[ExI] Religions and violence.

John Clark jonkc at bellsouth.net
Tue Aug 10 04:54:08 UTC 2010

On Aug 9, 2010, at 2:09 PM, Sabrina Ballard wrote:

> Currently, many people take the bible, torahand koron literally, while they were written mainly as metaphorical documents.

When that stuff was a new bestseller I'm certain that none of the bronze age tribal members who loved it thought of it as a metaphor but rather as the literal truth, just as most believers do today. It's true that some liberal theologians when interviewed on CNN will say the idea of Adam and Eve and the talking snake and all that crap shouldn't be taken literally, but that's not what they tell their congregation on Sunday nor is it what the followers believe.  

> What is it that makes religion "retarded toxic waste"? What about Shinto or Buddhism?

Originally Buddhism did not concern itself with God or the supernatural, it was just a philosophy and a way of life that was supposed to make you happy, so it was not a religion at all. Unfortunately it got corrupted to the point of making Buddha himself a God, he would have been horrified. Japanese militarism in the 30's and 40's could never have succeeded without the aid of Buddhist holy men.

As for Shinto, it's big on ancestor worship and bilge about spirits inhabiting mountains and trees and rivers and shit. Preaching stuff that just ain't so is toxic.

But eastern philosophy does have value, I highly recommend "The Tao Is Silent" by Raymond M. Smullyan, a brilliant book.

> I am neither for or against religion.

What an incredible wishy-washy philosophy! Love it or hate it religion is a major part of our world, how can you be neutral?

  John K Clark 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20100810/4daf5bcc/attachment.html>

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list