Religion makes you meaner

[Guest]

I think there's a good chance that the inception of religion (or the immediate forerunner to it, at least) was possibly cavemen fearing the dark and coming to worship the Sun.

 

Its probably fair to say that our earlier ancestors always believed in some higher power and perhaps this reason alone explains why people took the sun/moon (or nature) as God.

 

I do believe the concept of wanting to 'know' a higher power is ingrained in us- and that it has been since time immemorial.

 

The question could then be asked was the objective to only believe in one god- but as nations went in to polytheism, messengers/prophets were sent to bring them back to monotheism.

[Waldo]

Yeah they're like opposite sides of the same coin, in countrys with large atheist populations you hear about religious bloggers getting murdered by angry mobs of atheists all the time, just for daring to question them! because they're equally hateful.

 

Oh wait no, that's utter nonsense.

 

Why the sarcasm?

 

Do you mean, a person is only hateful, if they've gone to the extreme of murdering people?

 

I was not quantifying or contrasting relative levels of hatred. I was just saying, a lot of raging anti-relgious types on here, do seem rather hateful (irrational and emotive).

 

---------- Post added 11-11-2015 at 20:36 ----------

 

China is built on Confucianism and Taoism.

 

Ah, those evil Taoists, always trying to control everyone with their "if you don't believe in the Tao, you're going to hell" trickery!

[flamingjimmy]

Why the sarcasm?

Because you seemed to be invoking the oft-repeated idiom that religious extremists and atheists saying nasty things on the internet were opposite sides of the same coin.

 

Do you mean, a person is only hateful, if they've gone to the extreme of murdering people?

 

I was not quantifying or contrasting relative levels of hatred. I was just saying, a lot of raging anti-relgious types on here, do seem rather hateful (irrational and emotive).

 

Well, what you did do was say this:

 

A lot of religious people seem pretty screwed up to me; but a lot seem like really cool intelligent and deeply insightful people with kind benevolent natures. Conversely, a lot of raging anti-religous types, seem quite hateful.

 

Where, in the very same breath pretty much, you put the nasty atheists who say mean things right next to the religious people who 'seem pretty screwed up' to you, by which I can only infer you meant the types who beat people to death as part of mobs, behead people on video, bomb abortion clinics, commit mass killings against different religious sects and minorities, etc.

 

If you didn't mean them then you need to re-evaluate your definition of 'screwed up'.

 

I, as someone who I'm sure some on here would label as a 'raging anti-religious type', don't like being lumped in with that lot with good reason, so yeah you got a hefty dose of sarcasm, and you will again from me if you repeat that nonsense.

 

---------- Post added 12-11-2015 at 02:58 ----------

 

Its probably fair to say that our earlier ancestors always believed in some higher power and perhaps this reason alone explains why people took the sun/moon (or nature) as God.

 

I do believe the concept of wanting to 'know' a higher power is ingrained in us- and that it has been since time immemorial.

 

The question could then be asked was the objective to only believe in one god- but as nations went in to polytheism, messengers/prophets were sent to bring them back to monotheism.

 

Ha! That's hilarious! You answer your own question then waffle a bit to try and get back on track!

 

You try and suggest that we're wired in some way (designed! ) to believe in only one god, but you have no explanation for why most of the world was polytheistic for ages and ages, why even mention that you massively undermined yourself?

 

Why didn't god send any prophets to India or China or the Americas? what a foolish god to only send them to one particular place.

Edited November 12, 2015 by flamingjimmy

[RootsBooster]

Its probably fair to say that our earlier ancestors always believed in some higher power and perhaps this reason alone explains why people took the sun/moon (or nature) as God.

What on Earth makes you think that it's fair to say our ancestors always believed in some higher power? What evidence is there to suggest that?

 

Or is it just something that enables you to continue with this?...

I do believe the concept of wanting to 'know' a higher power is ingrained in us- and that it has been since time immemorial.

 

The question could then be asked was the objective to only believe in one god- but as nations went in to polytheism, messengers/prophets were sent to bring them back to monotheism.

 

No, that question could not be asked until you had first established that people had always believed in gods.

 

That issue aside, the very fact that there have been so many religions come and go over the millennia, with many different gods and deities, does not make for a good argument that any gods exist. Quite the opposite actually.

 

---------- Post added 12-11-2015 at 08:47 ----------

 

I was not quantifying or contrasting relative levels of hatred. I was just saying, a lot of raging anti-relgious types on here, do seem rather hateful (irrational and emotive).

Could you give any specific examples of such posts?

[Cyclone]

Along with finally figuring out the seasons and knowing that the Sun will return if you light a bonfire. I mean people light fires in the winter because they are cold but they also attract the Sun right because the Sun is hot.... so seeks out the bonfire... and then people don't light them in the summer and the sun runs away to find somewhere else...

