On July 14 2008 13:12 Nintu wrote: I guess to better articulate what I mean,
The question is "If a spiritual world exists that is, by it's own definition "supernatural", then why would you try and disprove it using scientific reasoning?"
One of the conditions of it's existence is that it is not scientifically explained, right? So what's with all the theorycrafting. 0_0
Because this spiritual/supernatural world is affecting our world, the real world. There are serious issues that arise as the result of the existence of religion.
This depends. If you believe the Spiritual/Supernatural world is directly affecting our world, as in God is pulling strings of world affairs, then I don't believe this is an issue because we can't exactly stop him. Assuming you mean the much more logical "people are doing bad things in the name of ____", then yes this is true, but I do not believe it is the affect of one religion itself.
Religion is being used as a tool, very unreligiously and terribly, I admit. This does not make religion responsible, atleast not anymore than a hammer is responsible if you murder someone else with it.
If it wasn't Religion, it would be philosophy, or sects of Science, or something else. In either case, religion cannot be extinguished, and it would be silly to blame it for all the mis-use in the first place anyway.
Yes, everything cannot be blamed on any sole religion, but why would religion not be responsible (at least partly responsible?). Doctors that perform abortion have been murdered by zealous religious groups. Women and young girls are raped in the name of religion. 9/11 occured beacuse of religion.
I'll start first with abortion. Anti-abortionists have generally done exactly what they're supposed to do regarding the matter. For the most part, they exercise their freedom of speech and that's it. Not for a while has it gotten violent, and I'd be willing to wager that overall they have been less so than many secular political groups.
Young girls are raped in the name of religion? What?
Thinking 9/11 occurred because of religion is an overly simplistic and naive view point. 9/11 and many, many "terrorist/freedom fighter" complaints are based on secular issues such as poverty, exploitation, corruption and having one's family killed by an F16. Religion, particularly fundamentalism, is a symptom of the problem, but it is not the cause.
On July 14 2008 11:34 Bozali wrote: You are assuming that life has to have a meaning and based on this assumption you conclude that God has to exist. The fault is in the assumption.
I think you leapt a little too quickly to this conclusion. You make a meaning for yourself. I was saying that science informs the meaning that you decide to make for yourself.
On July 14 2008 07:59 LuckyOne wrote: i mean we shouldnt try to kill the other ways of thinking like astrology etc.. because we would be doing the same thing religion was doing in Middle Ages. Where science was seen as something foolish.
No, it's not the same thing because here we're killing astrology by showing WHY astrology is stupid (watch the documentary for instance), not by putting all the astrologers under house arrest.
they would probably show you WHY science is stupid by quoting the bible or something. which for them was proof.
On July 14 2008 13:30 MyLostTemple wrote: yeah but those are human based rights. freedom of speech and thought are quite important. there is a diffrence between that and dying via suicide bombing because someone drew a cartoon character of your god and you think you'll get 70 virgins in paradise if you do so.
No, its both ideals. and it depends from person to person how drastic you will be to protect them.
How much freedom can be sacrifised before we can go to war. Same with religion.
Freedom and religion are different in this case; if populations were being severely oppressed, they would fight since it threatens their existence and right to existence. Drawing a single cartoon, that would've had basically no effect on your life otherwise, will not kill you.
And on the topic of the cartoon incident of Muhammed, there were numerous miscommunications and misunderstandings and misinterpretations that lead to the riots and chaos. You chould read the God Delusion (forgot where in it) which basically summarizes all of the idiodic things that made the riots and killings possible.
On July 14 2008 13:30 MyLostTemple wrote: yeah but those are human based rights. freedom of speech and thought are quite important. there is a diffrence between that and dying via suicide bombing because someone drew a cartoon character of your god and you think you'll get 70 virgins in paradise if you do so.
No, its both ideals. and it depends from person to person how drastic you will be to protect them.
How much freedom can be sacrifised before we can go to war. Same with religion.
well i'll take my own athiest approach to answer this. Basically as far as i can see you have one life to live. so you should have as much freedom as possible without infringing on the freedoms of others to explore that life. in other words i think my fellow apes should not be caged up and their one chance at living exploited.
This is radically different from wars which are fought due to unprovable deities existing in unprovable universes with, at times, illogical laws that may even impede on the freedoms of others. As i said before, blowing yourself up and killing others because you think your god really cares if someone draws a cartoon of him is a little problematic. especially when you think you'll be rewarded with the best possible eternal afterlife if you do his bidding.
