thanks for the suggestion. glad to have you around too
Hi Gamer,
sorry for the late reply, I was cut off from the world by one cable - I just had to find out which one.
There is of course an equally sharp answer to your derogatory comments on Religion - but we don’t want to enter into that type of exchange. What concerns me is the pseudo-darwinian assumption that we as a species have in any way progressed beyond ‘primitive heart-longings’ that you ascribe religious people. I maintain that in fact we have regressed as a species, exchanging natural abilities and intuitive understanding for technological playthings, becoming oafish in a way similar to the accusations made about church-goers.
Our supposed rational society is producing more and more brainless consumers who are completely unable to grasp the simple facts of life - and then this ignorance is even televised at prime-time, attracting gawking viewers laughing at themselves in the mirror. Speak to these ignoramuses and they will pour abuse on the church - imbibing progress from those ‘primitives’. A sad world that promotes such behaviour.
Shalom
Bob
There is a difference between HAVING heartlongings and ATTRIBUTING KNOWLEDGE to heartlongings. Yes, Bob, we haven’t progressed from having desires, thank God, but let’s not mistake our desires for knowledge. And regarding all the gadgetry and LCD pandering of the media and entertainment outlets, yes, I think it can do more harm than good. It urgently argues in favor of many things, but religion isn’t necessarily one of them. First you have to convince me of the validity of religion before you prescribe it as an elixir for all the worlds woes.
Here I go butting in again.
Gamer,
First, I don’t see religion, reason, or science providing us with anything that work’s very well. At the bottom of all there is a ‘leap of faith’ that something good is supposed to happen if I: follow the precepts and dogma of a chosen religion or, if I build a perfect system of rational thought or, wait for the “Grand Unification Theory” that will allow science to explain everything. There simply isn’t any discernable religious or secular utopia out there. If there is, it’s a well-kept secret. That said, the lack of an arbitrary ‘proof’ doesn’t invalidate any of the suppositions or propositions offered by religion, reason, or science.
We live in a time that honors only the pragmatic physical world. The mystical and metaphysical possibilities have little credence because they cannot yield to reason or scientific ‘proof’. We have replaced the concept of entertaining all the possibilities as possible with knowledge that, in it’s self-proclaimed superiority, dismisses any and all that fails to meet it’s own definitions. It cannot be illogical. (definition, please) It must be testable. (science) Do I need knowledge? Well of course I do! I need to know how to change a tire. I need to know how to light the grill. I need to know how to operate this computer. I need pragmatic how do I get through the day knowledge. I also have needs that aren’t answerable with knowledge alone, or answerable with knowledge at all. To dismiss those needs as unanswerable diminishes me and therefore diminishes the world around me.
Do I have the perfect elixer? Nope. But I refuse to dismiss the metaphysical possibilities because I can’t “prove” they exist.
JT
Hi Gamer,
Not if these ‘heartlongings’ are a first indication of direction, which is what most religions primarily give us. And if that direction turns out to be good for society, promoting life and welfare, helping up the small or frail - then it becomes knowledge or ‘wisdom’.
Shalom
Bob
No problem JT,
Carefully and slowly over time we would tease part the inner world from the outer. We develop more and more complex models to understand humanity. The purpose would be growth and development. It is a desire to increase the greatness of being.
Sentience may be just a special form of madness. That we can say “I†and almost be talking about someone else, make us different from other animals who need no such divisions in their sense of identity. Another mammal has no self-image. It looks in a mirror and sees another animal, not itself.
The question, “Who am I?†is silly. As though some linguistic explanation of being was even possible.
We have “I†because we have words, we have words because we needed a way to communicate while doing other activities. We communicate because we were weak as individuals but strong as a tribe. Humans have always needed each other to survive in a harsh, unwelcoming environment.
If God had never existed, The Earth would not exist, you would not exist, and I would not exist. What’s with all the speculative questions? If. . . ?
First of all, check you premises, monkey above.
Second,
I think a lot of religious people say:
“(Assumption based on subjectivity:) I have a desire which feels innate. (Bad premise:) The only way to fulfill this desire is through x religion. (Then this bad premise:) A universe would not have created me with x desire unless x desire could somehow be fulfilled. (Unsound conclusion:) Therefore, x religion must be, in addition to what I need to fill x desire, True, with a capital T in terms of the actually case about the universe, including its intrinsic and extrinsic meaning and purpose.”
