The God thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

Pat~

Luftmensch Emeritus, A.D.D.
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
6,817
Reaction score
2,975
William Haskins said:
religion, in and of itself, is mean-spirited.

People are (sometimes) mean-spirited; religion is just one of the many venues it happens in, unfortunately. That's often because it taps into some very basic fears, and people react emotionally, rather than calmly and rationally. (This also happens in the venue of politics.)
 

William Haskins

poet
Kind Benefactor
Absolute Sage
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
29,099
Reaction score
8,848
Age
58
Website
www.poisonpen.net
ancient texts are codifed into holy books which form the dogmatic foundations of beliefs—which are, in turn, made progressively more exclusive, whether it's a general concept of themselves as the elect, the moral delineation of what constitutes a sin, or which sins lead to damnation.

marriage outside of one's faith was, until very recently, frowned upon and inside the walls of their own houses of worship, these specific faiths insulate themselves in myopic self-righteousness and take for granted that they are the right ones, and all others—whether they call them heathen, infidels, unsaved or unbeliever—are seen as doomed. to believe that this doesn't color even the most trivial human interactions is to ignore the base psychology of humans.

this, however, is not an indictment of every manifestation of religion.

but the very notion of monotheistic religion, and all its denominational permutations, is predicated on being right and everyone else being wrong.
 

William Haskins

poet
Kind Benefactor
Absolute Sage
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
29,099
Reaction score
8,848
Age
58
Website
www.poisonpen.net
it doesn't really matter which god or when they're from. there are a lot of people who will be more than happy to discriminate, persecute, shun or kill you with the full confidence that they're on the right side.
 

Jean Marie

calm waters ahead
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 20, 2005
Messages
6,341
Reaction score
2,261
Location
Somewhere in the recesses of my mind
Website
www.jeanmariewiesen.com
And if we don't begin to learn toleration on some level at some point in time, than we are doomed. Entirely and completely. Hence, the sharing in this thread is some sort of a beginning. Maybe.

Otherwise, history will continue to repeat itself regardless of whom believes in what and in what form. Hard to accept that any G(g)od would allow for that to occur.
 

Pat~

Luftmensch Emeritus, A.D.D.
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
6,817
Reaction score
2,975
William Haskins said:
but the very notion of monotheistic religion, and all its denominational permutations, is predicated on being right and everyone else being wrong.

1. I think one can choose a denomination for reasons other than it being 'the only right one.' (Proximity to home, personality fit, etc. play a bigger part for some people.)

2. I think it's impossible for everybody to be 'right'. (But that's a whole 'nuther thread :D .)

3. I think it's possible to believe you are right without being mean-spirited.

Just my 3 centavos....
 

William Haskins

poet
Kind Benefactor
Absolute Sage
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
29,099
Reaction score
8,848
Age
58
Website
www.poisonpen.net
of course you may be right.

my perspective is that of an atheist who grew up in the bible belt, but also someone who has extensively studied comparative religion and a political junkie, who is aware of the historical trends of religion and all that came with that.

these two elements of my life have converged to for a macro view of the function and consequence of religion in society, but i also have tremendous respect for individual people of faith who build their lives around its more benevolent tenets. i think that spirituality can have a positive impact on the world.

it's a shame that most of them don't feel the same way about me.
 

Pat~

Luftmensch Emeritus, A.D.D.
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
6,817
Reaction score
2,975
Interesting article; it touches on the 'fear' factor mentioned earlier. I can see why that might be disheartening to an atheist--except there is some comfort in the fact that only 2000 people were polled. (Refresh my memory, but is that small of a percentage a representative sampling?)
 

ColoradoGuy

I've seen worse.
Staff member
Moderator
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 11, 2005
Messages
6,696
Reaction score
1,534
Location
The City Different
Website
www.chrisjohnsonmd.com
pb10220 said:
(Refresh my memory, but is that small of a percentage a representative sampling?)
Poll reliability is related to sample size, but only related. There is a huge body of research in the social sciences about validating poll results and generalizing from them. I don't know it well, but I assume (on faith?) that the U of MN sociology professors who did the research reported here are poll adepts. Maybe someone with that special knowlege can chime in.

It always seemed to me that atheists are as much (or more) feared as disliked. Could this be because of their additional association with "Godless communism"?

