The Faith & Religion mega Thread

Originally Posted by DJ Shaji I was a firm believer in my religion, and did everything that was expected of me with all my heart.

Did you do this in the public sphere (trying to live up to other Christians' expectations), or in the private (living up to God's expectations)? If you'd try the latter, without regard to the former, I'd bet you'd find that you CAN bear the burden of being a Christian.

Originally Posted by bluegospel Did you do this in the public sphere (trying to live up to other Christians' expectations), or in the private (living up to God's expectations)? If you'd try the latter, without regard to the former, I'd bet you'd find that you CAN bear the burden of being a Christian.

Where did he say that he was a Christian?

Originally Posted by bluegospel (trying to live up to other Christians' expectations), ... (living up to God's expectations)?

Why not concentrate on achieving your own happiness instead?

Originally Posted by DJ Shaji Personally, I don't try to either prove that religion is false, or convince those who believe in it to something otherwise. My take is fairly simple. I was a firm believer in my religion, and did everything that was expected of me with all my heart., Then after struggling with mental illness for nearly 7 years, somewhere down the line the question of heaven or hell simply lost its relevance. It wasn't at all a logical or scientific decision on my part. It didn't work for me, so I gave it up. Simple as that. Shall I be tormented in hell for all eternity? I doubt it. I'm there now. I hope there'll be a DSL line there as well.

If religion were a completely private matter, I would agree there would be no point to arguing its validity. But religion holds enormous political power around the world and religion + politics is always a dangerous mixture. It's not just a matter of personal conscience, but of a concerted effort by religiously motivated political groups to enforce their twisted morality on the rest of us. See the "Kill the Gays" bill in Uganda as a prime example, but even less violent goals like pushing creationism in schools seriously undermines science literacy and education.

I'll grant that some people are particularly extreme with their religion, but IMO the vast majority of those who consider themselves "religious" or having some kind of "spiritual" faith don't take it so far as to really push it on others (they might be suggestive, but probably most aren't evangelistic). I personally see no reason to extend the "evangelistic anti-science nutcase" stereotype to everyone with any kind of religious/spiritual faith. There are many who see no significant conflict between religion and science (though admittedly I think these people tend to use bent/twisted logic to support this idea ).

…only reason I'm so adamant about my own opinions here is because people practically ask for it (it's a religion thread, what do you expect?)…and because I have issues of my own…

Originally Posted by MrCode I'll grant that some people are particularly extreme with their religion, but IMO the vast majority of those who consider themselves "religious" or having some kind of "spiritual" faith don't take it so far as to really push it on others (they might be suggestive, but probably most aren't evangelistic). I personally see no reason to extend the "evangelistic anti-science nutcase" stereotype to everyone with any kind of religious/spiritual faith. There are many who see no significant conflict between religion and science (though admittedly I think these people tend to use bent/twisted logic to support this idea ). …only reason I'm so adamant about my own opinions here is because people practically ask for it (it's a religion thread, what do you expect?)…and because I have issues of my own…

Enough people that you have the entire Republican Party held hostage to the Religious Right. Enough that arguing whether Mormons are actually Christian could play a significant role in electing someone President of the US. Enough that you can't be elected president, Democrat or Republican, without being religious. Enough that nearly 50% of people in polls say they would disapprove of their kids marrying an atheist. Maybe, probably, the majority of believers are not nutcases, great. Let's all of us get together to oppose the significant and politically powerful subset that are.

Originally Posted by SigTerm It is supposed to be in god's power to do anything, so I don't see why wouldn't it undo damage of any war and at least bring back the dead.Surely resurrecting few dozens of millions of war casualities wouldn't be a problem AND there would be plenty of grateful people.

And just because you're such a nice fella, I don't see why wouldn't God also create a couple of good things for you personally. Like a decent house, a car, a yacht... oh and then of course a humble enough bank account to pay taxes for these goodies...

Yea, let's rather go for some linux questions.

Originally Posted by kostya And just because you're such a nice fella, I don't see why wouldn't God also create a couple of good things for you personally. Like a decent house, a car, a yacht... oh and then of course a humble enough bank account to pay taxes for these goodies...

Strawman. I was talking about basic things, you know, like not letting people die horribly for no reason. Not having a car is incomparable with allowing people to die or lose their family members. It is in your power to acquire car, yacht and a house - you don't need a god for that. However it is not in your power to bring back the dead. No matter how good you are as a person, there's always chance that something beyond your control will harm or kill you, your family or your friends absolutely for no reason. Which shouldn't be the case if your "omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, just god that is love" existed.

Originally Posted by TobiSGD Where did he say that he was a Christian?

Yeah, I guess I assumed that prematurely from the context.

Originally Posted by SigTerm Why not concentrate on achieving your own happiness instead?

The assumption is you can't be happy without God's blessing. IMFO, You can serve 1) self/sin 2) others 3) God. The only way to be truly happy and satisfied is Christ.

Originally Posted by reed9 goals like pushing creationism in schools seriously undermines science literacy and education.

