History BrokenBase / Religion

21st Mar '16 11:02:03 PM quirkygenius
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* ''Literature/TheBible'' has more of this than the rest of this page combined; Some of these also apply to the Talmud and the Qu'ran [[SelectiveObliviousness but it seems some people like to single out and pick on the Bible]] regarding them.

to:

* ''Literature/TheBible'' has more of this than the rest of this page combined; combined. Some of these also apply to the Talmud and the Qu'ran [[SelectiveObliviousness but it seems some people like to single out and pick on the Bible]] regarding them.
21st Mar '16 10:59:33 PM quirkygenius
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* ''Literature/TheBible'' has more of this than the rest of this page combined [[note]] Some of these also apply to the Talmud and the Koran [[SelectiveObliviousness but it seems some people like to pick on just the Bible]] regarding them. [[/note]]

to:

* ''Literature/TheBible'' has more of this than the rest of this page combined [[note]] combined; Some of these also apply to the Talmud and the Koran Qu'ran [[SelectiveObliviousness but it seems some people like to single out and pick on just the Bible]] regarding them. [[/note]]
15th Feb '16 12:59:51 PM quirkygenius
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* ''Literature/TheBible'' has more of this than the rest of this page combined (note, some of these also apply to the Talmud and the Koran [[SelectiveObliviousness but it seems people like to pick on just the Bible]] regarding them).

to:

* ''Literature/TheBible'' has more of this than the rest of this page combined (note, some [[note]] Some of these also apply to the Talmud and the Koran [[SelectiveObliviousness but it seems some people like to pick on just the Bible]] regarding them).them. [[/note]]
15th Feb '16 12:56:44 PM quirkygenius
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* ''Literature/TheBible'' has more of this than the rest of this page combined.

to:

* ''Literature/TheBible'' has more of this than the rest of this page combined.combined (note, some of these also apply to the Talmud and the Koran [[SelectiveObliviousness but it seems people like to pick on just the Bible]] regarding them).
15th Feb '16 12:50:10 PM quirkygenius
Is there an issue? Send a Message


Religious sects are not immune to this. In fact, these can often be worse than most, as dozens, hundreds, or even thousands of actual deaths are not an uncommon occurrence as a result of these arguments.

to:

Religious sects sects, and the non-religious are not immune to this. In fact, these can often be worse than most, as dozens, hundreds, or even thousands of actual deaths are not an uncommon occurrence as a result of these arguments.



** Specific examples: should we call ourselves atheists or agnostics?[[note]]Nearly all non-believers agree there's at least some chance of god existing, but self-proclaimed atheists feel the term 'agnostic' implies a greater likelihood than they're comfortable with, much like calling themselves 'unicorn agnostics' would. Conversely, many self-proclaimed agnostics think that atheists are speculating beyond the available data: they claim that just because there is no proof of God's existence today doesn't mean there always will be none. And ''then'' there are debates over whether "agnostic" means "someone who is unsure about the existence of a god" vs. "someone who believes that it is impossible to prove whether or not any god exists." The latter definition is technically correct, but the former definition has taken hold recently. And if you do use the latter definition, there's the issue of whether you're an "agnostic believer" or an "agnostic nonbeliever", since it's possible to believe in something even if you also believe that it's impossible to prove whether or not that thing is real. Related: There are people who seriously splot hairs between "I do not believe that God exists" and "I believe that God does not exist."[[/note]] Should we work with religious believers, against them, or both? Are all ideas fair game in the marketplace of ideas, or should we be sensitive to the strong attachments people might have to their beliefs?
** Even UsefulNotes/RichardDawkins gets this. He is portrayed in the media as one of the figureheads for Atheism and certainly has a large following, however a lot of atheists find him unpleasant, arrogant, and think he gives a bad image of atheism. This happens with other prominent atheists like Creator/ChristopherHitchens. Then there's the debate over whether the "New Atheists" are being Islamaphobic, such as Dawkins claiming on Twitter Islam was the world's greatest force for evil and that atheists should mock and be intolerent towards the religious.

to:

