You can only update anything to a point. Eventually an entirely new device is required. Even its devotees; or the more aware ones at least; increasingly question many aspects of the received aspects of their beliefs. How many beliefs can be questioned before these whole structures have to be dispensed with.
Time for a paradigm shift. We have many better ways of seeking truth than religion offers.
I can imagine Christianity, Islam and Buddhism all disappearing - but I don't think we are anywhere near that yet. People have different mental dispositions, and for many believing in a Creator God is still the most effective way for them to think of others before themselves.
And psychology has a long long way to go before it comes anywhere near the refined mind practices in some religions.
I think attempts to find non-religious paradigms are laudable. I wonder what 'seeking truth' really means though - whether, for instance, the Buddha's four noble truths of existence are the sort of truths you had in mind.
Are you suggesting that they were doing wrong to crucify all those that they did, or just Jesus.
The Romans may have had aqueducts, fountains, mosaics and central heating but in terms of judicial punishments they were just as barbaric as anyone else of that time.
Perhaps Jesus was referring to the fact that he was a volunteer.
Are you suggesting that they were doing wrong to crucify all those that they did, or just Jesus.
The Romans may have had aqueducts, fountains, mosaics and central heating but in terms of judicial punishments they were just as barbaric as anyone else of that time.
Perhaps Jesus was referring to the fact that he was a volunteer.
All and Jesus. A mistake in ignorance (possibly covert defiance) of the kingdom of god. A sin in the minds of humanity (at the very least the non-Roman ones). Just my take though.
I am glad we got that out the way as there are no gods let alone one no one can be a sinner
As for updating get rid of church marriage birth control is ok suicide same sex partnerships are ok abortions are not evil and can the church stop interfering with boys
Religion continuously suppress advancement yes the sun is not the centre of the universe and the bible can be translated into your mother tongue and no monarch has divine right Its still doing it today no abortions no condoms no wives for priests and I have no intentions of mentioning other religions ideas which are even more harsh
Individuals come on its more than that the church suppress it the pope has kicked out 400 at least recently
Have you ever thought of using commas and full stops? I don't normally comment on such things, but lack of punctuation makes the points you're making (which are not bad) less accessible.
Are you suggesting that they were doing wrong to crucify all those that they did, or just Jesus.
The Romans may have had aqueducts, fountains, mosaics and central heating but in terms of judicial punishments they were just as barbaric as anyone else of that time.
Perhaps Jesus was referring to the fact that he was a volunteer.
Ah I now suspect we have been talking about different things and at cross purposes. My point was that; by definition; one is only doing wrong if one knows they are doing wrong.
Atheists are ****ing annoying. Not for their beliefs, but for the fact they make statements like the OPs. Just how pompous and up their own arse most of them seem to be.
I can imagine Christianity, Islam and Buddhism all disappearing - but I don't think we are anywhere near that yet. People have different mental dispositions, and for many believing in a Creator God is still the most effective way for them to think of others before themselves.
And psychology has a long long way to go before it comes anywhere near the refined mind practices in some religions.
I think attempts to find non-religious paradigms are laudable. I wonder what 'seeking truth' really means though - whether, for instance, the Buddha's four noble truths of existence are the sort of truths you had in mind.
It is often argued on here that religion does not cause wars etc. it is argued that people cause wars and that if religion did not exist then people would find other things to fight about. that religious wars are usually territory wars. That people who kill in the name of God or Allah (usually Allah) are just bad people who misuse religion etc etc etc.
I am sure you can see my point coming here.
So if religion is an effective way of making people selfless can it not also be an effective way of making them selfish? Any argument that religion only motivates selfless acts is patently untrue. Even an act of charity or worship in the hope of eternal life is an essentially selfish act.
We have had thousands of years during which the majority of the world's population have subscribed to some version of the current world religions if these religions only incited selfless acts we would have long been living in a wordly paradise. The evidence is that those parts of the world where religion holds most sway are no more altruistic than those where it does not.
If religion has the inherent power to turn selfish people into selfless ones then it can turn peaceful people into warlike ones. I see no convincing evidence for either proposition.
As for your question about Buddha's four noble truths of existence
Buddha's four noble truths of existence are not the sort of truths I am looking for although I am sure seeking them is as good a way of spending our time until we die as any other and better than many. They certainly make more sense to me than Holy Trinities. If seeking them results in someone like yourself then they must have something going for them. ;-) But seriouly to apply my argument above I doubt such a quest made you a thoughtful enquiring person. That is just who you are.
