quote:

Originally posted by The17sss haha... same here. I also went to Catholic school from 1st grade to 3rd grade, then back for all 4 years of high school. Studied that stupid book cover to cover.

Didn't you also go to some militant Xtian College in Georgia for a while as well?

___________________
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

quote:

Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On Didn't you also go to some militant Xtian College in Georgia for a while as well?

LOL!!! Nah man, 2 state universities for me.

Right, I knew you went to University Of.. Florida... or something, but then there was some clown college before that...

There's no way I could be thinking of someone else.

___________________
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

quote:

Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On Ah-ah-ah, vanity!

Actually, my "excellent post below" was intended to convey my views on your post, which I was quoting below... not my own.

quote:

"Radical sects" are indeed in the minority - their outcries and ammunition beaing heard over all other forms of reason. This is indeed a tragic fault of mankind's nature, not necessarily that of religion, but the fact persists that wherever you have religion, you shall have religious intolerance and fanaticism, no matter how moderate the religion may seem.

I fully agree; however, this statement should really be broadened out to include all ideologies, philosophies, and doctrines.

quote:

Indeed, religion rarely teaches this explicitly. But it is implied to a point - doubt and sin and disagreement being forms of heresy. Things have no doubt changed with time - your church especially - but still there lingers an alienation, a sort of shelter of wisdom as it were, warding from certain thoughts and speech under penalty of social scrutiny. Once more though, this is no specific fault of religious dogma, but that of any social movement; political affiliations work in much the same way. But just because religion does not tell people to take this action, this thought, doesn't exempt religion from the reality of this dynamic. Christianity is somewhat exclusive in this regard, in that it brought about a revisionist approach - one analagous with rebirth, of course - to accept all into its fold who accept the love of Christ, regardless of social status. It's really the only way the organism has survived for so long. But it seems as though the wealth of modern Christianity is in appealing to the heart-strings so you can hook more believers - pad the flock. And through this, comes that almighty 'control' people like me are always harking about. It's not that religion is merely a tool to control people or milk them for cash, etc; It's just that men use it as such to the effect of quite radical agendas, subtle though they may be.

All of what you say here is true; however, these are the actions of men; not of the religion. While it is true that there are people abuse religion to influence others for their own gain; there are any number of non-religious systems of thought/belief that are abused in the exact same way. What one needs to apply is the legal test of "if not for"... would unscrupulous individuals be able to influence and manipulate groups of people to their own gain if not for the existence of religion.... the answer - of course - is yes; therefore, one must conclude that the fact that these abuses take place is not the fault of religion. Since that is the case then the argument really should not be against religion; rather, it should be against those individual malfeasors who by any means manipulate others to their prejudice for their own gain.

quote:

Whilst I certainly agree there is hypocrisy to be found on either side of the debate, I am not certain that full understanding on everyone's part would alleviate things. True, it's a step in the right direction, and one should always seek to understand as much as one can before commencing with rote and haphazard commentary, but there comes a point of conscience where I, and many others to be sure, believe Christianity (for example) to be utterly incorrect. No study on the subtleties and the structure, no matter how eloquent or interesting they may be to me, shall ever cause me to believe that there is at least one God and that he loves us in any comprehensible way.

Of course a fuller understanding of both sides from both sides would not end the debate; there will always be contention, as rational thinking persons will inevitably come to different conclusions as they apply more or less weight to the "arguments" and "evidence" then others would. This is natural and born directly from ones experience and frame of reference. What each side actively seeking a fuller understanding of both their own and the other side's positions/beliefs would do is eliminate the pot-shots from those that simply don't get either side... you know; the "you're saying we evolved from monkeys?" and "so god made women by carving up a rib," (or to be fair to the Vedic faiths... "so you're saying the world was formed by the vibration of god's voice"), shit arguments which do nothing to advance anything because they don't actually address any real belief. Without question, a full understanding of one's own and another's position won't end the debate (I'm a good example of this as I have a very good understanding of many faiths and non-faith based philosophies yet I am not an atheist, Hindu, Shinto, communist, humanist, etc.) nor should anyone ever expect it to.... what it would achieve; however, is an enriching of the debate as people could appreciate where the commonalities are (truth is always found in commonalities) and then the debate would only be over the differences, which would likely be a much more productive debate. Will any side "win?"... of course not; however, that's not to say that there is nothing to be gained from the exercise if it is done correctly; the problem now is that the exercise is not done correctly... radical elements and irrational people using poorly conceived arguments to try and discredit what they believe the other side's position is (and invariably they are wrong) just serve to bring what could be a great intellectual argument down to a shouting match and test of wills where actions are ultimately taken based on how many people are yelling and how loudly rather then based on the merit of what they are saying.

quote:

When I speak of "belief", I do not necessarily mean it in a religious sense. It seems to me that everyone who picks up (much less uses) a weapon does so out of some personal holding - be it the "virtue" of self-defense, the call to defend one's region from would-be occupants, or any other reasoning - no matter how radical - cannot be sifted from the personal belief that what one is doing is right and necessary. People do not kill without their convictions - it's the only way that otherwise sane people can bring themselves to committ some of the atrocities that history reflects. But this is not the fault of religion.

