Religion
Moderators: Public Relations Department, Players Department
- Nakranoth
- Posts: 1054
- Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2006 4:49 am
- Location: What if I were in a hypothetical situation?
- Mykey
- Posts: 954
- Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 8:00 am
- Location: Berne, IN
- formerly known as hf
- Posts: 4120
- Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 2:58 pm
- Location: UK
I don't see why Mykey is gunning at Catholicism in particular? Personally, I feel the world would be much better-off with no religion whatsoever.
All religions foster an understanding of the world that is incompatible with our observed reality, it teaches us to be happy without full understanding. It also teaches us blind faith, not to God, but to his human representatives - a blind faith which is easily abused.
And (most worryingly for me) religion promotes a morality based upon fear of retribution, rather than one which the individual feels is a moral stance benificial to themselves and others.
Religion has been the backbone of the development of our contemporary society (and look how screwed we turned out) and has been leading-forth some of the greatest attrocities the world has seen.
I would venture that not a whole lot has changed.
-Religion is still at the fore-front of our current wars (Radical Islam vs. Bush's 'crusade'(his word) and Nationalistic Jews vs Arab muslims).
-Religion still promotes deeply discrimniatory stances (homosexuality and catholicism, Islam etc. Women's rights and catholicism/Islam)
-Although not necessarily an indication of wider issues with the religion, individuals are still able to mis-use religion for abuse, especially of vulnerable children.
Yes, religious organisation brings a fair amount in terms of charity. Again, the principle of it, people should not need to be religious in order to feel charitable, and, secondly, the level and type of aid direct from religious organisations (including the substantial NGO 'chritian aid') is still fairly nominal.
Religion also adversely affects how aid is provided. After lobbying, the US government now does not provide aid to anywhere where abortion is legal, and most catholic aid agencies preach the 'abstinence' line, and refuse to provide contraception - a proovenly ineffectual position.
Religion may bring some good, but it is not a required factor - it is but a catalyst. Individuals may be swayed to do 'good deeds' by their religious belief, but they are also capable, and do, do these good deeds without religion. A loss of religion would not mean a loss of 'good deeds'.
As a society, as individuals, we no longer need religion, and it does little more than hold us back.
All religions foster an understanding of the world that is incompatible with our observed reality, it teaches us to be happy without full understanding. It also teaches us blind faith, not to God, but to his human representatives - a blind faith which is easily abused.
And (most worryingly for me) religion promotes a morality based upon fear of retribution, rather than one which the individual feels is a moral stance benificial to themselves and others.
Religion has been the backbone of the development of our contemporary society (and look how screwed we turned out) and has been leading-forth some of the greatest attrocities the world has seen.
I would venture that not a whole lot has changed.
-Religion is still at the fore-front of our current wars (Radical Islam vs. Bush's 'crusade'(his word) and Nationalistic Jews vs Arab muslims).
-Religion still promotes deeply discrimniatory stances (homosexuality and catholicism, Islam etc. Women's rights and catholicism/Islam)
-Although not necessarily an indication of wider issues with the religion, individuals are still able to mis-use religion for abuse, especially of vulnerable children.
Yes, religious organisation brings a fair amount in terms of charity. Again, the principle of it, people should not need to be religious in order to feel charitable, and, secondly, the level and type of aid direct from religious organisations (including the substantial NGO 'chritian aid') is still fairly nominal.
Religion also adversely affects how aid is provided. After lobbying, the US government now does not provide aid to anywhere where abortion is legal, and most catholic aid agencies preach the 'abstinence' line, and refuse to provide contraception - a proovenly ineffectual position.
Religion may bring some good, but it is not a required factor - it is but a catalyst. Individuals may be swayed to do 'good deeds' by their religious belief, but they are also capable, and do, do these good deeds without religion. A loss of religion would not mean a loss of 'good deeds'.
As a society, as individuals, we no longer need religion, and it does little more than hold us back.
Whoever you vote for.
The government wins.
The government wins.
- Mykey
- Posts: 954
- Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 8:00 am
- Location: Berne, IN
- formerly known as hf
- Posts: 4120
- Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 2:58 pm
- Location: UK
You talk about personal gods, creator concepts, spirituality and meditation, and yet, in your previous post, you renounce pseudo-paganism?
We do not need a creator concept, we do not need personal gods, and we do not need spirituality. We are human beings, creatures of bones, blood, flesh and neurones. Nothing more. There is no soul, no spirituality. The only thing that makes us different from any other creature is the capacity of our brains. We would do a lot better to recognise that, as, as a species, we have a far too grossly inflated sense of self-importance.
It is possible to recognise not only the individual, but the human race, as something vastly insignificant, without being fatalistic. Coming to terms with a purposeless universe is important.
