"The Nature of Religion Memes"

SandWraith · Post by **SandWraith** » 08 Aug 2005 12:07

I highly doubt that the current state of religion is a result of long-term planning and administrators that are 'in on it'. Rather, it would appear more logical that religion, like just about everything else, follows the course of evolution and survival of the fittest. The religions that are most viral grow in numbers, whether the originators of the religion had planned it that way or not. The religions that cannot spread rapidly enough fall into decay and disappear.

bigdirtyfoot · Post by **bigdirtyfoot** » 08 Aug 2005 12:11

exactly.

BainbridgeShred · Post by **BainbridgeShred** » 09 Aug 2005 12:49

I think religion does a lot of good in the world, but really I think we should move on from it frankly.

Lol... Lol...[/quote]

BainbridgeShred · Post by **BainbridgeShred** » 09 Aug 2005 12:50

You guys main problem is that you're looking at religion as an institution, not as a personal thing.

bigdirtyfoot · Post by **bigdirtyfoot** » 09 Aug 2005 15:28

BainbridgeShred wrote:You guys main problem is that you're looking at religion as an institution, not as a personal thing.

True. I agree with that. I don't think it's a problem. I think a lot of religions have become "institutionalized," or frankly just commercialized. Christmas? Come on.

Spirituality is cool I think. It seems like religion became the "answer" to many questions that people don't have answers to. That's just kind of what it looks like to me.

professor · Post by **professor** » 09 Aug 2005 17:39

There is a big difference between believing in a religion and believing in the Bible.

The person who wrote the article aparently hasn't read much of the Bible because many things he says aren't true, maybe true of different religions, but not the Bible.

Also, the article at it's core is inconsistent. Through the whole article he says how people can't accept another believe or even consider what another person believes, that people can't open their mind to other possibilities. When he is the exact same way. You think anyone could convince him he's wrong? Doubtful.

Chema · Post by **Chema** » 09 Aug 2005 18:39

professor wrote:Also, the article at it's core is inconsistent. Through the whole article he says how people can't accept another believe or even consider what another person believes, that people can't open their mind to other possibilities. When he is the exact same way. You think anyone could convince him he's wrong? Doubtful.

That doesn't mean the article is inconsistant, it just means the author is hypocritical, which he does not claim he's not. Furthermore he says "people can't open their minds...." which definately includes him so I disagree that the author is even hypocritical.

SandWraith · Post by **SandWraith** » 09 Aug 2005 18:54

professor wrote:The person who wrote the article aparently hasn't read much of the Bible because many things he says aren't true, maybe true of different religions, but not the Bible.

Given that you say many of the things he's said aren't true, would you mind offering several examples to back that up?

professor · Post by **professor** » 09 Aug 2005 22:39

The logical answer is to make the reward proposition a perpetually moving target: keep promising them that they'll get it if they work a little bit harder, do a little bit more for you. That way, if they don't get the reward you can move the blame from yourself to them, and they'll have to believe you.

Ephesians 2:8-9 wrote:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, 9 not of works, lest anyone should boast.

Romans 4:2-5 wrote:2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. 3 For what does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness." 4 Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt. 5 But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness,...

John 3:16 wrote:For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life.

This is not to say that the Bible says not to do good works, but it says that good works aren't going to get you to heaven. Only faith in Christ will. So there's no "work a little bit harder" to get to the reward.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

These ones will convince the infected that questioning the virus is wrong. Teach them that doubt is evil, that skepticism is to be set aside, that critical thought is to be avoided. Teach them that even a rational examination of their own beliefs will put them in serious jeopardy of losing their promised reward, and that instead, blind faith is essential. Trust me, your message will go. Don't think for yourself. Don't research. Believe what I tell you. Obey me and believe that I am always right. In this way, you will never give skepticism a chance to take root; you can cut doubt off at the pass.

This theme is seen once again in the Bible quotes at the beginning of this essay. They all say the same thing: trust God, believe in God, obey God (or at least his representatives here on Earth); think only the thoughts he wants you to think, believe only the things he wants you to believe; and above all, do not question. Do not rely on your own ability for critical thought (the one he created you with).

