Religion

[FlyingFox]

That's an interesting POV. I'd like to read that paper you wrote sometime.

 

Maybe, but I wouldn't know how to post it (its rather long for a forum), and I dont have a web site. But, if you really want, PM me and I'll send it to you.

 

Dark0ne has some very good points, but one struck me as particularly interesting:

 

At the end of the day, humans trying to explain the cause for the universe is a failed venture - all one can do is guess, predict or try and reference current day (or historic) events to its creation and come up with a scientific diagnosis of the situation. I would say it was just as pathetic to say an "all-loving, all-caring, all-knowing entity" created the universe as it is to say La-La from the "Teletubbies" pulled it off.

 

We cannot know how many universes there have been before ours or even if there is more than one at this current time. We can't even disprove the "Men In Black" theory that our universe is a part of an alien's marble game - so what justification do we have in claiming that either a super-entity created the universe or that "nothing" created the universe?

 

One must remember, however, that science is not a substitute for religion. Religion does not explain everday things. Just because Zeus is said to have thrown lightning bolts does not mean that the Greeks thought that Zeus was angry every time a storm occured. Just because we now know that lightning is produced by electricity between water molecules within clouds does not denounce the expression-- the idea-- that Zeus portrays. The same goes for God in Christianity.

 

The Bible says that God created the universe and Earth and beasts and Man in six days, and on the seventh He rested. This is not inteded to explain how many days are in a week, or how the universe was created. It is inteded to provide meaningful symbols for us to interpret and understand the basis of the religion.

 

Devising the Big Bang Theory does not mean that God creating the universe and Creationism are not relevent (I am an avid believer in the Big Bang and in Evolution), but both science and religion must cooperate and work in symbiosis. One does not replace the other.

 

------------------------------

Another thing, unrelated to Dark0ne's post:

 

Man needs (and you maay argue with me about this) two basic relationships. One with other humans and one with god(s). The former provides a sense of belonging, of likeness and similarity. The latter provides a relationship of wholeness and completeness-- a relationship that cannot be entirely fulfilled with other humans. An exterpt from my report states:

 

There is a conflict in modern Man, between the relatedness with other humans and with gods.  People say, “God is dead,” and to an extent this may be true.  But this can never be possible.  As stated, there are two different kinds of relatedness, both of which are necessary to Man: relatedness of wholeness and completeness, and relatedness of likeness and similarity.  Only through belief (either conscious or unconscious) in an overall force to the universe (and this may even be the person himself) can the former be attained, and only through communication with other humans is the latter possible.  In essence, to say that God is dead is to say the humans do not exist – they [too] are “dead.”  If one desires to oppose the view that God is indeed “alive,” one finds that there is a great rift in one’s life: the lack of a place where the comprehension of the universe can be explained, albeit not understandable at the time – a place where there should be “God.”

 

Without God (or an overall force in the universe) life cannot "exist," for there is that missing portion of one's identity-- the relationship with God. Without this relationship, Man is doomed to live on in a world alone, in a world of complete fear. For fear is derived from lack of relation (fear of the unknown, fear of loss), and complete fear is the worst fear of all.

[ThetaOrionis01]

I would argue with you on your last point. IMO, a lot of religion creates fear, and is using this fear as a sanction to get believers to comply.

 

I have also heard the point that the fear of these divine sanctions was required to ensure social cohesion.

 

 

Another point I'd like to make is that fear can also be caused by lack of knowledge - and all too often religion is opposed to the acquisition and distribution of knowledge.

[FlyingFox]

I would argue with you on your last point. IMO, a lot of religion creates fear, and is using this fear as a sanction to get believers to comply.

 

I have also heard the point that the fear of these divine sanctions was required to ensure social cohesion.

 

Yes, there are religions based on fear, however, those religions tended to be less long-lived than others. Belief in God has survived thousands of years (in the forms of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam). Take the Cult of Dionysis, for instance. This cult also had a belief in resurrection of the soul (life after death), and the Dionysiac (sp?) frenzies were a large part of this religion. However, people who performed the frenzies were so fearful of what had happened during the ritual (they would not remember what had happened-- only small flashes of memory) that soon the religion was no longer practiced. Out of the various cults during the Roman Empire timeframe in Europe which promised life after death, Christianity was the one that survived-- out of the Cult of Dionysis, the Cult of Isis, the Cult of Demeter, Mithraism, etc. Christianity was the one that the most people could relate to, the one that was a relationship of love, not fear (though some of these religions were based on love).

 

Another point I'd like to make is that fear can also be caused by lack of knowledge - and all too often religion is opposed to the acquisition and distribution of knowledge.

 

I feel that fear of the unknown (as I had described it) is similar, if not the same, as fear caused by lack of knowledge. Again, some religions do oppose aquisition of knowledge, but, like the aforementioned religions, they too did not survive. The Cathars-- a Christian sect during the Middle Ages (around 1200-1300) that was based on the idea that select few people can know the secrets of the universe-- where all but wiped out by a Crusade. What would have happened to them, had this not happened? No one can really say, but they probably would have remained a small Christian sect, or would have dissolved anyway.

 

Also, modern organized religion (at least for Christianity) has been influenced by cultures throughout history. Paganism has had a tremendous effect on Catholicism and certain Protestant sects, which in some instances contradict the teachings of Christ. Many more religions have done similarly. Not to say that this is a bad thing, but it shows the evolution of the original teachings of Christ to the teachings of modern day clergy.

