TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- Were religions made
Pages (3): [1] 2 3 »

Were religions made

for a source of comfort?

I've always believed in reincarnation....then recently I wondered..."well do I 'believe' in it because it's comforting to know where I'll be going?"

I'm starting to really believe that religion was simply made up to help comfort people. I know several people who all of a sudden "find their faith" when someone close to them passes. Wow, that's amazing. Sorry, but I think you suddenly "find" it because you don't know how else to cope.

i think religious people are a little to stubborn and inflexible to have a serious discussion with so it takes away any value in discussing religion with them.


as far as your question. i'd say religion is created and used for a lot of different purposes and yeah comfort is one of the big ones...

You cant disprove the existance of a devine being(s). Im talking outside of the bible and scriptures, just in general.

Even Einstein after all his research said that there must be some sort of god because there is so much that just simply cannot be explained.

I do though, have a belief in reincarnation. I think when our souls are finished using the body we are in now, we find another body to use.

lex400sc made an excellent point regarding this same topic. My rational side agrees with him 100%, but my religious side says no. I'll go ahead and look for his post and when I do you'll see what I'm talking about.

Re: Were religions made

quote:

Originally posted by Azia I'm starting to really believe that religion was simply made up to help comfort people. I know several people who all of a sudden "find their faith" when someone close to them passes. Wow, that's amazing. Sorry, but I think you suddenly "find" it because you don't know how else to cope.

Often the situation you've described is true, however, that stands to reason. The loss of a loved one forces people to think about their own mortality. For many this is an uncomfortable subject as there are no answers that can be proven. People will often then look for the answer that gives them the most comfort. Some people pick one religion or another depending on which makes the most sense to them, others will revert to what they were taught as children and others will pick no religion at all. That said, many religions did not initially address what happens after death. In most religions this is a question that was addressed long after the establishment of the religion itself, therefore, your position that religions were made up primarally to provide answers to the question of morality doesn't fit with the history of the major religions.

quote:

Originally posted by Floorfiller i think religious people are a little to stubborn and inflexible to have a serious discussion with so it takes away any value in discussing religion with them. as far as your question. i'd say religion is created and used for a lot of different purposes and yeah comfort is one of the big ones...

You cant talk about religion with just regular ole people, because they cant give you answers, they are within their own box. You have to talk to people who actually know the writings and who can explain the stuff to you. If you cant disect it literally and figuratively, than youre blind to alot of things.

god is an invention of the human psyque created to fulfill an existencial emptyness

quote:

Originally posted by stevieboy32808 lex400sc made an excellent point regarding this same topic. My rational side agrees with him 100%, but my religious side says no. I'll go ahead and look for his post and when I do you'll see what I'm talking about.

Eureka! Here's the post I was talking about which I agree with:

quote:

Originally posted by lex400sc it's simple human psychology... the less you know about something the more mythology you make up in its place... at least at the societal level. look at every other "hip" religion of it's time that came and went... the romans: didn't know shit about such uncontrollable concepts as love, war, the sun, the moon, the sky, the stars, comets, the oceans, thunder & lightening, etc etc etc... so in order to help them cope with such things they personified them into deities because it's much easier to deal with something that has a human face, a name and an agenda for you to work with. you can't explain a massive storm that destroys your town, well if you can't explain it then you live in perpetual fear that it can happen again and again and again at any moment. who needs the stress? so you rationalize it as an angry god and attempt to appease him. well the more science taught humanity, the fewer gods we needed to help cope with the meathook realities of life. ultimately what are we left with today? what don't we understand and probably never will? what happens after you die. it's so grim to think you just decompose like everything else in nature, so we created a soul, a loving god, an epic and poetic struggle between good and evil, ten commandments, stories of sacrifice, stories of miracle and hope, a universe that was made just for us. such a romantic tale, and i'm sure it helped millions of people cope with the pain and suffering of plagues and famine and wars, but in the end it's just false hopes. religion impedes the progress of humanity by asserting that all the important questions of origin are already known. well not that i really care what the hell anyone believes. i've accepted that free-thinkers will always be the minority and people will continue to believe simply because it's the EASIEST thing to do.

from this thread.