No, no, I knew exactly what you meant... I only objected to the use of the word "always" because I am too optimistic to concede that this will never change... I prefer to think humanity will progress beyond that... of course this is improbable but if we resign ourselves to believe that this is a condition that cannot be changed then the incentive to try is reduced; and there is simply too much to be gained by the attempt to allow that opportunity to pass due to apathy.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by RickyM you're just a shit version of Moral Hazard. At least he knows what he's talking about.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN lol, i love it when moral feels the need to lay the smack down

quote:

Originally posted by Moral Hazard Strangely, the more I learned about the great faiths and other non-theistic philosophies the more similarities I found between them all and the more truth I found in those things that were consistent across them, which ultimately resulted in a rather deep and profound faith. That said, I still continue to actively challenge my faith.

Nice...... I am finding that out as even we read this thread. I was raised strict Calvinist baptist. but once I moved on after 17 and started to experience the world outside the box the my child hood faith sat me in, I started to realize that the all the world's faith no matter how small or large, taught a core "vibe". This core "vibe" is what gave me comfort as a child in the belief that there was a higher state to look forward to. Plus I think that its one's own body that holds the key, thats why I have started to learn and practice meditation....ever since I started getting into it seriously last year, my life has started to be so much easier and oddly, healthier...

just my 2-cents

You'll find little disagreement from me, Moral. It was never my intent to establish some causal link between individual corruption and religion - it's simply not there in the pages, it doesn't exist. Religion is a tool like any other though - one that can be used to aid some and harm others - and its faults have almost always lied in its adherents. But there is no doubt that, as a supremely social factor, it is an empowering concept, to know that one is right only out of an appeal to some omnipresent authority, and I see all too often people also succumbing to (any) doctrine out of fear or ignorance, even curiosity or the will to make oneself a "better person" by some standard. True, you could argue that true faith is based on generosity and compassion and whatnot, but can you earnestly say this applies in the majority of cases? In light of the ideal, that love and acceptance are the standard by which religion is known for? Yes, the fault in execution hinges solely upon a fallible creature - man - and this is of course compensated for by parable and compassion, but what standard do we have for fallibility? What keeps us from being perfect, from being free to love whomever we want as your God would seemingly have us do? His design, it would seem.

And if this solution is what we have been conceding to all along - that man would be just as corrupt, just as voracious were it not for the presence of religion, then truly: what good has it done us? If we are no better nor more worse off - if it is entirely possible for me to lead a virtuous and fulfilling life without the notion of some omniscient Santa Clause judging me by decidedly human (and decidedly outdated) rules, then what place has God made for himself in our world? It would appear to me as though religion is nothing but a tool, given value only by human beings - a weapon in the hands of those who will it as such, and a handkerchief for all of the rest.

quote:

Originally posted by Moral Hazard (truth is always found in commonalities)

I thoroughly disagree, and not merely based on your use of "always".

"Truth", should there even exist one, may very well be imagined by the faculty of commonality - but once more, this serves a base, social purpose. There is no "love", no "god", exchanged when two people agree with one another. If we are to believe that man is an animal, created by a God or not, then we must accept the fact people are social merely out of the imperative to survive; and that survival is best achieved in banding together. But "survival" could mean a great deal of things, now couldn't it? Unless you meant that truth is "created" by commonality... which I shall deign true by agreeing with you in such a case.

Unless, of course, you take the route that God is the force behind all actions - base or noble by any human standard. Which I *know* you're going to take because you're a bastard like that!

quote:

No, no, I knew exactly what you meant... I only objected to the use of the word "always" because I am too optimistic to concede that this will never change... I prefer to think humanity will progress beyond that... of course this is improbable but if we resign ourselves to believe that this is a condition that cannot be changed then the incentive to try is reduced; and there is simply too much to be gained by the attempt to allow that opportunity to pass due to apathy.

