My Views on God

I just have to say that I think that religion hurts a lot more than it helps. Wars have been started over differences in religion. I think they take good idea's, and good moral standards and then ruin them by turning them into belief's. And the worst part is that a lot of religious people don't even know what they are supposed to "believe". It seems so juvenille.

 

My views on God well, I said to my friends last time that I don't believe in it.

Well I should have said "I've stopped caring"

and I did.

I don't care about religion anymore.

It takes too much time and I got better things to do then pray, read the bible, go to church and other stuff..

And there's the fact that there is no hard evidence that God excist... Which bothers me greatly...

 

I just have to say that I think that religion hurts a lot more than it helps. Wars have been started over differences in religion. I think they take good ideas, and good moral standards and then ruin them by turning them into beliefs. And the worst part is that a lot of religious people don't even know what they are supposed to "believe". It seems so juvenile

I have thought about this a bit, and I disagree somewhat. Yes, there have been many deaths and wars and murders all in the name's of many peace loving gods. But religion does have a set of morals that many people do follow. They are never the ones in the history books starting wars though.

Many of my friends are religious, and they know I am not. Yet we all have morals. I just have to wonder if some of them would have morals if they were not religious. I like to think I do, I believe (generally) harm to others is wrong. But I almost know that some people who are 'religious' would not have any sense of right or wrong if not for religion.

For some people (maybe more than I think), religion is a good excuse to have morals. Even if the reasons for morals are flawed (fear of hell or hope for heaven), it is better overall that they do the right thing, at least from the point of view of others, the receivers of their 'goodness'.

Yes, there are extremists everywhere who too many times have gotten too much support and gone on rampages (more or less). Whether the harm they have done is overall less harmful than the good is helpful, there really is not a way to tell.

BTW, most of that argument came from being asked by people "since you don?t believe in God, then why do you have a sense of morals?" (so other people seem to think I am moral ). I asked why does believing in God make you moral? That and thinking about the whole concept of religious wars made me think about it all.

EDIT: I am a little dislexic...hope for hell, fear of heaven, right...

 

I think the problem with God and religion comes into play when one confuses their book as being all-encompassing of their god.

How is this humanly possible?

If there is a god, it would have to be limitless... the existence of many interpretations of god is not a mistake, it's not an evil plot of Satan... it's a testament to god's multifaceted nature... that god is, as many religions have stated, everything and everywhere.

One religion describes god as "I am", another describes god as "That thou art". So, what's the difference? The difference is people taking poetic license with these constructs and attributing their individual and separate observations of things they don't understand to this invisible entity.

Why aren't many religions springing up ferociously today as they did 2000 years ago? Because the advent of science has given us a new, empirical means of pursuing answers instead of inventing them.

The difference between religion and science, however, is that the knowledge of science has been decentralized... the security of religious mythology relies on the public's acceptance of hearsay of that which cannot be empirically tested or falsified.

Global communication has also made it possible for many people to witness the same event around the world and scrutinize it in numbers... rather than times when one would witness something unexplainable, and news would have to travel verbally, or through written testimony, and by the time it reached the four corners of the world through how many mouths or hands... the original event would end up greatly amplified and distorted.

Ironically, religious zealots often perceive the absence of new religions as a testament to the strength of "old values"... rather than evidence of the growing reliability of scientific inquiry over blind, unquestioning devotion. When one's feelings of security are entirely dependent upon the infallibility of a book, questions are viewed as a sign of insecurity or infidelity... lack of confidence in values that "should not" change. The only real reason they should not change or be questioned is entirely a perceptive one... because the individual's very self-confidence depends on these values being reliable, absolute truth.

In psychological circles, this type of behavior is called a self-reinforcing delusion.

 

If there is a god, it would have to be limitless... the existence of many interpretations of god is not a mistake, it's not an evil plot of Satan... it's a testament to god's multifaceted nature... that god is, as many religions have stated, everything and everywhere.

I was just thinking about this on my way to work this morning. Couldn't have said it better myself.

 

Just an off shoot question

Has a miracle ever happened in the 20th centuary?

With a miracle I mean a miracle that hasn't been scientifically explained.

 

Most "miracles" of the 20th Century have been debunked by science as "mass illusions". Not to be confused with hallucinations... what people see is perhaps based on something real.

One shouldn't consider the fact that such events are rooted in something natural doesn't necessarily mean that god doesn't exist... but these "signs" shouldn't prematurely be attributed entirely to the supernatural, either.

Some great examples of mass illusions can be found in the work of the Pendragons... mass illusionists... who have managed to fool audiences in the hundreds with everything from "disappearing" elephants and space shuttles, to making it appear as though they've physically "moved" an island. All their work relies on creating visual illusions and false perceptions of reality.

 

Most "miracles" of the 20th Century have been debunked by science as "mass illusions".

so there have been some "miracles" not explained by sciencetists?