Bob, desires have a purpose, and fulfilling these desires is important. Science and religion both fulfill desires. In man’s desire for ultimate cosmic Truth, which is usually a want, not a need, religion provides a comfortable, and sometimes reasonable, speculation that can eventually masquerade as undeniable Truth for those too ignorant to know what’s happened to their minds. I won’t say this is tragic or wrong, but i will say i find it ugly and animalistic. As for the unknowns, philosophy does a good job keeping Mysteries alive, and probing them in an intellectually honest way. If you must supplement it with fiction, at least call a spade a spade, or else you are nothing more than a delusion drug addict, religion warping your “GODGIVEN” sense of the world in a hackneyed, manmade direction.
As for truth which facilitates daily life, science and reason wins in terms of medicine and physics, engineering, law. Psychology trumps religion in terms of mental health. Bourbon trumps religion in terms of its warming, soothing effect.
Tentative, I don’t dismiss metaphysical claims for lack of proof. but i do rule some out because of utter lack of coherence or proponderance of enything resembling good reason to believe. Without this basic faculty, how would discern the truth of any claim? I don’t have proof that my cousin isn’t in fact a can of tomato soup. I do, however, consider myself the better person for refusing to waste a second entertaining such a contention. I think similar time is wasted in similar ways entertaining religious claims that tend to be nothing more than a hangover from a primitive time when we were that much closer to monkeys. Which brings us back to the monkey above.
Hi Gamer,
Sorry for the late reply - I was busy.
I have a yearning that seems to be innate. By experience, Religion seems to answer this yearning. Religion has many facets and seems to be congenial to humankind, and ancient texts reveal a timeless wisdom. Question: Could this timeless wisdom reveal a principle of life that permeates the nature of man? Could it have a source? If so, it remains a mystery, but a mystery which from time to time sends a beam of enlightenment. Conclusion: There is truth that cannot be rationally proven but has to be experienced. All kinds of people throughout history have been moved by this truth and it seems to be a common denominator if people have inclusive spirituality. Let’s try that!
Gamer, you haven’t quoted me with this: “Therefore, x religion must be, in addition to what I need to fill x desire, True, with a capital T in terms of the actually case about the universe, including its intrinsic and extrinsic meaning and purpose†- I really don’t know where you get it from. Perhaps that is your problem. I have stressed the point that religion is mystical for me, that truth is available in many forms and that religious truth is just as sound as any other and complementary to scientific or rational truth. Your statements are aggressive by nature, accusing religious people of masquerading, lying, being delusioned and generally lacking integrity.
You have only one part of the picture and there are facts to prove that psychology only became necessary when mankind lost mythology and tried to incorperate non-rational truth into a world that accepted only reason. The tendancy to disqualify anything that didn’t fit into this rationality meant that those people who were confronted with facts that were beyond rational thought were personally disqualified. Consider the victorian society which was extremely draconic and how many people suffered from schizophrenia – a clear sign of an unhealthy society and something that steadily accompanied the march of relentless Rationalism.
The fact that Religion fell into the same trap as other areas of life is quite reasonable. That is the whole story of Fundamentalism – the assumed fight against modernity but under the adoption of rational thought. It was the inability to see the possibility of complementary facets of truth that has caused the contention in the world up until today. I watch the Atheists who swear by rationality denounce the religious fundamentalists and vic-versa. Both are wrong and both are a threat to world peace.
Shalom
Bob
I never said I quoted you, but that a lot of people come to religion because the shoe fits. They deduce that everything must fit like a puzzle, that all gaos must inevitably be filled, that justice will prevail.
Religion is amenable to humans because we created it. Timeless truths about humanity may come out of religion, but they also come out of just plain thinking and living. That’s all religion is, thinking and living…plus fiction. The thinking and living is the important part, the religion is nothing but a logo for the lowest common denominator, a gimmick to get under your skin.
I admit I’m being brusk and hostile and dismissive and its probably not fair, and definitely not productive. Sorry for that. On the other hand, I challnge these thoughts in their inception wherever I see them, before they get out of hand. I think second-tier contrived faiths, like those offered in religion, are a recipe for disaster, an insult to nature, and a hindrance to the development of humans’ potential.
You could apply all your same arguments to any religion, and that includes a religion I make up right now that worships socks and beans. At some point your thinking breaks down. How does BOB determine when a religion merits respect?
Hi Gamer,
When I see that it furthers the personal and collective development of humankind, is respectful to other, is compassionate and peaceful, it has made a great leap in my view. There are other lesser aspects of course.
Because there is a lot of fundamentalist Religion out there, especially in America, it is very difficult to even communicate with people on the subject. Very often my conversations with people outside of the church the more fruitful - but only because they admit that they see religion as belonging to their lives, but can’t find a group where they would feel comfortable.
Sometimes we have jokingly spoken about starting our own church - but that is an enterprise that is bound to fail. The attempt to reform from within suffers the influences of parochialism, although the church is steadily fading here in Germany. Again, I sometimes think that such a development isn’t all bad. At least the church which would be left over would be a comunity that is on a way to a common goal.
