#pro religion

[johnwicklover1999]

i think one thing that anti-theists like.. do wrong (?) is treat religions like they're monoliths, which is impossible. you might find that one denomination is larger than another, but there will pretty much always be other denominations, and varying interpretations within each denomination.

no religion is a monolith, and no religion ever will be one. that's because religion is a personal experience to the individual, who will have their own thoughts and feelings about their faith. that is how people are in regards to everything, because humans aren't a monolith of a species.

i understand it might be confusing, or even frustrating when a religion has many denominations and interpretations, but that doesn't work super well as a reason for wanting to rid of religion. in fact, just yesterday i was told by an anti-theist that 'ideally' the belief of magic would be rid of and traditional religion wouldn't change. i know for a fact that other anti-theists would disagree with that and present their own ideal outcome of anti-theism, because i often browse anti-theism tags to get an understanding of anti-theist beliefs (it's good practice to read up on some opposing opinions to get some standing ground! my dad taught me that.)

it is perfectly okay to be critical of religion, i myself am critical of some religious ideas from varying religions! but when you don't fully understand the religion you're criticizing, and you're getting your information from biased sources, or only reading about limited ideas then you don't have the information to accurately criticize any religion. the idea that all religions are strict monoliths is entirely false, and if someone believes that then their criticism isn't totally credible, especially when they can't acknowledge the good of religion.

in the end, individual religions can not be treated as if they are massive groups of people who all share the same ideas and the same beliefs, harmful or not. because that's literally just not true. if you want to improve religion then actually go forth and try to understand it and listen to different people discuss their religion and it's flaws, trying to get rid of religion will only hurt people. (and i very strongly believe that getting rid of religion will in turn hurt spiritually, and by extension culture.)

#i originally wrote this post in the shower after getting up at 5:15 im barely awake rn this is goinng in the drafts so i can proofread it #nothing that has ever existed has been a monolith 👍 people even have different ideas of how board games are played bro #if you're curious; i'd appreciate it if people could read my other post on anti-theism ♥️ #it focuses on how religion; spirituality; and culture are all connected and how getting rid of religion will ultimately hurt- #spirituality and culture- concepts especially important to POC in the modern age (and historically) #to sum up my other post; if you get rid of religion you will hurt spiritual and cultural concepts which will hugely affect POC; and we don't #need to have our beliefs and culture hurt again; no one does whether they are POC or not because white people have still suffered erasure of #their cultures and spiritual beliefs. #ok thanks for reading 👍 its 5:46 am now #OKAY HI it's 4:02 pm ive re-read this and got some input from a friend Yay! we're all good now #anti theism #theism #pro theism #pro religion

[theogbubblesnake]

#ask me anything #world religion #Pro Religion #God Loves You #Praise God #Praise Jesus #Queer People Of Faith #Queer Christians #Progressive Christians #Islam #Judaism #spiritualgrowth

[yanderestevenuniverse]

Im getting real tired of all this anti religous sentiment on both tumbr and reddit smh

#Christian #pro religion

[underleveledjosh]

No, religion is not fascist in nature. The anti-theist who told you that it was is just a fuckin idiot that does not know history and does not know how religion works.

However, anti-theism is fascist and authoritarian in nature.

#anti-theism #anti-theist #religion #pro religion

[paradiseillusory1998]

Yahweh was and is an anthropologically complex god who could be very violent.

The Old Testament god was also a warrior god who could have been a ruthless general who committed his fair share of atrocities.

It is not intellectually honest to say that he was a god who was always devoted to peace.

He was a very violent deity.

More than many others.

But some considerations need to be made.

The bible does not speak of slavery but of servitude.

Two things that are different.

The bible also the old testament was with exodus 21:16 expressly forbids kidnapping a human and selling him.

That slavery / servitude allowed to Israel as well as being regulated to be much less violent and give many rights to the servant, who was mostly either a war booty or a criminal, has a well-defined time limit.

See Exodus 21: 2.

And of course there were exceptions as seen in exodus 21: 5-6 but they were voluntary exceptions where the servant for whatever reason decided to stay.