An individual should bring purpose to their lives, and that of others, rather than looking to some kinda hocus-pocus source, even if that comes from supposed self-reflection.
We do not need a creator concept, we do not need personal gods, and we do not need spirituality. We are human beings, creatures of bones, blood, flesh and neurones. Nothing more. There is no soul, no spirituality. The only thing that makes us different from any other creature is the capacity of our brains. We would do a lot better to recognise that, as, as a species, we have a far too grossly inflated sense of self-importance.
It is possible to recognise not only the individual, but the human race, as something vastly insignificant, without being fatalistic. Coming to terms with a purposeless universe is important.
An individual should bring purpose to their lives, and that of others, rather than looking to some kinda hocus-pocus source, even if that comes from supposed self-reflection.
Whoever you vote for.
The government wins.
The government wins.
- Mykey
- Posts: 954
- Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 8:00 am
- Location: Berne, IN
- Piscator
- Administrator Emeritus
- Posts: 6843
- Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2006 4:06 pm
- Location: Known Space
formerly known as hf wrote:You talk about personal gods, creator concepts, spirituality and meditation, and yet, in your previous post, you renounce pseudo-paganism?
We do not need a creator concept, we do not need personal gods, and we do not need spirituality. We are human beings, creatures of bones, blood, flesh and neurones. Nothing more. There is no soul, no spirituality. The only thing that makes us different from any other creature is the capacity of our brains. We would do a lot better to recognise that, as, as a species, we have a far too grossly inflated sense of self-importance.
It is possible to recognise not only the individual, but the human race, as something vastly insignificant, without being fatalistic. Coming to terms with a purposeless universe is important.
An individual should bring purpose to their lives, and that of others, rather than looking to some kinda hocus-pocus source, even if that comes from supposed self-reflection.
I sign that.
@Mykey And I think hf isn´t stating facts, he merely explains his point of view.
- formerly known as hf
- Posts: 4120
- Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 2:58 pm
- Location: UK
People may need a God-figure, but people often need things which are not benificial to them.
It is impossible to prove that something does not exist. Which is why people often fall back to the 'well, you can't prove it's not the case' argument.
But a complete lack of evidence is as close as we can get to being able to say it does not exist. There is no soul.
A belief in a soul is something that has made human race arrogant and self-obsesed. Rather than just accepting that we are more biologically advanced than other creatures, humans have developed this quaint notion of a soul.
We can't seem to get over ourselves. We are advanced, we are so well suited to the world, that, oh, some inteligent force must have created us, and the world especially for us.
We are as suited to the world as a puddle of water is suited to a depression in the ground.
I do not state a belief as fact. I state facts as facts. And I state POV as POV
My 'belief' is based upon observation, evidence, proof. Calling it a belief in the same way Chritianity or pagan beliefs are considered beliefs is inaccurate.
It is impossible to prove that something does not exist. Which is why people often fall back to the 'well, you can't prove it's not the case' argument.
But a complete lack of evidence is as close as we can get to being able to say it does not exist. There is no soul.
A belief in a soul is something that has made human race arrogant and self-obsesed. Rather than just accepting that we are more biologically advanced than other creatures, humans have developed this quaint notion of a soul.
We can't seem to get over ourselves. We are advanced, we are so well suited to the world, that, oh, some inteligent force must have created us, and the world especially for us.
We are as suited to the world as a puddle of water is suited to a depression in the ground.
I do not state a belief as fact. I state facts as facts. And I state POV as POV
My 'belief' is based upon observation, evidence, proof. Calling it a belief in the same way Chritianity or pagan beliefs are considered beliefs is inaccurate.
Whoever you vote for.
The government wins.
The government wins.
- Piscator
- Administrator Emeritus
- Posts: 6843
- Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2006 4:06 pm
- Location: Known Space
formerly known as hf wrote:My 'belief' is based upon observation, evidence, proof. Calling it a belief in the same way Chritianity or pagan beliefs are considered beliefs is inaccurate.
How could physical observation tell something about the metaphysical. Theres no way to tell if dinosaurs really lived or if the skeletons were buried by the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
If it comes to metaphysical matters you just can believe or not.
-
- Posts: 943
- Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 3:08 am
Nakranoth wrote:Floris wrote:Moreover, God is not the cause of all the death and terror brought upon the earth by christianity. Men are, and the mistakes of men. And as we all know man is not perfect.
God is perfect though, correct? If God is perfect, then he cannot make a mistake, right? If God Cannot make mistakes, then everything it created is exactly the way it's supposed to be. God created Everything. Everything is exactly the way it's supposed to be.
If man is not exactly as God wants it to be, then God is not perfect. If man is exactly as God wants, then it has no reason to punish us.
God has been depicted as punishing humans in the Bible. Thus, there are two possibilities, The Bible was mistaken, or God is not perfect.
