Religion

[ThetaOrionis01]

I agree with Dark0ne - I'm certainly not going insane with fear either.

 

 

Flying Fox, you've described Mythology/religion as an intermediate phase between dreams and realities. Are you familiar with research in the field of neurotheology - a theory which states that religious visions are caused by abnormal brain function akin to temporal lobe epilepsy? http://ftp.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2003/...odonbrain.shtml

 

Is spirituality simply a brain chemical imbalance?

 

I believe that as neuroscience advances we will, at some point in the future, discover the precise location of what we call the 'soul', and will come to know the interplay of neurotransmitters which causes us to feel as we do, determines our personality etc. I also think, however, that it could be very difficult to accept that there is no 'divine spark' within us.

 

 

 

Another point I'd like to make and discuss (if anyone would like to discuss this) is that IMO there is a (IMO irreconcilable) dichotomy between religion as a set of moral and spiritual guidelines, and religion as an organisation.

 

IMO, when religion becomes organised it acquires a power structure and hierachy which seeks to perpetuate itself. It becomes a tool for exerting secular and political power, and frequently the means used to exert this power are in complete contradiction to the basic tenets of the religion. As an example I would cite Christianity - simply because it is the religion I know most about. Flying Fox described it as a religion based on love, not fear, and indeed Jesus did preach love. Compare this, however with the crimes against humanity committed by the church in the name of Christianity. The church - particularly throughout the Middle Ages - ruled through fear.

In this way religion is used - or abused - to manipulate and frequently oppress others. As I said - it becomes a tool. You only have to look at all the conflicts fought in the name of one religion or other.

 

I would be genuinely interested to hear how followers of a religion reconcile this dichotomy.

[Racius]

On a few other noted ideas in this thread, my ideas are as follows:

 

Man created the idea of time to have a sence of actually MATTERING in the universe, for those who have a long life, it is considered a good thing, Why? Why is it good to live for a certain amount of time longer than someone else? does it make the long-living person better in any way? and where did we get the idea of good and evil? For all we know it could be a good thing to go round murduring people randomly and it could be bad to allow any weaker people live (not that i follow that sort of idea myself).

 

Personally, i think time, religion, alignment and any kind of afterlife is just a bunch of silly human creations, something that we cling onto to make it seem like we actually matter to something, or someone greater and to keep us from going insane...

 

I think it was the android in Red Dwarf (i know, fictional character, follows the creaters human ideas, bla...) wh said "Heaven is just something they made up to stop you humans going insane"

 

And from what i have seen in people... its true.

[FlyingFox]

I'm not going insane with fear - so to say that "Man needs god otherwise we'd go insane" is ludicrous. IMO thats only relevant to the exploitative church days when peasants were told to work, else they'd lead an eternal life of damnation in hell - not to present day. Religion is the opium of the people, as Karl Marx would say.

 

I was not intending in my post that Man goes insane because of fear of the afterlife (hell, etc.). What was intended was something different: Man and his place in the universe. If one thinks deeply of the universe, and gazes into the sky and thinks of the infinity of space, there is a certain amount of fear. Man is so tiny (some might say insignificant) in relation to the vastness of space that one needs some sort of comfort-- that Man is not alone in the universe. This may be in the form of a god, or even in the form of extraterrestrial life.

 

I understand that you, Dark0ne, and others do not go insane from fear, and I do not want to make you, nor do I think I could/should make you, believe that that Man needs God to exist. And for Man to live in a world without fear. That is for you personally to decide. I merely state that I believe there is a place in Man's soul/heart/mind/whatever that is reserved for God or an overall force in the universe. And without this space being filled, Man leads an incomplete life, for that relationship that God or an overall force fulfills-- one of oneness and completeness-- is not present.

 

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

Theta, I am not familiar with neurotheology, but it would be nteresting to study, as it could provide a link between th religious tendencies between ancient and modern man.

 

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

 

IMO, when religion becomes organised it acquires a power structure and hierachy which seeks to perpetuate itself. It becomes a tool for exerting secular and political power, and frequently the means used to exert this power are in complete contradiction to the basic tenets of the religion. As an example I would cite Christianity - simply because it is the religion I know most about. Flying Fox described it as a religion based on love, not fear, and indeed Jesus did preach love. Compare this, however with the crimes against humanity committed by the church in the name of Christianity. The church - particularly throughout the Middle Ages - ruled through fear.

In this way religion is used - or abused - to manipulate and frequently oppress others. As I said - it becomes a tool. You only have to look at all the conflicts fought in the name of one religion or other.

 

As I stated previously in this thread, the Christian religion has been greatly influenced by other religions of the time, most prevalent in the Germanic religion. The ideals of perfection, and-- somewhat-- rule through fear have been adapted from the old Germanic traditions and placed within the Christian (Catholic and Protestant mainly) Church. The teachings of Christ do not state that in order be a good person/get into heaven, one must be like Christ. This is a Germanic view. Christ teaches one must be the best one can be, and God expects nothing more. This is the original Christian belief.

 

And again, priests and other clergy may not be the humblest people, either (though I must say, there are and were some very good clergy who stayed true to the teachings of God). They, too, are swayed by the powers of temptation and wealth and power, just as lay people are. Though they maybe should follow Christs teachings, not all of them do, and this results in the correption of the Church. I myself may lable myself a Protestant Christian, in the Episcopalian Church, but there are some discrepancies between my own philosophies and the organized Church's. That is not to say either one is better or worse than the other, but instead, one must follow one's own path and believe in what one truly does believe.