Not only was biblical servitude temporary and limited to 6 years but also weekly total rest was granted for all see Deuteronomy 5: 12-14

The bible also grants rights that did not exist in other cultures and are unlikely to exist afterwards.

For example as seen in Exodus 21: 26-27 a slave / servant who suffers permanent damage is released and if he is killed the offender must be tried as seen in Exodus 21:20.

According to soothing 25: 42-43 and talmud kiddushkn 20a the servants are not to be treated harshly and are to eat the same food as the master, enjoy the same comforts and reside in the same type of dwelling.

It was a type of servitude limited to prisoners and even then they are servants with enormous rights whose freedom is given in time for a maximum of 6 years.

Even female servitude and the situation of women were highly regulated in a positive way just see Exodus 21:11.

Which governs legal provisions to protect women from abuses that were widely granted according to ancient traditions.

It is certainly not a positive model or an ideal situation.

But it was an unpleasant situation that needed to be adjusted.

And even then it was a rare situation due to unpleasant circumstances such as economic disaster as seen in Kiddushin 20a and even then as seen in Nehemiah 5: 6-12 it was a situation that showed great indignation and in the nehemia texts urges the magistrates to condone the debts of the poor.

Of course there are exceptions and according to Levititicus 27: 28-29 there is talk of immolating men and women but there is the term cherem which indicates for what I know a condemned to death and / or an enemy doomed to destruction in war.

And there is no mention of a death but of a non-possibility of redemption from the sentence.

Now let's be clear it is not a beautiful thing but it is more similar to forced labor, however regulated, than to slavery as in Rome or Greece.

Furthermore, it must be considered that God and the bible show great ruthlessness.

Over and over again they commit objectionable best things at worst atrocity.

But although there are harsh and bloody verses, the ultimate goal and objective in the Torah and in the Old Testament was and still is universal peace.

See isaiah2: 4; Michael 4: 3 or Psalms 34:15.

But also Proverbs 3:17, Leviticus 36: 6, Isaiah 32:17.

Even when battle is encouraged in Deuteronomy 20: 1-4, the exaltation of battle is lacking.

Exemptions from war are shown in Deuteronomy 20: 5-9.

And in Deuteronomy 20:10 before any war there is always the offer of peace.

And in hilkhot malakshim 6: 1 it is obligatory to give the possibility of peace or to violate treaties or to deceive surrendered enemies.

In Deuteronomy 20:11, war only starts when peace is refused and the opposing national team refuses to give up their arms.

An attempt was made to stem the fury as seen with Deuteronomy 20:19 which prohibits the cutting down of fruit trees and therefore scorched earth.

It is also forbidden to kill civilians see Hilkhot Melakshim 6: 4 or Deuteronomy 20: 12-14.

In Deuteronomy 21: 22-13, a captive woman cannot be treated as a slave or a prostitute.

Even allowing marriage between Jews and peoples considered idolaters.

The exceptions are not due to racial or ethnic reasons in fact in Deuteronomy 28:63 God requires that even the Jews should be taken away from the land if they become corrupt.

The torah is not imposed against race and ethnic groups but against societies and cultures that are considered or have become corrupt and depraved and that have rejected peace and possible agreements.

It's not indiscriminate and we're certainly not talking about the Nazis.

After all, the connections were accepted and known.

See Genesis 38: 2 or 43:33.

Several prominent and positive and god-chosen people are not Israelites.

See the prophet Jeremiah who according to the peskta de Ravenna kahana 13.5 was Canaanite.

Now let's call it a total annihilation is certainly not a justification but it is honest to say that it is not a deliberate thing.

the wars waged were not motivated by ethnic reasons, the attempt at peace is always there, just like a regulated law to prevent the worst chaos.

And even then, peace is the ultimate goal and there is talk of exceptions.

Yahweh was a ruthless god but we certainly are not talking about a divinity who wants a state of eternal war and does what he does out of cruelty.

There are also contradictions.

Deuteronomy 16:10 the slaughter of gezer is retracted.

And the Amalekites are fought by David in Samuel 30 after their alleged extermination.

So it must be understood that the military terminology of the time was hyperbolic.

