Religion IS crazy!

[SirRumpole]

When I said "please specify", I was asking what cultures you claim the Ten Commandments were taken from ?

Where are these cultures now ? Christianity has survived them all. Can you explain why that is ?

 

[Value Collector]

I think you are just envious that religion spread further and faster than your "other sources of morality", which I notice you haven't bothered to state. ?

I think its the "other sources" that have tamed the religious craziness, Over a period of time we have seen gradual progression in the moral values of society through rational secular reasoning, this is some what slowed by the religious though who often don't want to budge, you can see this happening by the resistance to gay marriage, especially in the USA.

There are many highly secular countries that are very nice places to live, Australia is one of them. In fact there is a correlation between places that are highly religious and violent crime and lower education, health care etc.

 

[Value Collector]

When I said "please specify", I was asking what cultures you claim the Ten Commandments were taken from ?

Where are these cultures now ? Christianity has survived them all. Can you explain why that is ?

Well the actual ten commandments was some what copied from an older set of laws from Egypt.

How ever what I meant was that cultures from all around the world had rules against Killing, stealing etc, which are the ones I suspect you like to think of when you say the ten commandments is a source of morality.

we didn't need a god to tell us that we didn't want to be killed or have our stuff stolen, its pretty common sense, offcourse as civilisations developed, rules against those things popped up every where, humans were living in civilisations and very large social groups for thousands of years before the bible was written.

 

[SirRumpole]

I think its the "other sources" that have tamed the religious craziness, Over a period of time we have seen gradual progression in the moral values of society through rational secular reasoning, this is some what slowed by the religious though who often don't want to budge, you can see this happening by the resistance to gay marriage, especially in the USA.

There are many highly secular countries that are very nice places to live, Australia is one of them. In fact there is a correlation between places that are highly religious and violent crime and lower education, health care etc.

I believe we are coming to a middle ground. I don't want to live in a highly religious country, nor a totally atheist ( or anti theist if you prefer) society either. Both are examples of extremist positions that are intolerant of opposing views.

Better to have a society that respects other views and allows peaceful coexistence, but as a matter of history we also have to acknowledge the good and bad influences that shaped our society. I hope we can do that with an open mind.

 

[explod]

When I said "please specify", I was asking what cultures you claim the Ten Commandments were taken from ?

Where are these cultures now ? Christianity has survived them all. Can you explain why that is ?

At the basic level Christianity has survived because it has controlled the sheeple.

Just as the chief's witch doctor kept the tribe in order and to do as directed.

Of course the creation of heaven was a ripper, here the sheeple would virtually work for nothing and not only that, put coins on the plate.

Of course today we have the footy and the computers and you can mortgage thevhouse to keep it all going.

Anyolehow, i'm keeping my silver coins to myself.

The govmint should have a code of ethics like the commandments embellished under the constitution. Aw, no, that might dilute the power of the witch doctor.

 

[SirRumpole]

we didn't need a god to tell us that we didn't want to be killed or have our stuff stolen, its pretty common sense, offcourse as civilisations developed, rules against those things popped up every where, humans were living in civilisations and very large social groups for thousands of years before the bible was written.

Ah yes, but religion put an external Being above the despots of the time and eroded their power. That is why despots of all sorts despise religion because it is a threat to them. People started following a carpenter from Nazareth rather than Caesar. Religion was an antidote to despotism at the time. We have international laws now, but the concept derived from the common good overriding the abuse of power.

 

[DeepState]

This notion came to me:

Let's say there is no God. We arrived here spontaneously. Yet religion exists. Therefore, we as a species created religion and wage war in its name. Given the widespread nature of religion and the notion that it springs up in physically separate areas in different guises, this argues that we have a tendency/behavior that lends itself to doing this in one way or another. To VC's point, we are born atheist. However, we may be predispositioned as a society to shed it in favour of belief, at least in part. Removing religion from the agenda will simply move this practice from one form to another. You cannot destroy energy, you just change its form. Religion gives way to nationalism etc.

