Religion

[Elros]

You seem angrier with the person who claims to believe in God, but does something terrible "in God's name," than you are with someone who just does something terrible. Presumably because in your personal moral judgment, the former is not just a villain, but also a hypocrite -- while the latter may just be an ignorant villain, or at least a villain whose worldview and actions are internally consistent? I don't really get why the one should be any worse than the other in the long run. Both are equally bad.

Yes I completely agree with you again, they are both equally wrong. God, which many of you do not believe in, has no respect of persons when it comes to sin. All people are equal and all people will be judged equally for the sins they do.

Even if you don't believe for sure that there is a God, then that is still the right attitude to have towards the subject.

[Nosajimiki]

You seem angrier with the person who claims to believe in God, but does something terrible "in God's name," than you are with someone who just does something terrible. Presumably because in your personal moral judgment, the former is not just a villain, but also a hypocrite -- while the latter may just be an ignorant villain, or at least a villain whose worldview and actions are internally consistent? I don't really get why the one should be any worse than the other in the long run. Both are equally bad.

Exactly, he is also a hypocrite. "Thou shall not bare false testimony against they nieghbors", sounds familliar? The original villainious act is equally hanious no matter the cause, but by doing it under false pretences, you compound other sins apon yourself. So no, God will not nor should we judge such men equal to the man who was ignorant or honest.

[Nosajimiki]

Dostoyevsky used to say that if there is no God, then everything is permitted. If there is no objective moral standard outside of our socio-psychological framework, against which our actions can be judged and to which we will ultimately be held accountable, then why should I give a rat's ass what society thinks of what I do? I can be a serial killer, a cold-hearted back-stabber, a lazy glutton, whatever -- and you have no basis for arguing that any of it is wrong. Sure, you can say it's "anti-social" and take whatever steps your society allows. But you can't realistically argue that any of it is "wrong", without that external, objective standard. Dostoyevsky was a Christian, I'm not, but he's got a point.

This is exactly what I have been hitting at with F.K.A.HF and the others. I just couldn't describe what I was trying to say as clearly as the above paragraph does. If there is NO God then there is no higher authority to answer to or set your moral standards to. In this case, you can do whatever you want and its nobodys buisness or right to tell you what you are doing is wrong or that you need to stop doing it. I still am not describing it like I want, but the above paragraph does a pretty good job.

I'm a pretty big fan of Dostoyevsky, but he is reknowned as a man who never understood his own internal conflicts which he died self-admitably not understanding, meaning that although this may be a good quote, it comes from a man who never fully believed in it.

Furthermore, what of physiological influences? Emotions like guilt, fear, and love are the basis of what you claim that God dictates as right or wrong, but if by nature we feel these things that give us our own personal positive and negative conditioning we don't need anything else to guide us. In the end, it is these emotions that detirmine what is right or wrong, and emotions are just chemical reactions with no prerequisite of God.

And if I have these emotions to tell me what is right or wrong, then I have a reason to see what things others are doing as right or wrong, so wether they agree with me or not, I have the right to express my opinion, and should thier action lead them into conflict with my own existance, then I have the right to make them stop because my emotions dictate such action.

[Elros]

Furthermore, what of physiological influences? Emotions like guilt, fear, and love are the basis of what you claim that God dictates as right or wrong, but if by nature we feel these things that give us our own personal positive and negative conditioning we don't need anything else to guide us. In the end, it is these emotions that detirmine what is right or wrong, and emotions are just chemical reactions with no prerequisite of God.

Emotions do not dictate what is right or wrong according to God or what we believe in. Apperantly you are mistaken. God has given us commandments that we are to follow, and laws that we are not to break. That is what determines what is right or wrong, not our emotions. Emotions can be very misleading sometimes.

[Elros]

I'm a pretty big fan of Dostoyevsky, but he is reknowned as a man who never understood his own internal conflicts which he died self-admitably not understanding, meaning that although this may be a good quote, it comes from a man who never fully believed in it.

That does not change the fact that is a good quote, and is very right(according to what I believe).

[Elros]

To: Formerly Known as HF

We have all been talking about what we believe about everything like where the World came from, what happens after death, is or isn't there a God, ect...
Now I want to hear some of your beliefs on all the topics above, and any more you wish to share. That way we can turn the argument around a little. You seem to be able to argue against every body elses beliefs and why they are wrong, and I am just wondering what your beliefs are, seeing that they must be pretty strong for you to argue so strongly about the fault in our religions, believes, convictions, and morality.

