Was there a defining moment for you?

growler

always read of fiction / sci fi (and an anthology of greek mythology )and watched star trek and the like, noticed startling similarities in story lines and figured both were fiction by about 10/11

robindch

CerebralCortex wrote: »

Irish catholicism is all about respecting the managment

+1

robindch

Jannah wrote: »

Then again, my mother just tried to explain her racist beliefs to me today by saying that "blacks hadn't fully evolved from being monkeys yet" which is not only the most awful thing a mother who should be setting an example for her kids could say

Reminds me of one female relative of mine who explained over pre-xmas drinks two years back, that it was the job of the next generation to "out-breed the muslims" and "the blacks". At the top of her voice, mind. And before she found out that one of her descendants is going out with a muslim from Ghana.

Wasn't a defining moment for me -- that happened years ago -- but it is just one more example of the pitiable state to which religion reduces the vulnerable.

anti-venom

:eek:

robindch wrote: »

Reminds me of one female relative of mine who explained over pre-xmas drinks two years back, that it was the job of the next generation to "out-breed the muslims" and "the blacks". At the top of her voice, mind. And before she found out that one of her descendants is going out with a muslim from Ghana.

Wasn't a defining moment for me -- that happened years ago -- but it is just one more example of the pitiable state to which religion reduces the vulnerable.

:

:eek:

kelly1

robindch wrote: »

...it is just one more example of the pitiable state to which religion reduces the vulnerable.

Robin, with respect, that's a silly generalization to make. Sure terrible things are done in the name of God/religion, there's no doubt about that. But are these people practicing what their religion actually teaches? Someone who kills an abortionist can hardly be described as a faithful Christian. There's nothing new in using religion to justify evil but that doesn't make the religion evil.

robindch

kelly1 wrote: »

But are these people practicing what their religion actually teaches?

This person sincerely believes that she's practicing her religion as well as she can, and sincerely believes that she's doing that better than most people. The fact that you or anyone else might disagree with her is unimportant, since her religion teaches her that she's right -- just as your very similar religion is telling you that you're right (actually, it's your respective beliefs in your religion that's telling you both this, but that's a minor point)

Like most religious posters here on boards, she legitimizes her pre-conceived worldview, in this case, a rather nasty one, with what suits her from the bible, what she comes across in certain sections of the religious media and from interaction with people with similar views. This ability to legitimize almost any social viewpoint is a fundamental attribute of most religions, including christianity and its variations, and it's an attractive one: what person isn't going to want to believe that they've they the support of the Almighty? And all the more attractive if the person is vulnerable.

kelly1 wrote: »

There's nothing new in using religion to justify evil but that doesn't make the religion evil.

With her beliefs, mediated by her religion, constantly teaching her that she's right, she's not in a position to consider the possibility that she's wrong and perhaps, over time, come to change her views to something more accommodating to the 98% of the world's population who aren't white, catholic, homophobic and over 50.

However, neither her internal beliefs, nor her externally-acquired religion or its priesthood, or its media, is telling her that in any coherent way. And it's for that reason, principally -- there are other ones -- that I find religion is uniquely deserving of blame. And the adjective "evil" if you like.

Goduznt Xzst

kelly1 wrote: »

There's nothing new in using religion to justify evil but that doesn't make the religion evil.

I always like this quote

"Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion."

I'd like to ask you kelly1, what does it take to make your religion evil? If a religion isn't defined by the people who practice and preach it then what does define it?

My definition of evil would be a person who believes that if an individual uses contraception that they should suffer eternal torture and damnation. A person who is ok with this would be an example of true evil to me.

lugha

robindch wrote: »

I find religion is uniquely deserving of blame. And the adjective "evil" if you like.

I’d quibble slightly with the claim of uniqueness. Ultra nationalism and possibly tribalism in other guises would share with religion the same undesirable 'accept without question' trait you describe.

Zombrex

kelly1 wrote: »

Robin, with respect, that's a silly generalization to make. Sure terrible things are done in the name of God/religion, there's no doubt about that. But are these people practicing what their religion actually teaches?

She isn't practicing what your version of the religion (or interpretation of said religion) teaches, but she is practicing what her version teaches. You can argue that she is interpreting the religion wrong, and she no doubt argues the same about you.

The objection is to the power of religion to manipulate people into carrying out or believing in horrible things.

Your version religion has the same power, it just happens to teach different things to what this woman believes.

This can be seen by how nearly every Christian in the Christian forum supports both as moral and as correct, the genocide in the Old Testament.

