0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
quote: There is no denying that religion isn't crap
quote:but there is no denying that a religion that is fully supported and belived in that has a flawless set of rules would create the closest thing to a utopia that will ever work
quote:My evidence is that religions evolve out of every major culture
quote:Religion , not philosophy, seems archaic now because humanity is not so foolish to belive in something as whimsical as the easter bunny
quote:An omnipotent figure (or a philosophy) sets a strict code of moral values for a civilization
quote:Originally posted by Crazy117The other topic for disscussing this degraded into berating astrologers. There is no denying that religion isn't crap.My evidence is that religions evovle out of every major culture. I am not a man of faith but I think that it is (or at least was) for society to include a religion. An omnipotent figure (or a philosophy) sets a strict code of moral values for a civilization. Religion , not philosophy, seems archaic now because humanity is not so foolish to belive in something as whimsical as the easter bunny, but there is no denying that a religion that is fully supported and belived in that has a flawless set of rules would create the closest thing to a utopia that will ever work.
quote:Originally posted by DoctorBeaverHowever, 1 point that neither of us has so-far mentioned is fear. It is the driving force behind most religious dogma - fear of not attaining paradise, of burning in hell for all eternity etc.
quote:Originally posted by DoctorBeaverThat comes back to my point about the difference between spirituality & religion. Fear is not a part of spirituality, it is merely inherent in the dogma of some religions. It has proven to be, though, a very effective tool for ensuring compliance.I must, however, take exception to your point about it being a tool created by those already involved in religion. It is a cornerstone of Christianity & Islam, not a later addition to an original concept. In the New Testament & The Qu'ran it is stated that if you don't do this or that, you'll be in trouble when you die. Those scripts are the very basis of the religions concerned.
quote:But, I think it would be wrong to regard Judaism as a more spiritual religion that Christianity
quote:In this context, the social pressures the Jewish community could bring to bear upon its members would not have applied to these isolated Christians, and so the Christians had to use a mechanism of punishment that could be threatened beyond the reach of the close community. The punishment of a far reaching God, a God that could punish those beyond the reach of their community, served this purpose well.
quote:Originally posted by DoctorBeaverquote:But, I think it would be wrong to regard Judaism as a more spiritual religion that ChristianityI didn't imply that. At least I hope I didn't.
quote:I see the difference between spirituality & religion as the former being a private affair whereas the latter is the organisation of a belief system with dogma.
quote:But if you look at the socio-political & religious situation in the middle east when Christianity was born, it was most certainly a revolutionary way of thinking & bore very little resemblance to anything that existed there at the time. Yes, it drew on the Jewish tradition, but went against it at the same time - especially if you consider the more esoteric aspects of Judaism.
quote: quote:In this context, the social pressures the Jewish community could bring to bear upon its members would not have applied to these isolated Christians, and so the Christians had to use a mechanism of punishment that could be threatened beyond the reach of the close community. The punishment of a far reaching God, a God that could punish those beyond the reach of their community, served this purpose well.That is true to an extent, but only after the fact. That fear of punishment beyond the grave began with Christ. That means it has been an intrinsic part of the religion right from its outset, not added later as a means of control (although it has served that purpose admirably)
quote:if you believe the distinction is one of highly spiritual religions having less need for heaven and hell
quote:I would contend that Christianity was not born in the Middle East.Christianity was born within the Roman Empire. Christ was a Jew, he was not a Christian. Paul was a Christian, and probably the first Christian. Paul, who never personally knew Jesus in life, was born in Asia Minor (OK, that might be regarded as the Middle East, but not Palestine), but he was a citizen of Rome (unlike Peter).
quote:What we can say is that even in his own time, although Jesus was a Jew, he was also a maverick, an outsider (to some, even a terrorist), and as such, one can imagine that he too could find value in applying the notion of damnation in the hereafter to those upon whom he had little control within the here and now. By contrast, Herod could damn those who displeased him within this life, so he had no need to threaten them in the life hereafter.
quote:Originally posted by DoctorBeaver quote:but there is no denying that a religion that is fully supported and belived in that has a flawless set of rules would create the closest thing to a utopia that will ever workI can deny it - at least, I can deny it the way you've worded it; and I think the more extreme forms of Islam & Christianity, for instance, lend weight to my denial. History is littered with examples of people enduring almost anything if they believe that by so-doing they are guaranteed a place in Heaven."Fully-supported & believed in" - let's take the example of female circumcision. Among its adherents, it is fully supported & believed in. It is also 1 of the most barbaric practices imaginable. I certainly would not class it as part of a Utopian lifestyle.Puritan Christians persecuted even their own followers to an horrific extent.You must also take into account the fact it would be next to impossible to get universal support & belief. People are different from each other and so have different needs & wants. A single religion could never cater for everyone; hence the numerous schisms in Christianity, the Sunni-Shi'ite split in Islam etc."One size fits all" has been tried in various fields - religion, education, politics - and has almost invariably been found wanting. That is due solely to people having different wants & needs.
