What's Wrong About Religion?

[Sniffles]

For example, stem cell research is now to the point that it's been developed where it does NOT require the use of an embryo anymore, and can be done purely through literally any cell int he body. Meaning yeu can take a skin graft, and convert it into acting as though it were stem cells. And yet it's still technically banned and forbidden despite this. Why? Because conservatives are scared of 'playing god' and 'think of the children!' even though there's no children involved >.>;;

What are you talking about? I've yet to see any real opposition from conservatives for Adult Stem cell research, in fact that's usually the alternative they advocate for as opposed to using embryonic stem cells.

 

[AOA]

[In Reference to the title "What's Wrong About Religion."]

I'd like to know. Really. This is absolutely driving me insane.

Given your inquiry - what I could tell you from what I could relate in my own experiences with religion is; so long as you have had conviction with your faith, or religion, THAT is what really matters. Normally, one's conviction in their faith never (actually) changes, so the safe side is usually that whether you decide to leave the faith or not, you (yourself) would be carefree of any excuses to do with making that decision.

 

[draon9]

religion divides people and cause wars and death and cause people to be even more dishonest and self righteous

 

[Virtual ghost]

Is that truly a terrible thing to have? I know it can promote ignorance, but that's the fault of the individual practicing the faith, not the faith itself.

And that is the answer to this thread, inability of religion to accept it's flaws.

 

[Zangetshumody]

I'd like to know. Really. This is absolutely driving me insane.

So an ordinary person decides to believe that someone or something created the world greater than themself. They then proceed to worship said deity out of thankfulness, and hope in return that they will receive their creator's blessing. They hope to live a life that will best exemplify the good traits of the human being, and believe they can overcome the bad traits.

When they are hurt, they believe all isn't lost. When someone dies, they believe they are in a better place. When someone commits a wrong, they can be forgiven.

It's a healthy thing, when utilized correctly. It's something to fall back on when the rational mode of life can't help you.

Is that truly a terrible thing to have? I know it can promote ignorance, but that's the fault of the individual practicing the faith, not the faith itself. I just want an explanation. Thank you.

I take issue with the kind of religiosity which you describe, you might be able to argue pragmatically that this is, on some average utilitarian scale, a healthy default position to aid in keeping a basic level of social stability: I don't think this is a credible position in the realm of theological issues, its just a utilitarian preference, which as far it relates to 'other people', might end up being a morally neutral preference, unless it impacts your actions in your immediate interpersonal relations or style of interaction.

The premise of your question, involves something like a consideration for 'the little people', or the little cogs in the great machine that we all depend on functioning; this is ironically, a rather Gods eye view of the narrative that you then furnish us with. You are correct to be concerned that there might be something wrong with this worldly picture: it might satisfy the heathen, the pagan, or the pantheistic believer, but it is utterly dehumanizing, and fundamentally concerned foremost with human happiness, which at the very least, does not encompass the the form of joy espoused in the Christian doctrine.

The core of your questions deals with a sophisticated issue, which can be addressed in a various number of ways as its quite abstract and philosophical, I will try to do my best at directly attending to your question, but it rests on a number of spiritual issues which are voluminous and complex topics: so instead I will try to jot down a basic stream of thoughts which paint an alternative way of being; to be curt.

Living within a narrative is synonymous to idolatry; it removes the spiritual development of understanding and judgement, aka discerning. The framework of fatalism, is indistinguishable from any other form of Pagan worship, however many Christian labels are sprinkled onto the story, and into your worldly identity. Everyone is born into the narrative, the work of salvation is to disabuse yourself from being purchased by it; this is an internal process of actualization, and leads into its own freedom of the soul, in union with the truth: this doesn't mean anything beyond the context of the introspective searching, which can be well aided through a communion with other members who, in particular, have the same aim and complimentary gifts to share, so that these things can be broken down and refined, the bread, is a symbol of the fleshly understanding, being broken and consumed, over and over.

Although slightly obtuse to what I've just written, there is a secular philosophical treatise that lays out the intellectual basis upon which, in my view, all proper religion rests upon, and in any case, upon which all intellectual schema's must depend upon.

I will post a link or attach it my post. (PDF) Roodt, V 2018. Living with nihilism. In C Bremmers, A Smith, J-P Wils (eds), Beyond Nihilism? Germany: Traugott Bautz GmbH, 71-83.

