TITLE=
Christianity is not responsible – A conversation with a guy from extremetech

SUMMARY:
I would like to have your input, whether you are mormon, christian, atheist, pantheist and so on.
The question is:
is christianity responsible for anything.
For example (1), when person X is motivated to become a priest and build his own church, is christianity responsible for that?
For example (2), when person X is motivated to blow up an abortion clinic, is christianity responsible.

I invited that person here to come and chat with us.

PLAYBACK of the conversation:
======================
William Barath:
You mean x265, the encoder. H.265 is the ITU Video coding standard, not a piece of software. It's like saying that Christianity killed people in the Holy Wars, where in reality it was people who killed people.
======================
Jack324:
+William Barath:
That's a poor comparison. Christianity was why christians killed people in the crusades/holy wars. There is no christianity without the people. The cause of death was murder by christians, because of christianity. So in effect christianity was what killed those people.

A better analogy would be measuring something with the description of a ruler rather than with an actual ruler.
======================
William Barath:
+Jack324:
As with all wars, it was pride, greed, and fear among the leadership which led to the Holy Wars. Faith was the scapegoat. It's a fair analogy because ITU H.265 is a concept, x265, installed on the M1, is a functional implementation with real-world effects. Christianity is a concept. Indoctrined minions are functional implementations with real-world effects. The pros and cons of those effects aren't in scope of this conversation.

======================
Jack324:
+William Barath:
In my experience pride, greed and fear is the very backbone of all organized religion, none less so than christianity. Faith wasn't the scape goat, it was the reason why people died. The leadership wasn't doing the killing, it was the god fearing soldiers that believed it made them a good Christian to kill in the name of god. My point still stands, christianity killed those people, if it didn't exist those people would not have died for nothing more than not believing in the christian god. Your analogy still sucks.

======================

and the conversation goes on. I didn’t post what I said. It’s just too long.
Since I like it when multiple people give their input, rather than have a small bubble conversation between 2 or 3 people, I am posting it here.

Source:
https://www.extremetech.com/computing/318376-apples-m1-crushes-windows-on-arm-in-64-bit-benchmarks

~~~~iceman9090

I suppose in the same way, if someone cures some disease or invents the telephone, that's science, but when someone devises napalm or the electric chair, that's politics.

McNulty from Bawston Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

It’s not quite the same. There are no instructions in the books of science (or technology) about what to wear, how to cut your hair, what to eat, what to not eat, who you can have sex with, who to hate, who to kill.

In other words, there is no politics integrated into science.

However, there are is politics integrated into certain religions such as judaism and derived religions.

~~~~iceman9090

iceman9090 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> McNulty from Bawston Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> In other words, there is no politics integrated
> into science.

I disagree. Science is now, and "always" has been (back to the time of the ancient Greek philosophers) heavily involved with "politics" (as understood in any given time and place).

From the beginnings of European contact with indigenous Native Americans, politics was front and center: Are these new strangers-to-us "real" PEOPLE?, etc. Does the land, and the riches within and on that land, we are claiming for ourselves automatically belong to us [if these humans whose land it IS, and always has been, aren't really, in truth, "quite" human]?

In the years of slavery: Is it okay to experiment on black human beings if they are legally property? Can you legally kill black human beings (for any reason at all, or for NO actual reason) if they are legally property to be "done with" as the owner desires?

In the years of female subordination: Is it okay to experiment (including vivisection) on female humans of all kinds and colors if it advances the science of male-overwhelmingly-dominated doctors, investors, and scientists?

Who do you think pays for that science? One way or another, it all traces back to human hierarchies--which is politics....and it almost always traces back to economic hierarchies--which is politics.


> However, there are is politics integrated into
> certain religions such as judaism and derived
> religions.

I don't know what you are referring to here re: Judaism. The only thing I can think of is post-WWII, Israel-related subjects, but I don't think this is what you have in mind.

Re: Christianity, yes....historically (and back to the earliest of now-American colonial times) Christianity has been an integral part of politics on whatever specific subject you might choose.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/21/2020 11:26PM by Tevai.

You might ask whether evil is a problem in the world. As big a problem as evil is now, in centuries past it was orders of magnitude worse. Today the cops can be at your house in five minutes. If someone murders or rapes you, the chances of them getting away with it are slim to none. This is a real accomplishment. It’s not perfect, but it’s not 200 years ago either. For sure not 1000 years ago or dare I say 3000 years ago when a guy traipsed up Mt Sinai looking for answers.

What caused this state of affairs in our culture? This belief in not doing evil, this sanctification of individual rights. It’s all very Judeo Christian even if the secular crowd wants to disown its roots. So looking back, I can appreciate how far we’ve come. That culture has its problems, but as the least of many evils it’s tough to beat. Although it looks like we’re headed for a Confucian world so maybe its time will pass and Christians will remember “the good old days”.