** Specific examples: should we atheists call ourselves themselves atheists or agnostics?[[note]]Nearly all non-believers agree there's at least some chance of god existing, but self-proclaimed atheists feel the term 'agnostic' implies a greater likelihood than they're comfortable with, much like calling themselves 'unicorn agnostics' would. Conversely, many self-proclaimed agnostics think that atheists are speculating beyond the available data: they claim that just because there is no proof of God's existence today doesn't mean there always will be none. And ''then'' there are debates over whether "agnostic" means "someone who is unsure about the existence of a god" vs. "someone who believes that it is impossible to prove whether or not any god exists." The latter definition is technically correct, but the former definition has taken hold recently. And if you do use the latter definition, there's the issue of whether you're an "agnostic believer" or an "agnostic nonbeliever", since it's possible to believe in something even if you also believe that it's impossible to prove whether or not that thing is real. Related: There are people who seriously splot hairs between "I do not believe that God exists" and "I believe that God does not exist."[[/note]] Should we atheists work with religious believers, against them, or both? Are all ideas fair game in the marketplace of ideas, or should we atheists be sensitive to the strong attachments people might have to their beliefs?
beliefs?
** Even UsefulNotes/RichardDawkins gets this. this. He is portrayed in the media as one of the figureheads for Atheism and certainly has a large following, however a lot of atheists people, including many atheists, find him unpleasant, arrogant, even bigoted and think he gives a bad image of atheism. This happens with other prominent atheists like Creator/ChristopherHitchens. Then there's the debate over whether the "New Atheists" are being Islamaphobic, such as Dawkins claiming on Twitter Islam was the world's greatest force for evil and that atheists should mock and be intolerent towards the religious.



* The East-West Schism, sparked by a number of BrokenBase matters of their own, is the greatest example to be found in the history of Christianity. The differences in faith created mutual distrust between the Catholic and Orthodox churches and sparked many wars during the course of several centuries.

to:

* The East-West Schism, sparked by a number of BrokenBase matters of their own, is the greatest example to be found in the history of Christianity. The differences in faith created mutual distrust between the Catholic and Orthodox churches and sparked many wars during the course of several centuries. Then throw the other Abrahamic faiths into the mix...
30th Nov '15 10:22:36 AM FF32
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** Even Creator/RichardDawkins gets this. He is portrayed in the media as one of the figureheads for Atheism and certainly has a large following, however a lot of atheists find him unpleasant, arrogant, and think he gives a bad image of atheism. This happens with other prominent atheists like Creator/ChristopherHitchens. Then there's the debate over whether the "New Atheists" are being Islamaphobic, such as Dawkins claiming on Twitter Islam was the world's greatest force for evil and that atheists should mock and be intolerent towards the religious.

to:

** Even Creator/RichardDawkins UsefulNotes/RichardDawkins gets this. He is portrayed in the media as one of the figureheads for Atheism and certainly has a large following, however a lot of atheists find him unpleasant, arrogant, and think he gives a bad image of atheism. This happens with other prominent atheists like Creator/ChristopherHitchens. Then there's the debate over whether the "New Atheists" are being Islamaphobic, such as Dawkins claiming on Twitter Islam was the world's greatest force for evil and that atheists should mock and be intolerent towards the religious.
17th Oct '15 6:56:50 PM nombretomado
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** Of course, Luther's ideas would have remained a mere "dispute of monks" (as [[ThePope some Catholic]] put it) had it not been for the recent invention of the printing press; without the press, the only people to hear about it would be a few monks and theologians, who would proceed to write angry letters to each other until the new ideas were either accepted or forgotten. With the printing press, the public at large got wind of it within days, and that changed society forever. Neat, eh?

to:

** Of course, Luther's ideas would have remained a mere "dispute of monks" (as [[ThePope [[UsefulNotes/ThePope some Catholic]] put it) had it not been for the recent invention of the printing press; without the press, the only people to hear about it would be a few monks and theologians, who would proceed to write angry letters to each other until the new ideas were either accepted or forgotten. With the printing press, the public at large got wind of it within days, and that changed society forever. Neat, eh?
16th Aug '15 3:49:09 PM sonicsuns3
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** Specific examples: should we call ourselves atheists or agnostics?[[note]]Nearly all non-believers agree there's at least some chance of god existing, but self-proclaimed atheists feel the term 'agnostic' implies a greater likelihood than they're comfortable with, much like calling themselves 'unicorn agnostics' would. Conversely, many self-proclaimed agnostics think that atheists are speculating beyond the available data: they claim that just because there is no proof of God's existence today doesn't mean there always will be none.[[/note]] Should we work with religious believers, against them, or both? Are all ideas fair game in the marketplace of ideas, or should we be sensitive to the strong attachments people might have to their beliefs?