Let's say there is a God and the organized or unorganized religions are paying homage to the true superior being(s). God's instructions as recorded are full of contradictions and bizarreness. Maybe many of these actions occurred in the gap between God's literal instructions and mortal's translation and errors in communication down the years. Chinese whispers. Nonetheless, a God capable of creating a universe and a species, ecology etc.. must surely be powerful enough to set this right if it wasn't meant to be including the possibility of having some self-determination. Yet apes and chimps from whom we have genetically descended wage war. To the best of my knowledge, they do not do so in the name of religion. The animal kingdom is unbelievably violent. Look into microscopic levels..same. I am abhorred by this idea, but maybe this is the way God might have intended it to be if He exists.

Doesn't this imply that an effort to irradicate religion is pointless if God does not exist, and against His will if he does? Either way, we will/should have religion?

 

[Value Collector]

I believe we are coming to a middle ground. I don't want to live in a highly religious country, nor a totally atheist ( or anti theist if you prefer) society either. Both are examples of extremist positions that are intolerant of opposing views.

Better to have a society that respects other views and allows peaceful coexistence, but as a matter of history we also have to acknowledge the good and bad influences that shaped our society. I hope we can do that with an open mind.

My position hasn't changed, Perhaps you might be just slowly realising that I am not the antitheist you may have suspected anyone calling their self atheist must be.

I am a big supporter of religious freedom, But I do believe the only way to have religious freedom is to have a secular government, and have a system of laws based on rational, thought out non religious code of ethics, and when it comes to debates on how our society should be, arguments need to have a basis that is not based on scripture.

eg, If you want to ban gay marriage, saying the bible says its wrong is not good enough, you need a well thought out and reasoned argument that isn't based on your religion.

The public school system should also be secular.

I am happy to live and let live, As I said earlier, I generally on discuss religious matters with people who are making open statements that are not correct, or if the person says they care whether their beliefs are true. I don't door knock houses or churchs, and I don't try and legislate to get lessons on evolution added to the sunday school class, But I don't want Religion indoctrination in public schools either.

 

[Value Collector]

Ah yes, but religion put an external Being above the despots of the time and eroded their power. That is why despots of all sorts despise religion because it is a threat to them. People started following a carpenter from Nazareth rather than Caesar. Religion was an antidote to despotism at the time. We have international laws now, but the concept derived from the common good overriding the abuse of power.

On the contrary, Religion is a power tool used by despots.

 

[Value Collector]

Given the widespread nature of religion and the notion that it springs up in physically separate areas in different guises, this argues that we have a tendency/behavior that lends itself to doing this in one way or another.

Yes, humans tend to fill in the gaps in their understanding will made up stories. This is what religion springing up around the world did. We are curious creatures, and we like to know things, So stories of gods filled in the huge gaps in knowledge.

But I think we are past this, I think we are at the point where its ok to say we don't know and still live without fear of that unknown, and focus instead on uncovering the truths of the universe, Because the truth is going to be more useful and more interesting than any story in the religious texts.

 

[Value Collector]

Yet apes and chimps from whom we have genetically descended wage war. To the best of my knowledge, they do not do so in the name of religion. The animal kingdom is unbelievably violent.

Yes, humans are incredibly violent also, as Darwin said, we have the indelible stamp of our lowly origins.

This is an awesome video, the message to it really affected me when I saw it.

 

[SirRumpole]

On the contrary, Religion is a power tool used by despots.

Unfortunately, that is the statement of a pure bigot who can't admit there may be some good in a philosophy that has moderated the power of despots over the ages. Yes , religion can be a tool for control BY despots, but is can also be a moderator to the power OF despots.

If you can't honestly analyse the lessons of history, and look at the evidence both for and against your ingrained prejudices, then there is no point in continuing a debate with a bigot.

 

[DeepState]

But I think we are past this, I think we are at the point where its ok to say we don't know and still live without fear of that unknown, and focus instead on uncovering the truths of the universe, Because the truth is going to be more useful and more interesting than any story in the religious texts.

It is semantic, perhaps, but I don't think we are past it. Nonetheless, secularism has reduced the proportion of the population which is deeply religious or lives strictly in accordance with its tenets (actually, I'm not sure. Is the Muslim faith growing fast enough through population growth to offset secular decline in the West? Further, Christianity is spreading quickly throughout China as religious freedoms become more tolerated, I believe). As science winds back the shadow of mysticism, there is less need to believe in a superior being for comfort.