quote:Originally posted by Crazy117notice I said flawless. My point is that following a religion of virtue, whether you belive in the faith or not, would ultimmatley lead somebody to do no purposful wrong.
quote:http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/aug97/865380242.Me.r.htmlThis guy can explain why we sneeze when we look at the sun... But can he explain why kids love Cinnamon Toast Crunch?
quote:notice I said flawless. My point is that following a religion of virtue, whether you belive in the faith or not, would ultimmatley lead somebody to do no purposful wrong.
quote:My point is that following a religion of virtue, whether you belive in the faith or not, would ultimmatley lead somebody to do no purposful wrong
quote:Do all kids love Cinnamon Toast Crunch?
quote:Originally posted by another_someonequote:Originally posted by Crazy117notice I said flawless. My point is that following a religion of virtue, whether you belive in the faith or not, would ultimmatley lead somebody to do no purposful wrong.Not sure if an explanation of a childish preference for cinnamon toast crunch is available or not, but even if such an explanation is available, I'm sure there will always be many other things that remain unexplained. The fact that some things today remain unexplained, why does that prove the truth of religion? Religion provides effective barriers to knowledge, so one can invoke religion as a means of declaring something to be inherently inexplicable, but does the fact that we do not yet have an explanation for something inherently make it inexplicable? The history of science is littered with things that could not be explained in bygone eras, but are totally explicable today.
quote:Originally posted by another_someonequote:Originally posted by Crazy117This presumes commonly agreed and provable notions of virtue and wrong.
quote:Originally posted by Crazy117
quote:Originally posted by Crazy117I am not saying that the church orginization (as it is the church that stated these things, not the religion itself) has always had the most scientifically apt perspective of the world. I am merely saying that a person that follwed a perfect religion's teachings completely, he would do nothing wrong intentionally. (assuming everybody else in the world followed that religion).
quote: "The road to hell is paved with good intentions." does not mean that they person going to hell abided to the rules of the faith of christianity. In fact, it is quite the opposite. I don't know if you knew this already,but Christianity teaches that if you follow the religion you will be spared from hell (at least all Christian faiths that I have heard of).
quote:Postscript: I mentioned Cinnamon toast crunch because I know from personal experience that some kids like it because I am twelve years old. I didn't say that all kids liked it, but at least more than one I am assuming.
quote:Originally posted by Crazy117There has yet to be as religion that pleases everybody so that is why there are many different religions and sects within those religions.
quote:Originally posted by DoctorBeaverI would contend that it was. Christianity is based on the teachings of Christ. Christ lived in the middle east. His original disciples lived in the middle east. Christ preached to those disciples in the middle east. The teachings of Christ were then taken abroad where others learned of them & the adherents multiplied in number. You can't say that because Paul wasn't born in the middle east, Christianity can't have started there.
quote:Jesus was not the founder of Christianity as we know it today. Most of the New Testament doesn't even concern the historical Jesus while the main influence is the Apostle Paul and through the church he founded at Ephesus a Greek convert named John. Paul never met Jesus in the flesh, he only claimed some strange vision and proceeded to paganize the teachings of Jesus (who preached an enlightened form of Judaism), until he created Pauline Christianity. Because there are no known writings from Jesus, the actual Apostles, or anyone that actually knew Him in the flesh (other then perhaps James), most of what He taught is lost forever. While Jesus is regarded by Christians as the founder of their religion because events of his life lay the foundation story of Christianity. While a man named Jesus may be the foundation of Christianity, Paul is regarded as the great interpreter of Jesus' mission, who explained, in a way that Jesus himself never did, how Jesus' life and death fitted into a cosmic scheme of salvation, stretching from the creation of Adam to the end of time. The doctrines of Christianity come mostly from the teaching or influence of Paul, a Pharisee(?) who rejected his Pharisaic Judaism and converted to what he called Christ. Paul would later be placed over his Jewish-Christian rivals by a Gnostic heretic named Marcion.