On July 14 2008 13:28 MyLostTemple wrote: something i've always wondered is: if god exists, why would he necessarily care that people believed in him?
if i was the omnipotent being that created the universe and had a vested interest in people acting in a Good way, why would people buying into me existing matter? Arn't they going to find out either way? Why would i punish (assuming i was that type of god) people for not believing in me? To me this always seemed like one of the fishier parts of religion.
it's self evident that people can behave morally with our without the belief in god. so what necessitates this?
It is in Christian Belief that God created us in his image. It's not simply that we exist in a world he created, but he created us. I know you probably wanted a more wordy response but in Christian belief, it's simply the case that He created us. It's not as if me or you were granted Omnipotent powers and could do whatever we wanted. He is not bound by selfish desires, or human self-interest. He created us. We are his world.
Why would i punish (assuming i was that type of god) people for not believing in me? To me this always seemed like one of the fishier parts of religion.
I don't believe God punishes those who disobey him. Not directly. This of course varies between all the denominations, and through each individual of each religion, but I do not believe he actively attacks those who disobey him.
it's self evident that people can behave morally with our without the belief in god. so what necessitates this?
It is absolutely evident that people can behave well without religion. If there was an immediately evident correlation like this, Religion would seem logical, wouldn't it? Nothing Necessitates it. It's very nature means that it requires faith. You clearly want answers that nobody can give. If Religion was a necessity, it would be fundamentally flawed. (even more-so than most of you think it is.. )
As I said earlier, I cannot make others believe in what I believe in, but I can attempt to explain enough of what I believe to advocate understanding and sensitivity.
On July 14 2008 12:45 Nintu wrote: I told myself I'd read the entire thread before posting but I came across this at about page 7 and decided to reply.
There is nothing to explore about religion, you have a set of rules to follow and that's it no questions asked.
To be qualified enough to be able to write sentences such as this is, in your beliefs, impossible, since you quite vigorously disbelieve in any sort of religious or spiritual enlightenment. A more logical and acceptable way to word this statement would be to prefix it with "Atleast, in my attempts and experiences,"
Of course, you will close your eyes and ears anyway, and instead of adopting a more sensitive and logical attitude, you will continue to conduct yourself in such an arrogant way, because you have science to justify your insensitivity. Why be socially understanding if you are in the social majority, and have the boundless word of "science" to protect you.
Basically all you say is that I'm crude and illogical yet you give me no argument to that I'm actually wrong about what I wrote. And, to be completely honest, I do not feel that I'm insensitive. I'm simply stating the fact about religion in that sentence, and I never ever said anything about majority so please stop putting words in my mouth.
On July 14 2008 12:45 Nintu wrote: I never claimed I can show you God. The burden of proof argument doesn't apply until a Christian tries to prove to you the Existence of God. When a Christian tries, then go ahead, use it and have fun with it.
The very nature of God that I believe in is absolutely unprovable. Christianity is, and always has been, a Faith based religion. What this means is, if God was provable by scientific reasoning or any sort of amazing flawless argument, then the entire faith aspect would be destroyed. It would no longer be faith, it would be belief.
God could come to you right now and flip cars and shit to impress you, but then you would be believing with your eyes, not with your faith.
"Blessed are those who believe in that which they cannot see"
So God is, conceptually, unprovable by any sort of logical means. That's why when you ask for proof of his existence, any self-aware, spiritually attuned Christian will reply "I cannot do that for you, and I never said I could."
This is what terrifies me about religion. You say that God is unprovable and yet you (not talking to you personally all thought this might apply) go to church every Sunday, read the Bible, spend countless hours praying. For something that is not even provable. Thankfully, for some reason, you've decided to become somewhat of a half christian and you don't believe everything in the Bible, hence you're not on your way to Sweden to stone me. But every religious person isn't.
On July 14 2008 13:12 Nintu wrote: I guess to better articulate what I mean,
The question is "If a spiritual world exists that is, by it's own definition "supernatural", then why would you try and disprove it using scientific reasoning?"
One of the conditions of it's existence is that it is not scientifically explained, right? So what's with all the theorycrafting. 0_0
Because this spiritual/supernatural world is affecting our world, the real world. There are serious issues that arise as the result of the existence of religion.
This depends. If you believe the Spiritual/Supernatural world is directly affecting our world, as in God is pulling strings of world affairs, then I don't believe this is an issue because we can't exactly stop him. Assuming you mean the much more logical "people are doing bad things in the name of ____", then yes this is true, but I do not believe it is the affect of one religion itself.