Do you wish to share them with us?

[formerly known as hf]

First off, I did word things wrongly saztronic.

We can not comprehend objective or universal truths or moralities, if they existed, and so, there is no point saying that they do, or could, as it is irrelevant.

I do not believe that there is an objective or universal truth or morality, but I cannot substantiate - that is an irrational belief based on how I feel about and percieve the world.

Pie:
Universal truth - do I, or you, exist?
Maybe, possibly, probably, probably not...
Can you prove you exist? What is existence?
You can't prove you're not a figment of my imagination, or vice versa. Our innate subjectivity as humans makes us incapable of knowing anything objectively, or universally, if such a state exists.



Yes.
The person who is raped and abused as a child, and becomes a twisted human being, possibly commiting similar crimes - is wrong.

The person who is taken from an early age, indoctrinated with fundamentalist views, and kills others because of those fundamental religious views - is wrong.

The person who kills, lies or misleads people because they believe it to be the 'right' thing in God's eyes, but are simply using that excuse as justification to themselves and others - is wrong.

Are they all equally wrong?

To: Formerly Known as HF

We have all been talking about what we believe about everything like where the World came from, what happens after death, is or isn't there a God, ect...
Now I want to hear some of your beliefs on all the topics above, and any more you wish to share. That way we can turn the argument around a little. You seem to be able to argue against every body elses beliefs and why they are wrong, and I am just wondering what your beliefs are, seeing that they must be pretty strong for you to argue so strongly about the fault in our religions, believes, convictions, and morality.

Do you wish to share them with us?

I am deeply atheistic, if you hadn't already guessed.

I do not know there is no God, none of us can ever know that.

The world has all I would expect from it, if there were no supreme force involved - indifference.

I strongly feel that we need to come to an understanding about our universe based on what can be fully explained by observable fact. And not something which is observable to a 'select few'...

No proof exists for God. A lack of proof, in my books, especially when there have been huge attempts to provide proof, is about as good as saying it just doesn't exist.

Evolution has a huge amount of physical evidence. It can be observed in laboratory conditions with certain simple lifeforms.
That 'God put them there', for whatever silly reason, has nothing to subtsantiate it.
Thus, I think it very likely, we are descendent from apes, from small mammals before them, aquatic lifeforsm, etc etc.
Evolution isn;t theory. It's fact.


The origin of the universe is somewhat of a more difficult question. Saying that, though, the scientific theories which exist correspond to what we can see happening in the physical realm. Religious theories have nothing to back them but a few thousand years of human belief. And in a world that is billions of years old - I prefer to go with the physical nature of the world as it has been for those billions of years, than with the blip of time us silly humans have believed in a deity creation...

And when we die. We die. Our brains cease to function, we cease to be concious. That's it. There is no more. We die, we rot. Tada.



As for my social/political beliefs.
I believe religion has, overall, done a huge lot more harm than good for the human race.


One of the largest problems with western civilisation is damned arrogance. Religion has taught us that we are special somethings, that we are in God's image. That this world was made just specially for us.

From that arrogance, we feel we can get away with whatever we like.
We destroy our planet, 'cos we can. We cause untold suffering, 'cos, well, they have a different name for their God. We cause even yet more suffering, 'cos, although they believe the same God, they don't wear Black on the second thursday of everyother month, except on full moons. Or whatever other crap those damned christian sects bicker about.

We cause even yet more suffering, because women are just a by product of men, and, well, all they're good for is giving birth.


Almost all the really awful things wrong with our western civilisation is the product of hundreds of years of hypocritical, patriarchal religion.



As for the human condition. We are, essentially, selfish creatures. Genetic survival depends upon that.
But we have created societies and technologies fatser than our primitive genetic structure can keep-up.
The selfish imperative is no longer benificial.
We have managed to get over it in some respects, but, at the end of the day, almost everyone comes down to 'well, as long as I'm alright Jack'...

There is just not enough, unconditional, care and consideration of others in our world.

I'm not saying even I can achieve that. I am selfish, I can't help it. but I try to.