Joshua 24:14-15 wrote:14 "So now: Fear God. Worship him in total commitment. Get rid of the gods your ancestors worshiped on the far side of The River (the Euphrates) and in Egypt. You, worship God.

15 "If you decide that it's a bad thing to worship God, then choose a god you'd rather serve - and do it today. Choose one of the gods your ancestors worshiped from the country beyond The River, or one of the gods of the Amorites, on whose land you're now living. As for me and my family, we'll worship God."

Job 34:31-33 wrote:31 "So why don't you simply confess to God? Say, 'I sinned, but I'll sin no more. 32 Teach me to see what I still don't see. Whatever evil I've done, I'll do it no more.' 33 Just because you refuse to live on God's terms, do you think he should start living on yours? You choose. I can't do it for you. Tell me what you decide."

2 Corithians 13:5 wrote:Test yourselves to make sure you are solid in the faith. Don't drift along taking everything for granted. Give yourselves regular checkups. You need firsthand evidence, not mere hearsay, that Jesus Christ is in you. Test it out. If you fail the test, do something about it.

God doesn't want you to just choose him because someone says so, nor does he want you believe him without knowing what you are doing. He wants you to sit back and think about what you are choosing to do. Doubting is not going to make you lose your "reward". You need to test your faith and make sure you truly believe what you claim to believe.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is axiomatic that truth cannot contradict truth. In other words, a doctrine that is true should have nothing to fear from even the most rigorous critical analysis, because if it is correct, it will inevitably be borne out by the evidence. Therefore, it is only logical that any religion that really believes in its own truth should instruct its followers to question it at every opportunity. It should dare them to try to prove it wrong.

Go ahead and try and prove the Bible wrong. Nobody has done it. I'm not afraid that you will prove it wrong. Go ahead try, I dare you.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In contrast to atheism, religion teaches that there are such things as forbidden questions, that we should passively accept the decrees of authority, and that it is right and good to censor inconvenient knowledge and "dangerous" truths.

I've read a lot of the Bible and I've never found anything that said there are forbidden questions.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why is this, one wonders? Could it be that the fundamentalists are so deeply brainwashed that they are no longer able even to conceive of the possibility of people who think differently than they do? Could it be that they are threatened and incensed by the mere existence of people who do not agree with them? Or could it simply be that they are unable to tolerate opposing viewpoints? (Just think: Why is there even such a concept as blasphemy?) All of these speak eloquently to the status of religion as a mind-control tool.

Jesus spent a lot of his time talking to the Pharisees who opposed to what he was doing. They didn't believe that he was telling the truth. They had opposing viewpoints. Jesus was not threatened by them in any way. The people who are threatened by opposing viewpoints are the one's that have the problem not the belief system they claim to have.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Everyone knows that miracles of the sort described in the Bible don't really happen. Everyone knows, at some level, that three-days-dead people don't come back to life; that human beings require two parents to be conceived; that shrubbery doesn't speak, seas don't spontaneously part and rivers don't turn into blood; and that God never, ever, makes the sort of dramatic manifestations he is so commonly credited with in the Bible.

Really? I'd like him to prove it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is these people whom atheists must target - if not necessarily to convert them, to at least get them to understand that we exist, that we are people like everyone else, and that we have good reasons for thinking as we do.

The Bible says to love everyone and to respect them no matter what they believe. We don't, however, have to share the same opinions on what a "good reason" is.

I think christians need to target athiests to show them that we aren't ignorant, mindless followers of a whimsical idea. We have brains and we have reasons and proof for what we know is truth.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is these people who still have the spark of freedom that we can and must encourage - because religion, in the end, is a method of mind control, and it cannot survive forever in the presence of critical thought.

Actually I have more freedom in Christ than I did without him. I've been on both sides and I can say following Christ is where true freedom is. I didn't know freedom until I chose to obey God.

I am a logical person. I think critically all the time. Do I sometimes doubt that God exists? Sure I do, every human does, but there is something inside me that knows there's a designer and creator to our world. If you knew me, you would know that I don't like following anyone just because they say so. I don't truly believe anything until I research it myself. I never just blindly believe something just because some pastor or evangelist says to believe it, that's how you get it trouble.

bigdirtyfoot · Post by **bigdirtyfoot** » 10 Aug 2005 05:49

professor wrote:Go ahead and try and prove the Bible wrong. Nobody has done it. I'm not afraid that you will prove it wrong. Go ahead try, I dare you.

