The Religion Discussion

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

The Religion Discussion
Moderators: 3ne2nr Mods

KALI PUJA

can some one explain this please..cause i really will like my views on this curve..

AND THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE SYMBOL ON HINDU TEMPLES

take a read
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kali_Puja

and
http://www.diwalifestival.org/kali-puja.html

I'm sure some of the Hindu users can offer better explanations.

take a read here too
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika

The swastika (卐) (Sanskrit: स्वस्तिक) is an equilateral cross with four arms bent at 90 degrees. The earliest archaeological evidence of swastika-shaped ornaments dates back to the Indus Valley Civilization as well as the Mediterranean Classical Antiquity and paleolithic Europe. Swastikas have also been used in various other ancient civilizations around the world including China, Japan, Korea, India, Nepal and Southern Europe. It remains widely used in Indian religions, specifically in Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism.

The use of the swastika was incorporated by Nazi theorists in 1920 with their conjecture of Aryan cultural descent of the German people. Following the Nordicist version of the Aryan invasion theory, the Nazis claimed that the early Aryans of India, from whose Vedic tradition the swastika sprang, were the prototypical white invaders. The concept of racial purity was an ideology central to Nazism, though it is now considered unscientific.

[mamoo_pagal]

The Religion Discussion
Moderators: 3ne2nr Mods

KALI PUJA

can some one explain this please..cause i really will like my views on this curve..







AND THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE SYMBOL ON HINDU TEMPLES

oh snap you think you got one!!! Looks like another local Christian fanatic playing the "Kali"card. It is sad you can use the net to get that particular information on Kali and no other point of vies. This has been dealt with many times in this thread as well as others......do a search

[Chimera]

why was the thread that specifically spoke about kali puja, deleted?

[Dizzy28]

why was the thread that specifically spoke about kali puja, deleted?

Was a Brahmin conspiracy led by Trac.

[Habit7]

^ really? it's a big problem that people are smug?

Well this just one atheist critiquing other atheist. Atheists are not perfect, rather than engage in tu quoque you should humbly read what he has to said see if atheists are at fault.

It can also be said that religious people have annoyed alot of society for eternity! Pushing their own religion and personal beliefs on others and claiming they will burn in hell if they don't follow them.

We live in a society where we have a free exchange of ideas. If you dont like what you hear, reject it. Besides why should it matter to an atheist the threat of Hell if he doesn't belief that it is real? Should now enlightened adults file a class action lawsuit against parents who threaten them with Santa Claus to be nice or no good presents? If the Bible is not real then forget about it, however if you are convinced that it is real, act on it.

Then they try to get their beliefs taught in school and lobby to have their beliefs made into laws of the state.

Well in T&T religious bodies contribute financially to the running of government schools so they should have a say in what is taught. Also these schools tend to outperform secular schools even at the primary school level where they dont receive the best students by exams as in secondary schools. Furthermore any group can get together and lobby government to enact laws in the country, Arrive Alive does it, so too Unions, International groups, sporting associations, professional bodies, etc. We still live in a democracy with a gov't of the people and by the people you know Unless you believe that religious bodies alone should be suppressed and not contribute to governance, as in totalitarians countries (most of which tend to be atheist).

Roaming crusades tents, loud speakers, ringing home door bells.

How is this different than any other marketing campaign? Ask the citizens of Chaguanas West how was life for the weeks leading up to the by-election. Any religious body can rival that?

Then there is the war and fighting, this sect over the other, this belief over the other, killing, bombing and bloodshed, all in the name of God.

I have continually shown that sadly while there are those who kill in the name of God, the reality is that this is portional to each religion and that as a whole it is in the minority. According to Phillips and Axlerod's, Encyclopedia of Wars, only 7% of wars are religious, 4% of which are Islamic. 93% of all wars are non-religious. viewtopic.php?f=4&t=267363&hilit=axlerod&start=15240#p7117328 The 20th Century, the most bloody ever, had the WWI, WWII, Korea War, Vietnam War, Khmer Rouge Repression, Stalin and Mao which saw the death of hundreds of millions with no religious justification.

But please, dont feel like these facts are being rammed down your throat.

Religious people see atheists as being devil worshipers, immoral etc etc and that atheists are pushing their "religion" or "faith" on others.