Edit; I suspect the search for the Four Noble Truths or even the Holy Grail is a diddle compared with the quest for tinned loganberries. I believe even Mumsnet gave up on that one.
I can imagine Christianity, Islam and Buddhism all disappearing - but I don't think we are anywhere near that yet. People have different mental dispositions, and for many believing in a Creator God is still the most effective way for them to think of others before themselves.
And psychology has a long long way to go before it comes anywhere near the refined mind practices in some religions.
I think attempts to find non-religious paradigms are laudable. I wonder what 'seeking truth' really means though - whether, for instance, the Buddha's four noble truths of existence are the sort of truths you had in mind.
Your points are interesting and make me think of yoga and qi gong, two examples of practices for developing inner and outer qualities without necessity of religion.
I do wonder as well, about the ability of people to maintain without a higher authority. I'm not saying they cannot, but there is always the tendency toward chaos. Hollande in France reminds me of this drift toward chaos. He is hardly self-regulating.
Atheists are ****ing annoying. Not for their beliefs, but for the fact they make statements like the OPs. Just how pompous and up their own arse most of them seem to be.
Certain individuals certainly conform to your stereotype but I think upyourownarseness is a part of the human condition and can manifest itself without reference to the upownarseists belief or lack of belief.
Any argument that religion only motivates selfless acts is patently untrue. Even an act of charity or worship in the hope of eternal life is an essentially selfish act.
I mentioned previously that years ago in the town where I lived, the existence of an atheist family caused much gossip. I remember well that the thing that most exercised all of those aghast, was that these people didn't cling to the promise of an afterlife. Not so much a deity or a purpose here, but the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.
It is often argued on here that religion does not cause wars etc. it is argued that people cause wars and that if religion did not exist then people would find other things to fight about. that religious wars are usually territory wars. That people who kill in the name of God or Allah (usually Allah) are just bad people who misuse religion etc etc etc.
I am sure you can see my point coming here.
So if religion is an effective way of making people selfless can it not also be an effective way of making them selfish? Any argument that religion only motivates selfless acts is patently untrue. Even an act of charity or worship in the hope of eternal life is an essentially selfish act.
.
In how many instances of what appear to be major "religious" conflicts in the world today, can you point to as arising from disputes about ideology? Aren't the conflicts mainly ethnic, that is about keeping money, land and control within one's own group against the other? Very few are going to war over original sin, or the afterlife, or over whether Jesus was divine or just a regular person.
Religion doesn't 'make' people less selfish. It does call them back from their selfishness, though. It is a misperception that unselfish acts are only done for promise of an afterlife. We are taught to give, seeking nothing in return.
Most acts have a blend of selfish and unselfish, anyway, because to do good for someone else benefits the giver. That is an unavoidable but pleasant outcome.
In how many instances of what appear to be major "religious" conflicts in the world today, can you point to as arising from disputes about ideology? Aren't the conflicts mainly ethnic, that is about keeping money, land and control within one's own group against the other? Very few are going to war over original sin, or the afterlife, or over whether Jesus was divine or just a regular person.
Religion doesn't 'make' people less selfish. It does call them back from their selfishness, though. It is a misperception that unselfish acts are only done for promise of an afterlife. We are taught to give, seeking nothing in return.
Most acts have a blend of selfish and unselfish, anyway, because to do good for someone else benefits the giver. That is an unavoidable but pleasant outcome.
I don't think that conflicts much with what I was saying.
I don't think that conflicts much with what I was saying.
It does conflict to the extent that it is not the religious teaching that is motivating people. Even if you look within one religion, like Catholic vs. Protestant, the conflict was mostly economic and political. If you talk to a Palestinian about Israel, he will talk about jobs and standard of living, not Allah.
It does conflict to the extent that it is not the religious teaching that is motivating people. Even if you look within one religion, like Catholic vs. Protestant, the conflict was mostly economic and political. If you talk to a Palestinian about Israel, he will talk about jobs and standard of living, not Allah.
I don't think you understood my post then. No matter.
It is often argued on here that religion does not cause wars etc. it is argued that people cause wars and that if religion did not exist then people would find other things to fight about. that religious wars are usually territory wars. That people who kill in the name of God or Allah (usually Allah) are just bad people who misuse religion etc etc etc.
I am sure you can see my point coming here.
So if religion is an effective way of making people selfless can it not also be an effective way of making them selfish? Any argument that religion only motivates selfless acts is patently untrue. Even an act of charity or worship in the hope of eternal life is an essentially selfish act.
