The fatal flaw of both Christianity and Islam

[drg55]

The unfortunate events of this week with an intelligence style hit against the satirical magazine, has underlying it one single flaw.

As an Imam commented, "Mohammed responded with kindness to ridicule" - but that's not it.

It is of course the "cult of personality". What becomes a little nauseating is the constant reference to an individual (whose words were not even directly written down). Was he offended? Should his reputation be defended with death? Should a reputation that fragile be defended or "avenged"? Who really cares?

What about "No one comes to the father except through me"? Really? Of course it could be a little gnostic trickery of placing Jesus at the number two spot in the Pleroma, or just the escalation of theology a bit like a Monty Python script:

"Oi you said he was the Messiah"

"Yes..."

"Well is he perfect?"

"Well he must be perfect"

"Well if he was perfect he would be God then"

"Thank you very much, from now on we will call him God"

"Well how come he was born...?"

"Well now I remember it, that was a miracle..

Blah Blah on and on, off to fantasy land. The Orthodox creating a myth through "logic".

In fact if "Blessed are the poor for yours is the Kingdom of Heaven", it doesn't really seem that a cult of personality is necessary.

[Leucius Charinus]

The fatal flaw is that both male dominated cults take their "Sacred Bullshit" way too seriously.
Why FFS? Conditioning. Three cheers for Monty Python's "looking on the bright side of life".




****






**








LC

[MrMacSon]

Here's some interesting reflections of other aspects of other current discourse also described, interestingly, as religious 'violence', and aspects that I think reflect cult of personality -

• 1. http://gsneil.com/2015/01/03/speaking-of-myth/
  

  • I have a distaste for violence. Here, I must remind the good reader that violence is not strictly a physical phenomenon. Violence to a person’s ideas and reputation are harmful, just as other forms of violence are harmful to body and property. In the world of scholarship, violence is done by uncivil discourse and ad hominem attacks, to name just a couple of ways. And this is not only a modern development. It goes back a long way (just spend a little time reading the so-called saintly church fathers and you’ll see what I mean). The violence is not in simply challenging another person’s idea — it’s in why and how it’s done.

  2. http://vridar.org/2014/12/30/the-churli ... r-scholar/
  
  3. GS Neil again http://otagosh.blogspot.com.au/2014/12/ ... ernia.html
  

  • It is arguably evident to a third-party reader that Dickson is playing a “scorched student” strategy to distance himself from any criticism about where Lataster might have done his learning. Rather than preserving his credibility as an instructor, his emotional and careless response shines a light on his own exposure to bad marks and frankly, succeeds in making Lataster look better for having come through his influence with a better than average willingness to keep questioning the “settled” scholarship. Fail.

  4. http://vridar.org/2015/01/07/why-believ ... -question/

[drg55]

I have a distaste for violence. Here, I must remind the good reader that violence is not strictly a physical phenomenon. Violence to a person’s ideas and reputation are harmful, just as other forms of violence are harmful to body and property. In the world of scholarship, violence is done by uncivil discourse and ad hominem attacks, to name just a couple of ways. And this is not only a modern development. It goes back a long way (just spend a little time reading the so-called saintly church fathers and you’ll see what I mean). The violence is not in simply challenging another person’s idea — it’s in why and how it’s done.

A fantastic well put point, which I'm afraid is true against the French Satirical magazine. One goes out on a very long limb publishing


http://www.stareapresei.ro/charlie-hebd ... 45626.html

Particularly as the Middle East is so uptight on nudity. This can only be received by them as an absolute gratuitous affront.
One would expect that freedom of speech is used with judgement and there has to be a serious point to be made rather than random offense.
Of course satire is a very good weapon against tyranny. Sometimes evil is so heavy that people can't deal with it and look away, satire is useful to get the message across.
An example would be Candide by Voltaire.

However that in no way justifies the medieval murder campaign of Islamic State.

And where a Muslim leader in Australia said that clear references show that the Prophet did not respond to ridicule, how about this one from Saudi Arabia

Saudi blogger Raif Badawi has received the first 50 lashes of public flogging out of 1,000 for “insulting Islam” via an online forum that he launched. Jailed for ten years in prison, he faces over $200,000 fine. ....

Raif Badawi’s persecution started in 2008 after he co-founded the “Free Saudi Liberals” website to discuss the role of religion in Saudi Arabia. The network declared May 7, 2012 a "day of liberalism" in the kingdom and called for an end of religion domination over public life.

http://rt.com/news/221175-saudi-arabia-blogger-flogged/

Really this is completely unacceptable, Saudi Arabia needs to be cut off from all contact, sales of oil etc. Bank accounts frozen etc.
Their hypocrisy is also staggering with the abuses of some of them in the West. Badawi is a hero for freedom and we should help him in any way we can.

The problems with Islam are real, despite the fact that millions of followers are genuinely nice people, such as the Lebanese pastry cook I knew for nearly 40 years.
They have a blind spot for the social conformity that is a feature of the religion, and its abuses.

Extremists are responsible for atrocities but they can take lessons from Saudi Arabia.
Saudi Arabia has been funding conservative Islam around the world. This barbarism will only stop with the reform of the home of Islam.
America doesn't need their oil any more so how about some real action?

[kalima]

In fact if "Blessed are the poor for yours is the Kingdom of Heaven", it doesn't really seem that a cult of personality is necessary.

Who said it was?

People after all 'are who they are', they are really not bigger than life.