 

Cornwell wrote a book called Stonehenge that was a fiction book, but still a rather good read if you like these sorts of ideas. No idea of the scientific accuracy of it though.

 

I can imagine some sort of paleolithic forum where someone points out the bonfire/sun behaviour.

Unfortunately nobody was there shouting "correlation is not causation", and thus religion was born.

 

---------- Post added 12-11-2015 at 09:12 ----------

 

China is built on Confucianism and Taoism.

 

WRT to the infants comment - are we, or are we not 'Standing on the shoulders of giants'?

 

Maybe there's a reason Newton didn't say

 

~ what do you think?

 

The search for structured knowledge really only (appears) to go back what, 4k years.

Humans have existed in Sapiens form for about 50k.

 

So before the shoulders of giants, we presumably had a large collection of infants to support investigation.

 

---------- Post added 12-11-2015 at 09:13 ----------

 

Its probably fair to say that our earlier ancestors always believed in some higher power and perhaps this reason alone explains why people took the sun/moon (or nature) as God.

 

I do believe the concept of wanting to 'know' a higher power is ingrained in us- and that it has been since time immemorial.

 

The question could then be asked was the objective to only believe in one god- but as nations went in to polytheism, messengers/prophets were sent to bring them back to monotheism.

 

Someone else has already pulled you about the "always", but what's the nonsense about "objective", who's objective?

Ancient recorded religion, and some of the more popular ones today are Poly... You've heard of Hinduism right?

[Waldo]

Because you seemed to be invoking the oft-repeated idiom that religious extremists and atheists saying nasty things on the internet were opposite sides of the same coin.

 

Where have I equated one with the other? For clarity, religious extremists who murder people are far worse than the anti-relgious mob on here.

 

Where, in the very same breath pretty much, you put the nasty atheists who say mean things right next to the religious people who 'seem pretty screwed up' to you, by which I can only infer you meant the types who beat people to death as part of mobs, behead people on video, bomb abortion clinics, commit mass killings against different religious sects and minorities, etc.

 

You infer incorrectly.

 

Beheading people on video, bombing etc etc; is pretty screwed up ... and then some. That is way beyond 'pretty screwed up' on the scale...

 

However, I think those types are probably in a very small minority. You appear to think (though I may well read you wrong) that by critiquing raging atheists, who blanket attack religion; I am defending religion or religious types who are screwed up (either mildly or extremely screwed up). I am not.

 

If you didn't mean them then you need to re-evaluate your definition of 'screwed up'.

 

My understanding of 'screwed up' is just fine, thanks.

 

I, as someone who I'm sure some on here would label as a 'raging anti-religious type', don't like being lumped in with that lot with good reason, so yeah you got a hefty dose of sarcasm, and you will again from me if you repeat that nonsense.

 

Look, you are anti-religious; or at least, that's how I perceive you to be, on the strength of your posts here. I'm not lumping you with anyone, least of all people who are so screwed in the head, they feel justified in decapitating other human beings.

 

There's a lot I really don't like about religion. I think people often confuse the means for the ends; and perhaps, rather than it developing them in to more whole rounded complete people, it has an adverse psychological impact. That's not always the case though, but by blanket attacking religion, you're saying it's all bad.

 

As for your 'gift' of sarcasm; thank you for your kind offer, but I am unable to accept it.

 

---------- Post added 12-11-2015 at 19:18 ----------

 

Could you give any specific examples of such posts?

 

I could, but it would take a while to dig them up.

 

The anti-relgious sentiment, while it very much exists on the forum right now; it's not as bad as I've seen in past.

 

Do you not think it exists?

Edited November 12, 2015 by Waldo

[RootsBooster]

I could, but it would take a while to dig them up.

 

The anti-relgious sentiment, while it very much exists on the forum right now; it's not as bad as I've seen in past.

 

Do you not think it exists?

 

The closest I've seen to "raging" or "hateful" anti-relilgious comments, on SF, have been relatively lazy or casual comments by one-shot posters that go along the lines of "religion is a bunch of nonsense" or "only idiots believe in such nonsense".

 

Can you think of any particularly hateful or raging comments you've come across before (on SF) ?

[Phanerothyme]

A great little line to acknowledge that he wasn't working in a vacuum and owed his success to works of many great people before him.

 

Doesn't mean that stone age cultures weren't 'infants in terms of their knowledge' though that still rings true.

 

Ah OK, you took Zamo's 'ancient cultures' to mean neolithics, whereas I took them to mean ancient cultures. We don't know anything about neolithic cultures, because they didn't often write stuff down. So I don't think either of us can comment.

 

However, what we've learned from ancient Mediterranean cultures (Roman, Hellenic, Phonecian, Alexandrian, etc, etc) alone powered our intellectual economy in Europe for 400 years. And most of that knowledge was picked up from a few remnants of a colossal library at Alexandria which as you know was burned down more than once.