We have had thousands of years during which the majority of the world's population have subscribed to some version of the current world religions if these religions only incited selfless acts we would have long been living in a wordly paradise. The evidence is that those parts of the world where religion holds most sway are no more altruistic than those where it does not.
If religion has the inherent power to turn selfish people into selfless ones then it can turn peaceful people into warlike ones. I see no convincing evidence for either proposition.
As for your question about Buddha's four noble truths of existence
Buddha's four noble truths of existence are not the sort of truths I am looking for although I am sure seeking them is as good a way of spending our time until we die as any other and better than many. They certainly make more sense to me than Holy Trinities. If seeking them results in someone like yourself then they must have something going for them. ;-) But seriouly to apply my argument above I doubt such a quest made you a thoughtful enquiring person. That is just who you are.
Edit; I suspect the search for the Four Noble Truths or even the Holy Grail is a diddle compared with the quest for tinned loganberries. I believe even Mumsnet gave up on that one.
True enough - it's a delicate business at best. And I will be honest - whether years of meditation actually bring about a meaningful change in behaviour is a question I often ask myself.
I have tried, albeit briefly, a non-religious , non-spiritual approach - and I didn't fair well beyond the ordinary everyday distractions we mostly convince ourselves are real life. I personally need a spiritual hope else I rapidly descend into a kind of existential feeling of two dimensional pointlessness. Maybe I'd come out the other side, maybe I'm not brave enough - anyway, I fair better if I dabble with my mind and use my imagination to consciously blurr inner and outer realities.
I don't think that conflicts much with what I was saying.
You asked can religion not also make people selfish. I thought I got that. It was a fairly simple question.
And I'm saying it is not religion that makes people selfish. They have a proclivity to being selfish without religion. People will still take advantage of one another, if you take religion out.
Hollande as an example again. No religion and no loyalty, selfish and indecisive, and it is not just his personal affair, as it affects his official life. The rationale is that " a man has to do what a man has to do." He is managing to be selfish all on his own. Possibly a dose of religion would recall him to his senses, actually.
You asked can religion not also make people selfish. I thought I got that. It was a fairly simple question.
And I'm saying it is not religion that makes people selfish. They have a proclivity to being selfish without religion. People will still take advantage of one another, if you take religion out.
Hollande as an example again. No religion and no loyalty, selfish and indecisive, and it is not just his personal affair, as it affects his official life. The rationale is that " a man has to do what a man has to do." He is managing to be selfish all on his own. Possibly a dose of religion would recall him to his senses, actually.
Which was very much the whole jist of what I was saying. Try reading my entire post and not snipping bits.
Which was very much the whole jist of what I was saying. Try reading my entire post and not snipping bits.
Hmm, Richard. You said that but then said about where you were leading, that was where? To your point religion could make people selfish. And I'm (again) saying religion is not making people selfish. Where in religion are we told to be selfish? Can you show me a rite or ordinance that makes us selfish? People who are selfish are misusing religion, not religion misusing them.
Atheists are ****ing annoying. Not for their beliefs, but for the fact they make statements like the OPs. Just how pompous and up their own arse most of them seem to be.
The opening post was a question asking weather there are more and more atheists in the world ... there was no statement ... nor am I pompous or up my own arse ... but thank you for the ad hominems ...
Hmm, Richard. You said that but then said about where you were leading, that was where? That religion could make people selfish. And I'm (again) saying religion is not making people selfish. Where in religion are we told to be selfish? Can you show me a rite or ordinance that makes us selfish?
Look I agree with you I don't think religion on the whole makes people what they are for good or for bad. Cruel people follow cruel religions; kind people follow kind ones. (often different interpretations of the 'same' religion).
My point was it cannot be claimed that religion makes people selfless etc IF it is not also recognised that they can do the opposite. I said I was not convinced of either.
,,,
If religion has the inherent power to turn selfish people into selfless ones then it can turn peaceful people into warlike ones. I see no convincing evidence for either proposition.
,,,
Did you read that?
If you want to argue that the influence of religion is exclusively benign then good luck with that.
The opening post was a question asking weather there are more and more atheists in the world ... there was no statement ... nor am I pompous or up my own arse ... but thank you for the ad hominems ...
Erm..You missed the actual post - "Do you think more and more people are waking up?"
Look I agree with you I don't think religion on the whole makes people what they are for good or for bad. Cruel people follow cruel religions; kind people follow kind ones. (often different interpretations of the 'same' religion).
My point was it cannot be claimed that religion makes people selfless etc IF it is not also recognised that they can do the opposite. I said I was not convinced of either.