to:

** Specific examples: should we call ourselves atheists or agnostics?[[note]]Nearly all non-believers agree there's at least some chance of god existing, but self-proclaimed atheists feel the term 'agnostic' implies a greater likelihood than they're comfortable with, much like calling themselves 'unicorn agnostics' would. Conversely, many self-proclaimed agnostics think that atheists are speculating beyond the available data: they claim that just because there is no proof of God's existence today doesn't mean there always will be none.[[/note]] And ''then'' there are debates over whether "agnostic" means "someone who is unsure about the existence of a god" vs. "someone who believes that it is impossible to prove whether or not any god exists." The latter definition is technically correct, but the former definition has taken hold recently. And if you do use the latter definition, there's the issue of whether you're an "agnostic believer" or an "agnostic nonbeliever", since it's possible to believe in something even if you also believe that it's impossible to prove whether or not that thing is real. Related: There are people who seriously splot hairs between "I do not believe that God exists" and "I believe that God does not exist."[[/note]] Should we work with religious believers, against them, or both? Are all ideas fair game in the marketplace of ideas, or should we be sensitive to the strong attachments people might have to their beliefs?
9th Aug '15 12:14:38 PM CaptEquinox
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** Heck, even mentioning pretty much any rumored apparition of the BVM after Fatima can start a flame war.
*** Just AFTER Fatima? Try bringing up "the Third Secret", or whether "the Consecration" was "validly" perormed.

to:

** Heck, even mentioning pretty much any rumored [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marian_apparition apparition of the BVM BVM]] after Fatima [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Our_Lady_of_F%C3%A1tima Fátima]] can start a flame war.
*** Just AFTER Fatima? Try bringing up "the "[[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Three_Secrets_of_Fátima the Third Secret", Secret]]", or whether "the Consecration" "[[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consecration_of_Russia the Consecration]]" was "validly" perormed.performed.



* If you're a Hindu, try mentioning the Kama Sutra to your pandit (that's a priest, for any non-Hindus reading this) or any fellow Hindus who happen to be elderly. They will almost definitely react in a horrified, scandalized fashion. This is due to the fact that even though Hinduism used to have much more "modern" (for lack of a better word) view of sex in ancient times, over the past few centuries, both conservative Muslim and Victorian British conquerors imposed a much more conservative view of sexuality after they conquered India, and this conservative view still pervades much of Hindu society today.

to:

* If you're a Hindu, try mentioning the Kama Sutra to your pandit (that's a priest, for any non-Hindus reading this) or any fellow Hindus who happen to be elderly. They will almost definitely react in a horrified, scandalized fashion. This is due to the fact that even though Hinduism used to have much more "modern" or "liberal" (for lack of a better word) view of sex in ancient times, over the past few centuries, both conservative Muslim and Victorian British conquerors imposed a much more conservative view of sexuality after they conquered India, and this conservative view still pervades much of Hindu society today.
18th Jan '15 4:45:00 AM MrThorfan64
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** Even Creator/RichardDawkins gets this. He is portrayed in the media as one of the figureheads for Atheism and certainly has a large following, however a lot of atheists find him unpleasant and think he gives a bad image of atheism. This happens with other prominent atheists like Creator/ChristopherHitchens.

to:

** Even Creator/RichardDawkins gets this. He is portrayed in the media as one of the figureheads for Atheism and certainly has a large following, however a lot of atheists find him unpleasant unpleasant, arrogant, and think he gives a bad image of atheism. This happens with other prominent atheists like Creator/ChristopherHitchens. Then there's the debate over whether the "New Atheists" are being Islamaphobic, such as Dawkins claiming on Twitter Islam was the world's greatest force for evil and that atheists should mock and be intolerent towards the religious.
This list shows the last 10 events of 81. Show all.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=BrokenBase.Religion