The problem with that is with establishments like the care-home I work in, which is a church home. Much of what we can achieve above and beyond what other care-homes do is due to the support of the church.
You know, we are not far apart, you and I, but I am holding on to the good that is still achievable. I understand your arguments and can only argue for religion, whilst being (self-)critical of church.
Shalom
Bob
Your right, that’s the very sad part of it friend.
Most Atheists feel they can defy the human disposition because they are capable of freeing themselves from religions, and most of them I am not referring to all believes that fundamentalist are somewhat mentally inferior people in comparison with them. Although, they don’t hold solid evidence to support their evangelical belief, and for a good reason.
What different would it make (to you or to the planet Earth) if God didn’t exist? As in, God had never existed?
With god humans are:
Special
Without god humans are:
Composed of several different types of creatures, that have been failed to assimilate with each other. These creatures, or breeds, have selectively evolved to become efficient killers in their quest for ultimate power. This biological evolution, combined with an unmatched savagery and their blind devotion to the voraciousness and enviousness. Thus making them an extremely formidable and deadly foes, and is very difficult to eradicate.
surely the question should be changed to what difference would it make to us if god did exist
bob, I cannot believe you said that. fundamentalist religion especially in america? dude, that’s down right near fighting words.
while there are fundamentalist extremist christians in america the worst their doing right now is trying to prevent gay marriage. fundamentalist mormons are doing far more damage with their believes of polygamy.
if we look worldwide, we’ll see a large group of fundamentalist Islam, that are doing an enormous amount of damage towards world peace.
if you had said “fundamentalist religion is a problem worldwide.” instead of “especially in america”.
fact:
Islam and mormonism breed fundamentalist groups more than christianity, judaism etc.
Sometimes we have jokingly spoken about starting our own church - but that is an enterprise that is bound to fail. The attempt to reform from within suffers the influences of parochialism, although the church is steadily fading here in Germany. Again, I sometimes think that such a development isn’t all bad. At least the church which would be left over would be a comunity that is on a way to a common goal.
hatsu
read this before you comment about atheism anymore. I did and it changed my mind completely.
godlessgeeks.com/WhyAtheism.htm
[bob,xanderman]
i feel like this thread relates to the thread bob started: Not I but we. (the title says it all. we are the borg, resistance is futile) the ideas you have for world peace and world cooperation are not bad ones, but you are going about them in ways that lead to loss of individuality. many books about such societies, and like books they will all fail.
Hi scythekain,
I can understand you being totally ‘gobsmacked’ but have a read of this:
"The Reverend Billy Graham taught Bush to live in anticipation of the Second Coming but it was his friendship with Dr. Tony Evans that shaped Bush’s political understanding of how to deport himself in an apocalyptic era. Dr. Evans, the pastor of a large Dallas church and a founder of the Promise Keepers movement taught Bush about “how the world should be seen from a divine viewpoint,” according to Dr. Martin Hawkins, Evans assistant pastor.
S.R. Shearer of Antipas Ministries writes, “Most of the leaders of the Promise Keepers embrace a doctrine of ‘end time’ (eschatology), known as ‘dominionim.’ Dominionism pictures the seizure of earthly (temporal) power by the ‘people of God’ as the only means through which the world can be rescued… It is the eschatology that Bush has imbibed; an eschatology through which he has gradually (and easily) come to see himself as an agent of God who has been called by him to ‘restore the earth to God’s control’, a ‘chosen vessel’, so to speak, to bring in the Restoration of All Thingss.” Shearer calls this delusion, “Messianic leadership”-- that is to say usurping the role usually ascribed to the Messiah…
In dominionism we can see the theological source of Bush’s monomania. Not to be distracted by the fact that he lost the popular election by a half a million votes, that the Joint Chief of Staff at the Pentagon were so concerned about his plans to invade Iraq that they leaked their unanimous objection, that he has systematically alienated much of the world, that roughly seventy percent of Americans remain unconvinced of the imminent threat of Saddam Hussein and the same percentage object to war if there will be significant American casualties–none of this is in the least relevant. He believes his mandate toward action is from God."
counterpunch.org/hill01042003.html
For more information on how George W. Bush became the head of the new American Dominionist Church/State read this: yuricareport.com/Dominionism … merica.htm
There is more going on than you are actually noting and the fact that you don’t notice these thing shows, together with the fact that George W. Bush is in power, how effective they are.
Shalom
Bob
Hatsu, I find your definition of people with or without God completely arbitrary.
Bob –
I said –
How does BOB determine when a religion merits respect?
You said –
When I see that it furthers the personal and collective development of humankind, is respectful to others, is compassionate and peaceful, it has made a great leap in my view.