Well 1 John 3:8 says that anyone who makes a practise of sin is of the devil, so don't just isolate that to just atheists alone, even Christians at one point in time were devil worshippers. I have repeatedly said that atheists are not immoral just without a moral base. Finally the fact is, it is highly contradictory that people with "no beliefs" proselytise their idea of "no beliefs" to everyone. They are free to do so in my view, but if they truly had "no beliefs" then they should have nothing to proselytise. However they do, and it is the belief that God absolutely doesnt exist (and dont ask for proof of it).

[HOPE4ALL]

The Religion Discussion
Moderators: 3ne2nr Mods

THE STUDY OFF DIFFERENT RELIGIONS AN THERE CULTURE.....

TRUE MUSLIMS HAVE NOTING TO HIDE ABOUT THERE RELIGION AN THERE CULTURE THEY SHARE THIS,

TRUE CHRISTIAN / JEWS HAVE NOTING TO HIDE ABOUT THERE RELIGION AN THERE CULTURE THEY SHARE THIS,

MY QUESTION WAS TO EXPLAIN KALI PUJA AN THE RELATIONSHIP WITH THE SYMBOL TO THE HINDU TEMPLES.. IS IT NOT A QUESTION FOR HINDUS TO WILLINGLY SHARE THERE RELIGION AN THERE CULTURE ? NOT REFER ME TO A SITE TO READ LIKE THIS IS NOT PART OF TRINIDAD CULTURE...I DID NOT JUDGE CAUSE WE ALL HAVE LEARN FROM DIFFERENT RELIGION ONLY GOD JUDGE OR ARE WE GOD'S NOW?


IF THIS CANT BE EXPLAIN ON

The Religion Discussion
Moderators: 3ne2nr Mods

WHAT HAS THE PURPOSE OF 546 PAGES AN COUNTING FOR??

one must not be reminded of there word / rules then one intelligence is question...

[rocknrolla]

tell them atheist make they own thread lmao. they could talk all d sheit they want in there.. lol

[rocknrolla]

LMFAOO!

[Slartibartfast]

If the sex is unbelievable atheists shout something equally unbelievable... "Oh God!"

[Chimera]

[Habit7]

^^^somebody didnt read the Telegraph op ed http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/brend ... he-planet/

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

^^^somebody didnt read the Telegraph op ed http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/brend ... he-planet/

you posted that article again? even though you claim "These are not the views of Habit7.", seems you agree with the guy.

[Habit7]

They are not my views but I do agree with some of what he is saying:

Atheists online are forever sharing memes about how stupid religious people are. I know this because some of my best Facebook friends are atheists. There's even a website called Atheist Meme Base, whose most popular tags tell you everything you need to know about it and about the kind of people who borrow its memes to proselytise about godlessness to the ignorant: "indoctrination", "Christians", "funny", "hell", "misogyny", "scumbag God", "logic". Atheists in the public sphere spend their every tragic waking hour doing little more than mocking the faithful.

It seems that for people who have "no beliefs," internet memes are for them what Watchtower magazines are to Jehovah Witnesses.

[DJ]

^^no, memes are funny as hell and entertaining. Magazines are BORING. Thats the difference.

[RBphoto]

On the Kali puja issue, Muslims slaughter way more goats and cows for allah, don't hear you complain about that. The swastika is a type of cross and is found in many ancient cultures. Just do a search for how Hitler came up with the Swastika and you should be satisfied. The burden of proof is on the Religious. Scientific proof can be tested, is repeatable, and the underlying theory can be refuted by further tests. This allows science to march along to greater truths, while all religions seek to keep you mired in a single made-up untruth.

Quote:
"Well in T&T religious bodies contribute financially to the running of government schools so they should have a say in what is taught."

Yeah, that is a blasted shame. All schools should be secular and religious school should all be private institutions.

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

It seems that for people who have "no beliefs," internet memes are for them what Watchtower magazines are to Jehovah Witnesses.

one is comedy and the other is religion.

[Habit7]

I know right!

One engages in heavy proselytisation by dissemination of its literature which includes graphic displays of its message.
An the other is comically started by a guy who was proven by a court of law to have no knowledge of the biblical languages (Hebrew & Greek).

A religion and a comedy.

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

^ I can't tell which is which from your descriptions lol

seriously though, "proselytisation" is hardly the appropriate word since atheism is not a faith, doctrine, system of beliefs or has any structure at all - other than that I don't know of any atheist who was proven by a court of law to have no knowledge of the biblical languages (though I wont doubt most atheists lack that knowledge anyway)

[livewire]

On the Kali puja issue, Muslims slaughter way more goats and cows for allah, don't hear you complain about that.