Religion is being used as a tool, very unreligiously and terribly, I admit. This does not make religion responsible, atleast not anymore than a hammer is responsible if you murder someone else with it.
If it wasn't Religion, it would be philosophy, or sects of Science, or something else. In either case, religion cannot be extinguished, and it would be silly to blame it for all the mis-use in the first place anyway.
Yes, everything cannot be blamed on any sole religion, but why would religion not be responsible (at least partly responsible?). Doctors that perform abortion have been murdered by zealous religious groups. Women and young girls are raped in the name of religion. 9/11 occured beacuse of religion.
I'll start first with abortion. Anti-abortionists have generally done exactly what they're supposed to do regarding the matter. For the most part, they exercise their freedom of speech and that's it. Not for a while has it gotten violent, and I'd be willing to wager that overall they have been less so than many secular political groups.
Young girls are raped in the name of religion? What?
Thinking 9/11 occurred because of religion is an overly simplistic and naive view point. 9/11 and many, many "terrorist/freedom fighter" complaints are based on secular issues such as poverty, exploitation, corruption and having one's family killed by an F16. Religion, particularly fundamentalism, is a symptom of the problem, but it is not the cause.
In some country in the middle east (forgot which), there are bands of men who seek out women/young girls who arent wearing shawls, and consider them fair game because they do not follow the rules of their majority religion. Some girls as young as 8 (or 12 was it?) have been raped by these bands of men (in one case there were over eighty of them).
The more I reply, the more I think you and others should read the God Delusion; if you and others read it, you will find many, many of your questions, ideas, and thoughts answered.
On July 14 2008 13:12 Nintu wrote: I guess to better articulate what I mean,
The question is "If a spiritual world exists that is, by it's own definition "supernatural", then why would you try and disprove it using scientific reasoning?"
One of the conditions of it's existence is that it is not scientifically explained, right? So what's with all the theorycrafting. 0_0
Because this spiritual/supernatural world is affecting our world, the real world. There are serious issues that arise as the result of the existence of religion.
This depends. If you believe the Spiritual/Supernatural world is directly affecting our world, as in God is pulling strings of world affairs, then I don't believe this is an issue because we can't exactly stop him. Assuming you mean the much more logical "people are doing bad things in the name of ____", then yes this is true, but I do not believe it is the affect of one religion itself.
Religion is being used as a tool, very unreligiously and terribly, I admit. This does not make religion responsible, atleast not anymore than a hammer is responsible if you murder someone else with it.
If it wasn't Religion, it would be philosophy, or sects of Science, or something else. In either case, religion cannot be extinguished, and it would be silly to blame it for all the mis-use in the first place anyway.
Yes, everything cannot be blamed on any sole religion, but why would religion not be responsible (at least partly responsible?). Doctors that perform abortion have been murdered by zealous religious groups. Women and young girls are raped in the name of religion. 9/11 occured beacuse of religion.
Again, you're missing the point. Religion didn't CAUSE it. The people themselves DECIDED to KILL. The terrorists in 9/11 DECIDED TO KILL. It was not due to God, or Islam. It was because somebody taught them that that is what they should do. It wasn't God. It was a terrible islamic extremist. Someone (yes, some person) who wished harm on people who weren't like him. Much like Abortionist deaths. Somebody taught them that they should go kill these doctors. It wasn't God. It may have been a preacher, but that preacher was a human. A human who wished others to die because they were not like him.
These human beings USED belief, and religious teachings to murder other human beings. Religion is the most powerful force in the world, I believe. So yes, it also has potential to be used terribly. It's sad, and I pray for all those are hurt in the name of Christianity, or any other religion that is being used as a TOOL to hurt others. Please understand this.
On July 14 2008 13:12 Nintu wrote: I guess to better articulate what I mean,
The question is "If a spiritual world exists that is, by it's own definition "supernatural", then why would you try and disprove it using scientific reasoning?"
One of the conditions of it's existence is that it is not scientifically explained, right? So what's with all the theorycrafting. 0_0
It's when people start believing in nonsense for no apparent reason with no critical thinking that humans does irrational things. And believing in something unprovable is very much that.
edit: Dang this thread is to active, hard to keep up.
