You can just read them to be honest: Skeptic’s Annotated Quran Skeptic’s Annotated Bible
Of course these are only for the 2 most popular religions, and it is impossible to say that every religion is evil because there are religions we don’t know about and Buddhism isn’t inherently evil.
Even buddhism was used for awful things in tibet. I believe the problem is with class society and hierarchy not religion. Plenty of secular groups do similarly awful shit
Buddha abandoned his family and obsessed over suffering. Encouraged people to give up possessions and be happy about it which ultimately aids the state in oppressing people. He also encouraged people to harm their body through starvation and created entire sects of followers who self-mummified through self-inflicted harm. Also his wife was 16 when he married her, and that’s a very generous analysis. I could say even worse things but I won’t.
Because I’m not saying this as an attack on Buddhism or its followers. I’m saying this as an example that you can misinterpret or willfully misrepresent any religion to meet your own goals and bias. That doesn’t prove inherit evilness, it just proves the ability to reenforce bias through bad faith engagement.
I don’t know how direct quotes from the aforementioned religion’s books and the books themselves, supposedly written by their Gods, would be “misinterpretation” or “misrepresentation”. And although my knowledge is limited in the case of Buddhism, at least AFAIK the religion essentially focuses on accepting one’s suffering and ending it by losing one’s desires. It does have delusional aspects such as reincarnation, but I don’t really think they see Buddha as an absolutely virtous prophet. I could be wrong though, and I wouldn’t mind some sources for your claims.
So firstly, I am not a theologian. There are people who literally dedicate their lives to questions like these. I am not one of them. I also am not interested in discussing the merit or lack there of of Buddhism, I merely meant my oversimplification of its tenets to serve as an illustration of my point.
As to the Abrahamic “critiques” you shared, my gut reaction to the slander of the Prophet Abraham (Ibrahim) completely misses the mark on the entire purpose of the story. The practice of sacrificing children to gods was unnervingly commonplace across human societies (take a look at any archeological record globally.) The switching of his son (either Isaac or Ismail) and a ram is meant to serve as an alternative to a long standing damaging cultural practice. It was a “hey, kill a ram instead of a kid then eat that ram. It’s better for everyone.” Scenario. In that light Abraham was miles ahead of his times and it was meant to illustrate the mercy of God, not cruelty.
It’s like taking this verse “And when the female infant buried alive is questioned: For what sin was she killed.” And saying holy shit Islam buries baby girls alive! No. Full stop. **This was a horrific and unethical practice. ** Islam said fuck that. Do it and your daughter will testify on your day of judgement for what you killed her. She will give testimony on why to bar you from Paradise. It advocated for ending infanticide. Not for promoting it.
These are just some very simple examples that conveniently prove my point. You can certainly take fine toothed comb through generations of religious literature but there are believers who are doing this as well. Just because some man wrote something doesn’t mean it always makes it into canon and modern practice. A lot of the scriptures are challenged and discussed to exhaustion in religious settings. Much like your nuanced defense of Buddhism is a prime example of your own quick version of it.
I’m not saying there aren’t questionable things in religions. I’m saying it’s easy to throw the baby out with the bath water with pretty much every religion when you start nitpicking. Context matters.
But, this forum is probably not the appropriate place for an entire nuanced discussion on the ins and outs of theology. This topic is way too large and complex for addressing under a post that’s meant to center women and LGBTQ+ liberation movements. I’ve probably already overspent my welcome on said topic. (If you find a forum more appropriate for this sort of discourse feel free to tag me there to continue this topic.)
Then argue it, so we might see if your claim has substance
They didn’t invent the claim, and if you actually cared to know, you’d find that there’s a shit load of substance out there already.
I was an angry athiest for a long time, trust me I have looked and I am today unconvinced that religion is an inherent evil
Cool. You’ve convinced me.
Aggressively spreading misinformation on important topics is bad. Not too complicated
How is that inherent to the belief in a creator?