So yes of course the Jewish god and his faithful were merciless as they fought but they were not genocide.

Speaking also of the flood it must be said that unlike an enlil who did it on a whim, the biblical Yahweh did it for a moral question and for the corruption that a whole series of events brought (nephilim but this is another speech) enough see Genesis 6:12.

The biblical god does not need blood sacrifices just see Psalms 50:13.

In psalms 50 the moral sense is understood.

Noach / Noah is a common individual chosen for his morality and with a pact to ensure the survival of the human race, see Genesis 9.

The flood is not an act of revenge but an act of recreation.

And certainly it is not justifiable but the flood, Sodom and Gomorrah, the 10 plagues.

These are events that the bible are an extreme example of horror and inhumanity not something lawful.

They are exceptions due to complex circumstances, which Christians can hardly understand given that there are a lot of texts that should be canonical but are made apocryphal, see precisely the entire parenthesis of the nephilim.

Which its clear doesn't make it moral or justifiable.

An exception is not the norm.

The USA are not absolute monsters for the two atomic bombs launched at the end of the Second World War and for the many defects they have.

The bible itself is relatively more democratic than other ancient texts.

In Deuteronomy 17: 14-15 the monarchy was chosen and willed despite God's own advice not.

And even then in Deuteronomy 17: 15-20 there are abnormal legal limits.

And even then the torah shows a profound positive economic revolution as seen in Deuteronomy 10: 9_14: 28-29.

The New Testament is the logical progression of the Old Testament

Gradually throughout the Old Testament there is a progressive development of Yahweh and of his faithful.

That of the genesis is not that of the exodus which is not that of the Leviticus which is not that of Deuteronomy.

The Old Testament itself is the natural evolution of the Hammurabi code and the Sumerian myth.

This is not to justify Yahweh that anyone with a minimum of intellectual honesty will admit that he has done terrible things but it is to say that the situation is very gray and that there is a progression and a change of the Jewish people and their god.

#pro bible #anti bible #pro religion #anti religion #pro christianity #anti christianity #analysis

[lilithism1848]

#anti capitalism #leftism #communism #socialism #anarchy #abortion rights #reproductive freedom #bodily autonomy #abortion #reproductive rights #birth control #pro abortion #pro choice #abortion is healthcare #pro life #anti abortion #radical feminism #radical feminists do interact #radical feminist safe #gender roles #anti religion #fuck the patriarchy #sex based oppression #radical feminists do touch

[theblasianwitch]

Stole this from a friend with permission

#ex christian #pro chocie #reproductive rights #abortion #god was never pro life #do christians read the bible #bible shitpost #bible study #twilight academia #shadow academia #human rights #roe v wade #your religion is not mine

[mostly-funnytwittertweets]

#religion #abortion #pro choice #tweets #meme #memes #tweet #twitter #funny #lol

[balkanradfem]

religion will be like, it's because women talk to animals and eat fruit that childbirth is so painful, and the soil so hard to work! Not because we took away all of the midwives and created horrendous agriculture practices

#anti religion #blame shifting #victim blaming #radical feminism #anti christianity #anti patriarchy #pro midwife #pro no-dig gardening #anti agriculture

[sophieinwonderland]

I was thinking about making a plurality of God post, but the apologists beat me to it. 🤪

I'm not going to link directly to the article to avoid giving their site attention. Matt Slick and his organization CARM are notorious for being homophobic and transphobic.

The less traffic they're given, the better.

Still, I think this is a good weapon in our arsenal as plural systems. It seems inevitable that as plurality becomes more common and accepted and as tulpamancy continues to catch on, we're inevitably going to be faced with opposition from conservative bigots.

I think it was last year when I saw a thread in a Catholic subreddit with people there suggesting tulpa were demons.

I focus a lot on scientific evidence for non-traumagenic plurality. This is my weapon of choice when dealing with secular sceptics. But when the time comes and the religious right come after us, I believe the better tactic will be to remind them that their God Himself is a non-traumagenic plural.

Instead of arguing science against evangelicals, we argue instead that of course non-traumagenic plurality exists and is naturally occurring because God Himself is plural and humanity was created in the likeness of God and the Holy Trinity.