This part gets me. Ultimately, science and physics is limited at what it can see/observe/examine. This is built into the fabric of nature. If you are a proponent of Big Bang, as is the standard belief today, there was a beginning. Then my head gets totally messed up about what started it. And we can go through cosmological contortions about spontaneously appearing universes/multi-verses with randomly determined physical constants that might allow this universe to survive but others not to be stable...but what started that? And arguments akin to "it's turtles all the way down" are just avoiding the question. That is the limit to science. Can it answer "Why are we here? What am I supposed to do given I am here?" Due to the presence of these questions, I suspect there is also a limit to which secularism can displace religious belief of some sort. This is a neutral statement about the ability to prove, disprove, tangible value of...religion of any particular stripe.

 

[explod]

Value Collector,

As termed by you, what is a Despot?

 

[Value Collector]

,

If you are a proponent of Big Bang, as is the standard belief today, there was a beginning. .

Not necessarily, the Big Bang theory doesn't rule out that something may have existed prior, eg a continually crunch bang cycle

That is the limit to science. Can it answer "Why are we here? What am I supposed to do given I am here?"

No, but neither can religion. Science can tell you How you got here, if that's what you mean.

The purpose of your life can only be answered by you. Religion can't tell you what the purpose of your life is, everyone is different.

 

[Value Collector]

Value Collector,

As termed by you, what is a Despot?

a ruler or other person who holds absolute power, typically one who exercises it in a cruel or oppressive way

 

[Value Collector]

Unfortunately, that is the statement of a pure bigot who can't admit there may be some good in a philosophy that has moderated the power of despots over the ages..

Whoah, ok, you jumped to name calling pretty quickly there. How is me recognising that through out history religion has been used by despots to increase their power make me a bigot.

Even in modern times religion is still being used by warlords and leaders. It is not an accident that theocracies tend to be very violent places to live, with very bad human rights records.

Yes , religion can be a tool for control BY despots, but is can also be a moderator to the power OF despots.

That's what I was pointing out, you made the claim that religion moderates despots, I simply commented that it actually increases their power when its used.

If you can't honestly analyse the lessons of history, and look at the evidence both for and against your ingrained prejudices, then there is no point in continuing a debate with a bigot

I think you need to just stop looking at the past with rose coloured glasses, assuming religion is positive.

 

[DeepState]

3, yes but all apollo members were airforce, when you are working with any specialised group in a population you will find things diverge from averages, eg, a very high degree of military members vote liberal, and at the time i served in my regiment Queensland was over represented but you cant draw conclusions that it takes a liberal voting queenslander to do what we do.

3. Fair point. I don't have the stats on the subset. And there is a difference between correlation and causality. Still, I am amazed at it and find the depth of belief was so strong and think, as opposed to know, that it was uncommon.

Just going back to outer space and religion for a minute, just FYI. The surveys are for US military (2nd and 3rd columns) and US population (4th and 5th).



It implies that US military personnel are more secular than the general population whose stats I used to suggest there was something interesting going on between religion and the best of the best of the best in the Apollo program. This does not prove causality in the sense that nothing can do so in this instance. But it would seem more odd to say that incredibly talented, brave ... astronauts inferred religion rather than to say that religion may be part of the reason why these most able of an unbelievably elite group were as such. In any case, interesting to me as it is a big outlier. Could be nothing, but the chances of that are materially lower than to say something interesting is going on.

I am surprised at this. My expectation, upon highlight, was more in line with what you alluded to. But, the above is the data.

 

[Value Collector]

Some despots even turn them selves into gods, look at the emperor of Japan during WW2, he was worshipped and believed to have god like qualities, he was definitely thought to be more than human by his followers.

Same with the North Korean leaders.

And that not mentioning the long line of popes, Kings, Imams and other leaders who invoked gods to get people to follow them.

 

[SirRumpole]

I think you need to just stop looking at the past with rose coloured glasses, assuming religion is positive.

Your selective reading seems to have ignored all the times I said that religion is both good and bad. Everything I've heard from you indicates that you think it's all bad. I can't go with that approach, I don't think it's an unbiased view.

I have some ideas why you take a relentlessly negative approach to religion. Your previous posts provide some clues. It's fairly typical of groups who have an axe to grind against religions for wrongs they suffered at the hands of the church. Negative views held by those groups for those wrongs are justified imo, but it doesn't provide a good basis for an honest intellectual debate if they allow personal feelings to dominate a wider discussion.