Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2018
- Messages
- 4,902
Someone is getting pregnant at the end of this series
Kaguya-sama wa Kokurasetai: Tensai-tachi no Renai Zunousen - Vol. 17 Ch. 169 - The ABCs of Men and Women
- Thread starter MangaDex
- Start date
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2018
- Messages
- 1,464
@HolyDemon
In Islam at least that i know of for a fact, the religion allow pre-cursor existing religion that adhere to the original teachings of their prophet to be practiced.
sadly most of the teachings aren't so well reserved by the passage of time, for example; modern day bible are one that are heavily modified by the church.
if you have the time and feel like studying. i recommend comparative religion studies as an eye- opener.
to me, as a whole, religion aims to make human goood.... it's humans that are messed up regardless or religion or beliefs...
In Islam at least that i know of for a fact, the religion allow pre-cursor existing religion that adhere to the original teachings of their prophet to be practiced.
sadly most of the teachings aren't so well reserved by the passage of time, for example; modern day bible are one that are heavily modified by the church.
if you have the time and feel like studying. i recommend comparative religion studies as an eye- opener.
to me, as a whole, religion aims to make human goood.... it's humans that are messed up regardless or religion or beliefs...
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2019
- Messages
- 1,439
Poor Chika. All that bubbly idealized version of romance hopping around in her head just got a jolt of realism.
@no168_92 the 2 largest denomination of Islam, Sunni and Shia, frequently engage with each other in violent conflict. Their prophet Muhammad showed respect to precursor religion by conquering the entirety of Arabia, destroying the old religion statues and converting the populace to Islam. Yep very tolerant.
Religion is created by humans (at least all of them except an unknown one, if there's any, are). Religion has always been messed up from its very conception. It's always been a tool for charismatic individuals to consolidate power into themselves, to make the populace follow their orders without questions
Religion is created by humans (at least all of them except an unknown one, if there's any, are). Religion has always been messed up from its very conception. It's always been a tool for charismatic individuals to consolidate power into themselves, to make the populace follow their orders without questions
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2018
- Messages
- 56
woaaah what's happening here..... xD
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- May 31, 2018
- Messages
- 321
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2018
- Messages
- 1,464
@HolyDemon
the 2 largest denomination of Islam, Sunni and Shia, frequently engage with each other in violent conflict. (sunni and shia only started becomes distinct around 40~60 years after Prophet Muhammad pbuh passed away. fact-check it if you want)
Their prophet Muhammad showed respect to precursor religion by conquering the entirety of Arabia(When the prophet passes away, only 3 or 4 major cities was under the influence of Islam, again fact-check if you want),
destroying the old religion statues and converting the populace to Islam (the statues that were destroyed were ones that are actually either in public places or those that actually are too big that is untolerated. yes, certain contested holy sites are cleansed, can't argue that. but the practitioner are allowed to keep small or personal ones) ( the conversion are NOT compulsory, it is a choice given... fact-check again iyw)
Religion is created by humans (at least all of them except an unknown one, if there's any, are). (how can you say for certain a religion is not GOD sent then?, same principle how you can say it's human created. we'll never know. that's why I recommend comparative religion studies(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_religion). you can decide for yourself after comparing all the facts of the major or maybe minor religion facts)
Religion has always been messed up from its very conception. (NOPE totally wrong, do you know that buddhism is actually a schism from hinduism? just a random trivia)
It's always been a tool for charismatic individuals to consolidate power into themselves, to make the populace follow their orders without questions ( religion at their core are never about power or influence. the human interpretation are what made them seem so)
(not being snarky or sarcastic, and no offense intended whatsoever, but study more on them religions, based on facts and the teachings alone, not on human-based actions. then'll you see why i say religion are not the problem, humans are...)
