Religion, what's the point?

okLaptop1 said:
It's not a promise for just some, it's for all who would call upon His name and be save. However you have a a good point; this goes into a different area of theology, namely why are we going to hell in the first place. Disclaimer: I'm a Christian but I ain't no Biblical Scholar so if you're interesting more in the subject then look up works by people who have studied Biblical Theology for many years. This however, is my opinion.

The way I see it, it's that God created man with all the luxuries they could want. I don't take Adam and Eve in the Garden Of Eden as a literal story, but rather as a metaphor for the Fall Of Man. God creates humans, with all the food they could want, in a beautiful and natural habitat, gives them companionship with each other, and intimacy with himself, but also gives them something that would make life and joy worth having in the first place; free will (something that I think God values a lot more than people think He does). Tempted by Satan, humans use free will to disobey God, bringing sin into this world. Now humans are born into sin, and must accept Jesus and His sacrifice to fellowship with God again.

Keep in mind too, that sending us to hell isn't a decision that God is making, as if He could just choose not to if He were so inclined. Rather the Bible makes it clear that His perfect and holy nature (His very personality and being) is incompatible with sin, which means that we couldn't spend an eternity with him because we have sin in us. He wants everyone in heaven, but He can't just make it so, not without our consent. In that way, Hell is a prison locked from the inside.

And as for just making everyone good so that no one suffered, this comes back to another part of God's personality; He values free will. It's a contentious point for some, the fact that God lets us do what we want and leaves us with the consequences. There would be no pain without it, sure, but there would also be no true happiness, no lasting joy. Some people think it's not worth it. I guess God thinks it is.
Click to expand...


How can any being be perfect when he is by his own admission jealous and vengeful ?

Then god created man with all our imperfections that is why so many of us fail his test.

It seems to me that as a logical system they didn't think through all the ways they would be challenged when they decided the main claims to make about their god, it just seems like twisting ever since to me.
 
Not sure if it has been mentioned. Interestingly, Francis Collins, arguably the most powerful scientist today, is a believer. He is the current NIH Director with a budget of $30 billion and was Director of the Human Genome Project.
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
How can any being be perfect when he is by his own admission jealous and vengeful ?

Then god created man with all our imperfections that is why so many of us fail his test.

It seems to me that as a logical system they didn't think through all the ways they would be challenged when they decided the main claims to make about their god, it just seems like twisting ever since to me.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, perfect is too iffy a term for God, but then again, maybe jealousy and vengeful are merely the best terms we could use to describe those parts of his personality and not 100% accurate. These kind of technicalities and semantics don't interest me much though. God is entirely without sin is the best way I can describe it.

God didn't create humans perfect, but I doubt that's not what He's interested in. Like I said before, he values free will. Also, you don't need to be perfect to come to know God and to go to Heaven, only willing.
 
bishblaize said:
Imo using the Bible or the popular religions to explain the origins of the Universe is like looking in the bible for instructions on changing an iPhone screen. That's not what why they're there.

And the reverse is true. Not many people use the hard sciences to figure out where their life went wrong, how to deal with the loss of a loved one or to understand how some people maintain kindness in a seemingly hostile world.

Its not like the two are mutually exclusive after all, at least for non-fundamentalists (of every persuasion).
Click to expand...
That's not a proper opposition: it's a choice between the rational and the irrational.
 
okLaptop1 said:
Fair enough, perfect is too iffy a term for God, but then again, maybe jealousy and vengeful are merely the best terms we could use to describe those parts of his personality and not 100% accurate. These kind of technicalities and semantics don't interest me much though. God is entirely without sin is the best way I can describe it.

God didn't create humans perfect, but I doubt that's not what He's interested in. Like I said before, he values free will. Also, you don't need to be perfect to come to know God and to go to Heaven, only willing.
Click to expand...

Except for the genocide bits because if you can't call someone pushing genocide, in his book on how to live forever and ever, sinful then the term becomes a bit meaningless.