[Nosajimiki]

Furthermore, what of physiological influences? Emotions like guilt, fear, and love are the basis of what you claim that God dictates as right or wrong, but if by nature we feel these things that give us our own personal positive and negative conditioning we don't need anything else to guide us. In the end, it is these emotions that detirmine what is right or wrong, and emotions are just chemical reactions with no prerequisite of God.

Emotions do not dictate what is right or wrong according to God or what we believe in. Apperantly you are mistaken. God has given us commandments that we are to follow, and laws that we are not to break. That is what determines what is right or wrong, not our emotions. Emotions can be very misleading sometimes.

1)Your arguement is not a universal, it is a personal feeling

2)Your personal belief is dictated by your emotions. If you had no emotions you could not love or fear God, you would not feel compelled to do anything that he commands you to or find any since in what his laws mean, you also would not care if you did break his laws without a since of guilt. You love/fear God; therefore, you obey him. You achieve a since of right and wrong based on loyalty. But if I were to love other human beings, would that not allow me to form opions on what I can rightfully do in respects to them? Would I chose to kill someone I love without God? Would I not care if I die without God? No. So what makes morality imposible without him? Yes emotions breed both good and evil, but such things are equally as interpreted by emotions as they are generated. Could you understand something is evil, if it does not harm you or cause fear, or go agaisnt someone/thing you love? If you felt nothing, then nothing would be evil.[/b]

[Elros]

Could you understand something is evil, if it does not harm you or cause fear, or go agaisnt someone/thing you love? If you felt nothing, then nothing would be evil.

If something goes against the commandments that God has given in His Word(the Bible) then it is wrong and evil. It does not matter if one christian's feelings tell him it is wrong, and another tells him it isn't. It doesn't matter if I feel it is wrong or isn't, it does not matter if you feel it is wrong or isn't. In the end, it is what God has said that counts, and all other arguments will be pointless.

Am I right in everthing I do or believe? No, of course not. Are you right in everything that you do or believe? No, of course not. No one is perfect, but we chould all strive to develop better characteristics that are right in Gods eyes. God is Holy and Righteous, and eveverything that we do should be to be more like him. We will fall desperatly short however.

[west]

If something goes against the commandments that God has given in His Word(the Bible) then it is wrong and evil. It does not matter if one christian's feelings tell him it is wrong, and another tells him it isn't. It doesn't matter if I feel it is wrong or isn't, it does not matter if you feel it is wrong or isn't. In the end, it is what God has said that counts, and all other arguments will be pointless.

Well who says what God said?

Is it what God said in the Hebrew Bible? Then you better not be wearing a cotton/polyester blend, or shave your beard a certain way, or eat shrimp.

Is it what God said in the New Testament? Then eating meat is okay for you and not for me, but you'd better not eat it in front of me or you'll be causing me to stumble.

Is it what God said to Mohammed up on the mountain? In that case you'd better pray five times a day towards Mecca.

If you had been born in Saudi Arabia you'd be a Muslim. If you had been born in Israel or hell, Skokie Illinois, you'd probably be a Jew. You happened to be born to Christian parents, I'd assume, or at least been exposed mainly to Christianity, so therefore what God says is what other people told you he said. Who's to say one is right and the other isn't?

Dee (for example) believes just as strongly and has just as much faith that the Q'ran is God's final revelation and its precepts are God's commandments as you do that the Christian Bible is the inspired word of God. Now, you're not both right...are you?

And the only argument you can bring to bear against Dee's beliefs is that they are not the same as your beliefs, and that they are wrong. And you and she have exactly the same amount of evidence, belief, history etc. behind you. You cannot say that depth of feeling or personal belief is enough to make something true. And if you say, "well, it's true for me" aren't you contradicting yourself when you say it's the only way?


(And the only reason I mention you specifically, Dee, is that you are a Muslim and you have strong belief in Islam, which is a monotheistic religion that believes in the same God that Elros does, and is thus presumably proof against immediate dismissal, unlike HF and myself, apparently.)

[Pie]

First off, I did word things wrongly saztronic.

We can not comprehend objective or universal truths or moralities, if they existed, and so, there is no point saying that they do, or could, as it is irrelevant.

(pie here, saying this. oh, it is verry relevant.)

I do not believe that there is an objective or universal truth or morality, but I cannot substantiate - that is an irrational belief based on how I feel about and percieve the world.

