Religion, what's the point?

Silva said:
But almost everyone is going to say "no, innocent people shouldn't be harmed", regardless of who they are or their background. I don't think anyone ever doubted that. Personally I'd be more interested to know whether people with Muslim backgrounds agree with our generally held morals. Like the pew poll only in places where Muslims are the minority. Because I suspect there are some great discrepancies.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that would be interesting.

Infact I was having a similar discussion with a mate who came out with his own theory of 'passive terrorism'. His point was that the only people who he feels do not contribute much in this fight against Islamic extremists are normal moderate people from the same religion and in not reporting any suspicion they might have or bad people they might see, they contribute to terrorism as much as those who actually commit the acts. Maybe a bit more pointed polls like 'If you come across suspicious activity/person in a religious place, woul you report it?' could bring more light on the stance of moderates in the equation.
 
If you do polls of any large groups of people on issues you'll find scary statistics that stem from ignorance. How many people still would support drone program despite the civilian casualties, militarism in Palestine, a neocon foreign policy that resulted in the death of so many in Iraq. That to me is as dangerous in tangible terms as people who hold views on death penalties for converts etc.

Also when you press people on these views you'll find many contradictory stances and reduce it to simple yes/no which polls do can't quite capture the nuance and the way people view these things. You'd have thought looking at those polls that hard-right Islamist parties would romp to victories in Pakistan, Bangladesh. Yet in many (even non-dictatorships) that isn't the case. You can call this obfuscation if you want, I just find a lot of the sweeping generalisations made with regards to the aggregate psyche of Muslims based on these polls slightly ridiculous.
 
okLaptop1 said:
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.
Click to expand...

Do you not find it odd that God supposedly helped Moses lead Hebrew/Israeli/Jewish slaves out of Egypt but ignored the Jewish persecution in Nazi Germany?

Of course, we must consider there's no evidence of Hebrew/Israeli/Jewish slaves in Egypt but there is plenty of evidence of Jewish persecution in Nazi Germany. There's ample evidence that the individuals helping build pyramids in Egypt were paid, provided housing and medical, and given proper burial in death. Slaves? Well maybe in the Sepp Blatter's view.
 
Herman Van Rompuy said:
Romans 1:20 "For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse."

Indeed.
Click to expand...

Exodus 21:7 "“When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she shall not go out as the male slaves do. 8 If she does not please her master, who has designated her for himself, then he shall let her be redeemed. He shall have no right to sell her to a foreign people, since he has broken faith with her."

Indeed.

It must have sucked to be a woman in ancient times.
 
MrMarcello said:
Do you not find it odd that God supposedly helped Moses lead Hebrew/Israeli/Jewish slaves out of Egypt but ignored the Jewish persecution in Nazi Germany?

Of course, we must consider there's no evidence of Hebrew/Israeli/Jewish slaves in Egypt but there is plenty of evidence of Jewish persecution in Nazi Germany. There's ample evidence that the individuals helping build pyramids in Egypt were paid, provided housing and medical, and given proper burial in death. Slaves? Well maybe in the Sepp Blatter's view.
Click to expand...

Yes I do find it odd. Actually, without even going into the big issues of genocide and slavery, I find many things God does in my own life to be extremely odd. I wouldn't know how to answer your question in a manner that you'd find satisfying, because I don't know the answer myself. Maybe if you cared enough you could study the issue? Although if you didn't believe in God in the first place, it would be odd to begin with studying his personality as opposed to question of his actual existence.
 
okLaptop1 said:
Yes I do find it odd. Actually, without even going into the big issues of genocide and slavery, I find many things God does in my own life to be extremely odd. I wouldn't know how to answer your question in a manner that you'd find satisfying, because I don't know the answer myself. Maybe if you cared enough you could study the issue? Although if you didn't believe in God in the first place, it would be odd to begin with studying his personality as opposed to question of his actual existence.
Click to expand...

The problem is that there isn't a single piece of evidence for the existence of God. There is no evidence to argue against. But theists still want to argue the existence of God, so we turn to what is inconsistent or illogical in God's supposed personality.
 
niMic said:
The problem is that there isn't a single piece of evidence for the existence of God. There is no evidence to argue against. But theists still want to argue the existence of God, so we turn to what is inconsistent or illogical in God's supposed personality.
Click to expand...

I'm not arguing anything. I believe God exists, and you don't. Cool.
 
okLaptop1 said:
I'm not arguing anything. I believe God exists, and you don't. Cool.
Click to expand...

You have 15 posts in a thread regarding religion, clearly you are involved in an argument. Not that I specifically mentioned you anywhere. I just said "theists". I was explaining why it's not as simple as ignoring "his personality" in favour of "his existence".
 
niMic said:
The problem is that there isn't a single piece of evidence for the existence of God. There is no evidence to argue against. But theists still want to argue the existence of God, so we turn to what is inconsistent or illogical in God's supposed personality.
Click to expand...

Well, I would argue that everything is evidence for G-d. No matter what you consider Him to be.

Why are we here?....why is here even here?

When you get a minute, look up at the stars tonight and wonder where the universe ends. No matter how much science joins the dots, some things are just utterly unfathomable. Either it's one huge random accident or by design. We are in no position to really call it. Just enjoy the ride.
 
Fearless said:
Well, I would argue that everything is evidence for G-d. No matter what you consider Him to be.

Why are we here?....why is here even here?

When you get a minute, look up at the stars tonight and wonder where the universe ends. No matter how much science joins the dots, some things are just utterly unfathomable. Either it's one huge random accident or by design. We are in no position to really call it. Just enjoy the ride.
Click to expand...