This idea that free will means you have to have a desire to pick awful options is where I really start to think that the people who invented this religion were not very imaginative. Every day I make free choices which don't involve butchering other people or drowning in tsunami's. It can't be beyond the whit of an all powerful god to enable free will while at the same time putting into human nature and the nature of nature a little more control of the negative.

Then why make any people even decent law abiding socially advancing people unwilling?
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
Except for the genocide bits because if you can't call someone pushing genocide, in his book on how to live forever and ever, sinful then the term becomes a bit meaningless.

This idea that free will means you have to have a desire to pick awful options is where I really start to think that the people who invented this religion were not very imaginative. Every day I make free choices which don't involve butchering other people or drowning in tsunami's. It can't be beyond the whit of an all powerful god to enable free will while at the same time putting into human nature and the nature of nature a little more control of the negative.

Then why make any people even decent law abiding socially advancing people unwilling?
Click to expand...

The commands to slaughter the Canaanites is a big issue with some people, but I have no problem with God killing one person or many people if they are morally corrupt beyond the point of saving. Judgement and justice are a part of God's character after all.

As for free will meaning you have to pick the awful options, that's where you're just personally saying you don't get it, and you don't want to "freely choose" something you clearly think makes no sense. And that's fine. I don't believe you should follow God if you don't believe He exists, or if you've never found any reasonable explanations for religion, or if you've never personally had an encounter with Him. That would be ludicrous. The only thing I hope is that you are looking into all possibilities with an open mind without either agenda or preconceived notions (either pro or anti God), and that you try to understand the Bible with the context and knowledge of the cultures and history at their respective times, and up against what we know to be true about humanity and science.

One thing about your comment on human nature though; the point of free will is that it doesn't skew towards positive or negative, even if our personalities do. It depends entirely on how we nurture whatever type of personality we have. God understands people are different, and their circumstances and upbringings are different. One man might be more prone to outbursts of anger (whether through a natural inclination or how he was raised), and another man for other various reasons is by default very calm. Because of this, God takes delight in the former having restraint and holding his tongue when he should, and He doesn't really care about the latter doing the same. Even if we have little "control of the negative" as you put it, God can see our hearts, and our efforts. Those things matter more than the outward action.
 
okLaptop1 said:
The commands to slaughter the Canaanites is a big issue with some people, but I have no problem with God killing one person or many people if they are morally corrupt beyond the point of saving. Judgement and justice are a part of God's character after all.
Click to expand...
It's god's morality that I take an issue with. Drinking and boning all night are the worst thing ever but genocide's perfectly fine. That's not right. God's got it the wrong way round.
 
Silva said:
It's god's morality that I take an issue with. Drinking and boning all night are the worst thing ever but genocide's perfectly fine. That's not right. God's got it the wrong way round.
Click to expand...

Drinking and boning all night are fine if you're boning your spouse. Also I'm pretty sure God thought Hitler killing the Jews wasn't okay. If you're referring to the slaughter of the Canaanites, the answer to that is logical: He ended a society that was irreparably morally corrupt and beyond saving from their own sin. Cold, sure, but not in conflict with what we know about His personality.
 
Genocide trumps anything they were doing in terms of evil. It's literally the worst thing we can do. The bible isn't a relativist moral guide, it's an absolutist morality and if god's willing to commit genocide, how can it be wrong?

Taking a shitload mushrooms and fecking 10,000 prostitutes is still infinitely better behavior than genocide.
 
okLaptop1 said:
He ended a society that was irreparably morally corrupt and beyond saving from their own sin. Cold, sure, but not in conflict with what we know about His personality.
Click to expand...

This is the kind of logic religious extremists use to carry our terrorist activities. For likes of Al-Qaeda western society is "irreparably morally corrupt" and thus they have no qualms in carrying out attacks which kill people who are innocent for us but infidel to them.
 
peterstorey said:
That's not a proper opposition: it's a choice between the rational and the irrational.
Click to expand...

