Why is the past act of burning non believers at the stake seen as bad?

[joigus]

1 hour ago, dimreepr said:

That's the mistake of context, if one is content, what period of strife?

I meant "conform" rather than "content". My mistake.

No religion of the kind that I mentioned before has brought contenment to people. Only conformity.

[John Cuthber]

9 hours ago, dimreepr said:

but imagine if the other's were afraid of religion/the consequences. 

Then it  would still be wrong to say "It's the difference between a tithe and a tax; a tithe you give happily..."

[dimreepr]

19 hours ago, joigus said:

I meant "conform" rather than "content". My mistake.

No religion of the kind that I mentioned before has brought contenment to people. Only conformity.

Even if the original intent of 'that' kind of religion was to teach contentment, isn't inner-peace the central goal of a Buddhist?

15 hours ago, John Cuthber said:

Then it  would still be wrong to say "It's the difference between a tithe and a tax; a tithe you give happily..."

Some people are happy to help/pay tax, because they have more than they need and understand the benefits are both selfish and benevolent; some people have to have the consequences of not paying tax/helping people, explained to them and if the only analogy available is (god and the devil) understood, they too will be happy to pay/help, even if they have no intention of being benevolent.

 

 

I think Taoism and Buddhism are just further up the religious evolutionary ladder and Hinduism is on the cusp.

Edited December 18, 2020 by dimreepr

[joigus]

3 hours ago, dimreepr said:

Even if the original intent of 'that' kind of religion was to teach contentment, isn't inner-peace the central goal of a Buddhist?

Well, yes. But Buddhism is not a faith-based religion. It could be argued that it can be practised as a practical philosophy, if you dispose of the ritual part.

[iNow]

I do chuckle a bit that the discussion has turned to the peaceful spread of ideas and inner contentment when the thread topic was “why exactly shouldn’t the church be allowed to burn people who don’t believe their fictions.” 😂 

[dimreepr]

20 hours ago, iNow said:

I do chuckle a bit that the discussion has turned to the peaceful spread of ideas and inner contentment when the thread topic was “why exactly shouldn’t the church be allowed to burn people who don’t believe their fictions.” 😂 

Mostly because, it really puts a crimp in one's day. 😣

Besides “why exactly shouldn’t the church government be allowed to burn people who don’t believe their fictions.” seems to be more applicable since the original message of the church is, please don't kill people... 

And the original message of the government is, please only kill the people we tell you too...

20 hours ago, joigus said:

Buddhism is not a faith-based religion.

They do pray though... 

20 hours ago, joigus said:

It could be argued that it can be practised as a practical philosophy, if you dispose of the ritual part.

I'm arguing that buddhism just chose a different narative/rhetorical tool to teach it's philosophy. 

Every culture has a different set of metaphors at its disposal.

[dimreepr]

My friend's son (also my friend) had an interesting take on the thread.

Quote

That discussion raises pertinent and interesting questions about the nature of western thought itself

 

Edited December 19, 2020 by dimreepr