The Bible is the core basis for Christiandom. If God is Perfect, the Bible is mistaken in its interpretation of God. If the Bible is mistake, than anything based upon primarily upon it is mistaken aswell. Christiandom is flawed in it's interpretation of God. However, if God is perfect, then mankind belives what God wants it to belive right now, and thus we cannot be "evil", and as such, can not be the cause of divine retribution. Thus, God is the only cause.
If you find any faults in this train of logic, please tell me. I would like to know how anything in existence is ultimately caused by mankind.
With pleasure.
Mankind has something called free will. If God were to take this away, he would defeat the purpose of His creation of the Earth: a test of our willpower to see if we will stick to what is right in face of adversity. God cannot interfere with man's direct actions or else he has undone his own plan(and don't believe for one second that he didn't want to: he wasn't happy when Christ died).
A lot of the evil in the world is caused by mankinds free will, but without it our very existence is pointless. Thus, despite having created an imperfect world, it was only to provide adversity to test and challenge us (and to make us realize just how good Heaven is), and it is only a part of a perfect plan. The Earth itself is imperfect, but it perfectly suits God's plan.
God has never been wrong. In Sodom and Gommorah, he was only making a point to Abraham. Abraham said that if he could find fifty good people in these two cities, would God spare them? And God agreed. Eventually, Abraham whittled the request down to five people: Himself, his wife, his two daughters, and one other.
He found no one. God had made his point, Abraham fled, and the cities were destroyed.
Now, as to HF, there is slight physical evidence that the sould exists: after death, the body spontaneously becomes something like twenty seven ounces lighter. Some say it's the weight of the soul leaving the body. Now then, is there any evidence against the soul? I'm honestly curious.
- formerly known as hf
- Posts: 4120
- Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 2:58 pm
- Location: UK
Exactly. I do not believe, as there is no evidence.Piscator wrote:formerly known as hf wrote:My 'belief' is based upon observation, evidence, proof. Calling it a belief in the same way Chritianity or pagan beliefs are considered beliefs is inaccurate.
How could physical observation tell something about the metaphysical. Theres no way to tell if dinosaurs really lived or if the skeletons were buried by the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
If it comes to metaphysical matters you just can believe or not.
Fossilisation is a process that can be observed - it usually takes tens or hundreds of years, but it can be observed, even over short lab experiments.
Hence, there is evidence which suggests dinosaurs were living creatures, which died, and their remains were fossilised. So, I choose to 'believe' that explanation.
I do not choose to believe that they were placed there by the FSM, because there is no observable evidence for that.
Your point is precisely right - no physical evidence or observation can proove the metaphysical/paranormal/spiritual, therefore, it is not that difficult a judgement to make, that maybe there is no metaphysical, beyond the boundaries of human thought?
As for Nalaris and the bodies loosing weight...
I've heard that nonsesne before.
First off, they are no scientific studies which agree with that. And, anyway, how can people even suggest this - how often does someone die on a set of scales?
Secondly, it is well known that just before rigor mortis (and even after) the body secretes a fair amount of fluid. Sometimes this is urine or faecal, sometimes ejaculatory, sometimes bile, sometimes blood, sometimes regurgitated stomach contents, etc... These could quite easily account for the loss of the weight.
Whoever you vote for.
The government wins.
The government wins.
- Chris Johnson
- Posts: 2903
- Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2004 3:26 pm
- Location: East Sussex, United Kingdom
- Contact:
Nalaris wrote:Now, as to HF, there is slight physical evidence that the sould exists: after death, the body spontaneously becomes something like twenty seven ounces lighter. Some say it's the weight of the soul leaving the body.
Nearly 2 pounds different in weight - rubbish - if you are going to quote the 1907 study by Duncan McDonald "Hypothesis Concerning Soul Substance, Together with Experimental Evidence of the Existence of Such Substance" then the stated figure is 0.75 ounces - Incidently a study based on 6 patients who died which has never been verified by any other researchers - Nor is it any evidence for a soul
Though there is an interesting paper from 2001 by Hollander which shows that adult sheep gain weight at death, but not lambs or goats - an anti-soul maybe

- Piscator
- Administrator Emeritus
- Posts: 6843
- Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2006 4:06 pm
- Location: Known Space
Nalaris wrote:Now, as to HF, there is slight physical evidence that the sould exists: after death, the body spontaneously becomes something like twenty seven ounces lighter. Some say it's the weight of the soul leaving the body. Now then, is there any evidence against the soul? I'm honestly curious.
Are you serious?
And there can´t be evidence against something, just for it.
-
- Posts: 2067
- Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2004 10:21 pm
- Location: Canada
Nakranoth wrote:Honestly, Scheme, I'm so supprised by concession of points that I don't even feel like argueing any. You're a better person than most.