None of you abandon your own religion our religious beliefs when it teaches something that everyone else thinks is completely immoral and evil, and neither does this person.

kelly1

Goduznt Xzst wrote: »

I'd like to ask you kelly1, what does it take to make your religion evil? If a religion isn't defined by the people who practice and preach it then what does define it?

I'm assuming you don't mean *my* religion and that you mean religions in general?

A religion is evil when it opposes God's will. Actions are objectively good or evil depending on whether they are in accordance with God's will. Having said that God takes our intentions/ignorance into account.

The 2nd part of my answer is that a religion which contains error can't be pleasing to God. For instance Islam teaches that Jesus is merely a prophet and not the Son of God and that He was replaced by a double who died on the cross. How could God be pleased with Islam when it perverts His truth and frustrates His designs? That of course doesn't mean that He hates Muslims. I sure they will be judged by how they followed their consciences.

I believe there are many false relgions and only one true one. If there is a God who loves us, then we must accept that He has revlealed His purpose and His truths to us. Otherwise this God would be more like a scientist in a lab than a loving Father.

God cannot have revealed multiple conflicting relgions to us because that would make Him false and evil. True religion must come from God because otherwise it deny's the Creator's will.

Zombrex

kelly1 wrote: »

A religion is evil when it opposes God's will.

That is the problem right there.

Every religious person thinks they know God's will. That is the true evil.

kelly1

Wicknight wrote: »

That is the problem right there.

Every religious person thinks they know God's will. That is the true evil.

That's easy for an atheist to say. If God does exist, then it is He who decides what is good and what is evil. Is the creature greater that the Creator?

So the problem which remains is to determine which religion is true (assuming you believe in God).

Malari

kelly1 wrote: »

That's easy for an atheist to say. If God does exist, then it is He who decides what is good and what is evil. Is the creature greater that the Creator?

So the problem which remains is to determine which religion is true (assuming you believe in God).

And to interpret what he is meant to have said correctly...there are so many variations of what various biblical quotes mean. It's not quite that simple.

robindch

lugha wrote: »

Ultra nationalism and possibly tribalism in other guises would share with religion the same undesirable 'accept without question' trait you describe.

Yes, that's a good point, though in the case of this lady, religion really is her only input, so I think it's fair to say that it's the thing which is uniquely to blame (in her case).

If she were into nationalism, or any other 'ism', then I'd be happy to finger its peddlars too, but it doesn't happen. Mercifully, I have to say!

sink

kelly1 wrote: »

That's easy for an atheist to say. If God does exist, then it is He who decides what is good and what is evil. Is the creature greater that the Creator?

So the problem which remains is to determine which religion is true (assuming you believe in God).

There is no creator, belief in a creator is an enabler for either good or bad. We each have an internal moral compass and if it is unclouded by religion it will guide us to do the right thing. Believing in god enables people to go against their own moral compass without guilt.

robindch

kelly1 wrote: »

God cannot have revealed multiple conflicting relgions to us because that would make Him false and evil.

The reason that there are multiple conflicting religions is for the reason that's been pointed out a few times -- everybody's religion is theirs, and theirs alone.

It's a fabrication which is unique to every believer.

But it's a fabrication which is unexamined to the extent that people aren't really all that aware that what every other believer believes is subtly (or dramatically) different. Hence there are lots of people running around, all of who claim to be members of one religion or another, but who believe entirely different things.

kelly1

Malari wrote: »

And to interpret what he is meant to have said correctly...there are so many variations of what various biblical quotes mean. It's not quite that simple.

I believe God in His loving providence has given us the means via the Holy Spirit to preserve His truth. What kind of omnipotent God would fail to deliver the truth to those who seek it?

robindch

kelly1 wrote: »

What kind of omnipotent God would fail to deliver the truth to those who seek it?

Well, the fact that there are so many competing religious "Truths" out there that it really does suggest that either god is not delivering his truth very well, or else, he's not there to deliver it in the first place.

Malari

kelly1 wrote: »

I believe God in His loving providence has given us the means via the Holy Spirit to preserve His truth. What kind of omnipotent God would fail to deliver the truth to those who seek it?

You'd be better off posting that in Russian or something because I have no idea what it means.

No matter what you say, people are interpretting what they want to believe from what they think god has said. It's all different and they all think they are right.

Zombrex

kelly1 wrote: »

That's easy for an atheist to say. If God does exist, then it is He who decides what is good and what is evil. Is the creature greater that the Creator?

That is largely irrelevant. The problem isn't God existing, the problem isn't God deciding what is good or evil.

The problem is humans thinking they have access to this unshakable knowledge. Because there is no way to determine if they actually do, even if they do.

kelly1 wrote: »

So the problem which remains is to determine which religion is true (assuming you believe in God).

No, the solution is to say that you do not know (none of us do), or cannot determine to any reasonable degree, which if any of the religions are true.

You say this because it is true, you can't determine that.

So you don't take the Bible, the Koran, Dianetics etc etc as absolute authority on anything because you have no ability to determine which one actually is

sink

sink wrote: »

There is no creator, belief in a creator is an enabler for either good or bad. We each have an internal moral compass and if it is unclouded by religion it will guide us to do the right thing. Believing in god enables people to go against their own moral compass without guilt.

Just another thought but don't religious people believe their morals come from god? If that's the case how do religious people explain where I got my morals from since I do not believe nor have I ever believed in god? And if god gave me my morals why would he give me morals that make the book of 'revelations' sound like a horror story and god himself sound like a sadist?

kelly1

sink wrote: »

There is no creator, belief in a creator is an enabler for either good or bad. We each have an internal moral compass and if it is unclouded by religion it will guide us to do the right thing. Believing in god enables people to go against their own moral compass without guilt.

Prove there is no creator! That is nothing more than your personal belief based on lack of evidence.

So where does this internal compass come from and how reliable is it? For some people, abortion isn't evil. For others it's murder. How then can we trust this compass if it's so subjective?

robindch wrote: »

The reason that there are multiple conflicting religions is for the reason that's been pointed out a few times -- everybody's religion is theirs, and theirs alone.

It's a fabrication which is unique to every believer.

But it's a fabrication which is unexamined to the extent that people aren't really all that aware that what every other believer believes is subtly (or dramatically) different. Hence there are lots of people running around, all of who claim to be members of one religion or another, but who believe entirely different things.

Robin, I'm not talking about personal man-made religion. That's of no use since it's only based on personal preference and not one some external objective reality.

lugha

kelly1 wrote: »

Prove there is no creator!

Can you prove that there is no Santa Claus?

CerebralCortex

Prove there is a creator! If you can't how can you trust your moral compass?

kelly1 wrote: »

So where does this internal compass come from and how reliable is it?

Humanism.

CerebralCortex

lugha wrote: »

Can you prove that there is no Santa Claus?

Wha?

lugha

CerebralCortex wrote: »

Wha?

Well if somebody can furnish me with a proof that Santa doesn't exist then I expect I will be able to modify it to show that God doesn't exist.

But somebody won't as you cannot prove a negaitve. That doesn't add any credibilty to the claim that Santa etc. does exist.

lugha

kelly1 wrote: »

So where does this internal compass come from?

Isn’t there an argument from evolution that says that altruism is an evolved characteristic. Perhaps this gives us our moral compass?

Zombrex

kelly1 wrote: »

How then can we trust this compass if it's so subjective?

Half the worlds population doesn't follow your religion.

How can you trust your opinion on which religion is the ultimate authority if how humans pick a religion is so subjective. What? do you think you have a really really good reason for believing your religion is correct but they don't?

At least those who do not follow religion realize that human opinion, including morality, is subjective, and are open to debate, argument, persuasion etc.

Religious people just subjectively pick a religion and from then on that is it. No argument, no debate, no reason or rhyme. The religion is the ultimate authority, that is the end of it.

kelly1 wrote: »

Robin, I'm not talking about personal man-made religion. That's of no use since it's only based on personal preference and not one some external objective reality.

What is the external objective reality your religion is based upon?

How do you test your religion is the correct one?

sink

kelly1 wrote: »

Prove there is no creator! That is nothing more than your personal belief based on lack of evidence.

Prove there is no flying spaghetti monster. You can't, but you will act as if none exists. In my case the same thing goes for all gods.

My instinctive morality comes from evolution and is complemented the modern philosophy of humanism.

robindch

kelly1 wrote: »

I'm not talking about personal man-made religion.

And I'm saying that all religion is man-made, since all religion is based upon what people believe -- the products of their minds.

kelly1 wrote: »

That's of no use since it's only based on personal preference and not one some external objective reality.

Where is this "external objective reality"? My relative talks about one, quite a lot actually, but it's all of immensely subjective personal experience and personal interpretations of various bits of text.