What! That's ridiculous! The Western Education system was founded on Biblical teaching. It has only declined since evolution, which, mind you, in most places is being "pushed," not as theory, but fact! If anything's being "pushed" in schools it's by the people in your camp, not mine!

Originally Posted by bluegospel The only way to be truly happy and satisfied is Christ.

Here we go again. Would you be so kind and explain why? What does this nonsense even mean?

If you can't be truly happy without trying to please some imaginary friends, that is your problem, but please don't claim other people can't be happy without sucking up to god.

Originally Posted by bluegospel What! That's ridiculous! The Western Education system was founded on Biblical teaching. It has only declined since evolution, which, mind you, in most places is being "pushed," not as theory, but fact! If anything's being "pushed" in schools it's by the people in your camp, not mine!

Yeah, we've discussed that ad nauseum. In science theory is as close to fact as you get. Are you going to complain we're teaching quantum theory or relativity as fact as well? I realize you will never accept that evolution is true, but if you have a shred of intellectual honesty, you will at least, after being told a thousand times over, recognize that distinction is meaningless, or, to be consistent, object to teaching all of science, because it's all theory. Trying to get creationism or intelligent design taught as science, as a legitimate alternative to evolution is pushing a religious ideology in schools. Even if evolution somehow turned out to be wrong, it would still be trying to push a religious ideology and they would still not be science and it would still be wholly inappropriate to teach as an "alternative theory".

Now, as for the problem of pain tete-a-tete you're having with Sigterm there, I get that the religious position is that pain is a consequence of having free will and that to have free will, there must be some sort of neutral-ish universe in which to operate. That still does not answer the questions I posed here, or about why we should have the natural disasters we do have. My point to all of that is that religion is a non-answer. To say that God is ineffable and acts in mysterious ways doesn't say anything, gives us no real understanding of the phenomenon at work. Even if God exists and created us all, your answers would be meaningless, because YOU cannot know, no one can know. You all have your opinions and you all claim they make perfect sense if you just look at the Bible, and a thousand different people looking at the Bible will form a thousand different opinions about what makes sense and what they know from "revelation" and it's all hogwash, no one has a clue. All the post hoc rationalizations in the world won't change that. I would respect you more if you just said, yup, it's faith, there's no reason and no way to reason about it, I just believe and that's that, rather than trying to make it all somehow be logical and make sense. It isn't and it doesn't and it can't.

Originally Posted by bluegospel The assumption is you can't be happy without God's blessing.

As far as I know, you don't need a blessing to be happy. Trying to meet everybody's expectation, however, will make your life much harder.

Originally Posted by bluegospel IMFO,

You do know what "F" normally means, right?

Originally Posted by bluegospel You can serve 1) self/sin 2) others 3) God.

By your logic, your own happiness is sin. I can't "serve myself", build a house for myself, live there for myself and enjoy it alone without ever bothering anybody - by doing that I'm not serving others/god, so this is sin. Doesn't make sense. Is the goal of your religion to make you miserable and deny all happiness? Such logic caused LaVeyan satanism to appear, by the way.

Originally Posted by bluegospel The only way to be truly happy and satisfied is Christ.

Has been disproved by existence of happy non-believers.

Originally Posted by bluegospel What! That's ridiculous! The Western Education system was founded on Biblical teaching.

As far as I know, schools have been created in ancient greece/rome. So why don't you do the right thing and worship zeus? Even IF religion was responsible for creation of eductaion, that wouldn't justify religion.

Originally Posted by bluegospel It has only declined since evolution, which, mind you, in most places is being "pushed," not as theory, but fact!

As far as I know, education has nothing to do with religion.

Originally Posted by bluegospel not as theory, but fact!

Did you read anything people said to you? Difference between "theory" and "scientific theroy" has been explained - to you - many times.

Originally Posted by reed9 Now, as for the problem of pain tete-a-tete you're having with Sigterm there, I get that the religious position is that pain is a consequence of having free will and that to have free will, there must be some sort of neutral-ish universe in which to operate.

Regardless of existence of free will(omnipotence/omniscience + free will == another logical problem), god is meant to be able to undo damage or prevent the actual crime from happening, after decision to commit crime has been made. So free will does not solve problem of evil or "problem of omnipotence". That reminds me:

“I saw the bloodiest, grimiest side of human nature,” he recalls. “People shot by nuts, knifed by friends, little kids splattered in the gutter by hit and run drivers. It was disgusting and depressing. I asked myself: ‘Where is God?’ I came to detest the sanctimonious attitude of people toward violence, always saying it’s God’s will.”

Originally Posted by SigTerm Regardless of existence of free will(omnipotence/omniscience + free will == another logical problem), god is meant to be able to undo damage or prevent the actual crime from happening, after decision to commit crime has been made. So free will does not solve problem of evil or "problem of omnipotence". That reminds me:

Oh, I agree that doesn't solve the problem, but I understand what the position is. It explains human beings being awful to each other if you think biology doesn't have anything to do with our thoughts, but otherwise it doesn't have much to offer regarding the problems of evil and pain.