Why thank you. That's very kind of you to say.
Mykey wrote: Schme if you took my words as, dehumanizing religious people. I apologize, if I implied that, I did not mean it.
Well, thank you. But I think everyone can see that you do not think that way. I wouldn't worry about it.
Mykey wrote:Thank you for the laughs btw. Brightened my dayThe parts where you admitted to being conceited etc....
Well, I'm glad that made you laugh. Honesty is important.
Mykey wrote:I do feel I must comment on the Abolition of catholicism.....
Yes if I could, I would do it in a second. Why?
Because, we collectively as intelligent human-beings can do better than pseudo-paganism. I think you acknowledge the past, and see no chance of it being in the present, or the future. That is where we disagree the most. You have stated the corruption has ended. I await proof.
The proof is that there are no longer crusades, that the senior clergy would no longer be protected if they're found whoreing, and that they can no longer steal massive amounts from the Church, no longer are supported by governments in their taxation and campaigns of terror, they can't force anybody to do anything anymore. All they can do is ask nicely. Charity is all that's left.
Now, that's not to say that some sin doesn't still exist within the Church. For example, I'm more than certain that there are priests who use they're influence to, for example, get ahead in bussiness deals, take advantage of women, and so on.
It's a know fact that many Columbian parishes accept huge donations from mobsters (of course, they use if for charity, and money is money, but all the same, some of that's a bit iffy.)
It's not the faith that brings these things to pass. Do you blame the small town Priest, who dedicates his life to God and therefore to the sons and daughters of God, vowing chastistity, for what some other Priest thousands of miles away might possibly be up to? And not just that, his parishioners? What have they done wrong (Well, they've done wrong, but not through the Church.)
Mykey wrote:And I concede, what I described was extorsion, be good, or bad things happen, not necessarily hell, maybe natural disasters....
People should not be ruled by fear, imo. Love is a much better teacher. The catholic church preaches this, but as we have both stated, they have a poor track-record. I would really love to see the whole thing collapse, and something better without the "sin" of the old order tainting the new. And I would like to see the pagan roots acknowledged. And uprooted.
This here goes to Hallucinating Farmer too.
The thing is, people all saying "Fuck religion, I just believe in being good for the sake of being good." Whether or not you subscribe to a faith, all ideas of what good is come from faith.
Without these ideas that came from faith, the faith from which they came are not important, but the ideas, without those, why the Hell would I believe anything is wrong or right? Someone has to tell you. The ideas would not be there at all without these faiths having come around at some point.
If my society, which was evolved from another society which was based on Christian ideas of right and wrong, had not had any idea of right or wrong at all, if I had no access to the ideas, even if they we're views in the extreme minority, I wouldn't have delved into them.
Do you see what I mean?
If one day one hunter gatherer says to another, neither who have ever had any faith at all, he says "You shouldn't hurt people. That's "wrong"."
What's to keep the first one from saying "Fuck off.", stabbing you, and stealing you're woman. The secular ideas of good and bad come from religion.
The idea of sin is important. If I cannot be virtuous for some reason, then I won't do it. There must be the idea of sin, whether you call it sin or not. Some people call it "Crimes against Humanity" or "Infringement on "Human Rights" ". But it's all just other names for what they call sin.
People must be ruled by fear. If I have nothing to fear, I'll do whatever the Hell I want. I'll stab you and take you're woman. I'll cut someone's throat to get a bushel of peaches.
Selfishness is a God given tool that can be used to create virtue. Better for someone to be good because they fear than to not be good at all.
If you want to get all new age, His Holyness the Fourteenth Dalai Lama agrees with me, according to his books, anyways.
"Be selfish. Be good, virtuous and charitable so that you man attain Nirvana." (I'm paraphrasing.)
How's that bad? The one guy get's his soul closer to Nirvana, the other guy gets some help with whatever problem the selfish man helped him with.
I feel for you getting pressure from you’re family. That’s never any fun. Had you been from a Jewish family, you might be a Christian. Had my family pressured me to be Catholic (my family was pretty apathetic about religion, except when my mother wanted to prove a point or something.), I’d probably have converted to Islam.
Not to say I don’t think you believe what you say you do.
Just to clarify for myself, don’t let me speak for all Catholics, and don’t let other Catholics speak for me. I’m not the Pope. The current guy beat me by two votes.
The Church line is currently that “Creationism is Right”, for example. But they don’t really believe that, if you ask me. I know I don’t. It’s just official doctrine. Remember, technically, if you listen to them, the Earth’s been flat until about three hundred years ago.
"One death is a tragedy, a million is just statistics."
Joseph Stalin
Joseph Stalin
Return to “Non-Cantr-Related Discussion”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest