"Blind Faith", critizing religion... Options

[xjjajeengx]

Okay I just finished my report/essay on this topic. It's basically...

"Do you think that calling religion blind-faith is acceptable in today's society? Do you believe that it is blind faith?"

I know its a lamooo subject, but i actually wrote like more than 3 pages on this... so yea... amazing huh. And what sucks is that i have to think moreee of this subject sinc we're going to ahve this jumbo mumbo debate thing and i have smart people in my class who can beat the sh!t outtta me with language and brains...

My opinion:
-Amendment 1 states freedom of religion, it is the first amendment therefore was important...

-There is no solid proof that religion is in fact blind faith just as non beeleevers would say that there is no proof that religion is correct...

-True, amendment 1 states freedom of speech, but it seems disrespectful to use the freedom of speech to diss something that our forefathers have put into the constitution to better our country.

Lame lame opinion here, i admit, because i was required to addd a "legal-point-of-view" and OBVIOUSLY my teacher was dissapointed since i happened to add the FIRST amendment... hahah anyways. opinions?

[Nashvixen]

After reading one VERSE of that bullcrap I can tell its fake. Thats the stupidest thing I've ever read.

Don't rule it out altogether WhiteChocolate. I've done research on the parts of sacred texts that's been left out of the Protestant Bible.
As you know, the Protestant Bible is derived from Catholic texts, but there were some parts left out. There's a theory that even more was left out of the Catholic doctrine because of women's oppression. There is a story of Lilith, for instance, as Adam's first wife who rebelled against him. If men wanted to remain in power once their wives learned how to read, they had to simply keep certain information from them. Lilith's testimony could possibly have caused an uprising of newly confident women against their husbands.
There's also been thousands of years between the writing of the Bible and your reading of the Bible, and if some translator wanted a part taken out, he could easily have taken it out to keep the "weaker sex"... weaker (which women were).

Actually I didn't even realize that it was you I quoted until just now, mrs. dasturbd. Please forgive me, but I actually don't have a problem with you. I just thought that those "lost bible excerpts" were crap. I don't think it was a very credible link...

If the link was your problem, search for books on this at your local library. I encourage you to explore this further.

wow. anyways,.

i agree with this, most definately. Im christian, but i respect other religions most of the time unless they start telling me that im full of crap cause im christian.

please, i understand this is a debate forum and so there has to be friction, but could you guys please limit on the member bashing? Its kind of... messed up...

Hehe... *agrees* I said in the gay marriage debate forum that I was brought up a Southern Baptist Christian. I respect other religions, and I'm even open-minded to them. I don't want to be ignorant of what very well may be the truth as well.
If anyone who reads this believes that their belief is the one and only true and perfect belief, I remind you that there are others out there willing to die for theirs. They feel just as strongly about their faith as you yours. Can one compete?

[Pravda]

Don't rule it out altogether WhiteChocolate. I've done research on the parts of sacred texts that's been left out of the Protestant Bible.
As you know, the Protestant Bible is derived from Catholic texts, but there were some parts left out. There's a theory that even more was left out of the Catholic doctrine because of women's oppression. There is a story of Lilith, for instance, as Adam's first wife who rebelled against him. If men wanted to remain in power once their wives learned how to read, they had to simply keep certain information from them. Lilith's testimony could possibly have caused an uprising of newly confident women against their husbands.
There's also been thousands of years between the writing of the Bible and your reading of the Bible, and if some translator wanted a part taken out, he could easily have taken it out to keep the "weaker sex"... weaker (which women were).
If the link was your problem, search for books on this at your local library. I encourage you to explore this further.

Theory nothing. It's true. The texts left out of the Protestant Bible became known as the Apocrypha. It has several books that are still in the Catholic canon but no longer in the Protestant, like the book of the Maccabees (story of Channukah). Despite this, there are even more books that have been left out of the Bible as a whole due to the ideas of several 'scholars' at various conferences that met specifically with the idea of creating a holy compilation. For instance, no one wants to hear about the Book of Enoch or the Book of Jubilees, because it's filled with graphic descriptions of fallen angels rapping women and violence and giants that roamed the earth smiting men as they saw fit. During all this, God sat back and watched and laughed his ass off. This doesn't fit in with the way that most rabbinical counsels wanted God portrayed, so it was left out. Simple.

The same thing happened with the New Testament. Ever heard of the Nag Hammadi? It's filled with gospels not canonized. Ever heard of the Gospel of Thomas? How about the Secret Gospel of Mark? Ah, then there's Mary Magdalene. Mary was a prostitute, right? WRONG! Mary Magdalene was the daughter of the high priest in the temple, a member of the Levite clan. She was literate, rich, and well known. There are also implications in several of the gospels in the Nag Hammadi that Jesus even had a romantic relationship with Mary Magdalene. In some of the less complete gospels (they've decayed over time) there are lines like "And the Lord kissed Mary, expressing his love."

If you guys want to know more, give me some time to dig up some stuff from my honors religion class.