has about the subject at hand. How the so-called "mysteries" are dispelled once the relevant facts and elements of risk are analyzed, measured, evaluated, and taken the appropriate measures to either avoid or protect against its possible consequences.
Mystics on the other hand pretend, (and hope that others do the same), that by creating gods, saints, spirits, demons and other rather "airy" concepts, based on confusion, ignorance, foggy scripture, and indeed, "blind faith", will give all the answers to man's questions.
In addition, the book contains hard evidence that will put in question the figure you express as (I quote) "...I have read exceeded 66 million lives lost and the wealth of those victims going to a "church" but not the church depicted in the bible." (end of quote).
"Against the Gods"
The Remarkable Story of Risk. By Peter L. Berstein, you can find the following:
1. William the Conqueror kept a survey known as the Doomsday Book of 1085 (that's the 11th. century) in it included "cadasters" ~ registers of ownership and value of real property ~ he paid no importance to number of humans involved. Why ? because its purpose was taxation and such was based on property not individuals.
Over the years due to the increase in the populations of the cities, military considerations, and potentially taxation based on individuals, petty studies to the consideration of keeping tabs on individuals were considered but nothing was done in a serious scale.
2. It was not until 1604 through 1661 in which a more extensive study kept by John Graunt a wealthy businessman which published a little book called "Natural and Political Observations made upon the Bills of Mortality that records of live births and deaths were kept. This was for the city of London.
William Petty a friend of Graunt, who was a physician, Surveyor for Ireland, Professor of Anatomy, and profiteer during the wars in Ireland, assisted Graunt in his work. Petty published a work called "Political Arithmetik", which earned him the title of the Father of Modern Economics. Petty's review of Gaunt's work in a Paris Journal prompted the French to undertake a similar study in 1667.
3. Around the same time in Amsterdam similar records were kept, primarily for the issuance of life annuities and corresponding payments. Some churches in France kept records of "christenings" (baptizes, NOT births), and deaths.
4. the above did not include most of the countryside, nor we can be assured of the completeness of the statistics gathered.
This indicates to me that (with the benefit of the doubt), that it could not have been until the mid 1650's in which records of life and deaths were more accurately kept, and at best it could not really be complete.
That leaves us with around 350 years (to date) of somehow gradually improved statistics kept, which still does not guarantee that the churches would have either kept record of their death camps, not that they would have been willing to disclose such statistics even if they kept them. In addition that leaves us roughly with about 1,250 years of certainly a most bloody period (from around 400 AD to said 1650 AD) in which the church could have exercised a degree of control in a substantial way during which no doubt wielded sufficient power and sword and NOT A SINGLE RECORD WAS KEPT !!
Nevertheless, if we take your figure of 66 million victims as stated by you and divided into 350 years (from 1650 to present), that would leave us with 188,500 victims per year, or based on % of population we have the following:
Remember that this leaves out the years from 400 to 1650 (1250 years)
Population of the world in:
Year Total Pop. Victims % (based on a yearly constant of 188,500)
1650 550,000 34 %
1725 725,000 26 %
1850 1'175000 16 %
1900 1'600,000 11.78
1950 2'564,000 7.35 %
1980 4'478,000 .0042 %
Present 5'700,000 .0033 %
Population Data: home.worldonline.nl
The only conclusion I can get from the above is that the thirst for blood by the church has gone down (on a percentage basis), in a direct proportion to the amount of knowledge by the masses, and by science, which has been capable of improving the welfare of humans and extending their life span based on KNOWLEDGE AND SCIENTIFIC CURE, NOT based on Voodoo, prayer and ignorance.
Bottom line all of the above means that:
1. It is impossible to know (with true accuracy) the amount of people
the church killed.
2. It is clear, beyond doubt that science, reason, free thought and knowledge improves human life.
3. Prayer and belief on gods is irrelevant.
4. Your attempt to express a specific figure is deceiving, particularly when you continue to insist that "the bible does not indicate so, it is the churches that have done so, not the directives of the bible", further demonstrating that the bible, based on your own words is totally irrelevant !!
5. It is now clear to me why the church is so interested that the peasants reproduce as mindless imbeciles, indeed taking away the woman's decision what to do with her own body, placing it in the hands of the state and/or the priests. By doing so (and keeping the level of ignorance high), they can continue with their blood-thirsty practices, and in spite of this, not make the human race extinct as they kill each other with gusto.
This is so absurd that it is unbelievable. They hide in their so-called messages of love and "brotherhood of humanity", except the record simply does not match the theory.
Forgive me, but you are so casual about it, you sound as some of those history revisionist that have expressed, as the creationists (more like the cretins), for example, that the history of the earth spans only one million years, and all the Anthropological evidence of the history of earth, man and evolution establishing the history of the earth spanning 4.5 billion years, as mere rubbish and fabrication by Darwinist demons. Worse yet, you sound as the neo-nazis, indeed bible thumping Christian, claiming that the holocaust never really existed as history portrays it. In such case, I believe you are not only a fraud but also you are dangerous.
If you are going to strongly oppose an enemy you should study them. In this case you might find a friend to your way of thinking to a degree.
An enemy ??? hmm, that is interesting... there is the warring factor showing, same with the other poster earlier that misconstrued skepticism and tolerance for moral aimlessness and destruction !!
What is it with you people that if someone does not agree with your views, immediately you start with your fear mongering and with war, violence, destruction, lack of morals....
I would assume that it would be easier to simply say: You think your way and I think my way, end of story, no fear of gods, no war, no immorality, no destruction etc. etc.
As for "finding a friend" (I will be nice, and only answer as follows to such comment).
Thanks but no thanks, I know enough about the church, the bible, the deeds perpetrated by their relevant representatives, and their mentality, to stay away from them and be very aware of their modus operandi... I have enough real friends for me to possibly consider a bible zealot to call him "friend".
Besides, I want to be productive, not a student of a useless book that needs an update, as in been scrapped and re-written all together, by more rational and free thinking authors utilizing logic, science and reason, NOT torture, sadism, violence, despotism and mysticism.
The fact that I am not a bible expert, does not mean I am precluded to know and establish what is moral and what is not, what is ethical and not, for myself and those that depend on me. Get a reality check, it is only a book !! To decide that the bible is definitively a book Not to follow. Further to decide to stay away from bible zealots like you.
These are only a few of the many things that the bible teaches but the church you despise does not practise and in fact does the opposite of.
The bible does not require splendour and wealth for Christians to meet in. Christ preached on hillsides, later his followers held meetings in catacombs at the risk of their lives.
Well, thank you for supporting my point !! indeed the bible is irrelevant !!
Therefore, we can safely conclude that there is absolutely no need to read an old book, when I, as rational individual, am perfectly capable to lead a productive, satisfying and happy life, without the baggage of old scripture who was written about two thousand years ago, and can not possible relate to today's world, in spite of the voodoo representation that other human beings (without supernatural powers), may be willing to impose on me, in spite of my continuing refusal to believe in such quackery, requests to be left alone since I do not need to be convinced, nor lead to "salvation" from an unknown evil.
Thank you I rest my case.
Z.
p.s. It is obvious (at least to me), that you have no valid argument for me to even begin considering giving any importance to your ideas and book, therefore I suggest that You go your way, and I go my way, so long you do not attempt to press your ideas, I have no problem you expressing whatever it is you want to express, but please do not address them to me or make related comments to mine as I will not be kind in responding to your replies.
I am sure you feel the same way. Therefore, we are simply going in circles, so it is best if we ignore each other.
Remember that this thread is in re: the meaning of life, not bible school.
Have a nice life. |
