Religion (split from Q&A)

[Siggie]

Re: Religion (split from Q&A)

You guys totally missed the point. You're focusing on "FSM" and ignoring the rest of my post. I used FSM as an example. Insert any non-JC or Yaweh god in its place and read it again.

[KanadaHye]

Re: Christianity Q&A

The "Flying Spaghetti Monster" is not a good comparison to use. No one has ever claimed to see or have contact with it, as in true religions. There is no record of it's existence as there is in Christianity with Jesus Christ. It's not like people randomly created the figure of Jesus Christ and made a religion around him, there were eyewitnesses to his resurrection (apostles) who were so convinced that they packed up, left their family, spread the gospel across the region, and suffered terrible deaths happily. That is why the "FSM" comparison does not hold up. FSM is a figment of some man's imagination. Jesus Christ (and other figures) are actually based in history, not just "mythology" as some would like to believe.

Which one doesn't belong?

Moses
Lao Tsu
Buddha
Confucius
Jesus Christ
St. Paul
St. Augustine
Flying Spaghetti Monster
Mohammed
St. Thomas Aquinas
Martin Luther
Gandhi

[yerazhishda]

Re: Christianity Q&A

Regarding the soul or anything else that "can't be proven or disproven," please note that that does not make either outcome equally likely. FSM cannot be proven or disproven either, but would you say it's as likely that he exists as it is that he does not? Think about that... that was created to illustrate the hypocrisy of the belief in a god, especially a particularly god in light of all of the different religions people subscribe to in the world.

The "Flying Spaghetti Monster" is not a good comparison to use. No one has ever claimed to see or have contact with it, as in true religions. There is no record of it's existence as there is in Christianity with Jesus Christ. It's not like people randomly created the figure of Jesus Christ and made a religion around him, there were eyewitnesses to his resurrection (apostles) who were so convinced that they packed up, left their family, spread the gospel across the region, and suffered terrible deaths happily. That is why the "FSM" comparison does not hold up. FSM is a figment of some man's imagination. Jesus Christ (and other figures) are actually based in history, not just "mythology" as some would like to believe.

[Haykakan]

Re: Religion (split from Q&A)

It is learned but some people are geneticaly predisposed not to be diciplined, for example the addict personality trait has genetic roots and thus the lack of disipline in these people is only partialy their fault.
I think we have veared pretty far off topic so i am gona quit posting in this thread for a while.

[KanadaHye]

Re: Christianity Q&A

Incresed crime rates are strongly correlated to economic downturns and this particular one was a result of the conservative policy of deregulation. Kanadahye you are twisting the facts to make your argument look good but as you can see it doesnt work. I am no advocat of the right nor the left but i think we all know who and what started this economic mess. Intelligence is another description i would hardly credit any of the righty governments of possessing and as for disease i can make a strong point that the liberals are way ahead of the cons on this issue with universal healthcare and stemcell research.

I don't twist facts, I just state them. Whether or not this can be confirmed... I read a report that said that America's prisons are full to the rim. You can pretty much go around creating mayhem and they don't even have a cell for you. It's a free for all. So naturally, it will have to become a police state for any chances of maintaining civil order if things were to get any worse. If you have discipline, you don't need government to make decisions and control you.

You dont need religion nor do you need to be a conservative to possess self dicipline, this is a personal trait partly learned and partly influenced by your genetic makeup

Learned how? If you were left in the woods as a child, what would you learn? Discipline is learned, you aren't born with it.

[Haykakan]

Re: Christianity Q&A

What would laws look like in a society based on scientific evidence?

Some argue that what is bringing the world back to the dark ages is a break down in collective intelligence due to increased crime, disease, etc. as a result of liberalism and lack of discipline. If you have discipline over all aspects of human nature, you should also be able to control your weight, smoking habits, etc. Mind over matter. Unless of course, your mind is out of your control.

Incresed crime rates are strongly correlated to economic downturns and this particular one was a result of the conservative policy of deregulation. Kanadahye you are twisting the facts to make your argument look good but as you can see it doesnt work. I am no advocat of the right nor the left but i think we all know who and what started this economic mess. Intelligence is another description i would hardly credit any of the righty governments of possessing and as for disease i can make a strong point that the liberals are way ahead of the cons on this issue with universal healthcare and stemcell research. You dont need religion nor do you need to be a conservative to possess self dicipline, this is a personal trait partly learned and partly influenced by your genetic makeup.