PM me if you want to further discuss this like intellectuals. I can answer most of your question. for those that i cannot, i'll research more into it first....
the 2 largest denomination of Islam, Sunni and Shia, frequently engage with each other in violent conflict. (sunni and shia only started becomes distinct around 40~60 years after Prophet Muhammad pbuh passed away. fact-check it if you want)
Their prophet Muhammad showed respect to precursor religion by conquering the entirety of Arabia(When the prophet passes away, only 3 or 4 major cities was under the influence of Islam, again fact-check if you want),
destroying the old religion statues and converting the populace to Islam (the statues that were destroyed were ones that are actually either in public places or those that actually are too big that is untolerated. yes, certain contested holy sites are cleansed, can't argue that. but the practitioner are allowed to keep small or personal ones) ( the conversion are NOT compulsory, it is a choice given... fact-check again iyw)
Religion is created by humans (at least all of them except an unknown one, if there's any, are). (how can you say for certain a religion is not GOD sent then?, same principle how you can say it's human created. we'll never know. that's why I recommend comparative religion studies(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_religion). you can decide for yourself after comparing all the facts of the major or maybe minor religion facts)
Religion has always been messed up from its very conception. (NOPE totally wrong, do you know that buddhism is actually a schism from hinduism? just a random trivia)
It's always been a tool for charismatic individuals to consolidate power into themselves, to make the populace follow their orders without questions ( religion at their core are never about power or influence. the human interpretation are what made them seem so)
(not being snarky or sarcastic, and no offense intended whatsoever, but study more on them religions, based on facts and the teachings alone, not on human-based actions. then'll you see why i say religion are not the problem, humans are...)
PM me if you want to further discuss this like intellectuals. I can answer most of your question. for those that i cannot, i'll research more into it first....
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2018
- Messages
- 793
@HolyDemon
Religion has always been messed up from its very conception.
As Gobekli Tepe (12,500 BP) demonstrates, organized religion predates the Neolithic, so that's a pretty big conclusion. Especially from so little evidence.
@no168_92
for example; modern day bible are one that are heavily modified by the church
All the books of the of the Protestant and Catholic Canons, and that of the Coptic, Syriac, Orthodox and Ethiopian Churches have available manuscripts that predate the first seven ecumenical councils. These books may have been modified or been written by authors different from the ones they're traditionally ascribed to, but the "church" didn't modify them.
Religion has always been messed up from its very conception.
As Gobekli Tepe (12,500 BP) demonstrates, organized religion predates the Neolithic, so that's a pretty big conclusion. Especially from so little evidence.
@no168_92
for example; modern day bible are one that are heavily modified by the church
All the books of the of the Protestant and Catholic Canons, and that of the Coptic, Syriac, Orthodox and Ethiopian Churches have available manuscripts that predate the first seven ecumenical councils. These books may have been modified or been written by authors different from the ones they're traditionally ascribed to, but the "church" didn't modify them.
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2018
- Messages
- 1,464
@Northern
yeah, i got that, but i was maybe oversimplifying it too much... but yes the 'church' wasn't the one modifying them... my memory's a bit rusty. when was the first council again? in Gregorian years? and if we had to say, 'who' modified or changed the written bible to what is it nowadays? from the original transcribe or teachings? please do enlighten or refresh my memories...
yeah, i got that, but i was maybe oversimplifying it too much... but yes the 'church' wasn't the one modifying them... my memory's a bit rusty. when was the first council again? in Gregorian years? and if we had to say, 'who' modified or changed the written bible to what is it nowadays? from the original transcribe or teachings? please do enlighten or refresh my memories...
Double-page supporter
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2019
- Messages
- 574
I mean...as usual Ishigami kind of isn't wrong.
Seeing Fujiwara just back out the door had me creased up.
Seeing Fujiwara just back out the door had me creased up.
@no168_92
All that wiki page on comparative religion do is showing that some religion are similar, and some other religions are very different from each other. Are you suggesting that they're all correct?
The burden of proof is on you, you have to prove that God exists, that religion (all of them, or any specific one?) was created by God, and that God wanted humans to be "good" (you also have to define "good", because religion obviously doesn't agree upon a definition for good). Religion is as likely to be created by Alien or Dinosaur as it is created by God. (Heck how do you know if God isn't actually an alien or an dinosaur?)
