Kristinusko – moraalitonta hölynpölyä

“Let's say that the consensus is that our species, being the higher primates, Homo Sapiens, has been on the planet for at least 100,000 years, maybe more. Francis Collins says maybe 100,000. Richard Dawkins thinks maybe a quarter-of-a-million. I'll take 100,000. In order to be a Christian, you have to believe that for 98,000 years, our species suffered and died, most of its children dying in childbirth, most other people having a life expectancy of about 25 years, dying of their teeth. Famine, struggle, bitterness, war, suffering, misery, all of that for 98,000 years.

Heaven watches this with complete indifference. And then 2000 years ago, thinks 'That's enough of that. It's time to intervene,' and the best way to do this would be by condemning someone to a human sacrifice somewhere in the less literate parts of the Middle East. Don't lets appeal to the Chinese, for example, where people can read and study evidence and have a civilization. Let's go to the desert and have another revelation there. This is nonsense. It can't be believed by a thinking person."

-Christopher Hitchens

Tähän kun lisätään, että Jeesus hahmon koko sanoma perustuu täysin kuulopuheeseen. Sanoma, jonka sanotaan oevan ihmiskunnan tärkein viesti ja sanoma, jonka tarvitsee hyväksyä, jotta pelastuu. Evankeliumit, joissa väitetyt sanomiset ja tapahtumat ovat, ovat kirjoitettu vuosikymmeniä näiden väitettyjen sanomisien ja tapahtumien jälkeen, eri aikoina, tuntemattomien kirjoittajien toimesta. Mitään ulkopuolisia kirjoituksia/todisteita näistä sanomisista/tapahtumista ei ole.

Toteuttaisitko itse tällaisen viestin ilmoituksen näin? En minä ainakaan.

Tähän kun lisätään, että synti, jonka vuoksi Jeesus väitetysti "uhrattiin" (mitään uhraustahan ei ole, on vain näytöskuolema. Jeesus kärsi epämukavan viikonlopun syntiemme tähden) tulee Aatamin ja Eevan tarinasta ja he taas eivät koskaan ole olleet olemassa. Sen me tiedämme. Ei ole ollut kahta ensimmäistä ihmistä. Ja se tarinahan Raamatussa jo itsessään on täydellisen hölmö.

Tästä seuraa, että tämä synti on parhaimmassakin tapauksessa metaforinen/kielikuvallinen synti, jonka vuoksi olisi absurdia uhrata ketään. Synti ja ihmisuhri, joilla minäkin muka olisin vielä 2000 -vuoden jälkeen leimattu, vaikka en ole millään tavalla osallinen ja en niitä tarvitse tai ole pyytänyt. Jos en kuitenkaan osta tarjousta, minut tuomitaan ikuiseen kadotukseen.

"Jotka eivät usko, joutuvat kadotukseen" -Jeesus

Tämä on täyttä hölynpölyä.

Miten kristinusko on enää edes mikään juttu?

"Is it moral to believe that your sins (or mine) can be forgiven by the punishment of another person? Is it ethical to believe that?"

——————-

"To get to the point of the wrongness of Christianity, because I think the teachings of Christianity are immoral. The central one is the most immoral of all, and that is the one of vicarious redemption. You can throw your sins onto somebody else, vulgarly known as scapegoating. In fact, originating as scapegoating in the same area, the same desert. I can pay your debt if I love you. I can serve your term in prison if I love you very much. I can volunteer to do that. I can't take your sins away, because I can't abolish your responsibility, and I shouldn't offer to do so. Your responsibility has to stay with you. There's no vicarious redemption. There very probably, in fact, is no redemption at all. It's just a part of wish-thinking, and I don't think wish-thinking is good for people either.

It even manages to pollute the central question, the word I just employed, the most important word of all: the word love, by making love compulsory, by saying you MUST love. You must love your neighbour as yourself, something you can't actually do. You'll always fall short, so you can always be found guilty. By saying you must love someone who you also must fear. That's to say a supreme being, an eternal father, someone of whom you must be afraid, but you must love him, too. If you fail in this duty, you're again a wretched sinner. This is not mentally or morally or intellectually healthy.

And that brings me to the final objection, which is, this is a totalitarian system. If there was a God who could do these things and demand these things of us, and he was eternal and unchanging, we'd be living under a dictatorship from which there is no appeal, and one that can never change and one that knows our thoughts and can convict us of thought crime, and condemn us to eternal punishment for actions that we are condemned in advance to be taking. All this in the round, and I could say more, it's an excellent thing that we have absolutely no reason to believe any of it to be true.”

– Christopher Hitchens

0
MikaHyvrinen1
Kuopio

"Sometimes My Genius... It's Almost Frightening" - Jeremy Clarkson

Ilmoita asiaton viesti

Kiitos!

Ilmoitus asiattomasta sisällöstä on vastaanotettu