(Also, anti-endo Christians are inherently anti-God.)

#syscourse #christianity #religion #jesus #jesus christ #christ #bible #god #plural #plurality #multiplicity #sysblr #system stuff #systems #system #plural system #endogenic system #tulpa #pro endogenic #pro endo #actually a system #actually plural

[johnwicklover1999]

i find it interesting how anti theists will quote holy books and deny other interpretations of the text in favor of taking it literally. like yeah, a lot of literal religious interpretations are dogwater because of the time period they originate in. we still have the power to improve religion and welcome progressive ideas into religious spaces. but when you denounce religion by solely taking holy texts seriously? you are doing the exact thing youre against. youre treating religion as if it is a fact that is set in stone

#we (as humans) are not always the sins of our past; religion can still change and evolve culturally #im gonna spitball here (correct me if im wrong) but holy books arent often changed for the better; thats more of a political thing #-like church and state yk #political ideas gaining a place within the church and vise versa leads to religious governing or political preaching #theism #pro theism #pro religion #anti theism #this is a much less 'serious' post (all my posts are just me word vomiting) so like. if you're gonna harass me do it on a better post #also if it comes off like im being dramatic abt being harassed im just afraid of that happening and someone compromising my safety 👍

[theogbubblesnake]

worshipping God in your own way is the only way 🌹🐍🙏❤️✝️

#ask me anything #Heretic #Progressive Christian #Omnist #Omnistic #Hare Krishna #Religious Deconstruction #Religious Discourse #Pro Religion #anti religious corruption #Freedom of Religion #Wiccan #Buddhist #Unitarian #Quaker #Christian-Judeo

[cimerran-714]

So there's this person called @alaticba

He's pro-choice & made a claim that the SCOTUS recently ruled that performing abortions when the woman's life is in danger, is illegal. I asked him for a source.

First, he linked to the White House and Youtube videos (!), which is of course ridiculous since the government is pro-choice and you cannot expect any integrity from them. Youtube videos are also not a reliable source.

I asked for a direct link to the court decision & the judgements the judges had made. This is where it gets interesting. For some reason, he began to argue that saying "The court ruled that life-threat abortions should be illegal" is not a claim that he had made, and also proceeded to call me names. "Motherfucker", "Dense," and "Stupid" are some of them.

And now he's spamming my inbox & chat to say that he won't let me get away easily.

What's hilarious is that he STILL has not backed up his claim with proper evidence.

#pro life #abortion #conservatism #anti abortion #child free #pro choice #my body my choice #pro abortion #anti religion

[underleveledjosh]

Why You Shouldn't Pathologize Religion:

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/wildhunt/2012/07/dont-pathologize-religious-experiences.html?s=09

https://religionnews.com/2014/02/24/5-reasons-atheists-shouldnt-call-religion-mental-illness/

I'd also like to add that anti-theists call religious experiences as signs of mental illnesses in order to de-normalize it and demonize it. They are also making the implication that mental illness = immoral (whether or not they realize it), which is extremely ableist. This just makes anti-theists just as fascist and bigoted as the religious fascist extremists they say they are against.

In a social psychology perspective, there is 0 evidence that religion = mental illness.

#pro religion #religion #anti religion #anti theism #anti theist #theism #pro theist #fascism #anti fascism #pro theism #political post #mental health #psychology #social psychology

[paradiseillusory1998]

Yahweh era ed è un dio antropologicamente complesso che poteva essere molto violento.

Il dio dell antico testamento era anche un dio guerriero che poteva essere un generale spietato che ha commesso la sua giusta quota di atrocità.

Non è intellettualmente onesto dire che era un dio sempre votato alla pace.

Era una divinità molto violenta.

Più di molte altre.

Ma bisogna fare alcune considerazioni.

La bibbia non parla di schiavitù ma di servitù.

Due cose che sono diverse.

La bibbia anche l antico testamento era con esodo 21:16 proibisce espressamente di rapire un essere umano e di venderlo.

Quella schiavitù/servitù permessa ad Israele oltre ad essere regolamentata per essere molto meno violenta e dare molti diritti al servo, che per lo più era o un bottino di guerra o un criminale, ha un limite di tempo ben definito.