Indeed. The existence of religious scientists shows that.

That said I'm almost duty bound as a zen buddhist to point out the inherent falseness of dualist notions like rational vs irrational etc etc. But yeah, you probably dont need to hear any of that.
 
Silva said:
Genocide trumps anything they were doing in terms of evil. It's literally the worst thing we can do. The bible isn't a relativist moral guide, it's an absolutist morality and if god's willing to commit genocide, how can it be wrong?

Taking a shitload mushrooms and fecking 10,000 prostitutes is still infinitely better behavior than genocide.
Click to expand...

It's not the worst thing you can literally do. And no I wouldn't say it's a guide for absolute morality, but rather objective morality. In the world we live in, not many particular actions are always good or always evil; however in each and every particular situation there are very moral actions and there are very immoral actions, and whole lot in between. As for God killing the Canaanites, He had His reasons. All I know is that since I'm not God (who can see the end of all things and is the only true judge of good and evil), I can't truly say what those reasons were aside from what the Bible tells us.

crappycraperson said:
This is the kind of logic religious extremists use to carry our terrorist activities. For likes of Al-Qaeda western society is "irreparably morally corrupt" and thus they have no qualms in carrying out attacks which kill people who are innocent for us but infidel to them.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. And one issue I guess is whether or not they are truly hearing from God, or are just misinterpreting his message, or are just using religion to justify their predetermined hate. I don't pretend to know the answer to these things.
 
okLaptop1 said:
It's not the worst thing you can literally do. And no I wouldn't say it's a guide for absolute morality, but rather objective morality. In the world we live in, not many particular actions are always good or always evil; however in each and every particular situation there are very moral actions and there are very immoral actions, and whole lot in between. As for God killing the Canaanites, He had His reasons. All I know is that since I'm not God (who can see the end of all things and is the only true judge of good and evil), I can't truly say what those reasons were aside from what the Bible tells us.



Fair enough. And one issue I guess is whether or not they are truly hearing from God, or are just misinterpreting his message, or are just using religion to justify their predetermined hate. I don't pretend to know the answer to these things.
Click to expand...

It's just ironic that you're so desperate to believe in a homophobic, misogynistic, genocidal and above all hypocritical god, but then plenty of people supported Hitler so perhaps it's just human nature. If the god in the bible was in any way respectable, perhaps more of us would understand your commitment.

To say you can't question god because you know he has 'His' reasons is a complete moral tragedy, the same reasoning by which many millions have been made to suffer throughout history. When you ask an extremist why god commands them to kill people in his name, and he says it isn't his place to look for a reason, I doubt you would be satisfied with such a response.
 
Silva said:
It's also in the new testament.
Click to expand...

In the New Testament, Jesus talks about how sin (murder being one of them) comes from the heart. Killing isn't necessarily murder. What is your point exactly anyway? That killing is killing is killing? That situation, context, and intent don't matter? I disagree with you if that's what you're saying, and so does the Bible. Honestly, read all of the New Testament and study what Jesus says, to whom, and the context of each conversation.
 
okLaptop1 said:
In the New Testament, Jesus talks about how sin (murder being one of them) comes from the heart. Killing isn't necessarily murder. What is your point exactly anyway? That killing is killing is killing? That situation, context, and intent don't matter? I disagree with you if that's what you're saying, and so does the Bible. Honestly, read all of the New Testament and study what Jesus says, to whom, and the context of each conversation.
Click to expand...
I'm saying the bible is morally corrupt. They give all these rules for living a good life and so you can pretend you're being good, which you're allowed to ignore whenever it suits you because all you have to do is accept Jesus and you've got eternal bliss.

Committing genocide is morally wrong, regardless of whether you want to call it murder or not. If god's really into genocide we've solved Epicurus problem, god's a naughty boy.
 