(but you can tell when things are rong, right? That means there is morality, in a sence. you know that there are some things in this life that always happen the same way, you know for sure that some things are always rong, and thus it is a universal rongness. In this univers, it is always rong. I must agree that there is no objective things. What i ment is biassed, when i said that. Biassed. Biassed twards cristianity.(in my past posts, that is what i ment)

Pie:
Universal truth - do I, or you, exist?
Maybe, possibly, probably, probably not...
Can you prove you exist? What is existence?
You can't prove you're not a figment of my imagination, or vice versa. Our innate subjectivity as humans makes us incapable of knowing anything objectively, or universally, if such a state exists.

(PIe here: But, YOU know that YOU exist, in some sort of way, evin if it were a brain in a jar, a floating head or a supernatural form that is just immagining being human, you know that you exist. You don't know that I exist.)

Yes.
The person who is raped and abused as a child, and becomes a twisted human being, possibly commiting similar crimes - is wrong.

(HOw do you tell?)

The person who is taken from an early age, indoctrinated with fundamentalist views, and kills others because of those fundamental religious views - is wrong.

(how do you tell?)

The person who kills, lies or misleads people because they believe it to be the 'right' thing in God's eyes, but are simply using that excuse as justification to themselves and others - is wrong.

(how do you tell?)

Are they all equally wrong?

(No. One of them is lying becaus they were taught to lye, one of them is lying despite knowing the truth. The secont one is wors...er)

To: Formerly Known as HF

We have all been talking about what we believe about everything like where the World came from, what happens after death, is or isn't there a God, ect...
Now I want to hear some of your beliefs on all the topics above, and any more you wish to share. That way we can turn the argument around a little. You seem to be able to argue against every body elses beliefs and why they are wrong, and I am just wondering what your beliefs are, seeing that they must be pretty strong for you to argue so strongly about the fault in our religions, believes, convictions, and morality.

Do you wish to share them with us?

I am deeply atheistic, if you hadn't already guessed.

I do not know there is no God, none of us can ever know that.

The world has all I would expect from it, if there were no supreme force involved - indifference.

(If evolution happened-indifference)

I strongly feel that we need to come to an understanding about our universe based on what can be fully explained by observable fact. And not something which is observable to a 'select few'...

(jesus resurection)

No proof exists for God. A lack of proof, in my books, especially when there have been huge attempts to provide proof, is about as good as saying it just doesn't exist.

( pie here: first off, lack of evidence dosen't mean it didn't happen. Also, (JESUS'S RESURECTION) Also, that whole wright and rong thing i did... yea.)

Evolution has a huge amount of physical evidence. It can be observed in laboratory conditions with certain simple lifeforms.
That 'God put them there', for whatever silly reason, has nothing to subtsantiate it.
Thus, I think it very likely, we are descendent from apes, from small mammals before them, aquatic lifeforsm, etc etc.
Evolution isn;t theory. It's fact.

(pie here again. First, I will say, that it dosent matter. Evolution could have actually happened, and it wouldn't matter, becaus jesus lived died and rose again. It really, really dosen't matter.but in the spirit of debaiting, i will continue.the archeological evidence... really dosen't work to well... Becaus, well... we don't have any proof of evolution, just all these little jumps. And might i ask, pleas find the other dating tecneque that they use for dinosour bones. I really want to know. And might i ask you, about those other anomalies in the evolution theory that I have put forth before, such as the fosilised dinosour footprint and human footprint right beside each other, and the human scull that was really, really old. and the other ones of course.

And might I say that if the big flood thing did happen, then well... the water would have taken all the radio carbon frome every animal, making them apear alot older, not to mention the rains, river changes, AND(fosilisation takes water(and a layer of soot(ooooh)wich requires water, right?) so all fosils are likely as not, to be younger than they appear)

The origin of the universe is somewhat of a more difficult question. Saying that, though, the scientific theories which exist correspond to what we can see happening in the physical realm. Religious theories have nothing to back them but a few thousand years of human belief. And in a world that is billions of years old - I prefer to go with the physical nature of the world as it has been for those billions of years, than with the blip of time us silly humans have believed in a deity creation...

And when we die. We die. Our brains cease to function, we cease to be concious. That's it. There is no more. We die, we rot. Tada.



As for my social/political beliefs.
I believe religion has, overall, done a huge lot more harm than good for the human race.