BTW, Ken Miller gave a talk at my school last year and he absolutely killed. The presentation was hilarious, informative for those who haven't studied evolution and ID and he ended it by telling us that he was a Catholic, believing in a single deck stacking creator, based on faith alone. There's not much more to it than that because you can't really argue with personal faith very well, but I thought it was interesting.
For those who don't know, Ken Miller is a molecular biologist from Brown who tore apart Intelligent Design in court. He was also on the Colbert Report.
I suggest you watch if you have time (not my school.) There was a literal creationist on the panel so Miller quoted Samuel 23:2 and asked him if God was igneous, sedimentary or metamorphic.
On July 14 2008 13:12 Nintu wrote: I guess to better articulate what I mean,
The question is "If a spiritual world exists that is, by it's own definition "supernatural", then why would you try and disprove it using scientific reasoning?"
One of the conditions of it's existence is that it is not scientifically explained, right? So what's with all the theorycrafting. 0_0
Because this spiritual/supernatural world is affecting our world, the real world. There are serious issues that arise as the result of the existence of religion.
This depends. If you believe the Spiritual/Supernatural world is directly affecting our world, as in God is pulling strings of world affairs, then I don't believe this is an issue because we can't exactly stop him. Assuming you mean the much more logical "people are doing bad things in the name of ____", then yes this is true, but I do not believe it is the affect of one religion itself.
Religion is being used as a tool, very unreligiously and terribly, I admit. This does not make religion responsible, atleast not anymore than a hammer is responsible if you murder someone else with it.
If it wasn't Religion, it would be philosophy, or sects of Science, or something else. In either case, religion cannot be extinguished, and it would be silly to blame it for all the mis-use in the first place anyway.
Yes, everything cannot be blamed on any sole religion, but why would religion not be responsible (at least partly responsible?). Doctors that perform abortion have been murdered by zealous religious groups. Women and young girls are raped in the name of religion. 9/11 occured beacuse of religion.
Again, you're missing the point. Religion didn't CAUSE it. The people themselves DECIDED to KILL. The terrorists in 9/11 DECIDED TO KILL. It was not due to God, or Islam. It was because somebody taught them that that is what they should do. It wasn't God. It was a terrible islamic extremist. Someone (yes, some person) who wished harm on people who weren't like him. Much like Abortionist deaths. Somebody taught them that they should go kill these doctors. It wasn't God. It may have been a preacher, but that preacher was a human. A human who wished others to die because they were not like him.
These human beings USED belief, and religious teachings to murder other human beings. Religion is the most powerful force in the world, I believe. So yes, it also has potential to be used terribly. It's sad, and I pray for all those are hurt in the name of Christianity, or any other religion that is being used as a TOOL to hurt others. Please understand this.
Why this is important is the question "Why did they believe this?". And they believed this based on exactly the same rationality as any other religion is believed in. People always have to think critically and have a real view of the world to make healthy decisions. It would not surprise me if equivalent acts such as 9/11 which happen to be somewhat of Islamic origin will happen with Christian origin.
On July 14 2008 12:45 Nintu wrote: I told myself I'd read the entire thread before posting but I came across this at about page 7 and decided to reply.
There is nothing to explore about religion, you have a set of rules to follow and that's it no questions asked.
To be qualified enough to be able to write sentences such as this is, in your beliefs, impossible, since you quite vigorously disbelieve in any sort of religious or spiritual enlightenment. A more logical and acceptable way to word this statement would be to prefix it with "Atleast, in my attempts and experiences,"
Of course, you will close your eyes and ears anyway, and instead of adopting a more sensitive and logical attitude, you will continue to conduct yourself in such an arrogant way, because you have science to justify your insensitivity. Why be socially understanding if you are in the social majority, and have the boundless word of "science" to protect you.
Basically all you say is that I'm crude and illogical yet you give me no argument to that I'm actually wrong about what I wrote. And, to be completely honest, I do not feel that I'm insensitive. I'm simply stating the fact about religion in that sentence, and I never ever said anything about majority so please stop putting words in my mouth.
On July 14 2008 12:45 Nintu wrote: I never claimed I can show you God. The burden of proof argument doesn't apply until a Christian tries to prove to you the Existence of God. When a Christian tries, then go ahead, use it and have fun with it.
The very nature of God that I believe in is absolutely unprovable. Christianity is, and always has been, a Faith based religion. What this means is, if God was provable by scientific reasoning or any sort of amazing flawless argument, then the entire faith aspect would be destroyed. It would no longer be faith, it would be belief.