Silent_Running said:
It's just ironic that you're so desperate to believe in a homophobic, misogynistic, genocidal and above all hypocritical god, but then plenty of people supported Hitler so perhaps it's just human nature. If the god in the bible was in any way respectable, perhaps more of us would understand your commitment.
Click to expand...

I won't go into how "desperate" I am to believe Him except to say that I wasn't born a christian, and only became one later in life when I considered his existence to be more reasonable than the alternative, and later on I came to experience Him on a personal level. You sound bitter in your post though. If it's because of christians or the church treating you bad or just being dickheads in general, I'm very sorry to hear that, and apologize on their behalf. I've said before that there are idiots and ignorant people on both sides of any debate. If what you're upset about is God himself though, why? If you believe He doesn't exist, pay Him no mind.

Silent_Running said:
To say you can't question god because you know he has 'His' reasons is a complete moral tragedy, the same reasoning by which many millions have been made to suffer throughout history. When you ask an extremist why god commands them to kill people in his name, and he says it isn't his place to look for a reason, I doubt you would be satisfied with such a response.
Click to expand...

I didn't say I can't question God. I question Him all the time. I just can't speak on His behalf when someone asks me to give a reason for His actions.
 
Silva said:
I'm saying the bible is morally corrupt. They give all these rules for living a good life and so you can pretend you're being good, which you're allowed to ignore whenever it suits you because all you have to do is accept Jesus and you've got eternal bliss.

Committing genocide is morally wrong, regardless of whether you want to call it murder or not. If god's really into genocide we've solved Epicurus problem, god's a naughty boy.
Click to expand...

On what grounds are you saying that the Bible is morally corrupt? What morality are you holding it up against, a morality to which the Bible doesn't meet it's standards? I'm curious to know. If it's the Bible's own morality that it fails, then you're saying it's contradictory and inconsistent. If it's not the Bible's, then what is it?

As for the rules, there are many rules in the Bibles that are just laws made by men, or laws give by God to particular people at a particular time. The only big "rule" we ought to follow as law is Luke 10:27.
 
okLaptop1 said:
On what grounds are you saying that the Bible is morally corrupt? What morality are you holding it up against, a morality to which the Bible doesn't meet it's standards? I'm curious to know. If it's the Bible's own morality that it fails, then you're saying it's contradictory and inconsistent. If it's not the Bible's, then what is it?

As for the rules, there are many rules in the Bibles that are just laws made by men, or laws give by God to particular people at a particular time. The only big "rule" we ought to follow as law is Luke 10:27.
Click to expand...
On the thousands of years of people thinking about ethics. Notably, a lot people who think seriously about ethics would say that good shouldn't be based on reward.

There's nothing moral about loving god, it's a thing the bible forces you to do in return for salvation. Like a dog sitting when told because he knows he'll get his favorite biscuit.
 
Silva said:
On the thousands of years of people thinking about ethics. Notably, a lot people who think seriously about ethics would say that good shouldn't be based on reward.

There's nothing moral about loving god, it's a thing the bible forces you to do in return for salvation. Like a dog sitting when told because he knows he'll get his favorite biscuit.
Click to expand...

Biblical good isn't based on reward either. You'll know this if you've ever read the Bible before. Which is fine, you're free not to, but you're talking a lot about it, so I figured you would have at least read some. I guess not huh. Ditto goes for loving God in return for salvation.

Anyways, I'm out. All your comments and assumptions so far show me you know little about the Bible and more about what people commonly believe about it. Which makes talking about it less of a discussion and more of a lesson given to an unwilling student, and I'm definitely not patient enough to do that.
 
Last edited:
okLaptop1 said:
Biblical good isn't based on reward either. You'll know this if you've never read the Bible before. Which is fine, you're free not to, but you're talking a lot about it, so I figured you would have at least read some. I guess not huh. Ditto goes for loving God in return for salvation.

