• Shiggles@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That jesus dude had some pretty liberal thoughts. Buddhism was a nice reaction to the caste system. The method of delivery may not be inherently moral, but it is possible to manipulate a population in a way overall beneficial to society.

      • Kalash@feddit.ch
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That jesus dude had some pretty liberal thoughts

        He personally, maybe. I didn’t know the guy. The religion that grew around him, though … not so much.

        I’m not sure if it’s because of his father or he just had terrible editors for his posthumous book release. But some of the stuff in there is quite abhorrent.

        • folkrav@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s quite easy to find a lot of legitimately disgusting stuff in there, true. I’m on the antireligious apatheist side of things, so you don’t have to convince me on that. But I wouldn’t go as far as saying some religions’ fundamental pillars don’t have any good messages behind it. “Love one another” alone isn’t too bad at face value, isn’t it?

          • Kalash@feddit.ch
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            We a have so many other books now that contain all those good messages, even a lot more with more relevance to modern life, without all the terrible stuff and non-sense.

            It just makes no sense to keep a 2000 old book around for a couple of good messages that are already thaught in many other, more modern stories and context.

            • folkrav@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              The point was “do religions have any good in them”, not “are religious texts still relevant”.

              • Kalash@feddit.ch
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                No, that was not the point. They point was “do Relgions have good morals” and the answere is clearly no.

                • folkrav@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  I see. You seem to interpret it as “are they moral as a whole”. I interpreted it as “do they have any good morals”. I don’t think either affirmation is contradictory.

                  • Kalash@feddit.ch
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    I interpreted it as “do they have any good morals”

                    That seems like quite a low bar. Basically the broken clock being right twice a day.

                    No relgious person goes around and says “never mind that jesus and god stuff, I’m just in it because of the “you shalt not kill””. It’s always about bundling in all the irrelevant crap. Those couple good stories about helping neighbours doesn’t offset that.