Did you read that?
If you want to argue that the influence of religion is exclusively benign then good luck with that.
The influence of religion should be benign. If it is not then people are misusing it. I do think there are many people who because they pray, and because they go to church, are better than they were, or better than they would have been.
I can say for myself that prayer, yoga, spirituality has not made me an unselfish person, but I think I am a better person than I might have been, had I not done. I see religious people around me who are selfish, yes, but the really religious ones keep examining themselves, and correcting themselves. I am not saying that others do not self correct, but there is more motivation when you are asked to examine yourself.
Look I agree with you I don't think religion on the whole makes people what they are for good or for bad. Cruel people follow cruel religions; kind people follow kind ones. (often different interpretations of the 'same' religion).
My point was it cannot be claimed that religion makes people selfless etc IF it is not also recognised that they can do the opposite. I said I was not convinced of either.
I think it's safe to say that most people don't understand their own religion. Evidence can be provided in the unlikely event you disagree.
The influence of religion should be benign. If it is not then people are misusing it. I do think there are many people who because they pray, and because they go to church, are better than they were, or better than they would have been.
I can say for myself that prayer, yoga, spirituality has not made me an unselfish person, but I think I am a better person than I might have been, had I not done. I see religious people around me who are selfish, yes, but the really religious ones keep examining themselves, and correcting themselves. I am not saying that others do not self correct, but there is more motivation when you are asked to examine yourself.
Most of that can be put down to growing up. I am a much better person now than I was when I was a Christian, but I would never conclude that being an atheist has made me a better person.
Look I agree with you I don't think religion on the whole makes people what they are for good or for bad. Cruel people follow cruel religions; kind people follow kind ones. (often different interpretations of the 'same' religion)
Yes. Christianity can be hellfire and damnation, or charity, turn the other cheek and judge not, that ye be not judged.
Comments
I can imagine Christianity, Islam and Buddhism all disappearing - but I don't think we are anywhere near that yet. People have different mental dispositions, and for many believing in a Creator God is still the most effective way for them to think of others before themselves.
And psychology has a long long way to go before it comes anywhere near the refined mind practices in some religions.
I think attempts to find non-religious paradigms are laudable. I wonder what 'seeking truth' really means though - whether, for instance, the Buddha's four noble truths of existence are the sort of truths you had in mind.
Are you suggesting that they were doing wrong to crucify all those that they did, or just Jesus.
The Romans may have had aqueducts, fountains, mosaics and central heating but in terms of judicial punishments they were just as barbaric as anyone else of that time.
Perhaps Jesus was referring to the fact that he was a volunteer.
All and Jesus. A mistake in ignorance (possibly covert defiance) of the kingdom of god. A sin in the minds of humanity (at the very least the non-Roman ones). Just my take though.
Have you ever thought of using commas and full stops? I don't normally comment on such things, but lack of punctuation makes the points you're making (which are not bad) less accessible.
Ah I now suspect we have been talking about different things and at cross purposes. My point was that; by definition; one is only doing wrong if one knows they are doing wrong.
It is often argued on here that religion does not cause wars etc. it is argued that people cause wars and that if religion did not exist then people would find other things to fight about. that religious wars are usually territory wars. That people who kill in the name of God or Allah (usually Allah) are just bad people who misuse religion etc etc etc.
I am sure you can see my point coming here.
So if religion is an effective way of making people selfless can it not also be an effective way of making them selfish? Any argument that religion only motivates selfless acts is patently untrue. Even an act of charity or worship in the hope of eternal life is an essentially selfish act.
We have had thousands of years during which the majority of the world's population have subscribed to some version of the current world religions if these religions only incited selfless acts we would have long been living in a wordly paradise. The evidence is that those parts of the world where religion holds most sway are no more altruistic than those where it does not.
If religion has the inherent power to turn selfish people into selfless ones then it can turn peaceful people into warlike ones. I see no convincing evidence for either proposition.
As for your question about Buddha's four noble truths of existence
Buddha's four noble truths of existence are not the sort of truths I am looking for although I am sure seeking them is as good a way of spending our time until we die as any other and better than many. They certainly make more sense to me than Holy Trinities. If seeking them results in someone like yourself then they must have something going for them. ;-) But seriouly to apply my argument above I doubt such a quest made you a thoughtful enquiring person. That is just who you are.
Edit; I suspect the search for the Four Noble Truths or even the Holy Grail is a diddle compared with the quest for tinned loganberries. I believe even Mumsnet gave up on that one.