Vedasi Esodo 21:2.

E si certo c erano eccezioni come visto in esodo 21:5-6 ma erano eccezioni volontari dove il servo per qualunque motivo decideva di rimanere.

Non solo la servitù biblica era temporanea e limitata ai 6 anni ma anche settimanalmente veniva concesso riposo totale per tutti vedasi Deuteronomio 5:12-14

La bibbia accorda anche diritti che in altre culture non esistevano e difficilmente esisteranno anche dopo.

Per esempio come visto in Esodo 21:26-27 uno schiavo/servo che subisce danni permanenti viene liberato e se viene ucciso il colpevole deve essere processato come visto in esodo 21:20.

Secondo lenitivo 25:42-43 e talmud kiddushkn 20a i servi non devono essere trattati con asprezza e devono mangiato stesso cibo del padrone, godere delle stesse comodità e risiedere nello stesso tipo di abitazione.

Era un tipo di servitù limitato ad appunto prigionieri e anche allora sono servi con diritti enormi la cui libertà viene data a tempo di un massimo di 6 anni.

Perfino la servitù femminile e la situazione delle donne erano altamente regolamentate in modo positivo basti vedere Esodo 21:11.

Che disciplina disposizioni legali per tutelare la donna da abusi che erano ampiamente concessi secondo le antiche tradizioni.

Non è certo un modello positivo o una situazione ideale.

Ma era una situazione spiacevole che doveva essere regolata.

E anche allora era una situazione rara dovuta a spiacevoli circostanze come il disastro economico come visto in Kiddushin 20a e anche allora come visto in Nehemia 5:6-12 era una situazione che ha mostrato grande indignazione e nei testi nehemia esorta i magistrati a condonato i debiti dei poveri.

Certo si sono eccezioni e secondo levititico 27:28-29 si parla di immolare uomini e donne ma c'è il termine cherem che indica per quello che so un condannato a morte e/o un nemici votato alla distruzione in guerra.

E non si parla di una morte ma di una non possibilità di riscatto dalla condanna.

Ora sia chiaro non è una cosa bella ma è più simile a lavori forzata comunque regolati che a a schiavitù come in Roma o in Grecia.

Inoltre bisogna considerare che si dio e la bibbia mostrano grande spietatezza.

Più e più volte commettono cose al meglio discutibili al peggio atrocità.

Ma per quanto ci siano versi aspri e cruenti il fine ultimo e l obbiettivo anche nella torah e nell antico testamento erano e sono la pace universale.

Vedasi isaia2:4; michea 4:3 o salmi 34:15.

Ma anche proverbi 3:17, levitico 36:6, Isaia 32:17.

Perfino quando in Deuteronomio 20:1-4 si incoraggia alla battaglia manca l esaltazione alla battaglia.

In Deuteronomio 20:5-9 vengono mostrati delle esenzioni alla guerra.

E in Deuteronomio 20:10 prima di ogni guerra c'è sempre l offerta di pace.

E nell hilkhot malakshim 6:1 è obbligatorio dare possibilità di pace o violare i trattati o ingannare i nemici arresi.

In Deuteronomio 20:11 la guerra parte solo quando la pace viene rifiutata e la nazionale avversa rifiuta di abbandonare le armi.

Si cercava di arginare la furia come visto con Deuteronomio 20:19 che proibisce l abbattimento di alberi da frutto e quindi la terra bruciata.

Inoltre è proibito uccidere i civili vedasi Hilkhot Melakshim 6:4 o in Deuteronomio 20:12-14.

In Deuteronomio 21:22-13 non si può trattare come una schiava o una prostituta una donna prigioniera.

Permettendo addirittura il matrimonio tra gli ebrei e i popoli considerati idolatri.

Le eccezioni non sono dovuti a motivi razziali o etnici infatti in Deuteronomio 28:63 dio impone che anche agli ebrei qualora si corrompessero deve essere tolta la terra.

La torah non si impone contro stirpe ed etnie ma contro società e culture che sono ritenute o divenute corrotte e depravate e che hanno rifiutato la pace e possibili accordi.