But Bob, all these traits you describe are entirely possible, if not more possible, WITHOUT religion. Why are you so sold on religion? Why can’t you just pursue the things you just mentioned without insisting on salvaging the folkloric dogma? Sure, stringent faith and ritual will get you a quick fix, but long term it’s nothing but barriers as far as the eye can see for the human race.
I see a day when there’s no religion but poetry…no ritual but honest expression of emotion, no metaphysics, just natural wonderment of the mystery that surrounds us, and gentle exalting of it through scientific exploration, cooperation and love for purely aesthetic, deeply ingrained Darwinian reasons. I also see a day when religion will tear apart our future, our dreams, our potential. A day when children’s minds will be brainwashed before they’re old enough to judge for themselves, a day when humans are too busy looking at their own fictional Gods, which are merely glorified idols, such as the many concepts of Yahweh, Allah and Christ, and they will have ignored the truth that surrounds them, the vaccuum we are in, its actual traits, and the creatures around us. We can either appreciate the way things ARE, or we can turn away from it and look at the chicken scrawl of primitive, ignorant men. That would be a shame.
Why are you even here 70? That is the most close-minded, “I need attention”, anti-discussion, attempt at “shoving your ideals” in people’s faces i’ve seen so far on this site.
If you don’t like the thread, skip it.
bob in light of that information i wouldn’t blame you for thinking that of bush. it certainly is a frightnening thought that, he
#1 thinks we are in end times. where is his justification?
#2 is letting religious right wingers control him.
but a part of me also understands this living in america and the tragedy of 9.11, it probably changed the president drastically, as it did every american. he felt that Islam terrorists were the anti-christ so he turned to fundie christians for ideas.
I agree in a sense that Islam terrorism is dangerous, but I don’t think it has anything to do with christ anti-christ or the end of the world.
(like I said above, fundamental islam is still more dangerous, instead of “ruling” over you, if you don’t accept their rule, you die.)
one contrary thing to this statement I thought of though, is that Iraq is holding elections in January… it’s unlikely bush will be controlling it but not impossible.
Gamer quote:
We are all victims so don’t you say that we fundamentalists are the bad guys
Do you really think we fundamentalist are the nefarious or destructive entity here?
Your making it seems as if humans can be satisfied, maybe you, me and the few of us can be satisfied by just hanging with other brethren philosophers here, but how about the majority of people? That is feasible only if some human attributes will be removed, such as envy to possessions of others and many more.
Let’s say that this dream of yours take place, what’s next in that paradise, what? one man became infuriated with the next poker faced man he saw walking towards him, or he get mad because of the bigotry his little sister experience in her third grade class and so on… I believe burdens and reward cannot be equally divided amongst the people. But that’s the way its use to be.
Like a vegetable crop, after a particular plant is inoculates or immunize to a certain parasite, bacteria or virus another threat is yet to strike.
I say the major concern is GREED not the fundamentalist, the greedy dogs within ourselves.
GREED comes in various forms and faces such as envy and insatiability.
If only other creature can comment about humans:
1# They composed of several different types of creatures that cannot assimilate with each other, ever.
2# These creatures, or breeds, have selectively evolved to become efficient killers in their quest for ultimate power.
3# Biological evolution, combined with an unmatched savagery and their blind devotion to the voraciousness and enviousness.
4# Extremely formidable and deadly foes for other living and non living matters, and is very difficult to eradicate.
Exchanging different thoughts is really satisfying lol.
Hi Gamer,
[smiles] I think it is the fact that we have a completely different view on what Religion is. In my opinion, you are more concerned about what it has become. On that point we are agreed. Having said that, if what Religion has become hinders it ever returning back to what it should be, then I am obviously going to find myself another means of promoting those values I consider important.
I think that the metaphor of God as the Physician is probably the best to describe my views. Perhaps in modern days as the Psychologist (and sometimes the Dentist). The Prophet sees his people suffering and associates the suffering with all of the trappings of Idolatry (or Religion in it’s worse form and much of what you have mentioned) and proclaims that the Torah is the Book of the Covenant of Freedom, return to the God of the Torah and you will be again free. “He will cure you, he will heal you, he will dress your wounds, he will raise you up.”
This is all pictorial speech for the ‘inward’ wounds that were ‘soul injuries’ - and not yet mapped in the ICD 10. And indeed, the realisation of the Torah would have presented a state that would have been indeed completely different to what we know - ensuring the even distribution of wealth and property, the well-being of Widows and Orphans, and common obedience to a law for kings and paupers, etc… Unfortunately, Theologians assume that the Torah was never really fully installed and the system was never fully tried.
Shalom
Bob