... and to add to that...

At least they only sacrificing animals, remember Kane and Abel and the animal sacrifices to "god" or was that a different "god" in the bible. Thank "god" it is NOT the first born sons, only begotten son, eldest son.... a pattern emerges here...or drowning of the earth or turning people to stone/salt etc..etc..

[Slartibartfast]

Ummmmmm... you know that Cain and Abel aren't taken literally as fact (they used to be taught as fact for centuries but they no longer do). The thing is, if you believe in Cain and Abel, you must believe in Adam and Eve. If the story of Adam and Eve is true then we are all inbred.

[Habit7]

^ I can't tell which is which from your descriptions lol

seriously though, "proselytisation" is hardly the appropriate word since atheism is not a faith, doctrine, system of beliefs or has any structure at all - other than that I don't know of any atheist who was proven by a court of law to have no knowledge of the biblical languages (though I wont doubt most atheists lack that knowledge anyway)

The first one is atheism, the second one is JW (Charles Russell,founder of JW, was proven not to know the biblical languages he claimed to interpret when he disagreed with Christianity)




I see that you like to personally define words and then fault others for disagreeing with your personal definition. But atheism (a-theism) means no gods. A true atheist in the strictest sense believes that there is no divine beings, absolutely.

So what you are describing there sounds more like agnosticism which means no knowledge (a-gnosticism). They are the ones that can truly say that they are without beliefs because they believe they are unconvinced (which is contradictorily a belief in itself).

So clean up your terms, because an atheist has the strong and absolute belief that there is no God and that is a faith statement, which forms a doctrine and can take on any structure it wants: http://www.atheists.org/ (if you are right, their "become a member" and "donate" links shouldn't work)

[livewire]

Ummmmmm... you know that Cain and Abel aren't taken literally as fact (they used to be taught as fact for centuries but they no longer do). The thing is, if you believe in Cain and Abel, you must believe in Adam and Eve. If the story of Adam and Eve is true then we are all inbred.

That is my point... If you believe that Adam and Eve story...you have to believe the rest...so you can not judge others that believe in something equally as bizarre.

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

Ummmmmm... you know that Cain and Abel aren't taken literally as fact (they used to be taught as fact for centuries but they no longer do). The thing is, if you believe in Cain and Abel, you must believe in Adam and Eve. If the story of Adam and Eve is true then we are all inbred.

but Habit7 claims the Bible is absolute truth and must be taken literally.

A recent study in Iceland by the deCODE genetics company, published by the journal Science, found that third cousins produced more children and grandchildren than more distant marriages, suggesting that "in spite of the fact that bringing together two alleles of a recessive trait may be bad, there may be some biological wisdom in the union of relatively closely related people". For hundreds of years, inbreeding was historically unavoidable in Iceland due to its then tiny and isolated population.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inbreeding

[Habit7]

Arent you guys imposing your morality on everyone else?

Who said that inbreeding in morally wrong?

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

^ I can't tell which is which from your descriptions lol

seriously though, "proselytisation" is hardly the appropriate word since atheism is not a faith, doctrine, system of beliefs or has any structure at all - other than that I don't know of any atheist who was proven by a court of law to have no knowledge of the biblical languages (though I wont doubt most atheists lack that knowledge anyway)

The first one is atheism, the second one is JW (Charles Russell,founder of JW, was proven not to know the biblical languages he claimed to interpret when he disagreed with Christianity)




I see that you like to personally define words and then fault others for disagreeing with your personal definition. But atheism (a-theism) means no gods. A true atheist in the strictest sense believes that there is no divine beings, absolutely.

So what you are describing there sounds more like agnosticism which means no knowledge (a-gnosticism). They are the ones that can truly say that they are without beliefs because they believe they are unconvinced (which is contradictorily a belief in itself).

So clean up your terms, because an atheist has the strong and absolute belief that there is no God and that is a faith statement, which forms a doctrine and can take on any structure it wants: http://www.atheists.org/ (if you are right, their "become a member" and "donate" links shouldn't work)

I posted a quote before "if atheism is a religion then not collecting stamps is a hobby"

Many people do not believe in santa claus, the tooth fairy or leprechauns but they did not base that on faith. They base it on a lack of evidence. Perhaps if they were presented with sufficient evidence they would change their view.