 

These people were not "infants" in terms of their knowledge. Not by a long shot.

 

---------- Post added 12-11-2015 at 22:44 ----------

 

Ah, those evil Taoists, always trying to control everyone with their "if you don't believe in the Tao, you're going to hell" trickery!

Well that's what you get with these slippery 'no-god' religions.

 

---------- Post added 12-11-2015 at 22:48 ----------

 

The search for structured knowledge really only (appears) to go back what, 4k years.

Humans have existed in Sapiens form for about 50k.

 

That's a very good point.

 

What caused this ascension of knowledge across the whole human race, suddenly after 44,000 years?

[flamingjimmy]

Ah OK, you took Zamo's 'ancient cultures' to mean neolithics, whereas I took them to mean ancient cultures. We don't know anything about neolithic cultures, because they didn't often write stuff down. So I don't think either of us can comment.

Seeing as at the time the discussion was about the development of early religion, he was talking about the invention of gods, I don't need to shrewdly infer that it was right there in the bit you're quoting

 

"The people of our ancient cultures were but infants in terms of their knowledge and as such invented gods to explain the unknown and rituals for reassurance."

 

so yes obviously that's what I took it to mean, but I'd say it still applies to those later cultures to a lesser extent.

 

The Greeks, Phoenicians and Romans came around a long time after the invention of gods and religion.

 

However, what we've learned from ancient Mediterranean cultures (Roman, Hellenic, Phonecian, Alexandrian, etc, etc) alone powered our intellectual economy in Europe for 400 years. And most of that knowledge was picked up from a few remnants of a colossal library at Alexandria which as you know was burned down more than once.

 

These people were not "infants" in terms of their knowledge. Not by a long shot.

In any case, even if he was referring to the ancient Greeks and Phoenicians I'd still agree that relative to us now they were definitely infants in terms of their knowledge, sure. According to some sources the Phoenicians sacrificed children for good harvests for Pete's sake, hardly an adult thing to do!

 

They knew stuff sure, and much of our knowledge now is built on what they knew. But does that not also apply to infants?

Edited November 12, 2015 by flamingjimmy

[Guest]

 

Ha! That's hilarious! You answer your own question then waffle a bit to try and get back on track!

 

You try and suggest that we're wired in some way (designed! ) to believe in only one god, but you have no explanation for why most of the world was polytheistic for ages and ages, why even mention that you massively undermined yourself?

 

Why didn't god send any prophets to India or China or the Americas? what a foolish god to only send them to one particular place.

 

I have no idea what your post is trying to say as it sounds more of a waffle on your part.

 

Given that historically nations have believed in a higher power (that was the main point and answer I was giving to RB's post).

 

From my own studies it does appear that nations before us (to this day I might add) have toyed with the idea of a higher being.

 

Whether you reject it outright or come to your own conclusions of why you think this higher being doesn't exist, it's still proof that we all have the ability to think and the idea of god has always been there.

 

You can carry on denying and asking question after question (as this is atheist western philosophy) but god isn't going away.

 

Many great thinkers have indirectly or directly spoken about god or higher beings- you probably can gather 50 quotes from google alone.

 

The idea of god is here to stay despite your dislike of it- and as for your last point, pretty silly in my opinion.

 

Religion has found its way in pretty much all corners of the world- you don't know who was sent where, neither do I.

 

Take Gautama Budda as an example, he never spoke about worshipping him or taking him as some diety- he was a path only. People go corrupt afterwards and take others as 'gods'.

 

You have the Greeks, who applied logic and rationality, even Socrates questioned as did Einstein.

 

I want to know how God created this world. I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts; the rest are details.

 

My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble mind.

 

Sometimes the evidence is out there and may be this is what life's intent is-search/ask and use the mind you have been given.

 

The very fact so many atheists have god on their mind is proof alone of it being ingrained in us...

 

A final add on, a friend who posted this short but thoughtful poem.

 

Thinkers, philosophers and people of wisdom,

From the ancient past till now,

Have understood that what made man different,

Was his reason and to question how;

 

However, with his ego unabated,

He left the realm of the mind,

To conclude the most irrational,

Subsequently, turning him blind;

 

The cosmos never evoked thinking,

And his inner self began to complain,

Why do you deny your Maker,

You deny reason, once again;

 

Obeying his whims and desires,

Forgetting the person he once was,

Pushing his soul into destruction,

Believing fairy tales, like The Wizard of Oz;

 

Enclosed, trapped and forgotten,

His heart began to decay,

He chose hate over love,

His life now in dismay.

 

Following the path of rejection,

The truth was covered and ignored,

His delusion of self-submission,

Created a barrier and closed the door;

 

The entrance to Divine love and mercy,

That was once open and a free,

Remained shut, clamped and secure,

As he forgot himself completely;

Edited November 13, 2015 by Guest