I guess I would have to see the movie (I won't) to get an idea of exactly what you mean. Are you saying even that even if there is a God and Christianity is true, one should abandon their beliefs because religious division can cause war? I think religion does provide plenty of hope on an individual level. In any case, I will be interested to hear how the movie fares...for now I'm going to focus on the games....and going to go say a prayer for Iowa.
Whoever said I was an Atheist? My beliefs, which are shared by Christians around the world, isn't the issue here. I will say that I am "spiritual" rather than religous. If you'd like to bash me for that, so be it. Jesus Christ was a man I would have liked to have known. He certainly had some great ideas based on what I've studied. Does that concept make you prickly? Be honest with yourself. Do you have an overwhelming urge to set me straight because I referred to Christ as a man? Do you have an overwhelming urge to preach your "truth" to the RX forum. If your blood pressure is going up while reading this thread, you're experiencing one of the dangers of religion. Peace my friend. Live and let live.
Last edited:
I wouldn't go that far. While religion has done alot of bad, there are numerous instances where it has done alot of good. Religious Charities that help those in need is an easy example. And not everyone has the same moral compass as the rest of us. For them, the notion of god and religion keep them in line.
Bill Maher made a movie interviewing people about religion without interviewing theologist, philosophers and scriptural scholars. That is like making a movie about cooking without interviewing chefs. If you're watching it for laughs, fine. But it is by no means an honest objective discourse on the subject.
Again, Bill Maher, and most of the people who share his opinion against religion, would get owned if they presented their arguments to people who study and analyze the bible for a living.
Again, Bill Maher, and most of the people who share his opinion against religion, would get owned if they presented their arguments to people who study and analyze the bible for a living.
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/-CWiASiqDdU&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/-CWiASiqDdU&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
My point is that the movie isn't some kind of intellectual, serious study of religion as you made it seem in your first post, it's a flat-out attempt to bash it in a backhanded way by a guy who's known for his 'gotcha journalism'. There isn't an ounce of credibility for this movie, period. Just look at the name, combining 'religion' and 'ridiculous' says it all. If you're naive enough to believe that this movie provides any kind of serious foundation for enlightenment, then you've clearly been fooled. It's nothing more than typical liberal atheist fodder.
As for your bizarre, off-subject, nonsensical rant about Christ being a man... where did I say that He wasn't? It clearly states in the Bible that God came to Earth in the form of a perfect man in order to spread the Gospel to Gentiles. Gentiles needed a path to God and salvation which only Christ could provide, since Gentiles weren't provided one in the Torah which was given to the Jews only by Moses. So, again, I'm not sure why you decided to somehow try and attack me on the issue of Christ being a man, especially since I never even mentioned the fact and certainly don't deny it. He's part of the Trinity, a concept you would understand a lot better if you were actually a Christian. If you're ever interested in truly opening your mind, turn off these garbage movies and read the true word of God in a Bible (KJV).
Well if you interviewed theologist you wouldnt get a very accurate depiction of modern religion seeing as how only a small percentage of religious people are scholars. The majority are just insecure sheep clinging on to a fairy tale and looking to fight whoever disagrees with their golden cow theory.
1. I can't find a single review of the movie that doesn't refer to it as a "documentary" or "satirical documentary". But maybe you're right -- I think a more appropriate genre would be "asking-nonsense-questions-to-people-who-aren't-qualified-to-answer-them-tary".
Why interview "boring" religious scholars questions about religion? Hmmm. Why ask boring brain surgeons questions about how the brain works.
2. The scholars would have owned Maher because they would have exposed the fact that his basic objections towards Christianity are based on faulty logic and appeals to emotion. They wouldn't of had to prove the existense of God to own him.
HK correctly notes that Maher's new movie is not a documentary.
Instead it is in fact a simple 90 minute exercise in exposing the often incredibly humorous inanity that many people use as a crutch for getting them through life.
I am a lifelong Christian and find Maher's observations on religion to be hilarious and often poignant.
It never gets old watching a fundy Christian (not the sect to which I adhere) try and defend the notion of the Old Testament God that spends a good portion of the OT murdering humans with which he is "angry".
Instead it is in fact a simple 90 minute exercise in exposing the often incredibly humorous inanity that many people use as a crutch for getting them through life.
I am a lifelong Christian and find Maher's observations on religion to be hilarious and often poignant.
It never gets old watching a fundy Christian (not the sect to which I adhere) try and defend the notion of the Old Testament God that spends a good portion of the OT murdering humans with which he is "angry".
Uh, by definition, a theologist (or is it theologan?) IS a biblical scholar. Most religious people are not scholars but I guess I did not understand what you are saying..Also, can you explain what you mean by "golden cow theory?" I'm curious. I am aware of the story of the golden calf in the Old Testament, but what is this "Golden Cow THEORY" of which you speak?
P.S. Thanks God for hearing my above referenced prayer for Iowa!!
ok - so you're interpreting my first post comment that the movie is "highly recommended" and that it is a "good insightful production" to mean that it's a serious study of religion? You're wrong. Since when does "insightful" mean "serious study"? There nothing to learn in the movie. It's not a lesson for anyone. There is no truth revealed for the masses to follow. As for the enlightenment you mention, I would hope anyone seeking that would do their own research and come to their own conclusions. I understand my place in the world much better than when I took someone's else's word for why I am here.
You go on to further interpret my comment that Christ was a man to mean that I am attacking you. I'm not trying to reveal anything to you fellow poster. If you're feeling attacked, then you're just being defensive. Relax... have a cheese sandwich and a vanilla coke. Enjoy a football game today.
When you're a bit more relaxed, come back and read a bit further past our shared belief that Christ was a man. You'll read that I was asking if the subject matter is raising your blood pressure. The subject matter in this case was Jesus Christ. You know nothing about me, but my my mere mention of Christ, even in a commonely accepted idea that he was a man, has riled you up. I'll say it again for you....If your blood pressure goes up because Christ is the subject... you're experiencing a danger of religion.
Would you like to have everyone in the world believe exactly what you do because you're on the correct path to enlightenment and anyone who isn't on your path is wrong? Do we need to learn a lesson?
Religulous. Great movie full of laughs. Bill Maher isn't out to teach us anything. He's simply questioning religion. That's right, man made religion.
And for the second time in this thread... Live and let live. Peace