I wouldn't say that religions were "made." The religions that exist today developed over hundreds of years and they are highly complex social phenomena so it cannot really be said that they have a single specific purpose.

It is certainly true that many people do find comfort in their religion when they are facing a personal loss of some kind. Then again, others may find comfort in alcohol. My advice would be to take both in moderation, if at all.

A friend was saying how they can't believe anyone who doesn't go to church/follows a faith....how they're life must be so empty. But who's to say what "empty" is

I almost wish I had a strong belief in something, because then maybe I wouldn't have so many questions....but there's no way I'm going to follow a certain group of people (when I don't truly believe), once again for comfort and to feel like I know where we're all going, no question. It seems so pathetic.

I think for sure that it's definitely one path to understand the world.

Not everybody is wired to understand concepts of life and humanity, what it means to be a good person, etc., the same way. Some people need religion. Others need politics. And so on.

The smartest people can take ALL concepts and make them work together. There doesn't have to be ONE definitive answer for everything. That's unrealistic.

quote:

Originally posted by Vlad You cant talk about religion with just regular ole people, because they cant give you answers, they are within their own box. You have to talk to people who actually know the writings and who can explain the stuff to you. If you cant disect it literally and figuratively, than youre blind to alot of things.

well let's face it the success of religion is entirely based on these types of people. my personal opinion is if people were more rational about religion they wouldn't necessarily subscribe to a religious group. the topic just gets so frustrating because people are unwilling to see other viewpoints.

quote:

Originally posted by Azia I almost wish I had a strong belief in something, because then maybe I wouldn't have so many questions

I have a strong belief, I still have questions. Having faith should not be the end of one's religious explorations. Faith needs to be challenged, questioned, and explored as that will lead to a deeper understanding and closer connection with one's god(s). Alternatively, deciding to not have faith should also be only the start of one's exploration of life's questions.

quote:

Originally posted by Moral Hazard I have a strong belief, I still have questions. Having faith should not be the end of one's religious explorations. Faith needs to be challenged, questioned, and explored as that will lead to a deeper understanding and closer connection with one's god(s). Alternatively, deciding to not have faith should also be only the start of one's exploration of life's questions.

very good post.....

and I agree

quote:

Originally posted by Moral Hazard Faith needs to be challenged, questioned, and explored as that will lead to a deeper understanding

see that is the key to the puzzle right there. i think any intelligent person would agree with that. i have nothing against anyone that has a religious view that came about and continues to be scrutinized by this logic. it's people that are against that questioning that i can't stand. how can you believe something to be true if you have never taken the time to challenge it?

quote:

Originally posted by Vlad You cant talk about religion with just regular ole people, because they cant give you answers, they are within their own box. You have to talk to people who actually know the writings and who can explain the stuff to you. If you cant disect it literally and figuratively, than youre blind to alot of things.

So does this mean that nobody should be entitled to contribute to a discussion on any given topic if they aren't thoroughly versed in the intricacies and specifics of said topic?

quote:

Originally posted by Azia A friend was saying how they can't believe anyone who doesn't go to church/follows a faith....how they're life must be so empty. But who's to say what "empty" is I almost wish I had a strong belief in something, because then maybe I wouldn't have so many questions....but there's no way I'm going to follow a certain group of people (when I don't truly believe), once again for comfort and to feel like I know where we're all going, no question. It seems so pathetic.

Consider this:

If you believe in an immortal soul or spirit that will exist eternally, then what meaning is there in the 70 or 80 years that comprises your life span? After all, that time represents only an infinitesimal fraction of your existence.

On the other hand, if you believe that human beings are purely biological creatures, and that when you die, everything about you will cease to exist, then your lifespan represents the totality of your existence.