This is all a major cop-out, though. For one, you're essentially talking about the god of the gaps. The fact that there are some things we don't know does not in any way constitute evidence for the existence of a divine being. Furthermore, this is a deist's argument. Even if we were to accept the idea that the fact that we don't know how everything works means there must be a greater being, that by definition can't begin to suggest which greater being exists, let alone what that unknown divine being wants from us - if anything.

I don't really have anything against the idea that there is something greater than us. I don't believe it, and I don't believe there is any evidence for it, but I can see that some people would be taken in by it. However, that is not what organized religion is. Organized religion involves a set of rules and restrictions on what to believe, or at the very least a culturally and societally based guideline on what to believe. And the vast majority of people in the world aren't Deists, except when they are arguing together against atheists. Then suddenly they're all the same religion, really, and all praying to the same god, really. The vast majority of people believe in some form of organized religion, which has nothing to do with your idea of "look up at the stars, accident or design, just enjoy the ride."

Atheists are very rarely arguing against the existence of that vague, posited supernatural being. We're almost always arguing against the existence of specific gods, who have specific holy texts that say specific things about how to live in society and how the physical world works.
 
niMic said:
Atheists are very rarely arguing against the existence of that vague, posited supernatural being. We're almost always arguing against the existence of specific gods, who have specific holy texts that say specific things about how to live in society and how the physical world works.
Click to expand...

Understood. Belief in G-d doesn't mean subscribing to one religion or another. I've nothing against those who do mind, as long as it doesn't affect me in any negative way. I've met beautiful / horrid people who are on both sides of the debate.
 
Fearless said:
It doesn't mean that there's not an answer though.

I'm basing my evidence - thus far - on that I and the universe exist.
Click to expand...
How did god come into being though? Who created the creator?
 
Stick said:
How did god come into being though? Who created the creator?
Click to expand...

Not wanting to answer a question with a question, but the following mirrors the limits to relevant knowledge on both sides of the debate.

What did the big bang explode into?
What was there before?
If nothing, what non-existent ingredients caused the explosion?
Whats the universe expanding into?
 
Stick said:
How did god come into being though? Who created the creator?
Click to expand...

That always felt like a very human question. Its a very human thing to assume that everything has to be in something else, or before something else, or after something else, or come from something else.
 
Who created the creator is quite an anthropocentric question that we eschew to the way we perceive the world around us in terms of time and the notion that things are "created". A bit myopic and underwhelming imo.
 
Raoul said:
Who created the creator is quite an anthropocentric question that we eschew to the way we perceive the world around us in terms of time and the notion that things are "created". A bit myopic and underwhelming imo.
Click to expand...

Well, there certainly seems to be some kind of momentum. The mechanics of evolution must have some kind of 'drive' to even bother.
 
Fearless said:
Well, there certainly seems to be some kind of momentum. The mechanics of evolution must have some kind of 'drive' to even bother.
Click to expand...

Its entirely possible that there are mechanics that exist completely devoid of any reason. In fact, the desire to eschew reason is just a manifestation of the current evolutionary threshold of our brains and a byproduct of our recent sociological interactions with one another. There's nothing to say that such questions won't become obsolete in the future.
 
Silva said:
I'm not, if you were to ask me how the universe was created I'd say "dunno". You're the one making a claim you can't support.
Click to expand...

I understand your point of view, until somebody shows my a piece of alien technology then Roswell means bugger all. Doesn't mean there no alien life though.
Raoul said:
Its entirely possible that there are mechanics that exist completely devoid of any reason. In fact, the desire to eschew reason is just a manifestation of the current evolutionary threshold of our brains and a byproduct of our recent sociological interactions with one another. There's nothing to say that such questions won't become obsolete in the future.
Click to expand...

I hope thats not the case. Curiosity is what drives us.
 
Raoul said:
Who created the creator is quite an anthropocentric question that we eschew to the way we perceive the world around us in terms of time and the notion that things are "created". A bit myopic and underwhelming imo.
Click to expand...

But isn't that precisely the point of the question, to use the justification for a "creator" against itself?
 
Fearless said:
I understand your point of view, until somebody shows my a piece of alien technology then Roswell means bugger all. Doesn't mean there no alien life though.


I hope thats not the case. Curiosity is what drives us.
Click to expand...

Curiosity should lead us to finding answers through scientific inquiry, not ancient mysticisms. Thankfully this idea seems to be catching on in recent years.
 
Fearless said:
Not wanting to answer a question with a question, but the following mirrors the limits to relevant knowledge on both sides of the debate.

What did the big bang explode into?
What was there before?
If nothing, what non-existent ingredients caused the explosion? .
Whats the universe expanding into?
Click to expand...

I don't know the answer to any of those questions. I know the universe is expanding. To what or into what well I can't tell but I think someone will extrapolate an idea based on facts and in fact probably has. I've read somewhere about something from nothing before but again just theories but as they are looked into I'm sure they'll be expanded upon.

I understand where you're coming from but shouldnt we just stop trying to understand and answering these questions if there is a Creator? Shouldnt we just ask the Bill the Creator to do everything for us?
 
JohnDoe said:
Perhaps I misunderstood you, I thought you criticized the retort "who created the creator"..?
Click to expand...

I meant the question is inappropriate because it seems to cling to the idea that all things are created by someone consistent with how humans may perceive their deity of choice. The question should not be who, but by what process or phenomena was the Universe created - and the answer can't have a reason hidden behind it in order to satisfy our human desire to affix one to it.
 
bishblaize said:
That always felt like a very human question. Its a very human thing to assume that everything has to be in something else, or before something else, or after something else, or come from something else.
Click to expand...
I am human though. What kind of question should I ask? I have only my learning and experience to ask questions on. I ask these questions to learn more but maybe only understand time and being from my point of view.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.