Non è una cosa indiscriminata e di sicuro non parliamo dei nazisti.

Dopotutto i legami erano accettati e noti.

Vedasi genesi 38:2 o 43:33.

Diversi personaggi importanti e positivi e prescelti da dio non sono Israeliti.

Vedasi il profeta Geremia che secondo il pesikta de Ravenna kahana 13.5 era cananeo.

Ora chiamiamolo non è certo una giustificazione un annientamento totale ma è onesto dire che non è una cosa voluta.

Le guerre fatte non erano motivate da motivi etnici, il tentativo di pace c'è sempre, esattamente come una legge regolamentata per impedire caos peggiore.

E anche allora la pace è il fine ultimo e si parla di eccezioni.

Yahweh era un dio spietato ma di certo non parliamo di una divinità che vuole uno stato di guerra eterna e fa quello che fa per crudeltà.

Ci sono inoltre delle contraddizioni.

Il Deuteronomio 16:10 il massacro di ghezer viene ritrattato.

E gli amalekiti sono combattuti da Davide in Samuele 30 dopo il loro presunto sterminio.

Quindi bisogna capire che la terminologia militare dell epoca era iperbolica.

Quindi si certo il dio ebraico e i suoi fedeli erano spietati mentre combattevano ma non erano genocidi.

Parlando anche del diluvio bisogna dire che al contrario di un enlil che lo ha fatto per capriccio lo Yahweh biblico lo ha fatto per una questione morale e per la corruzione che tutta una serie di eventi ha portato( nephilim ma questo è un altro discorso) basta vedere genesi 6:12.

Il dio biblico non ha bisogno di sacrifici di sangue basti vedere salmi 50:13.

Nei salmi 50 viene inteso il senso morale.

Noach/Noè è un comune individuo scelto per la sua morale e con un patto per garantire la sopravvivenza della razza umana, vedasi genesi 9.

Il diluvio non è un atto di vendetta ma un atto di ricreazione.

E certo non è giustificabile ma il diluvio, Sodoma e gomorra, le 10 piaghe.

Questi sono eventi che la bibbia sono un esempio estremo di orrore e disumanità non qualcosa di leciti.

Sono eccezioni dovute a circostanze complesse, che i cristiani possono capire poco dato che mancano un sacco di testi che dovrebbero essere canonici ma sono resi apocrifi, vedasi appunto l intera parentesi dei nephilim.

Il che sua chiaro non lo rende morale o giustificabile.

Un eccezione non è la normalità.

Gli Usa non sono mostri assoluti per le due bombe atomiche lanciate a fine seconda guerra mondiale e per i molti difetti che hanno.

La bibbia stessa è relativamente più democratica rispetto ad altri testi antichi.

In Deuteronomio 17:14-15 la monarchia è stata scelta e voluta nonostante dio stesso consiglio di no.

E anche allora in Deuteronomio 17:15-20 ci sono limiti legali abnormi.

E anche allora la torah mostra una profonda rivoluzione economica positiva come visto in Deuteronomio 10:9_14:28-29.

Il nuovo testamento è la progressione logica dell'antico testamento

Via via nel corso dell antico testamento c'è uno sviluppo progressivo di Yahweh e dei suoi fedeli.

Quello della genesi non è quello dell esodo che non è quello del levitico che non è quello del Deuteronomio.

L antico testamento stesso è la naturale evoluzione del codice di hammurabi e del mito sumero.

Questo non per giustificare Yahweh che chiunque abbia un minimo di onestà intellettuale ammetterà che ha fatto cose terribili ma è per dire che la situazione è molto grigia e che c'è una progressione e un cambiamento del popolo ebraico e del loro dio.

#pro bible #anti bible #pro religion #anti religion #pro christianity #anti christianity #analysis #politic #war

[oatsandeggs]

#iloveabortion #texaskillswomen #texashateswomen #texas #red states #abortion access #abortion #prochoice #feminism #leavewomensbodiesthefuckalone #reproductive rights #forced birth #giving birth still kills #pregnancy still kills #rape #yes all men #pro choice #anti religion #Instagram