Now, from which viewpoint, do you think life can best be appreciated? In which situation is the motivation to make the most of every minute of every day stronger?

The first question that you have to tackle before you enter the arena of religion is does it reflect the divine or not.

If no. You will partake in logic in Realm A. It's a generally cold, sterile mechanical realm because its very hostile to true love.

If yes, then the most important philosophical question you should answer is "Does the divine influence how it is perceived?" which will immediately lead to "What does the divine gain by wearing different masks to different people?"

Then you can start working at what is behind the mask, rather than running around like a zealot screaming "I see the true face of God"

quote:

Originally posted by Floorfiller see that is the key to the puzzle right there. i think any intelligent person would agree with that. i have nothing against anyone that has a religious view that came about and continues to be scrutinized by this logic. it's people that are against that questioning that i can't stand. how can you believe something to be true if you have never taken the time to challenge it?

Not everyone has the intellectual capacity or (more likely) the will to closely examine their own faith let alone others. Those people just comfort themselves in the faith that whatever they hear on friday, Saturday, or Sunday (depending on faith) is correct because those that teach the faith must know. These are the people that will defend every bit of what they believe to be true even if it doesn't make sense to anyone (themselves included) and/or cannot be substantiated in any way. These are most certainly not the persons one should discuss religion with. Interestingly, over my long journey to find answers to my own questions I found that the the people most open to a frank discussion of faith and most readilly accepting of the faillings of faith are the priests, ministers, rabbis, brahmans, etc. It seems the more one knows about one's faith the more one accepts that it is not perfect.

quote:

Originally posted by UWM So does this mean that nobody should be entitled to contribute to a discussion on any given topic if they aren't thoroughly versed in the intricacies and specifics of said topic?

You can discuss it, challenge it in your own abilities with other people... but to really challenge the words of the bible, you need to talk to people who are well versed, people that live their lives studying the laws of god.

In the jewish religion, its a sin to accept the written words of the bible literally, because they mean nothing - you cant do anything with it. There is a written bible (the torah) and an oral bible (the talmud) and when reading and studying, you have to read both because the torah has the literal words, and the talmud has the explanations of what everything means.

Its like someone who has absolutely no concept of computers, goes out, buys a computer... and doesnt get a manual on how to use it.

i think yea one religion's goals (and im speaking about religion in general) is to comfort people and reassure them ....all through the centuries religion was for to some whole population the only reason which could make them accept their miserable lives .....religion was basically what kept them alive and im thinking about harsh living condition during the 19th century in europe and the birth of working class .....but then religion is an excellent to pretext to make accept to hundred of people something which isnt acceptable

Religion was established to classify determine identify and make use of divine belief and thought.
Religion in itself is not a divine creation as too much of it is shaped and determined by mankind and not guided by the divine.

One can argue about the legitimacy of religion and it's definitions as established by men but if Jesus and various other beings viewed as divine truly had a supernatural power or control they certainly were not the ones that made religion what it is today.

Others also say that religion is the root of all evil, the thorn in humanities side, the source of all wars but I beg to differ.
It is too easy to classify something as a holy war when you do not take the complete picture in mind.
Is it a war to spread religious belief, or is it a war to regain a patch of land and use religion, the divine, or whatever form as a means of justification to an end?

Oversimplification has it's good and bad values but when something cannot be explained because we are not properly equiped where do we go? What do we call the other? What defines the devine?

Q - Were religions made?

A - http://www.geocities.com/thewitchescircle/biggg.htm

What really bakes my noodle is that even if this universe was created by a divine being, there are so many different types of religions/beliefs. So really, one must be correct and the others must either be made up bullshit or gross derivations or reversals of the truth. Question is, which one is right?


I'll take my chances with Christianity

quote:

Originally posted by aquila What really bakes my noodle is that even if this universe was created by a divine being, there are so many different types of religions/beliefs. So really, one must be correct and the others must either be made up bullshit or gross derivations or reversals of the truth. Question is, which one is right?

What did I just say?

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.