In Europe, interestingly, atheists are said to be in the majority, and much of Europe is totally mystified by America's perceived obsession with religion.
 

PsychySensei

Registered
Joined
Feb 4, 2006
Messages
15
Reaction score
1
Location
Two miles east of you
William Haskins said:
marriage outside of one's faith was, until very recently, frowned upon and inside the walls of their own houses of worship, these specific faiths insulate themselves in myopic self-righteousness and take for granted that they are the

But you're talking as if these things are due to religion and not simply part of human nature, which they are. When religious elements are not a factor people find other elements. Religion is definitely one excuse, but people don't approve of others based on the state they live in, the accent they have, the education they have, the country they're from, the country their parents are from, the fact that they have relatives some don't approve of, the schools they go to, the color of their hair, skin, their height, illness, physical "irregularities," intellect. You can say "he doesn't want his daughter to marry that man because (his parents are Scottish, he's from the South, he went to a state college, he dropped out of high school, he's very short, he has arthritis, he has three nipples, his brother is a loser)". Feuds have started over such things, wars have started over some of them. In the UK you can't wear certain colors into a pub because of team rivalries.

I'm not convinced the religion is the basis for the problems. I think people look for reasons to create conflict and religion is convenient. It's not like people of the same faith all agree and never have conflicts amongst themselves.

It's human nature to form groups and clubs to support us in who we are and what we believe and to insulate our fragile egos from those who disagree - whether that's school A is better than school B or Italians are better than the Irish or Muslims are right and Catholics are wrong, or whatever.

If you took away all religion tomorrow, 50 years from now the world would be no more peaceful or less violent, they'd just be fighting over something else.
 

ColoradoGuy

I've seen worse.
Staff member
Moderator
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 11, 2005
Messages
6,696
Reaction score
1,534
Location
The City Different
Website
www.chrisjohnsonmd.com
PsychySensei said:
If you took away all religion tomorrow, 50 years from now the world would be no more peaceful or less violent, they'd just be fighting over something else.
Ah, but the question is, can you take away religion? Many besides me -- it is a cliche -- have wondered if the need for religion, at least defined as a spiritual quest for something significant outside of ourselves, is basic to the human brain. Are you truly that cynical, or am I truly that naive?
 

Duncan J Macdonald

Plotting! Not Plodding!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
1,882
Reaction score
455
Age
66
Location
Northern Virginia
ColoradoGuy said:
Poll reliability is related to sample size, but only related. There is a huge body of research in the social sciences about validating poll results and generalizing from them. I don't know it well, but I assume (on faith?) that the U of MN sociology professors who did the research reported here are poll adepts. Maybe someone with that special knowlege can chime in.
I'm not a person with special knowledge, but statistical sampling is a pet peeve of mine, especially when polling such fickle creatures as humans. I'd much prefer a sample size of 100% -- then I might believe the figures.

ColoradoGuy said:
It always seemed to me that atheists are as much (or more) feared as disliked. Could this be because of their additional association with "Godless communism"?
Yup.

ColoradoGuy said:
In Europe, interestingly, atheists are said to be in the majority, and much of Europe is totally mystified by America's perceived obsession with religion.
It stems, I believe, from the fact that this country was founded mainly by the wackiest of the lunatic fringe group splinter sects of non-mainstream religious thought.
 

reph

Fig of authority
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
5,160
Reaction score
971
Location
On a fig tree, presumably
ColoradoGuy said:
Poll reliability is related to sample size, but only related....

It always seemed to me that atheists are as much (or more) feared as disliked. Could this be because of their additional association with "Godless communism"?
I am not a statistician, but I think a sample of 2000 is big enough. The numbers to look at would be margin of error and the probability levels for individual findings.

Most people now wouldn't remember the Cold War, when "godless Communism" was a big catchphrase. Some were born since then; others were born early enough, but they don't remember much of anything. Possibly, fear and mistrust of atheists come from the notion among religious people that morality was invented by God, not by us, so that if you didn't go to Sunday school, you won't know right from wrong.
 

Duncan J Macdonald

Plotting! Not Plodding!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
1,882
Reaction score
455
Age
66
Location
Northern Virginia
ColoradoGuy said:
Ah, but the question is, can you take away religion? Many besides me -- it is a cliche -- have wondered if the need for religion, at least defined as a spiritual quest for something significant outside of ourselves, is basic to the human brain. Are you truly that cynical, or am I truly that naive?
I don't think that PsychySensei is cynical -- more a realist.
 