One of the largest problems with western civilisation is damned arrogance. Religion has taught us that we are special somethings, that we are in God's image. That this world was made just specially for us.

From that arrogance, we feel we can get away with whatever we like.
We destroy our planet, 'cos we can. We cause untold suffering, 'cos, well, they have a different name for their God. We cause even yet more suffering, 'cos, although they believe the same God, they don't wear Black on the second thursday of everyother month, except on full moons. Or whatever other crap those damned christian sects bicker about.

(Pie here, I need to insert something. (we are special. We have intelegence beond any primate, we can wonder, we can imagin, we can ask the most important question of all "why?" we can debait, many more things than a mear primate can do. And actually, i must debait that we didn't caus untold suffereing cos of a differen't name for god, it was for greed of the pope. the pope lied to everyone, using his power (becaus he didn't have an objective biassed morality(hah)) And we also biker with other groups of christians becaus of there teachings, such as, do they believe that crist and god are the same, that the pope has all the power (hah) that only bishops can try and interperet the bible (hah) and other things)) and also, just to say, If god exists right now, than if we didn't have god, we wouldn't have hope. ANd you can't live without hope. And like it or not, god affects everyones life. And, if we truly did have god in everyones life, if everyone whas truly a christian(not just a hypocrit) no murders, no crime, no greed(wich means that nobody would be cutting down the rainforest becaus of greed, no big pollution of the air becaus of greed) yep.)

We cause even yet more suffering, because women are just a by product of men, and, well, all they're good for is giving birth.


Almost all the really awful things wrong with our western civilisation is the product of hundreds of years of hypocritical, patriarchal religion.



As for the human condition. We are, essentially, selfish creatures. Genetic survival depends upon that.
But we have created societies and technologies fatser than our primitive genetic structure can keep-up.
The selfish imperative is no longer benificial.
We have managed to get over it in some respects, but, at the end of the day, almost everyone comes down to 'well, as long as I'm alright Jack'...

There is just not enough, unconditional, care and consideration of others in our world.

I'm not saying even I can achieve that. I am selfish, I can't help it. but I try to.

[Nosajimiki]

Elros, if you are following the rules of God, not because you agree with them, but becasue God dictates them, what compells you to follow him if not your emotions? What about God motivates you to be like him? Are you seeking perfection (pride), are you repaying him for your gift of life (graditude), do you do it as a gift to him (love), do you want to go to heaven(greed), do you want to avoid hell(fear), or are you compleatly apithetic towards him and his opinions of you and are driven to do good only by his dirrect affliction of your free will?

[Talapus]

Is it what God said in the Hebrew Bible? Then you better not be wearing a cotton/polyester blend, or shave your beard a certain way, or eat shrimp.

Feeling lust towards another person, and urinating are also prohibited by the old testament (actually, urination just makes a person unclean, for which they have to spend many days to clean themselves).

[Floris]

ah, but what is the age frome the happening to the writing of it? (900 years)

The Ilias is a text written by Homeros based on orally transferred stories and tales about a war about 400 years before.(The fall of troy did happen around 1200 BC, Homeros wrote the Ilias somewhere around 800 BC) Nonetheless, most of what is in the Ilias is not 'exactly' true: names, fights, dialogues, none of them will probably have happened in the exact way as they are described. But still there was a battle, there were Greek kings, and Trojan heroes, there was probably some titan fight between the Greek and the Trojan champion and the Greek probably used some sort of cunning trick(be it a horse, or a smart maneuver, or a strong siegeweapon, or a surprise assault or whatever, I'm no specialist in Martial History) to overcome the Trojan defences. Anyway, the fall of Troy is not described in the Ilias anyway.

Yet this is not what the Ilias is about, Homeros wanted to write a story about Heroes and Gods, and how human they are. The essence of the Ilias is the wrath of Achilles(the book begins with the wrath of Achilles, and ends with that wrath having ended(Hector's death), and most of the book goes about envy, treason, pride, cheating, as much with the Heroes as with the Gods(eg Zeus cheating on Hera; or Apollo feeling insulted because of his priests daughter is captured; and out of the Odysseia, Poseidon being angry with Odysseus because he(O) claimed to have won the war on his own, ignoring Poseidons help). But it also goes about honor, glory, sacrifice, love. In other words, it's a book about all the good and the bad of mankind.

