Topic: Thoughts on religion for a Sunday morning - page 4. (Read 3179 times)

I wasn't suggesting that religion has dibs on love. Quite the opposite, actually -- more like religion is one widespread method through which human empathy -- i.e., love -- manifests itself. I was also merely observing that organized religion (most particularly, from my vantage point, Christianity) "does" love more noticeably than many other organized human endeavors do. As a non-religious person myself, I'm not unaware of the unacceptable levels of sanctimony that goes along with religious belief, but on balance, I'll take a world with religion in it,despite all the bloodshed, over its opposite because I'm pretty well convinced that human beings can fix themselves without having to shed everything (you know, the baby-with-the-bathwater analogy). Religion has been with us from the beginning and it ain't going nowhere, and since it's inextricably mixed up with our capacity for empathy, I regard it hopefully (if not faithfully). In fact, because it is overwhelmingly Christian, I believe that contemporary right-wing American conservatism will eventually realize that so many of its immoral, non-Jesus-like political stances are just that -- violations of the code of the Christian gospels. (It should go without saying that I could be completely wrong, of course.)

To want understand who we are within a larger context is universal.  I could not disagree more  that intellect plays no part in religion...that is just an ignorant statement on its face making it also ironic.  
While religion and philosophy are not the same thing, there is an intellectual exercise with both that are similar as they grappling with the meaning of life, ultimate truth, etc.  Just because conclusions differ (between philosophers or  between religionists/non religionists) does not mean those who walk their respective paths do not use their brain to get or stay on one.  If one has ever actually studied philosophy or any major religion in depth, it is not an exercise for dummies.  
Reducing what you never learned down to the absurd so you can reject it does not a genius make.   

I am not religious and probably will never be, but I respect those who are. Some people do need a religion, they need it to give them strength, at times of weakness or uncertainty.

All major religions tends to give answers to three basic questions in life:
Where do we come from?
Where do we go when we die?
Why is life unfair?

If these three questions never bothered you, or you believed science gave you satisfactory answers. You tend not to be religious.

These types of posts get under my skin.

There is a *vast* wealth of information and knowledge that one can explore that is completely off-limits to the scientific method.  This is why philosophers, for example, give serious consideration to religious claims.  It's not because they're stupid.  It's because they have, and know how to use, certain tools that scientists simply aren't allowed to use via their own methods.  

People who don't apply their intellect make foolish claims like "religion and intellect will never be compatible."

Here's my question, and I'll assume that you defect to the scientific method since that is often the proposed dichotomy:  What do you think about the intellect of someone who *solely* utilizes a specific method of knowledge acquisition that carries demonstrably false assumptions?  Because, guess what...science carries assumptions that are demonstrably false according to one's intellect.  

Religious belief hasn't arisen in anyone for a few million years....its bred into them from the teachings of their elders or their society.  It arose in people as a whole a few million years ago when we first began to contemplate our existence.  It was a gradual progression.  A few million years ago we were about as intelligent as an elephant is now.  Elephants are beginning to contemplate their existence.  They mourn their dead and they revisit grave sites many years later.  They are currently very likely confused about death, but they understand what it is and they ponder it because they visit grave sites.   When their language becomes more sophisticated they will start to tell themselves similar stories we told ourselves to calm our fears and uncertainty.

A tribal priest passing on stories to the warriors that if they fought well, they would sit on a throne in Valhalla for all eternity sure sounds a bit more inspiring than "if you get killed it's over".  It makes perfect sense. Why wouldn't we want to motive our kids or our subjects with stories that have a greater influence?  Rule by fear.

Well part...that's true for what its worth but at the same time you can't ignore that the graveyards of the world are stuffed to overflowing with the graves of those who have killed in the name of religion and were killed in the name of religion. The earth weeps over the weight of human blood shed for God.

Religion has no dibs on love or any other emotion.  People of every religion and people of no religion love just as deeply.
Why is religion always trying to take credit for the good things?   Love...yeah, that one's ours.  We got love.  We are all about love.  (Implying that those without religion aren't quite as in tune to love).  We got compassion....oh yeah....we are the most compassionate (implying that the non-religious are therefore less compassionate).  WE have a more fulfilled existence, less bleak  (that's pretty straightforward alleging those without religion are bleak).

