Ideas on Religion

[Torurot]

http://books.guardian.co.uk/extracts...879076,00.html
has most of the first chapter of "The God Delusion".

[Guest]

There is another couple of books that some of you may be interested in. Sam Harris has "The End of Faith" which he wrote directly after 9/11, saying that competing religious beliefs are killing us.

In response to that book, he got many letters from Christians telling him where he is wrong. As he began to reply to so many of the same answers, he wrote another book called "Letter to a Christian Nation". Although it is intended for the US, I think the principles remain the same no matter where you are or what the countries actual religion.

His point is that magical thinking is killing us, and it's time to give up the mythologies and personal "me centered" self justifying, and get on the Reason Boat.

A few of the things Harris says:

George Bush has said on more than one occasion that he has a dialog with god. If he said he had a dialogue with god through his hairdryer, people would think he was insane. I fail to see how the addition of a hairdryer changes anything.

People who believe that Elvis is still alive, or that the holocaust never happened could not expect to be promoted to high positions of importance or be due much social recognition. But people who believe ideas just as absurd are running our government.

From me personally (grunyen's words): I think most people have a pretty good BS filter, not beieving in unicorns and fairies- except when it comes to god. Then suddenly they lose any sense of rationality. What is the difference? Leprechauns and Bigfoot don't purport to be personally interested in you and acting on your behalf. God is like everyones corner coach.

I contend that everyone is an atheist to all gods except one. I just believe in one less god. People who believe in God "A" routinely cast aspersions on everyone else who believes in Gods "B through Z". But at the same time, they use the fact that most people in the world believe in some god as a point of proof.

This is disingenuous. That is like Democrats saying "most people in the world believe in some type of government, therefore the Democratic position is right". If you actually break down each religious god, then each denomination, and then have people one-on-one comparing their full beliefs on god, you will find that they cannot be describing the same being.

I suspect if you weeded out the inconsistencies, you would find very tiny groups that believe in any one specific definition of god. Like maybe 2% of the world population as the most popular.

It is not accurate to say most people believe in god. It is more accurate to say most people are susceptible to magical thinking when it proves personally useful or provides psychological individual comfort. You never hear anyone say "yeah, I talked to god, and he's not on my / my tribe / my country / my peoples side".

[Guest]

gods everywhere


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCFHJ2eCa1k&search=GOD


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v....rch=GOD

[Torurot]

What about that old movie "the gods must be crazy" where that African Tribes guy gets hit on the head with the Coke bottle thrown from the plane.

[andre459]

This made me laugh, this is about Rev.Ted Haggard who was the head of the National Association of Evangelicals in the US.

Evangelist Ted Haggard admitted Friday that he bought methamphetamine and received a massage from a gay prostitute who claims he was paid for drug-fueled trysts by the outspoken same-sex marriage opponent.
Haggard, 50, resigned Thursday as president of the National Association of Evangelicals and stepped down as leader of his Colorado megachurch while the two groups investigate the allegations.
Talking to reporters outside his house Friday, Haggard denied the sex allegations but said that he did buy meth from the man because he was curious.
"I bought it for myself but never used it," he said. "I was tempted, but I never used it."

Yeah right!

Typical they go around with the holier than thou attitude, make everything about guilt and sin, when they are no better.

[Guest]

The original poster said God loves all people, however, he loves women and gays less, due to the fact that women cannot be ordained and homosexuality is strictly taboo.

As for being raped as a child, I always thought that we (me included) should have been taught several philosophies during school, Islam, Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, and others, and just left it at that. Then anyone who had an affinity to one of them could pursue it further or not. Like most of us, I was given no choice until I could think clearly, and once I could, I dropped Christianity in heart-beat due to its discrimination and absolute condemnation of all other faiths. That on its own was enought to repulse me.

Then ridiculous things like condoms are forbidden and there was a list of books one could not read for several 100 years (Did ja know that?), and complete hypocrisy (like the Vatican is one of the wealthiest real-estate countrie sin the world?), made it almost farcical.

And recent discoveries of othe gospels that refute parts of the the bible (like Judas' and Mary Magdelene's) and are ignored by the Vatican only show its continued lack of basic common sense.

All that being said, what I do think makes sense is reading and understanding these religions, just for understanding history, and taking the good parts out of them, dropping the bad parts, and creating a personal set of ethical guidelines for life -- for example, I like Buddhism's idea of doing good things in this life to get karma for next life, or Christianity's idea of do on others as you'd do to yourself, or Hinduism's attention to tradition, ...

[andre459]

I always thought that we (me included) should have been taught several philosophies during school

The so called Religion classes we had at my school should have been called Christianity classes.

[Groundhog]

(ziggystardust @ Nov. 07 2006,07:54) The original poster said God loves all people, however, he loves women and gays less, due to the fact that women cannot be ordained and homosexuality is strictly taboo.

... even these statements aren't an accurate representation of Christianity IMHO

... after all, the bible was just the product of political haggling at the Council of Nicea, and as far as I know, there is really only one passage that even mentions men lying with men (no ladyboys so that must be OK).