Even the Mormons, whose whole thing is fighting evil, I can appreciate. I think they go too far, to their detriment, but their hearts are in the right place. The early Mormons were jihadists. Maybe they still are. The money hoard, the missionary program, the command structure, all part of a white Jihad. So they have no problem fighting evil with evil even though it doesn’t work. Mormons are dumb enough to think it will, which is why I can’t stand them. I really don’t like stupid. But they are right about evil not leading to long term prosperity. If America can’t get a handle on its internal banality, it’s empire is finished.

On the other hand is the problem of evil. The reason their are soldiers and police. That’s not all fun and games, evil actually is a real problem in the world.

Incidentally, Mormons are why you don’t want a civil war in the US. They are the Taliban without guns. In a war torn land they would have teeth.

bradley Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

“You might ask whether evil is a problem in the world.”

==I wasn’t asking that but thanks for your comments.

“If someone murders or rapes you, the chances of them getting away with it are slim to none.”
“It’s all very Judeo Christian even if the secular crowd wants to disown its roots.”

==I disagree.
I think raping and stealing from others is part of the jewish religion and its derived religions.

Example:
Deuteronomy 21:10 KING JAMES VERSION
{21:10} When thou goest forth to war against thine enemies, and the LORD thy God hath delivered them into thine hands, and thou hast taken them captive, {21:11} And seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and hast a desire unto her, that thou wouldest have her to thy wife; {21:12} Then thou shalt bring her home to thine house; and she shall shave her head, and pare her nails; {21:13} And she shall put the raiment of her captivity from off her, and shall remain in thine house, and bewail her father and her mother a full month: and after that thou shalt go in unto her, and be her husband, and she shall be thy wife. {21:14} And it shall be, if thou have no delight in her, then thou shalt let her go whither she will; but thou shalt not sell her at all for money, thou shalt not make merchandise of her, because thou hast humbled her.

^^^^^These were times when the jews had enough firepower to attack their neighbors.
Although it says women, I doubt that these guys would take a mature women as a wife since probably she is already married and has had sex many times with her husband.
The go-to girls were the young virgins, perhaps age 12 and below.
Notice that it does not state “ask her if she wants to marry you.”
It says, take her and bring her home. Were these girls willing to go with the enemy once they saw their family cut into pieces?
And as for the male kids, they would cut them up into pieces.
So, what happens when Jesus comes to Earth (or god turns into a human and calls himself Jesus). Israel no longer has any firepower. They can’t do anything to the romans. The Romans are militarily superior. Time to turn the other cheak.

“On the other hand is the problem of evil. The reason their are soldiers and police. That’s not all fun and games, evil actually is a real problem in the world.”

==I would say lack of resources is the problem. Some have plenty. Some have very little. Crime is a solution to even things out. The other option is socialism (share resources).

~~~~iceman9090

This exchange smacks of the old argument by the NRA cheerleaders that "Guns don't kill people, people kill people," which is in the same category as the old argument, "Which came first, the chicken or the egg." These types of arguments obfuscate, though the proponents are sure they have made their important point and smugly claim the win.

Faith is not a scapegoat. Faith is the enabler that allows people to force their own fabricated beliefs on others. Faith takes the place of actually having a conscience. Faith hobbles empathy and understanding as it gives counterfeit holiness to an agenda based on that for which there is no evidence as their gospel is hearsay passed down from generation to generation. It works because we are loathe to doubt our parents, most of us.

Done & Done Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

“This exchange smacks of the old argument by the NRA cheerleaders that "Guns don't kill people, people kill people,"”

==It does, however on one hand, a gun is not a book from a god telling people to worship only him or you go to hell.
On the other hand, the purpose of a gun is to commit crime, to defend yourself, to go to war. Basically, the purpose is to kill and damage.
For defense, it is a nice weapon to have if the enemy just has bows and arrows but if you can invent a gun, then so can anyone and eventually, everyone will have one. So, eventually, you lose the advantage.

It’s also possible that some people just like shooting at cans.

~~~~iceman9090

A deconstructed dish which allows flavors to be tasted individually denies the beautiful collision of the whole being a whole lot greater than the sum of its parts.

My point wasn't whether someone should have a gun or not. Shoot one or not.

That's a poor comparison. Christianity was why christians killed people in the crusades/holy wars. There is no christianity without the people. The cause of death was murder by christians, because of christianity. So in effect christianity was what killed those people.

No matter what the excuse it was still PEOPLE killing PEOPLE

It's irresponsible.

I invited the guy I met at extremetech to visit this thread so that we can continue the conversation here but I think he doesn't want to.

~~~~iceman9090