What does becoming a member or donating to a website have to do with a doctrine? atheists.org wouldnt be any more proof of a religion than trinituner.com. People with similar thoughts and ideas grouping together is not a religion. Similarly a biology convention is not a religion. A Trekkie Convention is not a religion either, even if many of the participants wish it was and treat it like it is.

[Slartibartfast]

Arent you guys imposing your morality on everyone else?

Who said that inbreeding in morally wrong?

Nobody said inbreeding was morally wrong. I can't love my sister in that way but who am I to tell you that you should not.

But Cain and Abel were both men. Which means if the story is true, the were both gay and one of them had a baby for the other. The most logical conclusion is that Abel impregnated Cain before Cain murdered him. But Cain would have had to at least have twins unless Cain's grandchild was born from a virgin or had a baby with either Cain or Adam. Unless Cain had a child with Eve. Which I doubt because it was not mentioned in the bible.

What is the bibles take on homosexuality and inbreeding have to say about this?

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

^ men can't make babies!

the Apologists explanation is that Adam and Eve had many children and many daughters after Cain and Abel were born and it was one of these daughters who Cain was married to and she was the one who had the child Enoch

Arent you guys imposing your morality on everyone else?

Who said that inbreeding in morally wrong?

did slartibartfast say anything about being immoral?

if anything it is Leviticus that states that incest/inbreeding is immoral. Where then is the imposing being done?

[Habit7]

Stamp collectors, tuners, trekkies, biologists, etc. don't unify based on theological beliefs.
Atheists do.




slartibartfast said "If the story of Adam and Eve is true then we are all inbred." Which deductively means that he believes the Adam and Eve story is not literally true and we are not all from a common ancestor (contrary to human evolution theory).

However for the Christian, incest is morally wrong because Paul reaffirms the Old Testament principle against incest in 1 Corinthians 5:1 which points back to Leviticus 20:11-12,19-21 and 18:6. However, this law of the Jews is thousands of years after Adam and Eve where God allowed inbreeding for the sake of population and dispersal. When this was sufficient, God outlawed it. That is why incest is immoral.

Having grown up in the West, whose laws have been influenced by Christianity, we see incest as taboo. So it is condescending to stand on the basis for why you see incest as taboo, the Bible, and ridicule the Bible.

[Habit7]

If not by providence or what others might call random chance, I just encountered this:

Atheists incensed after IRS grants them tax exemption as religious group
By Cheryl K. Chumley-The Washington Times Wednesday, August 21, 2013


The leader of an atheist group reportedly is incensed that the U.S. government has granted it a tax exemption, citing allowances for religious organizations — and she's even angrier at learning that she's considered a minister under the Internal Revenue Service code.

"We are not ministers," said Annie Laurie Gaylor, who heads the Freedom from Religion Foundation in The Blaze. She added: The organization doesn't want the tax exemption if it's based on codes granting allowances to religious groups.

"We are having to tell the government the obvious – we are not a church," she said.

Most people might welcome the chance to bypass paying taxes to the IRS. The Justice Department even filed a brief in court arguing that Ms. Gaylor is eligible for the exemption, which gives her tax-free housing, because she heads the group and atheist organizations are eligible for some of the same benefits granted churches.

But Ms. Gaylor's group is suing, saying the federal government's tax exemptions for religious groups does not apply to the atheists — and that the federal government's insistence on giving the benefit is actually tantamount to a tax-free housing award, The Tennessean reported. Ms. Gaylor and her husband, Dan Barker, initially were awarded a government housing allowance of $15,000 per year in 2009. They've been arguing they don't deserve the benefit — because they're atheists and proud to claim no religious affiliation — ever since.

The Justice Department's view: Buddhism and Taoism are affiliations that don't believe in God, but they're still considered religions and are qualified for the benefit.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... tax-exempt

I say take it and just say thanks. Errant televangelists have been using this to fleece the gov't for years as they make their millions, time for atheists to get their share.

[Slartibartfast]

slartibartfast said "If the story of Adam and Eve is true then we are all inbred." Which deductively means that he believes the Adam and Eve story is not literally true and we are not all from a common ancestor (contrary to human evolution theory).

It's definitely not true. However "common ancestor" in terms of the bible means Adam and Eve but in terms of human evolution means "Common Species" which could be thousands if not hundreds of thousands of beings that are able to pro-create with one another. Anyway that is an extremely simplified version of evolution I am giving here. It's a lot more complex than that and I'm not going to pretend that I fully understand it. Darwins book just too boring for me to get past the first couple chapters.