Your points are interesting and make me think of yoga and qi gong, two examples of practices for developing inner and outer qualities without necessity of religion.
I do wonder as well, about the ability of people to maintain without a higher authority. I'm not saying they cannot, but there is always the tendency toward chaos. Hollande in France reminds me of this drift toward chaos. He is hardly self-regulating.
Certain individuals certainly conform to your stereotype but I think upyourownarseness is a part of the human condition and can manifest itself without reference to the upownarseists belief or lack of belief.
I mentioned previously that years ago in the town where I lived, the existence of an atheist family caused much gossip. I remember well that the thing that most exercised all of those aghast, was that these people didn't cling to the promise of an afterlife. Not so much a deity or a purpose here, but the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.
In how many instances of what appear to be major "religious" conflicts in the world today, can you point to as arising from disputes about ideology? Aren't the conflicts mainly ethnic, that is about keeping money, land and control within one's own group against the other? Very few are going to war over original sin, or the afterlife, or over whether Jesus was divine or just a regular person.
Religion doesn't 'make' people less selfish. It does call them back from their selfishness, though. It is a misperception that unselfish acts are only done for promise of an afterlife. We are taught to give, seeking nothing in return.
Most acts have a blend of selfish and unselfish, anyway, because to do good for someone else benefits the giver. That is an unavoidable but pleasant outcome.
I don't think that conflicts much with what I was saying.
It does conflict to the extent that it is not the religious teaching that is motivating people. Even if you look within one religion, like Catholic vs. Protestant, the conflict was mostly economic and political. If you talk to a Palestinian about Israel, he will talk about jobs and standard of living, not Allah.
I don't think you understood my post then. No matter.
True enough - it's a delicate business at best. And I will be honest - whether years of meditation actually bring about a meaningful change in behaviour is a question I often ask myself.
I have tried, albeit briefly, a non-religious , non-spiritual approach - and I didn't fair well beyond the ordinary everyday distractions we mostly convince ourselves are real life. I personally need a spiritual hope else I rapidly descend into a kind of existential feeling of two dimensional pointlessness. Maybe I'd come out the other side, maybe I'm not brave enough - anyway, I fair better if I dabble with my mind and use my imagination to consciously blurr inner and outer realities.
All I ask is that we leave these options open.
You asked can religion not also make people selfish. I thought I got that. It was a fairly simple question.
And I'm saying it is not religion that makes people selfish. They have a proclivity to being selfish without religion. People will still take advantage of one another, if you take religion out.
Hollande as an example again. No religion and no loyalty, selfish and indecisive, and it is not just his personal affair, as it affects his official life. The rationale is that " a man has to do what a man has to do." He is managing to be selfish all on his own. Possibly a dose of religion would recall him to his senses, actually.
Which was very much the whole jist of what I was saying. Try reading my entire post and not snipping bits.
Hmm, Richard. You said that but then said about where you were leading, that was where? To your point religion could make people selfish. And I'm (again) saying religion is not making people selfish. Where in religion are we told to be selfish? Can you show me a rite or ordinance that makes us selfish? People who are selfish are misusing religion, not religion misusing them.
The opening post was a question asking weather there are more and more atheists in the world ... there was no statement ... nor am I pompous or up my own arse ... but thank you for the ad hominems ...
Look I agree with you I don't think religion on the whole makes people what they are for good or for bad. Cruel people follow cruel religions; kind people follow kind ones. (often different interpretations of the 'same' religion).
My point was it cannot be claimed that religion makes people selfless etc IF it is not also recognised that they can do the opposite. I said I was not convinced of either.
Did you read that?
If you want to argue that the influence of religion is exclusively benign then good luck with that.
Erm..You missed the actual post - "Do you think more and more people are waking up?"
The influence of religion should be benign. If it is not then people are misusing it. I do think there are many people who because they pray, and because they go to church, are better than they were, or better than they would have been.
I can say for myself that prayer, yoga, spirituality has not made me an unselfish person, but I think I am a better person than I might have been, had I not done. I see religious people around me who are selfish, yes, but the really religious ones keep examining themselves, and correcting themselves. I am not saying that others do not self correct, but there is more motivation when you are asked to examine yourself.
I think it's safe to say that most people don't understand their own religion. Evidence can be provided in the unlikely event you disagree.
Most of that can be put down to growing up. I am a much better person now than I was when I was a Christian, but I would never conclude that being an atheist has made me a better person.
Life experience did that.
Yes. Christianity can be hellfire and damnation, or charity, turn the other cheek and judge not, that ye be not judged.