Not even going to try. Spent weeks and weeks analyzing it to no avail. Can't disprove a written text from thousands of years ago. But hey, I'd like to see you try to prove it true!

professor wrote:I've read a lot of the Bible and I've never found anything that said there are forbidden questions.

Perhaps "forbidden answers" would be a better phrase.

professor wrote:I think christians need to target athiests to show them that we aren't ignorant, mindless followers of a whimsical idea. We have brains and we have reasons and proof for what we know is truth.

I certainly don't think you're ignorant. You know your shit. I'm not atheist at all. I don't think you "know" that all of this is truth though. You may "know" with your heart, but I'd say that's more of a feeling than a proven thought.

professor wrote:I didn't know freedom until I chose to obey God.

This I am interested in. What do you mean by this? I can't even fathom an understanding of your feelings toward this statement, because I have no... understanding of it. Do you know what I'm saying? I was saved, and spent many years of my life feeling uncomfortable in churches, being around extremely religious people, seeing how it restricted their ways of life, and decided that it was best for me to make my own choices about how I wanted to live my life spiritually. I just think personal spirituality is much stronger and free than an institutionalised religion.

professor wrote:Do I sometimes doubt that God exists? Sure I do, every human does, but there is something inside me that knows there's a designer and creator to our world.

You know, that's cool. I honestly wish I could feel like that sometimes. But I still say that you're feeling this with your heart, not "knowing" it.

professor wrote:Also, the article at it's core is inconsistent.

I must say that I find the Bible pretty inconsistant as well, to be honest.

professor wrote:Through the whole article he says how people can't accept another believe or even consider what another person believes, that people can't open their mind to other possibilities. When he is the exact same way. You think anyone could convince him he's wrong? Doubtful.

You think I could convince you you're wrong? Doubtful. Along with many of your contemporaries. I DO think you would listen, which is way better than I can say for many of my religious friends. I really try to not take religion so seriously anymore, because I've been in many heated debates and ruined a few good friendships because they couldn't hear what I was saying. I'm sorry, but many of the people who follow your religion ARE ignorant. These people haven't even read as much of the Bible as I have. They're mindless sheep, to be honest. Whenever I make an argument their counterpoint is "No that's not true because God exists." If that's their only argument, then why the fuck would I want to talk to them about their religion? I've had way to many experiences like this, and it has definitely tainted my opinion on the religion as a whole. I can honestly say that I don't know whether God exists or not, but that I have felt some sort of spirituality through music. If I want to seek this spirituality through my own means, I find that my method is more productive towards my life.

Chema · Post by **Chema** » 10 Aug 2005 09:01

professor wrote: Do I sometimes doubt that God exists? Sure I do, every human does, but there is something inside me that knows there's a designer and creator to our world.

You know god exists just as well as I know god doesn't. That is a ridiculous statement. I would consider it to be complete ignorance, because none of us really know anything about this.

professor wrote:
Everyone knows that miracles of the sort described in the Bible don't really happen. Everyone knows, at some level, that three-days-dead people don't come back to life; that human beings require two parents to be conceived; that shrubbery doesn't speak, seas don't spontaneously part and rivers don't turn into blood; and that God never, ever, makes the sort of dramatic manifestations he is so commonly credited with in the Bible.

Really? I'd like him to prove it.

You don't think basic physics (...and some other laws of science) is proof enough?

Chema · Post by **Chema** » 10 Aug 2005 09:08

The thing that really bothers me about institutionalized religion now is that it has inevitably taken law into its own hands, why is it that we must all live by christian morals. I'm not saying that all chistians want it to be like this, but it definitely has become this way, and I think it's due to institutionalization (along with some "inconsiderate" leaders).

professor · Post by **professor** » 10 Aug 2005 09:17

How do laws of physics prove that miracles can't happen? I thought the essence of a miracle was something "impossible" happening from an act of God.

Chema · Post by **Chema** » 10 Aug 2005 09:26

professor wrote:How do laws of physics prove that miracles can't happen? I thought the essence of a miracle was something "impossible" happening from an act of God.