Or concluding, it's a mighty great story, and it also bears mighty great moral(Greek morality though) lessons for those who want to read them.



On a same note, I don't hold the Ilias over the Bible as religious guidance, but in my intellectual development it has meant more than the Bible. I even feel that I only appreciated the Bible as it is, after I read the Ilias. There are many books, some claim to hold truths, and some claim to hold absolute truths, well one thing that I would claim to be a near-universal truth: keep on reading, learning, studying; test your brain and, whether or not we were created by God, see our wonderful world and enjoy life and love and friendship and peace.

I am only 20, but I am happy that I am trying to learn to live without hate. Four days ago I was hit on the eye at a party, my eye was closed for three days, full of blood and other stuff you get in wounds. Yet I don't feel anger or hate for the person who did it. I ofcourse want him to be judged for it (or in other words, I expect him to apologise and pay the medical costs), but it doesn't make me bitter or anything.
Although, if I had lost my eye forever I would probably not think the same about it, but yet, it's an emotional development I'm proud of.

[saztronic]

Dostoyevsky used to say that if there is no God, then everything is permitted. If there is no objective moral standard outside of our socio-psychological framework, against which our actions can be judged and to which we will ultimately be held accountable, then why should I give a rat's ass what society thinks of what I do? I can be a serial killer, a cold-hearted back-stabber, a lazy glutton, whatever -- and you have no basis for arguing that any of it is wrong. Sure, you can say it's "anti-social" and take whatever steps your society allows. But you can't realistically argue that any of it is "wrong", without that external, objective standard. Dostoyevsky was a Christian, I'm not, but he's got a point.

This is exactly what I have been hitting at with F.K.A.HF and the others. I just couldn't describe what I was trying to say as clearly as the above paragraph does. If there is NO God then there is no higher authority to answer to or set your moral standards to. In this case, you can do whatever you want and its nobodys buisness or right to tell you what you are doing is wrong or that you need to stop doing it. I still am not describing it like I want, but the above paragraph does a pretty good job.

I'm a pretty big fan of Dostoyevsky, but he is reknowned as a man who never understood his own internal conflicts which he died self-admitably not understanding, meaning that although this may be a good quote, it comes from a man who never fully believed in it.

Show me a man who does understand his internal conflicts. Show me anyone on this forum who does.

No, Dostoyevsky is interesting and provocative precisely because of his self-contradictions. An avowed Christian who was an inveterate gambler and addict. Someone who said he would believe in Christianity even if it could be categorically proven to be false, because without it the world would not make sense -- and yet, who wrote some of the most irrefutable and damning critiques of Christian theology in his novels. A man who understood the depths of sin and the heights of virtue with equal candor and conviction. I think that if wisdom comes to us, it often comes in accepting the irreconcilable paradoxes in our lives, living on the razor's edge. I don't agree that Dostoyevsky is less compelling because he was inconsistent or could not -- or would not -- resolve the conflicts his life. That's exactly what makes his best work so mesmerizing.

Evolution has a huge amount of physical evidence. It can be observed in laboratory conditions with certain simple lifeforms.
That 'God put them there', for whatever silly reason, has nothing to subtsantiate it.
Thus, I think it very likely, we are descendent from apes, from small mammals before them, aquatic lifeforsm, etc etc.
Evolution isn;t theory. It's fact.


The origin of the universe is somewhat of a more difficult question. Saying that, though, the scientific theories which exist correspond to what we can see happening in the physical realm. Religious theories have nothing to back them but a few thousand years of human belief. And in a world that is billions of years old - I prefer to go with the physical nature of the world as it has been for those billions of years, than with the blip of time us silly humans have believed in a deity creation...

I dig, I dig. Hear you loud and clear. But science can be its own kind of religion, with the same pitfalls and problems. It's not the pure panacea to life's questions -- even the ones you pose above -- that many take it for. There's not space or time to get into this adequately here, but I would recommend two books for your perusal -- first, "Life Is A Miracle" by Wendell Berry; and second, Pascal's "Pensees". Both (one written by one of history's more respected scientists and mathematicians) are excellent dissections of science, its strengths and weaknesses, and its ultimate inability to grapple with the essential mysteries of life. I think you would find either pretty fascinating, whether you agreed with them or not.