God could come to you right now and flip cars and shit to impress you, but then you would be believing with your eyes, not with your faith.
"Blessed are those who believe in that which they cannot see"
So God is, conceptually, unprovable by any sort of logical means. That's why when you ask for proof of his existence, any self-aware, spiritually attuned Christian will reply "I cannot do that for you, and I never said I could."
This is what terrifies me about religion. You say that God is unprovable and yet you (not talking to you personally all thought this might apply) go to church every Sunday, read the Bible, spend countless hours praying. For something that is not even provable. Thankfully, for some reason, you've decided to become somewhat of a half christian and you don't believe everything in the Bible, hence you're not on your way to Sweden to stone me. But every religious person isn't.
I say that God is unprovable to others. From one person to another. Your insinuation that my lack of bloodlust somehow makes me a "half-Christian" is ridiculously offensive. And instead of responding in kind and ripping you a new one for this, I'm just going to explain to you that it is this kind of insensitivity that causes flame wars in threads, and flame wars in real life.
Thank you for demonstrating my favourite hypocrisy of all. That the arrogant and insensitive nature towards someone who believes differently from you, is on the Atheist side of the fence aswell.
On July 14 2008 13:12 Nintu wrote: I guess to better articulate what I mean,
The question is "If a spiritual world exists that is, by it's own definition "supernatural", then why would you try and disprove it using scientific reasoning?"
One of the conditions of it's existence is that it is not scientifically explained, right? So what's with all the theorycrafting. 0_0
Because this spiritual/supernatural world is affecting our world, the real world. There are serious issues that arise as the result of the existence of religion.
This depends. If you believe the Spiritual/Supernatural world is directly affecting our world, as in God is pulling strings of world affairs, then I don't believe this is an issue because we can't exactly stop him. Assuming you mean the much more logical "people are doing bad things in the name of ____", then yes this is true, but I do not believe it is the affect of one religion itself.
Religion is being used as a tool, very unreligiously and terribly, I admit. This does not make religion responsible, atleast not anymore than a hammer is responsible if you murder someone else with it.
If it wasn't Religion, it would be philosophy, or sects of Science, or something else. In either case, religion cannot be extinguished, and it would be silly to blame it for all the mis-use in the first place anyway.
Yes, everything cannot be blamed on any sole religion, but why would religion not be responsible (at least partly responsible?). Doctors that perform abortion have been murdered by zealous religious groups. Women and young girls are raped in the name of religion. 9/11 occured beacuse of religion.
Again, you're missing the point. Religion didn't CAUSE it. The people themselves DECIDED to KILL. The terrorists in 9/11 DECIDED TO KILL. It was not due to God, or Islam. It was because somebody taught them that that is what they should do. It wasn't God. It was a terrible islamic extremist. Someone (yes, some person) who wished harm on people who weren't like him. Much like Abortionist deaths. Somebody taught them that they should go kill these doctors. It wasn't God. It may have been a preacher, but that preacher was a human. A human who wished others to die because they were not like him.
These human beings USED belief, and religious teachings to murder other human beings. Religion is the most powerful force in the world, I believe. So yes, it also has potential to be used terribly. It's sad, and I pray for all those are hurt in the name of Christianity, or any other religion that is being used as a TOOL to hurt others. Please understand this.
Why this is important is the question "Why did they believe this?". And they believed this based on exactly the same rationality as any other religion is believed in. People always have to think critically and have a real view of the world to make healthy decisions. It would not surprise me if equivalent acts such as 9/11 which happen to be somewhat of Islamic origin will happen with Christian origin.
On July 14 2008 13:28 MyLostTemple wrote: something i've always wondered is: if god exists, why would he necessarily care that people believed in him?
if i was the omnipotent being that created the universe and had a vested interest in people acting in a Good way, why would people buying into me existing matter? Arn't they going to find out either way? Why would i punish (assuming i was that type of god) people for not believing in me? To me this always seemed like one of the fishier parts of religion.
it's self evident that people can behave morally with our without the belief in god. so what necessitates this?
It is in Christian Belief that God created us in his image. It's not simply that we exist in a world he created, but he created us. I know you probably wanted a more wordy response but in Christian belief, it's simply the case that He created us. It's not as if me or you were granted Omnipotent powers and could do whatever we wanted. He is not bound by selfish desires, or human self-interest. He created us. We are his world.
Why would i punish (assuming i was that type of god) people for not believing in me? To me this always seemed like one of the fishier parts of religion.