Do you honestly believe that an entire body of water was completely split to the point where thousands of people could walk through, I think that is physically impossible.

But really, do you honestly believe that?

Chema · Post by **Chema** » 10 Aug 2005 09:29

professor wrote:How do laws of physics prove that miracles can't happen? I thought the essence of a miracle was something "impossible" happening from an act of God.

Shoot no edit button, oh well...

I though the essence of a miracle was something merely unbelievable not an impossible act of God.

professor · Post by **professor** » 10 Aug 2005 09:35

A miracle is something that God does that is humanly impossible.

Chema · Post by **Chema** » 10 Aug 2005 10:01

professor wrote:A miracle is something that God does that is humanly impossible.

If that was truely the definition, than if God doesn't exist, there is no such thing as a miracle. I don't believe in God, but I think there has been miracles in the world (ie. someone surviving some incredible plane crash could be considered a miracle, but I don't think God has anything to do with that because I don't believe in him.)

mir·a·cle (m?r'?-k?l)
n.
An event that appears inexplicable by the laws of nature and so is held to be supernatural in origin or an act of God: “Miracles are spontaneous, they cannot be summoned, but come of themselves” (Katherine Anne Porter).

It isn't something impossible, it just appears to be impossible (or unexplainable which is how I previously stated it). It is also something "held to be supernatural...." so basically, it is assumed to be an act of God, which is ok it isn't the most terrible thing in the world to assume, so I can't say that it absolutely isn't an act of God.

Now, Let's get back on topic

professor · Post by **professor** » 10 Aug 2005 10:12

There's no need to get into what various dictionaries say because all dictionaries will say something a little different. I could give definition's that prove my point and you could give definitions that prove yours, but that would be a waste of time.

If that was truely the definition, than if God doesn't exist, there is no such thing as a miracle. I don't believe in God, but I think there has been miracles in the world (ie. someone surviving some incredible plane crash could be considered a miracle, but I don't think God has anything to do with that because I don't believe in him.)

You're right, if there was no God then there would be no miracles. Just because you don't believe in God doesn't mean he's not there.

BainbridgeShred · Post by **BainbridgeShred** » 10 Aug 2005 10:16

The thing that really bothers me about institutionalized religion now is that it has inevitably taken law into its own hands, why is it that we must all live by christian morals. I'm not saying that all chistians want it to be like this, but it definitely has become this way, and I think it's due to institutionalization (along with some "inconsiderate" leaders).

It has now taken law into its own hands? I think that's been happening for awhile now, like thousands and thousands of years awhile. And by the way, who's making you live by Christian morals? Last time I checked, nobody.

About the whole miracle thing, anyone who says "It's physically impossible so it can't happen so the Bible is wrong" is missing the entire point of the argument. If there is a God who created this Earth, then miracles like parting a sea wouldn't be too hard for him.

Chema · Post by **Chema** » 10 Aug 2005 10:28

BainbridgeShred wrote:
The thing that really bothers me about institutionalized religion now is that it has inevitably taken law into its own hands, why is it that we must all live by christian morals. I'm not saying that all chistians want it to be like this, but it definitely has become this way, and I think it's due to institutionalization (along with some "inconsiderate" leaders).
It has now taken law into its own hands? I think that's been happening for awhile now, like thousands and thousands of years awhile. And by the way, who's making you live by Christian morals? Last time I checked, nobody.

About the whole miracle thing, anyone who says "It's physically impossible so it can't happen so the Bible is wrong" is missing the entire point of the argument. If there is a God who created this Earth, then miracles like parting a sea wouldn't be too hard for him.

You're completely right. I just personally think that if you believe God created the earth, than you might as well believe in Santa Clause or The Tooth Fairy. (Sorry That's just my opinion, I understand the counter arguments, you don't have to respond to my blasphemous statement. I'm soory if anyone was offended by that.)

What we really need to do to continue this debate is to define God (not with a dictionary), because I've heard people say that "God is a man in the clouds etc..." and I've also heard people say that "God is just the feeling of love that keeps people connected, absolutely nothing more than that."
So let's try to agree on a solid definition to debate about. Or we could have mutiple definitions and just use different words, like "Creationist God" and "Spiritualist God".