[Switch]

That is not to say either one is better or worse than the other, but instead, one must follow one's own path and believe in what one truly does believe.

well said. :)

[ThetaOrionis01]

Lol, I was under the impression that any deviation from the tenets of an established religion constituted heresy - for which people used to get executed in quite gruesome fashion?

 

 

I do agree about your point of man being insignificant and looking for comfort - and perhaps, during the origins of religion, also hoping for some form of divine intervention? Believing in some greater power perhaps gives you a point of reference?

 

However, as religion evolved over the course of history, would you say that the relationship between man and god(s) has matured - people no longer expect a direct intervention in their lives, or material reward, but rather look for spiritual guidance?

 

Do you think that the religions we have now are still adequate to provide this guidance? What I am referring to, in particular, - rather than the way religion is being used as a reason for conflict (eg. Islam against the Western World, Hindus against Muslims, Protestants v. Catholics) - is the emergence of a myriad of cults, the substitution of consumerism for religion, and the observation that quite a few people only play lipservice to the faith they claim to follow while engaging in behaviour contradictory to it.

 

 

I very much agree with you that people must follow their own path, and arrive at at a philosophy or set of moral and spiritual guidelines that helps them live the best life they can.

[miltonic]

Theta, I dig your style. I can't help but agree with your arguments, as I have encountered similar answers through my own research. You mentioned a topic above about neuroscience, and through research of my own awhile ago, a scientist had discovered that patients would see a "Bright light", when a certain area in their brain was triggered. It appeared that this area of the brain took control when a huge rush of adrenaline was released throught the patients system. This could occur naturally if the person encountered a fatal accident. It basically occurs with death, and it's purpose is to leave the "victim" in the child-like state of death. After all, if death is inevitable, why go through the pain? Pain is just a function to warn your body to stop doing what it is doing to avoid further damage. If you are going to die, pain is an irrelevant function. Anyway, when people say they see the white light of heaven when involved in a bad accident, it's interesting to note that scientists can re-create that experience in a patient who is in total safety. This 'experienence' appears to be an evolved state so people, and possibly other creatures, can accept death.

 

As far as the arguments about religion, I couldn't agree more with Dark One and Theta, but I won't even get started because they've already made some good points, and there is so much evidence that does not support religion that it really must be up to the individual to pursue. It's a process that will take time, because there is too much information to process it all at once.

 

Peace

[FlyingFox]

Sorry, thunderstorms up here in my area... had to shut down... :P

 

However, as religion evolved over the course of history, would you say that the relationship between man and god(s) has matured - people no longer expect a direct intervention in their lives, or material reward, but rather look for spiritual guidance?

 

Yes, it today's society people may not expect direct intervention by God or an overall force, and not that they should or should not. I agree with you that people in today seek guidance more than direct intervention (though this latter has not completely disappeared). People, to an extent, want to do the right things and live their lives well. When the going gets tough, though, some form of comfort is needed-- a feeling fulfilled by God (henceforth covering all forms of a godly figure: i.e. an overall force in the universe.). Thus, it gets back to my previous argument on relationships with God.

 

Do you think that the religions we have now are still adequate to provide this guidance? What I am referring to, in particular, - rather than the way religion is being used as a reason for conflict (eg. Islam against the Western World, Hindus against Muslims, Protestants v. Catholics) - is the emergence of a myriad of cults, the substitution of consumerism for religion, and the observation that quite a few people only play lipservice to the faith they claim to follow while engaging in behaviour contradictory to it.

 

I think that this comes down to the fact that people (especially in the Western world) no longer understand their religion. Cults arise from one of two (as I see it) conditions:

1. The cultist group sees their religion as corrupt, and seeks to change it, though not themselves dievrting from the main teachings of the religion; or

2. The cultist group sees their religion as corrupt not because it is truly corrupt, but because the cultist group has not studied/philosophied/etc. about the religion well enough to understand it and thus proceeds to what the cultist group in number 1 does.

 

The latter of the two stimulates movements within a religion such as consumerism, etc., which have little basis in the original teachings of the religion, but nonetheless fulfill what the cultists needs are. While neither 1 nor 2 can be labled as "good" or "bad," to me it is a shame to see groups (mainly formed by number 2's conditions) diverting even further from the original religion than they would be in the "corrupted" part of the religion.

 

I will not say whether or not I think the Church is corrupt. I think that some of its teachings are different from the original teachings of Christ, but I do not believe it is "bad."

 

Again, it comes down to what one wishes to believe and what one finds as to be fulfilling in one's life.

[Shakkara]

I don't follow any religion, but I believe there is something divine in everyone of us. I also believe in reincarnation.

[OddGuy]

i agree with switch, some people do turn to religion to ease a fear of death, and i personally am not afraid of death either (at least i like to think im not :D ) but i do beleive in one form or another of the afterlife.

[Shakkara]

i agree with switch, some people do turn to religion to ease a fear of death, and i personally am not afraid of death either (at least i like to think im not :D ) but i do beleive in one form or another of the afterlife.

Well, I think of it this way, if I am right then there is little to worry about, if I am wrong and there is no afterlife then life wasn't really worth living anyway.

 

Ohh how optimistic :lol: