In the beginning, the temple resembled a hoar house.

[Greatest I am]

In the beginning, the temple resembled a hoar house.

 

In studying ancient history of the advances of technology used in temples, and knowing that the first prostitutes were temple prostitutes, and also knowing that alcohol and psychotropic drug use was common, I tried to envision the reality of just what the temple and early religion was all about.

 

 

 

We generally envisage a large building that held many but in truth, the early churches where more like the home churches used today in smaller communities. I think they may have begun as places of worship but to early man, worship looked quite different than it does today.

 

Churches latter expanded along with the populations and used the latest technology to draw the crowd and the best technology and God would win the hearts of the patrons. These patrons were mostly poor people and for them to be persuaded to part with their hard earned wealth took the best effort that science and persuasion powers of the priests could muster.

 

The temple then, by the time Jesus came along to throw his temper tantrum, was a place of commerce, theatre for myth reading, partying and prostitution.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_prostitution

 

http://www.truthcontest.com/entries/the-present-with-religion/belief-truth-fantasy-reality.html

 

Just how important the theology of whatever God was worshipped we can never know. We can assume, because of the vast number of Gods that their theology was not important to them as they changed from one God to the other. We can know that the wealth that the temples amassed was earned with methods, that many today, would consider rather odious. They were more like carnivals, speak easies and hoar houses.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacred_prostitution

 

There is a hint in the following--

 

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians+6&version=KJV

 

where the writer seems to be bemoaning the use of these various delights yet not quite calling them illegal.

 

Even when I was young, the small local church was where I learned of drinking, partying and key clubs. It was rumored that every church had a key club but I have no direct proof of this last. Drinking and drugs though, I can vouch for.

 

From such is where our, ever so proper moral religions were born. From what we today would call immoral activity. Sacrifice, indulgences, fees for drink and drugs and prostitution gave birth to religion and financed what we have today.

 

Was religion born of what we would call corruption?

 

Were the ancient battles between churches just what we would call turf wars for wealth and the various magic tricks that the churches used to compete with each other?

 

Today, with religions that are based on fantasy, miracle and magic, are priests just doing the same Flim-Fam job on believers for their wealth?

 

IOW. Are priests just con artists?

 

http://www.megavideo.com/?d=3D3511DE

 

 

 

Regards

 

DL

 

 

[Moontanman]

BTW, that would be whore house and yes modern religions are to one degree or another whore houses especially creationism....

[imatfaal]

GIA - what do you hope to accomplish with your posts on religion? I am a firm atheist and rationalist and have been for many years so my criticism of your posts is not made with a religious perspective; in your posts you seem to be going out of your way to offend and upset those who do believe in god and are members of an established religion, is there a reason for this constant attack? I cannot believe that you are of a mind such that you think religious members of the forum will read your posts and re-examine their faith, they do not raise any interesting or new points, and they use highly inflammatory language; to me they only seem to evince an attitude of snide contempt and mockery, and I am curious why you bother.

[Marat]

In connection with the original churches being houses of prostitution, there still are temple prostitutes in religious shrines in India. The girls work there for a few years to collect enough money to help their families or finance their own later endeavors.

[Greatest I am]

GIA - what do you hope to accomplish with your posts on religion? I am a firm atheist and rationalist and have been for many years so my criticism of your posts is not made with a religious perspective; in your posts you seem to be going out of your way to offend and upset those who do believe in god and are members of an established religion, is there a reason for this constant attack? I cannot believe that you are of a mind such that you think religious members of the forum will read your posts and re-examine their faith, they do not raise any interesting or new points, and they use highly inflammatory language; to me they only seem to evince an attitude of snide contempt and mockery, and I am curious why you bother.

Firstly.

I write more for the lurkers than those who are likely to respond. Those are the ones who will likely think of the issues as opposed to the more literal or fundamental who will try to refute my position.

 

 

 

Seconly.

I bother because I care for my fellow man. Believe it or not, and think it evil for us not to correct poor thinking.

 

It is my view that all literalists and fundamentals hurt all of us who are Religionists.

 

They all hurt their parent religions and everyone else who has a belief. They make us all into laughing stocks and should rethink their position. There is a Godhead but not the God of talking animals, genocidal floods and retribution. Belief in fantasy is evil.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5HKHaClUCw4&feature=PlayList&p=5123864A5243470E&index=0&playnext=1

 

They also do much harm to their own.

 

African witches and Jesus

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlRG9gXriVI&feature=related

 

Jesus Camp 1of 9

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOqGhcwwE1s

 

Promoting death to Gays.

 

 

For evil to grow my friends, all good people need do is nothing.

Fight them when you can.

 

If you do not, what does that say about you?

 

Regards

DL

 

 

 

In connection with the original churches being houses of prostitution, there still are temple prostitutes in religious shrines in India. The girls work there for a few years to collect enough money to help their families or finance their own later endeavors.