Funny we were viewing the word in so seperate of ways - I did not mean to imply at all that man "shall always" follow this course. I am with you that there is still a shred of hope that we may yet conquer our reptilian natures in exchange for a more stable and free world (though we no doubt have differing ideas on how this should be achieved ). Perhaps I would have done better to phrase it, "beliefs have guided almost all violence thusfar"?

___________________
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

Last edited by Halcyon+On+On on Apr-01-2009 at 16:24

quote:

Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On And if this solution is what we have been conceding to all along - that man would be just as corrupt, just as voracious were it not for the presence of religion, then truly: what good has it done us?

I would suggest to you that the benefit of religion is that which the adherent receives (in this world; presuming there is another). While there are great benefits to humanity realized through the great faiths (the social welfare system they bring with them perhaps being the greatest example), it is the adherent of a faith that principally benefits from it. Of course this benefit varies from individual to individual but if there were no benefit no one would adhere (human nature being as it is). In order to gauge the benefit of religion to humanity you would need to look at all that has been done by people of faith living their faith to benefit humanity.... I simply don't have the time to do this; however, I suspect that the benefit is substantial... more importantly for me; the benefit to me is substantial and that's really where one needs to evaluate the worth of a thing.

quote:

If we are no better nor more worse off - if it is entirely possible for me to lead a virtuous and fulfilling life without the notion of some omniscient Santa Clause judging me by decidedly human (and decidedly outdated) rules, then what place has God made for himself in our world?

It is entirely possible for you to lead a virtuous and fulfilling life without faith.... it may not be as full as mine but it may be full enough for you. I think your question about what place God has made for himself in our world is utterly flawed as it is entirely based on the assumption that God has sought to do this, which I do not believe to be the case; rather, I would suggest to you that God has made room for us in his world.

quote:

It would appear to me as though religion is nothing but a tool, given value only by human beings - a weapon in the hands of those who will it as such, and a handkerchief for all of the rest.

Absolutely it's a tool... all systems of thought and/or belief are; however, I wouldn't write it off as a handkerchief (as I'm sure you would expect).

quote:

I thoroughly disagree, and not merely based on your use of "always". "Truth", should there even exist one, may very well be imagined by the faculty of commonality - but once more, this serves a base, social purpose. There is no "love", no "god", exchanged when two people agree with one another. If we are to believe that man is an animal, created by a God or not, then we must accept the fact people are social merely out of the imperative to survive; and that survival is best achieved in banding together. But "survival" could mean a great deal of things, now couldn't it? Unless you meant that truth is "created" by commonality... which I shall deign true by agreeing with you in such a case.

Truth must exist because to state there is no truth is a logical fallacy. The reason I belief one can find truth in the commonalities (granted the use of the word always was an error on my part) is because it is unreasonable to conclude that there is no truth to all belief/thought systems; thus, where these systems converge that is where one will most likely find truth. That said, I would also agree that what most perceive as truth is formed by consensus which may or may not be factually accurate and objectively true.

quote:

Unless, of course, you take the route that God is the force behind all actions - base or noble by any human standard. Which I *know* you're going to take because you're a bastard like that!

Actually, I've long since struggled with this very idea and I've concluded that God more or less let's us do what we will (with the odd spectacular intervention like hordes of locusts and killing Egyptians here and there). You may not actually be interested but I feel I should share why I believe this (but I'll spare you all the complex thought and years of mental wrestling that went into this). My belief starts with the belief that god is everything and everything is a part thereof that the reason for creation (all creation) was to allow for the development of free thinking independent creatures that would be individual and separate from God that would be able to observe creation from the inside and decide for themselves whether or not they wish to love god... which is to say love et al. Since this is my belief I cannot accept that God would be the motivation behind all actions, as this would undermine the entire reason for creation.

FYI, even if I did believe that God was the force behind all actions I would never raise it in a discussion such as this because it is a position that cannot be defended though any reasoning that is not entirely based on Christian dogma (or if it can said reasoning is too complex for me to rationalize); subsequently, it would kill discussion rather then foster it.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by RickyM you're just a shit version of Moral Hazard. At least he knows what he's talking about.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN lol, i love it when moral feels the need to lay the smack down

quote:

Originally posted by Moral Hazard I would suggest to you that the benefit of religion is that which the adherent receives (in this world; presuming there is another). While there are great benefits to humanity realized through the great faiths (the social welfare system they bring with them perhaps being the greatest example), it is the adherent of a faith that principally benefits from it. Of course this benefit varies from individual to individual but if there were no benefit no one would adhere (human nature being as it is). In order to gauge the benefit of religion to humanity you would need to look at all that has been done by people of faith living their faith to benefit humanity.... I simply don't have the time to do this; however, I suspect that the benefit is substantial... more importantly for me; the benefit to me is substantial and that's really where one needs to evaluate the worth of a thing.