If so name them

 

Darth_SnowDog: Why aren't many religions springing up ferociously today as they did 2000 years ago? Because the advent of science has given us a new, empirical means of pursuing answers instead of inventing them.

I'd like to see some stats on that. I've known several "religions" that have been started in the 20th century. For one, it takes a long time for a religion to become a religion and widely known. I think we're starting just as many "religions" as ever. We just don't hear about them all the time, but then I'm sure they didn't know about all the religions started 2000 years ago either.

But your point about science is very good. Science is decentralized, and perhaps in some words the "new religion". Personally, I don't think that religion and science are opposites, but could work together.

Darth_Omega: Has a miracle ever happened in the 20th centuary?

With a miracle I mean a miracle that hasn't been scientifically explained.

Define miracle.
I assume you mean something that has a supernatural force behind it. In that case, there have been no miracles, just unexplained or partially explained occurances. Science can't explain everything (yet), but that doesn't mean there isn't a scientific explanation.
Before science, a solar eclipse could have been considered a miracle (for example). Today we know it is the movement of the heavenly bodies cause it. But does that make it any less a miracle?

 

LOL yeah sorry I didn't define it, I mean religious miracles.

That cannot be explained by scientist now or in the future.

So nothing like Bermuda Triangle stuff

 

so there have been some "miracles" not explained by sciencetists?

If so name them

Strange, I can't think of any. But I said "most" as a disclaimer in case someone decides to hurl semantics at me and bring up a case that, for example, has yet to be explained but may have not been publicized enough to have warranted anyone's interest to investigate.

 

Strange, I can't think of any.

Understandable

But I said "most" as a disclaimer in case someone decides to hurl semantics at me and bring up a case that has yet to be explained but may have not been publicized enough to have warranted anyone's interest to investigate.

ahha ok

 

At any rate, I don't understand why anyone's faith in a god or gods would hinge on the belief that god has a fetish to perform the occasional grand magic trick... something along the lines of a a publicity stunt, rather than taking comfort in the every day miracle of life, and even the mere existence of this universe.

Perhaps the expectation of miracles is a side effect of the anthropomorphization of god. Kind of like how we're routinely impressed when animals can imitate trival and/or downright stupid human behaviors.

As if god is going to one day show up riding a unicycle, juggling a few planets while singing Stars & Stripes Forever (Dubya would especially love that, ya think?)...

 

Darth_Omega: That cannot be explained by scientist now or in the future.

So nothing like Bermuda Triangle stuff

Darn, there goes that argument
Personally I don't think miracles like that exist. Sorry.
Personally two, I think miracles exist. Just becuase there is a scientific explanation, doesn't mean it's not a miracle.

Like, Darth_SnowDog, I can't think of nay unexplained miracles at the moment and I'm too lazy to go look some up. But you come across them all the time (or at least I do). There are plenty of mysteries in the world yet to discover.

Darth_SnowDog: At any rate, I don't understand why anyone's faith in a god or gods would hinge on the belief that god has a fetish to perform the occasional grand magic trick... something along the lines of a a publicity stunt, rather than taking comfort in the every day miracle of life, and even the mere existence of this universe.

Wow, I completely agree. You said that very well

 

(Dubya would especially love that, ya think?)...

LOL guess so

I don't understand why anyone's faith in a god or gods would hinge on the belief that god has a fetish to perform the occasional grand magic trick

Well actually most of the time it actually increases the faith of people they have in God.

That trick never seems to fail

Personally two, I think miracles exist. Just becuase there is a scientific explanation, doesn't mean it's not a miracle

hehehe that is true, same thing goes with the darwin theory. Most christians still believe in Adam & Eve. Even though bones clearly explain that humans were created by evolution.

well I know a miracle has not been explained by sciencetist and it happened in the 20th century

 

I don't subscribe completely to any one religious doctrine. They're all based on books which are based on something someone said to someone else about something they heard, allegedly, from god. (It could have just been the whiskey talkin' for all we know.).

I've never personally seen and talked with, physically, any of these deities of which these books speak... or any of the people who wrote of them... and the written "evidence" is only testimonial (hearsay), not scientifically observed, tested, predictable and/or reproduceable results.

 

At any rate, I don't understand why anyone's faith in a god or gods would hinge on the belief that god has a fetish to perform the occasional grand magic trick... something along the lines of a a publicity stunt, rather than taking comfort in the every day miracle of life, and even the mere existence of this universe.

Too true. Far as I know according to my religion, it is considered insulting to God to expect him to perform miracles just to prove that he exists.

Especially when those stubborn exodusing Israelites couldn't seem to get the hint even when He WAS performing them.

 

TeeBee: Could the problem then be that our written points of view on god speak egocentrically (naturally, as scriptures are written by man, even if they are "god-inspired", poetic license, egocentrism and mistranslation in the transition from god to human hand is inevitable) assuming that god is and always has been concerned primarily, or solely with the goings on of one little blue spot in the cosmos, much less specifically one out of the millions of species on it?