ColoradoGuy

I've seen worse.
Staff member
Moderator
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 11, 2005
Messages
6,696
Reaction score
1,534
Location
The City Different
Website
www.chrisjohnsonmd.com
reph said:
Why couldn't you? Look at the people who function well without it.
Well I suppose then my question becomes: should we examine our definition of just what religion is? If it is adherence to a set of instructions given (or sent) to us by some all-powerful higher entity, and association largely or even exclusively with others who share that viewpoint, then clearly we can do without that. Or at least I could.

But if religion is taken to mean a search for any larger meaning outside of ourselves, and our association with others of like mind, our own congregation of believers, it seems to me that most of us want that. We may even be driven by our intrinsic nature to seek it out. That is what I mean when I ask if religious yearning is basic to our human nature.
 

Atomic Bear

the Bruin of Tomorrow™
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 2, 2005
Messages
173
Reaction score
15
Location
San Francisco Bay Area
Website
www.atomicbearpress.com
reph said:
Why couldn't you? Look at the people who function well without it.

I do.

Or some folks could use something else to replace religion. Fandom for movies, TV shows, etc. can reach a religious fervor at time. I go to San Diego Comic-Con ever year and some of the Star Wars fans are kind like that. Also look at the folks who were out side the court house to support Michael Jackson. Some of them imagined him as some magical holy androgynous angel or something.

I met someone who found Cirque du Soleil a spiritual experience.

Political movements can be like a religion as well. Look at the power some movements have for good or ill. Hitler had that kind of attention from his followers.

Heck some folk even find a person who they "worship the ground they walk on" to a point of obsession.
 

blacbird

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
36,987
Reaction score
6,158
Location
The right earlobe of North America
pb10220 said:
only 2000 people were polled.

Standard statistical error deviation for a sample of 2000 would be less than 2%. I do a lot of statistical counting in my real life, and commonly stop at 200 or 250, which have a computed error bar of 5-6% (good enough for the kind of work I do). A sample set of 2000 is pretty big; most major political polls, like Gallup, run in the upper level of hundreds, with error bars of +-3% or so.

caw.
 

maestrowork

Fear the Death Ray
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
43,746
Reaction score
8,652
Location
Los Angeles
Website
www.amazon.com
I think spiritual needs are very human, and people seek spiritual experiences (be it rock concerts, drugs, Lord of the Rings, etc.) to enrich or connect with their souls. But spirituality is different from religons. Religions, to me, are cults, what with their rituals and pageantry and doctrines... Religions are also ideologies to bind people together, so they can feel like they belong to something greater and grander than they -- a common purpose. Not everyone needs to "belong" in that sense, but I think we all have that need to fulfill our souls in some way.
 

Puddle Jumper

LightShadow said:
I'll let you know when I go to Heaven and ask Him.
Yet no one who's gone on has returned yet to let us know. Light Shadow, this comment and some others I've read from you seem a little condescending. If someone were to talk to me in that tone I'd be like, "Yeah whatever bud, see ya." It lacks kindness and humility.

Besides, I don't think we go to heaven when we die. I don't think we go to be with God when we die. I believe death is more like sleep. The Old Testament often refers to death as sleep. That or our spirits go somewhere, those belonging to the Lord going to paradise as Jesus told the repentant man on a cross next to Him that the man would be with Jesus that day in paradise.

But it's more than that. The Bible talks about when Jesus returns, the dead in Christ will rise first, then those who are alive belonging to Him will be caught up with those rising from the dead and together go up to meet Jesus in the air and then go to be with the Father. The picture I see being painted is that nobody who has died is yet with God the Father, they are awaiting the second return of Christ to this world to gather all who belong to the Father to then bring them up at once, the Groom Jesus bringing His Bride home. We being the Bride of Christ.

Just felt like adding that in.

NeuroFizz said:
LightShadow said:
As Kirk Cameron says: The Bible is not just a big dusty book that's filled with rules. It is the uncompromising Word of God.
So, all of the other religions of the world are out of luck? Their holy books are just bathroom reading? Do you feel comfortable drawing that conclusion, with your message being convert to my way, or I'll send down some water?
I can't speak for Kirk, I can't speak for LightShadow, just myself. I feel comfortable with the Bible being the uncompromising Word of God. And that's all I'll say in regards to what you asked.