[KanadaHye]

Re: Christianity Q&A

I think you make my points rather well, it is people that change the world, religion is simply a tool they use to do it with. Religion was created by people to explain the unexplained then laws were made based upon these explainations. My argument is that we have a much better way of explaining the unexplained now (scientific method) and that laws need to be made based on this approach vs religion. It is really freaky seeing creationism etc being taught while evolution gets questioned in a modern country like the USA. It is a lot easier not to use ones brain and simply say it is so because god wanted it that way, vs researching why it is so and finding and testing the answers. The later method will often provide you with real answers which you can use to build,cure,create... while the former would like nothing better then a recreation of the darck age. Sure people like mohamad and jesus existed and they used religion to gather followers and have greatly influenced humanity, but i would argue this influence has a disasterous divisive effect which has pitted one group against another. Our closest relatives are the persians yet we have warred with them many times due to our religious differences.

BTW this post was in reponce to kanadahyes post, this is why i use quotes i guess ill have to start doing that again.

What would laws look like in a society based on scientific evidence?

Some argue that what is bringing the world back to the dark ages is a break down in collective intelligence due to increased crime, disease, etc. as a result of liberalism and lack of discipline. If you have discipline over all aspects of human nature, you should also be able to control your weight, smoking habits, etc. Mind over matter. Unless of course, your mind is out of your control.

[Haykakan]

Religion was created to bring order and discipline to society. It is no different than discipline that is applied to martial arts. If anyone wants to argue whether or not Jesus, Mohammed, etc. existed, just follow the history, the population distribution of Christians, Muslims, etc. and sure enough you'll find the evidence to support it. We have a society that doesn't believe certain individual changed the world but will believe a news article that projects the future of the economy. It's rather mind boggling.

I think you make my points rather well, it is people that change the world, religion is simply a tool they use to do it with. Religion was created by people to explain the unexplained then laws were made based upon these explainations. My argument is that we have a much better way of explaining the unexplained now (scientific method) and that laws need to be made based on this approach vs religion. It is really freaky seeing creationism etc being taught while evolution gets questioned in a modern country like the USA. It is a lot easier not to use ones brain and simply say it is so because god wanted it that way, vs researching why it is so and finding and testing the answers. The later method will often provide you with real answers which you can use to build,cure,create... while the former would like nothing better then a recreation of the darck age. Sure people like mohamad and jesus existed and they used religion to gather followers and have greatly influenced humanity, but i would argue this influence has a disasterous divisive effect which has pitted one group against another. Our closest relatives are the persians yet we have warred with them many times due to our religious differences.

BTW this post was in reponce to kanadahyes post, this is why i use quotes i guess ill have to start doing that again.

W/o religion world will be submerged into an absolute anarchy.

There are people, who are convinced that they know everything and are the only right ones. They would answer, without exception, any question one may ask

Religion makes people understand that always there are things that they don’t know and it makes them humble a little bit, preventing humanity from collapse.

We need to be religious, at least, in following situations:
When people become absolutely hopeless; there is God to rely upon.
Belief to the God makes the death a little bit bearable, eventually.
Etc.

I fail to see how religion "prevents humanity from collapse". I would actually argue the very opposit point, religion creates artificial differences which make us look at one another in a inhuman way. the rest of your post is the security blnaket argument i adressed earlier.

[gegev]

Re: Christianity Q&A

W/o religion world will be submerged into an absolute anarchy.

There are people, who are convinced that they know everything and are the only right ones. They would answer, without exception, any question one may ask

Religion makes people understand that always there are things that they don’t know and it makes them humble a little bit, preventing humanity from collapse.

We need to be religious, at least, in following situations:
When people become absolutely hopeless; there is God to rely upon.
Belief to the God makes the death a little bit bearable, eventually.
Etc.

[Siggie]

Re: Christianity Q&A

Regarding the soul or anything else that "can't be proven or disproven," please note that that does not make either outcome equally likely. FSM cannot be proven or disproven either, but would you say it's as likely that he exists as it is that he does not? Think about that... that was created to illustrate the hypocrisy of the belief in a god, especially a particularly god in light of all of the different religions people subscribe to in the world.

The same goes for the soul. The lack of evidence against, does not at all act as evidence for... However, the soul is not one of these cases. If the soul was as it is claimed: independent of the physical body. Organic injury to the brain would not affect cognitive functioning as it does. This is evidence against the existence of a soul or consciousness outside of boundaries of the organic brain.