I don't believe God punishes those who disobey him. Not directly. This of course varies between all the denominations, and through each individual of each religion, but I do not believe he actively attacks those who disobey him.
it's self evident that people can behave morally with our without the belief in god. so what necessitates this?
It is absolutely evident that people can behave well without religion. If there was an immediately evident correlation like this, Religion would seem logical, wouldn't it? Nothing Necessitates it. It's very nature means that it requires faith. You clearly want answers that nobody can give. If Religion was a necessity, it would be fundamentally flawed. (even more-so than most of you think it is.. )
As I said earlier, I cannot make others believe in what I believe in, but I can attempt to explain enough of what I believe to advocate understanding and sensitivity.
well i understand the dogma behind it because i was catholic for about 18 years and i come from a well educated religious family. i think your views tend to be much looser than those of other christian factions.
some of the most educated and modernized countries in the world are rapidly becoming non religious. Sweeden, Switzerland and Japan to name a few. I tend to predict that as the world becomes more educated and modernized we will see atheism spread more heavily in north america and asia. i suppose i'm curious if religious people feel threatened by this concept or if they actually believe a rapture would ever come of it.
On July 14 2008 13:12 Nintu wrote: I guess to better articulate what I mean,
The question is "If a spiritual world exists that is, by it's own definition "supernatural", then why would you try and disprove it using scientific reasoning?"
One of the conditions of it's existence is that it is not scientifically explained, right? So what's with all the theorycrafting. 0_0
Because this spiritual/supernatural world is affecting our world, the real world. There are serious issues that arise as the result of the existence of religion.
This depends. If you believe the Spiritual/Supernatural world is directly affecting our world, as in God is pulling strings of world affairs, then I don't believe this is an issue because we can't exactly stop him. Assuming you mean the much more logical "people are doing bad things in the name of ____", then yes this is true, but I do not believe it is the affect of one religion itself.
Religion is being used as a tool, very unreligiously and terribly, I admit. This does not make religion responsible, atleast not anymore than a hammer is responsible if you murder someone else with it.
If it wasn't Religion, it would be philosophy, or sects of Science, or something else. In either case, religion cannot be extinguished, and it would be silly to blame it for all the mis-use in the first place anyway.
Yes, everything cannot be blamed on any sole religion, but why would religion not be responsible (at least partly responsible?). Doctors that perform abortion have been murdered by zealous religious groups. Women and young girls are raped in the name of religion. 9/11 occured beacuse of religion.
I'll start first with abortion. Anti-abortionists have generally done exactly what they're supposed to do regarding the matter. For the most part, they exercise their freedom of speech and that's it. Not for a while has it gotten violent, and I'd be willing to wager that overall they have been less so than many secular political groups.
Young girls are raped in the name of religion? What?
Thinking 9/11 occurred because of religion is an overly simplistic and naive view point. 9/11 and many, many "terrorist/freedom fighter" complaints are based on secular issues such as poverty, exploitation, corruption and having one's family killed by an F16. Religion, particularly fundamentalism, is a symptom of the problem, but it is not the cause.
In some country in the middle east (forgot which), there are bands of men who seek out women/young girls who arent wearing shawls, and consider them fair game because they do not follow the rules of their majority religion. Some girls as young as 8 (or 12 was it?) have been raped by these bands of men (in one case there were over eighty of them).
The more I reply, the more I think you and others should read the God Delusion; if you and others read it, you will find many, many of your questions, ideas, and thoughts answered.
I've read it and many of Dawkins' essays. What you're missing is that religion isn't making them do it. A set of rules, formed by a shitty society with likely a shitty standard of living, have been enacted and called religion. If there were supposed to be wearing a shawl made out of their country's flag, it would be no different.
Religion is a man made tool crafted by different societies. Islam didn't just spring up as the way Afghans interpret it today. For several centuries, Islamic cultures were more advanced and tolerant than any others because of the societies themselves. As society changes, so does religion.
On July 14 2008 12:45 Nintu wrote: I told myself I'd read the entire thread before posting but I came across this at about page 7 and decided to reply.
There is nothing to explore about religion, you have a set of rules to follow and that's it no questions asked.
To be qualified enough to be able to write sentences such as this is, in your beliefs, impossible, since you quite vigorously disbelieve in any sort of religious or spiritual enlightenment. A more logical and acceptable way to word this statement would be to prefix it with "Atleast, in my attempts and experiences,"
Of course, you will close your eyes and ears anyway, and instead of adopting a more sensitive and logical attitude, you will continue to conduct yourself in such an arrogant way, because you have science to justify your insensitivity. Why be socially understanding if you are in the social majority, and have the boundless word of "science" to protect you.