Dawno said:
In reference to that same post, that's exactly the stuff that will get this thread locked. If you can't stick to the OP's intent and you have to talk about things that are related you must refrain from personalizing or coming across as disrespectful of your fellow writers' beliefs and persons. One more shot like that and this thread is done.
Is it fair to lock a thread because of one person's comments? Why not delete the post?

I understand locking a thread if there is a complete breakdown and an all out brawl between posters.

William Haskins said:
religion, in and of itself, is mean-spirited.
William just took on the world!

I echo Pat, people can be mean-spirited, and they can find any reason to be that way.

William Haskins said:
marriage outside of one's faith was, until very recently, frowned upon
Why do you think it is no longer frowned upon? I don't know of any belief that is happy with someone marrying someone of another faith. Christianity is not that way. I've been taught since I became a Christian that you should not marry someone who isn't a Christian.

William Haskins said:
but the very notion of monotheistic religion, and all its denominational permutations, is predicated on being right and everyone else being wrong.
But aren't you saying that you're right and everyone who believes in these things are wrong? In which case, aren't you then condemning something that you yourself are guilty of?

Jean Marie said:
And if we don't begin to learn toleration on some level at some point in time, than we are doomed.
We're doomed whether or not we learn tolerance. Even scientists will tell you this world will eventually die. Of course we're certainly helping it along, namely since the industrial revolution.

***

An argument I have heard from people, especially atheists, is that Christianity, like all other religions, is man-made and all religion and faiths are is a smorgosboard for people to decide what they want to believe in to make them feel better about their lives or to give them a reason to hate other people, etc...

Of course each religion and faith would make the claim that it's not man-made but that it came from God. So if I tried to argue that Christianity is the only faith that is not man-made, I'd get an earful, or eyeful as the case may be, of that.

I did choose to become a Christian when I was 12 years old. I saw who Jesus was, knew that He was the Living Son of God, and said to Him, "I choose you, Jesus."

Why was I so confident in that choice? Because before I was born, Jesus said to me, "I choose you." And He put people in my life to tell me about Him. My mother, my Sunday School teachers, and ultimately the people leading the came I went to. So that when the time was right there was no question in my mind. I chose Him because He first chose me. I love Him because He first loved me. If he had not first chosen me I would have never turned to Him. I'm blown away that He would want me, someone as low as me. It makes no sense to me as to why He loves me as much as He does and how He never gives up on me.

Perhaps people of all other religions will make similar claims, I don't know. But I know that there is no question in my mind. God has proven His existance to me time and time again so that I could no more question His existance than I could question the existance of the two human beings who brought me into this world - my parents.
 

ColoradoGuy

I've seen worse.
Staff member
Moderator
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 11, 2005
Messages
6,696
Reaction score
1,534
Location
The City Different
Website
www.chrisjohnsonmd.com
One of my basic problems with standard Christian doctrine, particularly the severe Protestant varieties that trace their lineage back to Calvin, is its emphasis on the fallen nature of humankind, original sin and all that. This is the Lord of the Flies view of human nature: that we are all craven, some more, some less, but all of us would knife our neighbor if left to our own devices. “Left alone, we all sin,” as one of the more bombastic posters on this thread has put it.

I lean more toward the old utopian anarchist viewpoint: left to ourselves, we try to help each other more than Hobbes would have predicted. Not always, of course, but that we do it at all is astonishing. Why do we do that? As I have said before, that quality of freely giving of ourselves to strangers, that spark to do this, is my definition of God. Perhaps you would say that I have done a semantic and rhetorical sleight of hand, merely redefining God and religion so that I can keep them: I don’t think so.
 

Pat~

Luftmensch Emeritus, A.D.D.
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
6,817
Reaction score
2,975
blacbird said:
Standard statistical error deviation for a sample of 2000 would be less than 2%. I do a lot of statistical counting in my real life, and commonly stop at 200 or 250, which have a computed error bar of 5-6% (good enough for the kind of work I do). A sample set of 2000 is pretty big; most major political polls, like Gallup, run in the upper level of hundreds, with error bars of +-3% or so.

caw.

Thanks for the info, Blacbird :) .
 
Status
Not open for further replies.