[ThetaOrionis01]

I would argue that Christianity is very much based on fear - fear of sin, fear of hell etc. IMO, the concept of 'Original Sin' is one of the most obscene in the history of mankind. An ideal tool to keep believers in their place.

And fear is certainly abundant in the Old Testament with its vengeful god.

 

Also, Christianity was very much opposed to the acquisition and spreading of knowledge - Galilei is but one example.

 

 

The unknown and lack of knowledge - IMO they are the same. Once you have acquired knowledge about a thing it is no longer unknown to you.

 

Regarding the Cathars - they were murdered for being heretics daring to question the authority of the Roman Church. Political as well as religious reasons.

 

 

IMO religion as an evolutionary trait has developed in line with the evolution of society - from animism via pantheism to patriarchal monotheism - and as it has been an evolution each new phase has adopted those concepts of its predecessors which suited it.

[Switch]

I would argue that Christianity is very much based on fear - fear of sin, fear of hell etc. IMO, the concept of 'Original Sin' is one of the most obscene in the history of mankind. An ideal tool to keep believers in their place.

And fear is certainly abundant in the Old Testament with its vengeful god.

 

Also, Christianity was very much opposed to the acquisition and spreading of knowledge - Galilei is but one example.

christianity isnt about fear at all... not all forms are at least. it all depends on the person preaching about it and what type of christianity it is... a lot of these american people who scream about on TV most of wot they say is total cr@p. im not sure about god being vengeful in the past i have heard a few stories from the bible saying he used to punish us for our sins. but anyway we no longer believe that hes vengeful and believe that we have been relieved of our sins thanks to Jesus. also im not sure whether we believe their really is a hell with satan and all that.

 

this is just speaking from a baptist point of view as i know it (my dad's a minister at the local baptist church.) there's so many different types of christianity and so many different ways people put it across that i dont really think it can be generalised like that.

[SothThe69th]

I was wondering how long it would take before a religion topic sprang up. I give it 3 more pages before lockage due to flame war. Well, maybe more, you guys are, for the most part, rather well behaved. Anyhow...

 

I'm an atheist. Not the most logical choice (the most logical, of course, being agnostic, as no ones been able to conclusively prove or disprove God's existence.), but I go for it simply because I haven't seen any good reason to believe he exists. I mean, seriously, if 2,000 years ago he was throwing around miracles like they were 90% off at the local Rite-Aid, now where are they? Where are the angels with flaming swords? The water into wine (I could REALLY go for that.), all the other fun stuff?

[Switch]

I was wondering how long it would take before a religion topic sprang up. I give it 3 more pages before lockage due to flame war. Well, maybe more, you guys are, for the most part, rather well behaved. Anyhow...

 

I'm an atheist. Not the most logical choice (the most logical, of course, being agnostic, as no ones been able to conclusively prove or disprove God's existence.), but I go for it simply because I haven't seen any good reason to believe he exists. I mean, seriously, if 2,000 years ago he was throwing around miracles like they were 90% off at the local Rite-Aid, now where are they? Where are the angels with flaming swords? The water into wine (I could REALLY go for that.), all the other fun stuff?

lol thats a good point, dont know why he stopped, maybe he used 2 like showing off? :P

 

and yeah i was just thinking this could turn into a flame war if we're not careful, infact i thought that as soon as i saw the topic header, but it might hold together for a bit longer! besides Dark0ne cant justify stopping us he verged on flaming himself with that little comment about a teletubby creating the universe... :P

[ThetaOrionis01]

Lol - I'd say in the absence of conclusive proof and eye-witness accounts the teletubby theory could be considered as valid as any other. If you have a look at creation myths from around the world, the teletubby one doesn't look that far-fetched either. :lol:

 

As for flamewars...yeah, I've been on forums where debates about religions turned into flame wars mainly because people weren't debating facts or theories but were resorting to the 'all atheists will go to hell' and 'I believe this and if you disagree you are a moron' exchange of insults technique.

[FlyingFox]

Yeah... hate it when a good topic burns in flames (pun intended)

 

Anywho, the whole thing about God in the Old Testiment being a vengeful God, and a God to be feared: God Himself was made incarnate in the flesh of Man by way of Jesus Christ. Christ was killed on the cross, and thus he died. In essence, God Himself has witnessed and experienced death (since Jesus is all-Human, and all-God). God, thus now has a deep, intimate relationship with humans. God no longer is a far-out mystical force in the unverse, God Himself is like Man: he has "died." Mortality is the one thing that separates Man from the immortals (i.e. God), and now that God too has died, that intimate bond is even greater (or at least existant in some cases) than it was before.

 

And since God has experienced the only thing separating Man from him ("physically"-- if God is physical...?) He has a deeper understanding of His creation, and his children made in his own image: Man. Thus, with this new experience, God has no need to "smite the sinners" and "[throw] around miracles like they were 90% off at the local Rite-Aid"

 

And anyway, one must look at the symbolism of God's "acts" in the Old Testiment, NOT taking it as this is how Biblical authors explained how the world works and such (in other words, not as a literal historical document).

[The_Reaper]

Humanity just created religion because it was affraid, affraid to be all alone in the universe with no one to watch over it, affraid of not having any answers about how the universe works, everyone is affraid of dying, affraid of seasing to exist so they invent a place to go after you die, a place were one doesn´t suffer and lives forever.

FACE IT! Enjoy your stay in this world, because when you die you cease to exist!!

 

ps: It´s no reason to be evil, i´m no anarchist, i don´t do bad things to others because i wouldn´t like if they did the same!