Basically all you say is that I'm crude and illogical yet you give me no argument to that I'm actually wrong about what I wrote. And, to be completely honest, I do not feel that I'm insensitive. I'm simply stating the fact about religion in that sentence, and I never ever said anything about majority so please stop putting words in my mouth.
On July 14 2008 12:45 Nintu wrote: I never claimed I can show you God. The burden of proof argument doesn't apply until a Christian tries to prove to you the Existence of God. When a Christian tries, then go ahead, use it and have fun with it.
The very nature of God that I believe in is absolutely unprovable. Christianity is, and always has been, a Faith based religion. What this means is, if God was provable by scientific reasoning or any sort of amazing flawless argument, then the entire faith aspect would be destroyed. It would no longer be faith, it would be belief.
God could come to you right now and flip cars and shit to impress you, but then you would be believing with your eyes, not with your faith.
"Blessed are those who believe in that which they cannot see"
So God is, conceptually, unprovable by any sort of logical means. That's why when you ask for proof of his existence, any self-aware, spiritually attuned Christian will reply "I cannot do that for you, and I never said I could."
This is what terrifies me about religion. You say that God is unprovable and yet you (not talking to you personally all thought this might apply) go to church every Sunday, read the Bible, spend countless hours praying. For something that is not even provable. Thankfully, for some reason, you've decided to become somewhat of a half christian and you don't believe everything in the Bible, hence you're not on your way to Sweden to stone me. But every religious person isn't.
ok we've already had pages of discussion on this and i already told this guy to keep it civil, u too plz.
On July 14 2008 13:12 Nintu wrote: I guess to better articulate what I mean,
The question is "If a spiritual world exists that is, by it's own definition "supernatural", then why would you try and disprove it using scientific reasoning?"
One of the conditions of it's existence is that it is not scientifically explained, right? So what's with all the theorycrafting. 0_0
Because this spiritual/supernatural world is affecting our world, the real world. There are serious issues that arise as the result of the existence of religion.
This depends. If you believe the Spiritual/Supernatural world is directly affecting our world, as in God is pulling strings of world affairs, then I don't believe this is an issue because we can't exactly stop him. Assuming you mean the much more logical "people are doing bad things in the name of ____", then yes this is true, but I do not believe it is the affect of one religion itself.
Religion is being used as a tool, very unreligiously and terribly, I admit. This does not make religion responsible, atleast not anymore than a hammer is responsible if you murder someone else with it.
If it wasn't Religion, it would be philosophy, or sects of Science, or something else. In either case, religion cannot be extinguished, and it would be silly to blame it for all the mis-use in the first place anyway.
Yes, everything cannot be blamed on any sole religion, but why would religion not be responsible (at least partly responsible?). Doctors that perform abortion have been murdered by zealous religious groups. Women and young girls are raped in the name of religion. 9/11 occured beacuse of religion.
Again, you're missing the point. Religion didn't CAUSE it. The people themselves DECIDED to KILL. The terrorists in 9/11 DECIDED TO KILL. It was not due to God, or Islam. It was because somebody taught them that that is what they should do. It wasn't God. It was a terrible islamic extremist. Someone (yes, some person) who wished harm on people who weren't like him. Much like Abortionist deaths. Somebody taught them that they should go kill these doctors. It wasn't God. It may have been a preacher, but that preacher was a human. A human who wished others to die because they were not like him.
These human beings USED belief, and religious teachings to murder other human beings. Religion is the most powerful force in the world, I believe. So yes, it also has potential to be used terribly. It's sad, and I pray for all those are hurt in the name of Christianity, or any other religion that is being used as a TOOL to hurt others. Please understand this.
Why this is important is the question "Why did they believe this?". And they believed this based on exactly the same rationality as any other religion is believed in. People always have to think critically and have a real view of the world to make healthy decisions. It would not surprise me if equivalent acts such as 9/11 which happen to be somewhat of Islamic origin will happen with Christian origin.
It has happened! It's called the Crusades. but why stop there? How about Roman Republic days! Let's conquer Greece and then kill Archimedes because he practices a level of science that is feared by our many Gods!