quote:Some argue that he was instrumental in establishing Christianity as a distinct religion, rather than a sect of Judaism, as Christianity was first known. Due to his body of work and his undoubted influence on the development of Christianity, many modern scholars have considered Paul to be the founder of Christianity, who modified Jesus' teachings and added important new doctrines. However, this view remains controversial. Many Christian scholars say that no teachings were modified, and assert that Paul taught in complete harmony with Jesus. Some Christians, however, particularly those who embrace dispensationalism, believe that Jesus' teachings are for the Jews – especially those teachings found in Matthew – and that Christians necessarily have a different belief system since Christianity, according to this perspective, only arose as a result of the rejection by the Jews of their Messiah.
quote:About AD 49, after fourteen years of preaching, Paul travelled to Jerusalem with Barnabas and Titus to meet with the leaders of the Jerusalem church
quote:Following this visit to Jerusalem, Paul's own writings and Acts slightly differ on his next activities.
quote:Originally posted by DoctorBeaver quote:What we can say is that even in his own time, although Jesus was a Jew, he was also a maverick, an outsider (to some, even a terrorist), and as such, one can imagine that he too could find value in applying the notion of damnation in the hereafter to those upon whom he had little control within the here and now. By contrast, Herod could damn those who displeased him within this life, so he had no need to threaten them in the life hereafter.Indeed. And that backs up my statement that fear of eternal damnation was a part of Christianity right from the start. It was merely a reiteration of the spite and vindictiveness that was attributed to God in the Old Testament.
quote:Originally posted by Ian33The Model religious Community for the world was Ancient Egypt. Thought of as a Heaven on Earth by it's peoples, Egypt complex and diverse religions stemmed from careful obseservation of all natural phenomena Thus Egyptians in general, were protective of their enviroment and conservative with nature. The decline in Religion occured with the coming of the Nazerine and his following fundemetalists , such as Paul. When the Church formed and dictated it's dogma. The world was in for it....Cafe Del Mar. Vol Siente
quote:And ofcourse, just as with Christianity (probably even more so), Judaism has mutated over time.
quote:Originally posted by Soul SurferI do not believe in God as a form of super intelligence that organises everything but I do believe in religion as a guide to behaviour and a force of broader social cohesiveness. I am a regular worshipper and contributor to my local Church of England church.I feel that when it comes to difficult decisions between right and wrong the model that there is someone else who is compassionate but stern who knows what you are doing and will in future ask you to account for it, is as simple a model to live by that I can think of.
quote:When it comes to "written" evidence the book of nature is supreme we live in a "what you see is what you get" universe. The Bible and many other ancient writings and myths contain much wisdom about human nature and good and bad behaviour but must always be read bearing in mind the context and understanding of those who wrote them. To treat them totally literally is just plain stupid.
quote:I do find that the concept of God is a useful and simple mental model to guide behaviour.
quote:Originally posted by peterclarkequote:I do find that the concept of God is a useful and simple mental model to guide behaviour.But that behaviour is often not 'good', especially when it leaves the personal level and becomes a 'religion'. Just think of all the atrocities that are/have been committed in the name of god/religion.There is an interesting letter in New Scientist this week about goodness, co-operation and self sacrifice for the good of others being a basic evolutionary necessity. The god concept may seem to be useful but it nearly always becomes corrupted into a religion, so it may not be a successful mental model in the context of the survival of the human species.Peter
quote:Originally posted by neilepIs religion the antithesis of science ?If so, I will move this thread to the ' just chat ' section instead of here in General Science.
quote:Originally posted by Crazy117QuoteOriginally posted by peterclarkeYOU PEOPLE JUST DON'T GET THE ****ING POINT SHUT THE **** UP WITH THAT BULL****. Crazy117, a word of advice; if you want to get your point across, this kind of language will do little to achieve that.Maybe others don't understand what you are trying to say – then regard that as your inability to express yourself adequately for the audience in question. Maybe some people will understand you with the least effort on your part, may with some others it may take a bit more effort. That may be their fault, it may be yours, but more likely it is neither, it is just two people speaking a slightly different language.You started this discussion with some comments about maintaining a moral code – where does charity, patience, and respect for others, come within your sense of morality?
Originally posted by peterclarkeYOU PEOPLE JUST DON'T GET THE ****ING POINT SHUT THE **** UP WITH THAT BULL****.
quote:Originally posted by Soul SurferNo I do NOT believe in any sort of God who meddles with the universe but I do find that the concept of God is a useful and simple mental model to guide behaviour. Can you come up with a simpler and/or a better one?
quote:Originally posted by Andrew K FletcherInteresting experiment.Take 100 thousand people, convince them that once they are dead, they are dead and there aint no such thing as life after death.give them all a gun and tell them to fight to the death and see how many of them actually pull the trigger.