Since same sex pairings weren't even recognized as wrong until a couple of Papel Bulls in the 14th century (and Romans didn't distinguish homo from hetero ... in fact male male was considered purer) it's doubtful that those men interpreted men-men pairs the same way as bible thumpers today.

It reminds me of the time that I went to a Jehovah's Witness meeting (I really did this) and listened for two hours to drivel about whether we should mow our lawns because the rapture is just around the corner. These nutsos would pull a verse out of the Bible at random and then say whatever came to mind, and receive this as truth.

It's a sad sad truth ... Logic and Religion .... they just don't mix (Escatalogical verse 24:76)

[Guest]

The pope, who is, of course, officially declared "infallible" (can you imagine anything more stupid?), during Hitler's Pope, Pope Pius XIIth I think, who, by the way, also supported the Nazi political party gain power, and did not aid Jews during WWII, and was canonized by John Paul, denotes homosexuality as against God's will. Anyone on this forum who even has thoughts of biological males, forget actions, is sinning and will go to hell.

[Groundhog]

(Tomcat @ Sep. 23 2006,23:53) Anyone who needs convincing that religion is tripe should read Richard Dawkins new book ,, the God delusion,, .

Agree. Dawkins looks at both the reasons we believe (mainly atavistic instincts) and it's consequences -- racisim, self-delusion, hate, and various behaviors that in another context would be considered insanity (e.g., talking a.k.a. praying, to imaginary friends)

Dawkins takes on religious moderates, showing that they basically make the world safe for fundamentalists, by promoting faith as a virtue and by enforcing an overly pious respect for religion.

and we buy it ... e.g. , why is it easier for a Quaker to avoid combat duty as a conscientious objector than someone who simply deplores violence?

He also shows that any and every positive aspect of religion can be replaced by equally beneficial non-religious substitutes.

We only have to look at recent history: 9/11 pilots guided by God; Bush's crusade in Iraq; Israel and Palestine killing each other over who has the best imaginary friend.

Religions are increasingly complex and extended machines for justifying murder and creation of human misery on an industrial scale. As long as there is money in it, lots of industrialists are happy to be "born again."

Religion is perhaps the most effective tool in history for the mind control of the masses. Those who believe, go along; those who don't are bullied into submission. No political machine could be as effective.

But Stogie is wrong to equate rape and religion. Religion is in the larger picture much more evil. Rape is violence against a single child. Religion assures that violence will be spread -- like a cancer -- to many others. And whereas we may abhor rape, violence born of religion is always justified.

[Tomcat]

New book.........just out...

Anyone deeply interested in why the Universe is the way it is and not otherwise should read the Goldilocks Enigma by Astro Physicist, Paul Davis. This is a open minded Scientists view and Philosophy on the subject of how and why.

Why is the Universe so suited to life?
The chances are very very very slim that life can exist but is does never the less!.

Maybe a theory of every thing will come about as a kind of self explanatory loop where no god is involved.. but they are a long way from that. Or maybe there are an infinite number of Universes where everything that can exist, must exist.

I ilke the theory that the universe evolves so that mind and matter merge in the very far off future and become one . This being then creates the Universe that we   now live in. If you think that backward causation is Science Fiction , it isnt any more. They are testing this theory soon in a USA University where a special light photon computer may give an answer before the question is put in....information from the future , under certain circumstances, may effect the past....thats the theory . Indeed, the book i mentioned touches on this towards the end.

The best book ive bought for years..

[Guest]

Where does Goldilocks fit in that?

[Tomcat]

Goldilocks porridge was just right, not to hot not to cold
just right..

.in Science circles its called the Goldilocks Enigma because...................

Scientists and Philosophers argue why the  Universe is exactly right for life, not to hot or to cold. If you examine the parameters for atoms , expansion of the universe, the hubble constant and so on and on ...if they were just a micron out then we would not exist  ...so how come so many constants are spot on!

That is what the book is about,   why??

After reading this book i doubt if anyone will ever think the same way again. Paul Davies is no gonk but a real respected Scientist up there with Hawking and the rest.
rational thinking taken to the extreme.

[andre459]

I remember watching a series on the ABC about 10 years ago called Big Questions which were interviews between Paul Davies and Philip Adams. They covered a range of topics and were basically just enough to wet your appetite. I enjoyed the series but I have never read any of his books, the new one sounds interesting.

[Stewart]

Maybe a theory of every thing will come about as a kind of self explanatory loop where no god is involved.. but they are a long way from that. Or maybe there are an infinite number of Universes where everything that can exist, must exist.

I ilke the theory that the universe evolves so that mind and matter merge in the very far off future and become one . This being then creates the Universe that we now live in. If you think that backward causation is Science Fiction , it isnt any more. They are testing this theory soon in a USA University where a special light photon computer may give an answer before the question is put in....information from the future , under certain circumstances, may effect the past....thats the theory . Indeed, the book i mentioned touches on this towards the end.

Note to self.....remember not to open Tomcat's threads with a hangover!

PS - I did not need any fancy photon computer last night to tell me how bad I was going to feel this morning!