Every individual with an illusion of grandeur or ambition can claim to be messenger of God. How do you differentiate them from the genuine one, if there's any?
All that wiki page on comparative religion do is showing that some religion are similar, and some other religions are very different from each other. Are you suggesting that they're all correct?
The burden of proof is on you, you have to prove that God exists, that religion (all of them, or any specific one?) was created by God, and that God wanted humans to be "good" (you also have to define "good", because religion obviously doesn't agree upon a definition for good). Religion is as likely to be created by Alien or Dinosaur as it is created by God. (Heck how do you know if God isn't actually an alien or an dinosaur?)
Every individual with an illusion of grandeur or ambition can claim to be messenger of God. How do you differentiate them from the genuine one, if there's any?
@Northern And? The fact that religion predates Neolithic doesn't prove that it wasn't created by humans, and thus corrupted by human's greed and social hierarchy?
By the way, greed and social hierarchy predate humanity. Many lifeforms were capable of greed, through hoarding behavior and social animals all display various form of social hierachy
By the way, greed and social hierarchy predate humanity. Many lifeforms were capable of greed, through hoarding behavior and social animals all display various form of social hierachy
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2018
- Messages
- 1,464
@HolyDemon
oh, i personally don't refer to wiki actually. just usually for basic sharing with others... but the field is basically not just about similarities or differences amongst religion. it's about methodically, filtering out facts and details on the religions itself. not mainly on the preachers, prophets, holy persons or practitioners but still a part of the studies.
burden of proof. hmmm... that's a difficult thing to tackle... same as a crime committed in secrecy, what about alibi, witness or evidence...? can you prove them to be genuine? the court, judge, accused, lawyers all try to achieve their own desired aim or job, but who can say they are doing the good/bad or even coming closer to the truth?
who can say dinosaurs or alien exist? that's why we have scientific fields and studies.
how can you say all religion are messed up if you've never studied all of them in depth? maybe you've studied one? have YOU studied them in detail then? disregard the human part in their proliferation if you want to be hyper critical.
ok, now we move onto personage or maybe historical figures... again, study them in historical texts, from multiple different sources if you want to be sure it's free from bias. again, it all comes to studying... yes, people often say, history is written by the winners, that's why cross-checking exist.
this not only apply to religion if you want to be petty, every political, noblesse oblige, economic personage make a move/policy/act etc. and is theirs the one you personally agree on? or disagree? how can you know if you never know them in person? again, we come back to researching them... or studying them from valid sources....
it's up to you to actually invest time and energy. BUT if you wan to be specific, than be specific, which person? which religion? where and when they originated? you decide.
oh, i personally don't refer to wiki actually. just usually for basic sharing with others... but the field is basically not just about similarities or differences amongst religion. it's about methodically, filtering out facts and details on the religions itself. not mainly on the preachers, prophets, holy persons or practitioners but still a part of the studies.
burden of proof. hmmm... that's a difficult thing to tackle... same as a crime committed in secrecy, what about alibi, witness or evidence...? can you prove them to be genuine? the court, judge, accused, lawyers all try to achieve their own desired aim or job, but who can say they are doing the good/bad or even coming closer to the truth?
who can say dinosaurs or alien exist? that's why we have scientific fields and studies.
how can you say all religion are messed up if you've never studied all of them in depth? maybe you've studied one? have YOU studied them in detail then? disregard the human part in their proliferation if you want to be hyper critical.
ok, now we move onto personage or maybe historical figures... again, study them in historical texts, from multiple different sources if you want to be sure it's free from bias. again, it all comes to studying... yes, people often say, history is written by the winners, that's why cross-checking exist.
this not only apply to religion if you want to be petty, every political, noblesse oblige, economic personage make a move/policy/act etc. and is theirs the one you personally agree on? or disagree? how can you know if you never know them in person? again, we come back to researching them... or studying them from valid sources....
it's up to you to actually invest time and energy. BUT if you wan to be specific, than be specific, which person? which religion? where and when they originated? you decide.
Member
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2019
- Messages
- 350
What the fuck is wrong with the comment section
Similar threads