 

 

I would never vote to make prostitution illegal, as in the West, most of these people are there because of past abuses, mostly in the home, and I would not add to that abuse.

 

At the same time, I think prostitution to be a blemish on any society.

 

Sure, many are in it just for the money but it is still human trafficking and placing a dollar figure on humans.

 

We cannot say we venerate human life while at the same time putting a price on it.

 

 

 

It is like the death penalty in some states and countries.

 

Can they be seen as venerating life while killing it.

 

I do not think so.

 

Regards

 

DL

 

 

[Moontanman]

How is prostitution putting a price on human life? Do they kill prostitutes after they are done where you live?

[npbreakthrough]

GIA - what do you hope to accomplish with your posts on religion? I am a firm atheist and rationalist and have been for many years so my criticism of your posts is not made with a religious perspective; in your posts you seem to be going out of your way to offend and upset those who do believe in god and are members of an established religion, is there a reason for this constant attack? I cannot believe that you are of a mind such that you think religious members of the forum will read your posts and re-examine their faith, they do not raise any interesting or new points, and they use highly inflammatory language; to me they only seem to evince an attitude of snide contempt and mockery, and I am curious why you bother.

 

i agree,

GIA your posts are boring me to death,

 

if you cant understand the important role that religion has played in the development of human society

and can only rephrase your misunderstanding of religious precepts into arrogant quips

you'll be none the wiser.

[imatfaal]

Firstly.

 

I write more for the lurkers than those who are likely to respond. Those are the ones who will likely think of the issues as opposed to the more literal or fundamental who will try to refute my position.

 

Seconly.

I bother because I care for my fellow man. Believe it or not, and think it evil for us not to correct poor thinking.

 

It is my view that all literalists and fundamentals hurt all of us who are Religionists.

 

They all hurt their parent religions and everyone else who has a belief. They make us all into laughing stocks and should rethink their position. There is a Godhead but not the God of talking animals, genocidal floods and retribution. Belief in fantasy is evil.

 

/youtube stuff stripped

For evil to grow my friends, all good people need do is nothing.

Fight them when you can.

 

If you do not, what does that say about you?

 

Regards

DL

....

 

 

You have noticed that most of the people who have argued with you on this forum are either agnostics/atheists or liberal fairly free-thinking religious believers (and no obvious fundamentalists or literalists) ?

 

If you are serious in wanting to convince fundamentalists of the error of their ways you are going about it the wrong way - your posts are aggressive, hectoring, and offer no argument merely comment. I made similar comments in Lemur's thread talking about the issue of hate and polarisation http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/57593-hate/ You will win no one to your cause by mockery and contempt. And I do fight the good fight - I am an active member of both the Rationalist Association and the South Place Ethical Society both of which are dedicated to providing a reasoned humanist alternative to religion. Your posts are at the point of becoming impossible to discern from a parody of anti-fundamentalism - a sort of Reverse Poe's Law.

[Greatest I am]

We all have our styles and all do the best we can with what we have.

 

Two things that I would point out.

 

Any that dare question religion will get shit on.

 

I have seen the loving type buried in it as well as my type so I will just follow my bliss.

 

As to fundamental or literal beliefs.

 

I would point out that any that believe in Jesus must read scriptures literally to some extent and all of them have fallen to belief in fantasy, miracles and magic.

 

To my way of thinking, they are all just as foolish as those who believe in talking animals.

After all, they have to believe in a God who would covet another man's woman, a sin, and impregnate his own mother with himself via invisible flying sperm. Incest.

How droll.

 

I leave it to others to be gentle with those, who as shown with my links above, are abusing children and promoting hate.

 

If that kind of thing does not set you off then you are not a moral person.

 

 

Regards

DL

Edited June 10, 2011 by Greatest I am

[mississippichem]

Firstly.

I write more for the lurkers than those who are likely to respond. Those are the ones who will likely think of the issues as opposed to the more literal or fundamental who will try to refute my position.

 

Start a blog. like Imatfaal stated, you are preaching to the choir here. Most of us are athiests, agnostics or rational [scientifically minded] believers. This is a discussion forum, and you really never offer anything to discuss.

 

Alright, fundamentalists are foolish, we get it. Move along, nothing to see here.

[Realitycheck]

psst. psst. (I think perhaps the biggest issue in many people's minds is the obnoxious picture. Greatest, really? As in like Marilyn Manson greatest?) Many people have distinct reasons for their overblown distastes of religion, childhood issues and so forth. It's important to remember that most of the religious have good intentions in mind, however flawed, distorted, and problematic they might be (especially some of the writings), though things like mental instability and drug abuse can cause things to go too far. Might I suggest a style makeover, new name/picture? You might actually like it, find it freeing. Just a suggestion.