 

What I don't understand is that people say that they don't believe in miracles because they don't have any solid proof of one actually occuring, well...........people believe in scientific theories all the time without question. Majority of scientific discovers are all just a bunch of theories yet people don't have a problem with that, they take it as truth and nothing else.

Yet when people believe in miracles, it's a big problem all of a sudden because someone has to have proof that it actually accured. What's the difference. Is it because it deals with religion so it needs to be proved for you to believe it. Believing in no God takes more faith then believing in one.

 

Well, with scientific theories, there is usally some evidence for them. Not to mention that with science we have the chance to try to explain it, to be curuious and to have it rewarded instead of having to force, ignore, or pretend we dont have any wondering ability in that which we cannot explain.

 

A scientific theory is based on hypotheses already tested. Now, granted, people should never accept a scientific theory without understanding the factual observations behind it... but, to clarify something... a scientific theory generally differs from miracles because it is a falsifiable thing.

No one can disprove whether or not god has something to do with a miracle. But one can disprove a scientific theory by demonstrating that the results of a hypothesis, e.g. "evolution occurs by genetic drift, mutation and natural selection", cannot be repeatedly produced with consistency of statistical significance.

A simpler example:

If I drop a ball 100 times, and 70 times out of 100 it does not fall to the ground, but falls upward, that would put significant doubt in the theory of gravity.

However, generally, miracles imply a supernatural cause... supernatural causes cannot be observed, tested, nor falsified. If you want to say that god is the reason reindeer have antlers... there's no way to disprove that... since we cannot empirically test for consistent evidence of god making antlers.

Whether or not an event is a miracle caused by supernatural forces is one thing... but generally, miracles are either hoaxes or mass illusions, which many people will inevitably attribute to a supernatural cause for, primarily, two reasons:

1. Many people have one religious belief or another.

2. Religious beliefs act as a blanket explanation for everything that lacks a natural explanation... Naturally, at a time when no one understood why solar eclipses happen, they were perceived as supernatural occurrences or "miracles." Same with crop circles. Same with the "movement" of the sun and the stars. Same with epilepsy (once thought to be "possession").

There are some people who prefer to resign everything to a simple explanation they can understand. Others aren't satisfied or comforted by not understanding the mechanics of an event... and prefer to investigate, test and experiment.

So, a scientific "theory" is one which has been rigorously tested and gathered enough evidence for which a cause-effect relationship can be established far beyond a reasonable doubt. It is not an assumption, by any means. Scientific theories, before accepted by the scientific community, are reviewed by a community of peers and only upon substantial acceptance by members of the scientific community can a theory achieve publication in a peer-reviwed scientific journal. If a lay person doesn't realize this, that doesn't validate unsubstantiated theories, nor does it invalidate accepted ones.

 

How confusing...

I think that religion is man's attempt to explain the unexplainable, to fill that empty space within our soul. Truth has been hidden by man's futile attempts to create their own "religion."

I know a lot of "religious" people are good. Unfortunately, there are plenty under the same religious label who are definitely bad. I used to think that people naturally are inclined to do good. I know better now. Look at a baby, what are their natural instincts? Look at ourselves, what are our natural inclinations?

I think we all need something, someone, don't you?

 

You are exactly right, mankind is an animal who kills for territory and the to increase the chances of mating.
i dont know if we all need something, personally i am fully content in my belief that there is no purpose to life. I would say most people would not be content with this way of thinking but i am. Religion gives people something that logic cant. the hope that there is some point to there life and they are something special. I will have to quote Tyler Durden " you are the same decaying piece of gray matter as everyone else, you are not a unique snowflake".


The blue bus is calling us

 

"I just have to say that I think that religion hurts a lot more than it helps. Wars have been started over differences in religion. I think they take good ideas, and good moral standards and then ruin them by turning them into beliefs. And the worst part is that a lot of religious people don't even know what they are supposed to "believe". It seems so juvenile"

I have thought about this a bit, and I disagree somewhat. Yes, there have been many deaths and wars and murders all in the name's of many peace loving gods. But religion does have a set of morals that many people do follow. They are never the ones in the history books starting wars though.

But, you are wrong. 90 percent of all historic wars were caused by difference in religion. To some degree of course. Whether religion was the main cause, I don't know, but a major one if not the main.

 

Wow, Sleazo, that's really depressing. If there's no purpose in life, then why live, why are we here? I'd feel so incredibly insignificant and void. I mean why strive for anything much less excellence? Why love? Why eat? Why drive? Why think? Why want a comfortable or joyful lifestyle?

What difference does it make then if I help the little old lady across the street or run her over with a Harley Davidson? As a friend once said, "One happens to be more challenging and entertaining than the other."

I just don't know about that. Where do we find joy?