Everywhere religion has been, there has been violence. Why? Because ever since humans could communicate, they pondered their existence and the existence of their fore-fathers.
Religion has ALWAYS been used as a tool by politicians. It sickens me, and it skews the very nature of most religious teachings, such as "DO NOT FUCKING MuRDER" a commandment that was skewed quite liberally in the crusades.
You cannot convince me that Religion has not been used as a tool to do harm. That makes the wielder of the tool responsible, not the tool itself. While we're at it, let's take away every gun in the world, because they cause most deaths now-a-days right? Fuck, let's keep putting the responsibility on the tools instead of the wielders. I feel more logical already.
For the record, before I hit post, I really do apologize for being so frustrated with your posts. I'm sorry if it was uncivil, which I'm certain it was. I respect critical thinking, scientific thinking, and the logical mind state that Atheists are in. The trouble seems to be with convincing you to have the same level of sensitivity in interacting with someone who believes in the same thing, but also something else.
On July 14 2008 13:28 MyLostTemple wrote: something i've always wondered is: if god exists, why would he necessarily care that people believed in him?
if i was the omnipotent being that created the universe and had a vested interest in people acting in a Good way, why would people buying into me existing matter? Arn't they going to find out either way? Why would i punish (assuming i was that type of god) people for not believing in me? To me this always seemed like one of the fishier parts of religion.
it's self evident that people can behave morally with our without the belief in god. so what necessitates this?
It is in Christian Belief that God created us in his image. It's not simply that we exist in a world he created, but he created us. I know you probably wanted a more wordy response but in Christian belief, it's simply the case that He created us. It's not as if me or you were granted Omnipotent powers and could do whatever we wanted. He is not bound by selfish desires, or human self-interest. He created us. We are his world.
Why would i punish (assuming i was that type of god) people for not believing in me? To me this always seemed like one of the fishier parts of religion.
I don't believe God punishes those who disobey him. Not directly. This of course varies between all the denominations, and through each individual of each religion, but I do not believe he actively attacks those who disobey him.
it's self evident that people can behave morally with our without the belief in god. so what necessitates this?
It is absolutely evident that people can behave well without religion. If there was an immediately evident correlation like this, Religion would seem logical, wouldn't it? Nothing Necessitates it. It's very nature means that it requires faith. You clearly want answers that nobody can give. If Religion was a necessity, it would be fundamentally flawed. (even more-so than most of you think it is.. )
As I said earlier, I cannot make others believe in what I believe in, but I can attempt to explain enough of what I believe to advocate understanding and sensitivity.
well i understand the dogma behind it because i was catholic for about 18 years and i come from a well educated religious family. i think your views tend to be much looser than those of other christian factions.
some of the most educated and modernized countries in the world are rapidly becoming non religious. Sweeden, Switzerland and Japan to name a few. I tend to predict that as the world becomes more educated and modernized we will see atheism spread more heavily in north america and asia. i suppose i'm curious if religious people feel threatened by this concept or if they actually believe a rapture would ever come of it.
Same situation actually, raised Roman Catholic for the first 12 or so years, then questioned it and moved away from it, and after years of spiritual exploration, came back to "Christianity" but am not an adherent to any particular denomination right now.
It's true, I am a bit "looser" because of this. I am aware of what "most" of my Christian friends believe, and what they were taught. But I also am well aware of many Christians who may seem "loosely christian" when in fact, they are simply "evolved" Christians. Okay, that's a few too many quotes, so lemme re-articulate.
I agree that there are many issues regarding skewed religious teachings in Christianity. Many people are raised to "believe" something because it was where they were born. I never believed that going to church every sunday somehow saved your eternal Soul. As I mentioned earlier, in every congregation, there are those who are there out of obligation and social habit, and others who are there to explore their spiritual curiosity. I am personally found greater fulfillment in my exploration of Christianity than anything else in my life. Of course, this means nothing to you or anyone else on this forum, and I don't pretend it does. I am merely clarifying that I, as a Christian, am also aware of the sad state that Religious teachings has been brought to. Whether you believe in the teachings or not, I think we can agree that we share a lot of the same morals. And a lot of those teachings, whether you believe them to be the word of God or not, have been skewed and used for terrible, personal and political purposes. From an objective standpoint, we can observe that and look poorly on it together. But I have to speak up if I feel it, as a core, is being accused of these terrible acts, instead of those responsible for turning it into what it is.
That paragraph was way too long, and hopefully you've been able to navigate it in the way I intended..
EPT
)