You can just read them to be honest:
Skeptic’s Annotated Quran
Skeptic’s Annotated Bible
Of course these are only for the 2 most popular religions, and it is impossible to say that every religion is evil because there are religions we don’t know about and Buddhism isn’t inherently evil.
A more accurate statement would be that all Abrahamic religions are evil; with their genociding gods and child-fucking prophets. Literally by name they have a child-murdering schizophrenic as their central figure.
Even buddhism was used for awful things in tibet. I believe the problem is with class society and hierarchy not religion. Plenty of secular groups do similarly awful shit
I don’t know if Buddhism is necessarily “inherently evil,” but it absolutely can and has been used as a justification of violence.
Just look at places like Myanmar and Sri Lanka.
Buddha abandoned his family and obsessed over suffering. Encouraged people to give up possessions and be happy about it which ultimately aids the state in oppressing people. He also encouraged people to harm their body through starvation and created entire sects of followers who self-mummified through self-inflicted harm. Also his wife was 16 when he married her, and that’s a very generous analysis. I could say even worse things but I won’t.
Because I’m not saying this as an attack on Buddhism or its followers. I’m saying this as an example that you can misinterpret or willfully misrepresent any religion to meet your own goals and bias. That doesn’t prove inherit evilness, it just proves the ability to reenforce bias through bad faith engagement.
I don’t know how direct quotes from the aforementioned religion’s books and the books themselves, supposedly written by their Gods, would be “misinterpretation” or “misrepresentation”. And although my knowledge is limited in the case of Buddhism, at least AFAIK the religion essentially focuses on accepting one’s suffering and ending it by losing one’s desires. It does have delusional aspects such as reincarnation, but I don’t really think they see Buddha as an absolutely virtous prophet. I could be wrong though, and I wouldn’t mind some sources for your claims.
So firstly, I am not a theologian. There are people who literally dedicate their lives to questions like these. I am not one of them. I also am not interested in discussing the merit or lack there of of Buddhism, I merely meant my oversimplification of its tenets to serve as an illustration of my point.
As to the Abrahamic “critiques” you shared, my gut reaction to the slander of the Prophet Abraham (Ibrahim) completely misses the mark on the entire purpose of the story. The practice of sacrificing children to gods was unnervingly commonplace across human societies (take a look at any archeological record globally.) The switching of his son (either Isaac or Ismail) and a ram is meant to serve as an alternative to a long standing damaging cultural practice. It was a “hey, kill a ram instead of a kid then eat that ram. It’s better for everyone.” Scenario. In that light Abraham was miles ahead of his times and it was meant to illustrate the mercy of God, not cruelty.
It’s like taking this verse “And when the female infant buried alive is questioned: For what sin was she killed.” And saying holy shit Islam buries baby girls alive! No. Full stop. **This was a horrific and unethical practice. ** Islam said fuck that. Do it and your daughter will testify on your day of judgement for what you killed her. She will give testimony on why to bar you from Paradise. It advocated for ending infanticide. Not for promoting it.
These are just some very simple examples that conveniently prove my point. You can certainly take fine toothed comb through generations of religious literature but there are believers who are doing this as well. Just because some man wrote something doesn’t mean it always makes it into canon and modern practice. A lot of the scriptures are challenged and discussed to exhaustion in religious settings. Much like your nuanced defense of Buddhism is a prime example of your own quick version of it.
I’m not saying there aren’t questionable things in religions. I’m saying it’s easy to throw the baby out with the bath water with pretty much every religion when you start nitpicking. Context matters.
But, this forum is probably not the appropriate place for an entire nuanced discussion on the ins and outs of theology. This topic is way too large and complex for addressing under a post that’s meant to center women and LGBTQ+ liberation movements. I’ve probably already overspent my welcome on said topic. (If you find a forum more appropriate for this sort of discourse feel free to tag me there to continue this topic.)
I’m good thanks.
Then I encourage you to avoid making dogmatic claims if you are unwilling to defend them