Anyways, I'm out. All your comments and assumptions so far show me you know little about the Bible and more about what people commonly believe about it. Which makes talking about it less of a discussion and more of a lesson given to an unwilling student, and I'm definitely not patient enough to do that.
Click to expand...
You should take it up with Herman, I don't think you know the bible that well either.

The entire bible is based on reward/punishment. That's gods whole thing.
 
Silva said:
The entire bible is based on reward/punishment. That's gods whole thing.
Click to expand...
What do you mean by this? I can see why you put it that way but that is a very narrow interpretation, and at the same time mistaken in terms of what is revealed in the Bible about God.
 
He does - very disappointing from a guy who I thought was a bit more free thinking. Harris makes him look like a desperate, mildly drunken narcissist.
 
Maher is blind on one eye and extremely self-righteous, which makes him unbearable at times. Its a problem with many liberal politicians/stars/intellectuals in the USA. Affleck looks like a jerk in this video. He is just shouting around trying to drown the argument of harris.
Regarding the topic: The amount of discrimination in muslim countries is staggering. Its not far fetched to see some sort of connection to the preachings of Islam. Even in Indonesia, the example that is always brought up by people who defend the Islam, there are plenty of examples that other religions and minorities are getting discriminated. So even the prime example of the "good islam" is anything but flawless.
Sam Harris has some fairly extreme views and his patterns of argumentations are often annoyingly one-sided. So, yes, he is frequently going overboard with his criticism, but being too critical of an idea is better than not being critical at all.
 
Raoul said:
He does - very disappointing from a guy who I thought was a bit more free thinking. Harris makes him look like a desperate, mildly drunken narcissist.
Click to expand...

Funny how he falls into the exact fallacy that Harris calls attention to at the beginning of the clip. He just can't distinguish between criticism of a religion/an ideology and generalizing about Muslims as people, and in his misplaced rage reaches straight for the race-card, inadvertedly proving the point that Maher made about liberals abandoning their principles when it comes to Islam.

Also his attempt to downplay ISIS is a bit of an insult to its victims.
 
Harris has it spot on here imo. He seems to be the only one on the panel who is taking a clearly definable position.
 
Just saw the whole episode. Affleck's behavior is somewhat bizarre, he seems a tad unstable to say the least. Not only is he speaking ridiculously fast, but his behavior changes from one second to the next. When Harris is first introduced to the show he's polite and jokes around, and then the second the topic shifts to islam he becomes extremely defensive and rude. It's really weird. He must be on something.
 
JohnDoe said:
Just saw the whole episode. Affleck's behavior is somewhat bizarre, he seems a tad unstable to say the least. Not only is he speaking ridiculously fast, but his behavior changes from one second to the next. When Harris is first introduced to the show he's polite and jokes around, and then the second the topic shifts to islam he becomes extremely defensive and rude. It's really weird. He must be on something.
Click to expand...

:lol: It gets more disturbing each time i watch it. Look at Affleck's gestures around the 6:20 mark in the above clip. Looks like he's searching for his next line of coke or something.
 
JohnDoe said:
Just saw the whole episode. Affleck's behavior is somewhat bizarre, he seems a tad unstable to say the least. Not only is he speaking ridiculously fast, but his behavior changes from one second to the next. When Harris is first introduced to the show he's polite and jokes around, and then the second the topic shifts to islam he becomes extremely defensive and rude. It's really weird. He must be on something.
Click to expand...

While I admit I quite liked Affleck's passion and agree with some of the points he raised, he did seem to have a personal dislike towards Harris and wasn't shy of hiding it.
 
Raoul said:
:lol: It gets more disturbing each time i watch it. Look at Affleck's gestures around the 6:20 mark in the above clip. Looks like he's searching for his next line of coke or something.
Click to expand...

:lol: Exactly.

I just saw him on the Daily Show as well, that was equally bizarre. And his face looks really unhealthy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.