 It is the greatest load of horseshit ever shoveled onto mankind and of all the religions of the world only the Buddha saw it.  He realized every human, no matter what they believe have felt the same emotions in the same ways and have the capacity to love and feel just as deeply as people of other faiths or of no faith.

Religious belief can arise from many impulses -- fear, curiosity, you name it -- but one impulse I think it definitely comes from is love, which seems to be an essential component of all the big religions (and probably all the lesser known ones that I'm not familiar with): the Golden Rule, which they all build upon, springs from the instinctive human experience of empathy, which is just another word for love. My favorite religion, in terms of being something that's a manifestation of the human impulse to love, is Christianity. I don't know enough about the charitable efforts of non-Christian religions, but, wow -- you've gotta give it up for the tremendous human good that gets done by groups of people motivated by the gospels of the New Testament. Throughout my life, I've known and sometimes worked with religiously motivated people carrying out wonderful acts of human kindness (another synonym for love), and have always contributed to Christian charities. True enough, it may all just be due to ordinary human kindness, but, well . . . who cares? If it helps people to do so many good things, I'm quite certain I don't want a world free of "irrational" belief.

I do good because i feel it ,not because i am afraid that i will go in hell .Now depends on each person how understands God or a religion.As for afterlife ,i believe it has to be something after we die,maybe not heaven ,maybe not hell......

That's really just YOUR perception and frankly it's ridiculous. I am a spiritual person and I don't fear any of the things YOU think everyone does. There may be some who live in a fear based existence, just as there are some like yourself who also have a closed mind and warped perceptions concerning spiritual things.

OK you kinda lost me a bit but I think I understand what you are trying to say,  Anyone who has any kind of opinion will likely believe of what they are saying no matter if there smart or not intellectual. 

Bleak?
It's actually quite the opposite. It is actually liberating.
Realizing that there is no afterlife or heaven or earth or valhalla after death, a person can focus on the life they have now, instead of holding themselves back because they are worried about not getting into [insert_preferred_afterlife_here].


As for the argument that we need religion to have morality... I think people who only do good deeds and not bad ones just because they are scared of "hell" are not good people at all! 
Are they saying that if they didn't believe in hell they'd go berserk? 

In a time where people would lose their heads for saying god wasn't really do you really believe the smartest people on the planet believed what came out of their mouths?

Not exactly scriptural.  In fact, off hand, it is the only faith I know of where it teaches that good works cannot save us - rather, they should flow out of appreciation of what the Creator has done for us.
Now, agreed, there are churches that teach some variation of what you posted .  But, churches do err - thus one of the reasons for most if not all of the books of the New Testament.  Be it Revelation, where John is correcting the churches, or Paul's epistles, etc.

One of the best forums of control over the masses.

Loot at how easily you can convince people to go and slaughter in the name of some BS.

The entire concept of Christianity is based on the game show "Let's make a deal."  I will do good things and in return, I will receive ever lasting life.  I get a pay back for my efforts.  It is only when you do good, for the sake of others with no desire for payback that you are actually manifesting the highest form of charity.  And, any review of today's churches shows they are far far away from this charity.

I actually do believe religion can and has done good in this world. My argument is that the dogma and stories don't make sense....and they don't. The beliefs are often silly and totally implausible but many folks just don't want to think about it. I can understand people believing God is sacred...but man made religions???

Religion isn't for the perfect. It is for the imperfect, like me for instance.

Says someone who believes the entire universe just happened out of essentially nothing and for no particular reason. Okay.

Many of the greatest minds of history were people of faith and they didn't seem to find any incompatibility between their accomplishments and their beliefs.

I disagree. I believe most religion is a natural attempt to understand the complexity of the universe and to form the basis for a moral, just, and kind society. Understanding that there is a power greater than oneself and knowing that spiritual power can be engaged with doesn't result in or come from fear.

What a bleak existence it must be to feel that life has no meaning beyond its superficial and temporary earthly manifestation.

Science can not explain everything, hence people need to find rational explanation on things they can not understand and find religion.

The believe in evolution is not that much different than the believe in god, both are highly speculative with no concrete proof.

By removing information about their belief - or - what you mentioned. Both were implemented in the soviet union. But it seems even that does not stop people from believing.