Right, feels good, helps people cope, therefore its value is confirmed by individuals. The same could be said of Teddy bears though... why aren't people at one another's throats over whose Teddy bear is more comforting than the next?

Indeed, value is determined by individual benefit... but would you say this is consistent throughout the course of a person's faith, or merely in the beginning? When you transmit a meme, it has to be tasty, otherwise people simply will not swallow it. Once more, the same could be said of any philosophy or ideolgy, and of course tastes in what is "truthful" will differ - you and I are fine examples of this. Benefit, it would seem, is the primary survival mechanism of any dogma. Would you say that personal gain is at the heart of the rest of Christian philosophy as well?

quote:

It is entirely possible for you to lead a virtuous and fulfilling life without faith.... it may not be as full as mine but it may be full enough for you.

Oh dear, pride and vanity, too!

quote:

I think your question about what place God has made for himself in our world is utterly flawed as it is entirely based on the assumption that God has sought to do this, which I do not believe to be the case; rather, I would suggest to you that God has made room for us in his world.

What makes your assumption any more substantial than mine though? We're not distant relatives who have been crashing at His place for a few million years... He created us, according to you. If God did not seek to do this, then what could possibly lead you to believe in the soundness of the rest of your philosophy? I do not love pieces of skin and debris that cling to me; though I created them, I did not seek to do as such, but I've inadvertently made room for them regardless.

quote:

Truth must exist because to state there is no truth is a logical fallacy.

Hence the quotation marks around the word. Sure it is logical that there is a single truth to just about everything, but I am sure that you can agree mankind is not always positioned to discern such a thing.

quote:

The reason I belief one can find truth in the commonalities (granted the use of the word always was an error on my part) is because it is unreasonable to conclude that there is no truth to all belief/thought systems; thus, where these systems converge that is where one will most likely find truth. That said, I would also agree that what most perceive as truth is formed by consensus which may or may not be factually accurate and objectively true.

Well my aim was never to establish that religious systems are completely void of any truth. Have they been a necessary instrument to our survival though? I don't think any one person is in a credible position to say.

quote:

Actually, I've long since struggled with this very idea and I've concluded that God more or less let's us do what we will (with the odd spectacular intervention like hordes of locusts and killing Egyptians here and there). You may not actually be interested but I feel I should share why I believe this (but I'll spare you all the complex thought and years of mental wrestling that went into this). My belief starts with the belief that god is everything and everything is a part thereof that the reason for creation (all creation) was to allow for the development of free thinking independent creatures that would be individual and separate from God that would be able to observe creation from the inside and decide for themselves whether or not they wish to love god... which is to say love et al. Since this is my belief I cannot accept that God would be the motivation behind all actions, as this would undermine the entire reason for creation. FYI, even if I did believe that God was the force behind all actions I would never raise it in a discussion such as this because it is a position that cannot be defended though any reasoning that is not entirely based on Christian dogma (or if it can said reasoning is too complex for me to rationalize); subsequently, it would kill discussion rather then foster it.

Nono, I find it interesting. Make no mistake, we have progressed quite beyond the realm of reasonable debate and are now just plucking at beliefs.

Fuck, have to finish this later. Stupid work.

___________________
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

Last edited by Halcyon+On+On on Apr-01-2009 at 19:12

quote:

Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On Indeed, value is determined by individual benefit... but would you say this is consistent throughout the course of a person's faith, or merely in the beginning?

I would suspect and have experienced that the benefits change overtime; however, as long as there are benefits and those benefits will be how one principally assesses the value of their faith.

quote:

Benefit, it would seem, is the primary survival mechanism of any dogma. Would you say that personal gain is at the heart of the rest of Christian philosophy as well?

No, I would not say that personal gain is at the heart of Christian philosophy; rather, people who adhere to said philosophy... any philosophy... do so because they perceive a benefit is gleaned by doing so.

quote:

Hence the quotation marks around the word. Sure it is logical that there is a single truth to just about everything, but I am sure that you can agree mankind is not always positioned to discern such a thing.

While I agree I don't believe that this is reason to abandon the search for same.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by RickyM you're just a shit version of Moral Hazard. At least he knows what he's talking about.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN lol, i love it when moral feels the need to lay the smack down

It's not really "faith" if there is a direct benefit though... that's called incentive.

___________________
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

It's both.

There is an incentive in having faith in God.

___________________