To elaborate on the text for a moment: There is a basic level of humility which is the ground floor to all knowledge and morality claims, nothing can be certain, it is a faith-based framework, and that framework is never not subject to potential revision: this makes choice part of life, and life into an ongoing and endless negotiation, which means also, that the only authority that exists, is one which is actively contended into being, made by free will and potentially free-wills (plural in agreement), which can be considered to be free by so choosing to consider your will chosen— to be of that condition (ie. recourse to your own accounting as a witness, evidenced by your recording which then epistemology belongs foremost to the truth), which then becomes your basic character, not an impenetrable character to be certain in, but that can still be contended with certainty, while also freely admitting, that you might be wrong (ie. open to persuasive challenge): there is no incoherence in such a position, but there are many fractured skeptical minds which are craven only for external sources of authority to bestow dignity to their empty, brittle belief in ordered-certainty. There is an economy of compelling and persuasive factors that under-gird the field of uncertain-order [aka what a real understanding is like] (which persists to contend an active-semblance of order, by its subjective account, vulnerable to emulation of finer subjective-accounting schemas as they are uncovered), this can be called the mystery of life, and it can be understood as its own set of issues, all these issues are not claims of certainty, they are closer to technae of contextual wisdom, depending on tracking the transactional nature of metaphysical features that appear to permeate some element of the mystery: this ordering of the mystery into an understanding, is not a narrative, its technically tentative, and in the absolute sense, its all context specific and tenuous in the extent that it rests squarely as individual responsibility for conducting yourself accordingly thereto: if it is communicated, its either clearly transmitted and understood, compelling or persuasive, or it isn't, there are of course dangerous interactions in which spiritual responsibility appears to be intended to migrate externally (this is dangerous because it offers confusion to the observation of the spiritual paradigm, which is also only capable of being viewed through a spiritual vision to begin with: many of these things can be gated by confusion and false teachings, or from deprivation of enough complimentary spiritual organs within a communion, thus seek is the first and prime spiritual command... anyway, I will end my rambling discourse.)

 

[Yuurei]

Nothing is inherently wrong with religion.

Much like the internet, it is capable of doing a lot of good. It's the people who use it who make it utterly toxic garbage which will lead do the downfall of our civilization.

religion divides people and cause wars and death and cause people to be even more dishonest and self righteous

No, people do that...in the name of religion. It's part of the " us v them" nature of humanity. it's ingrained in our DNA and people are always looking for differences to vilify and fight each other ( even people in the same community. Nerds always be fighting over which fictional character could beat up the other and yes, they can get very vehement about it) Religion is just really convenient one.

 

[draon9]

Nothing is inherently wrong with religion.

Much like the internet, it is capable of doing a lot of good. It's the people who use it who make it utterly toxic garbage which will lead do the downfall of our civilization.



No, people do that...in the name of religion. It's part of the " us v them" nature of humanity. it's ingrained in our DNA and people are always looking for differences to vilify and fight each other ( even people in the same community. Nerds always be fighting over which fictional character could beat up the other and yes, they can get very vehement about it) Religion is just really convenient one.

I think you might have misunderstood me. When i mean religion of not just Christianity islam and Judaism. I mean anything can be religion. Religion of comic books,job religion,religion of materialism,relationship religion, and so on. Because in reality religion is a cult. Christian religion and christian culture,first 4 letters are cult.

 

[Justin of Flavia Neapolis]

I think you might have misunderstood me. When i mean religion of not just Christianity islam and Judaism. I mean anything can be religion. Religion of comic books,job religion,religion of materialism,relationship religion, and so on. Because in reality religion is a cult. Christian religion and christian culture,first 4 letters are cult.

The misunderstanding may have came from your original reply:

religion divides people and cause wars and death and cause people to be even more dishonest and self righteous

Comic books and D&D don't actually cause wars and death.

Your understanding of religion seems to be the same as mine, which is the 4th definition in Merriam-Webster and seems to be all-inclusive:

: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

...in which case, I agree that this world is enveloped in religion.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Nothing is inherently wrong with religion.

Much like the internet, it is capable of doing a lot of good. It's the people who use it who make it utterly toxic garbage which will lead do the downfall of our civilization.

Yes, but don't "sacred texts" have plenty of pure sadism and horror in them ?

 

[Tellenbach]

Any ideology, organization, or profession that prevents you from becoming a transcendant libertarian should be discarded; unfortunately, religion is a major obstacle to rational thinking for many people.

 

[EllevenSevenSounds]

I define religion very broadly, basically any idea that is unsupported to be 100percent absolutely empirically true. Therefore even the multiverse theory is a religion or spiritual disposition. I believe science is 10 percent scientific method and 90 percent science. I believe we built atom bombs and weapons of mass destruction under religious and dogmatic pretenses similar to the crusades and Christianity, except now it's the frontier and science.

So if you ask me, it's not religion or science that is to blame, but us ourselves. Certainly in a thousand years what is known as science now will be seen as the new world zeitgeist, like we view Christianity and the other world religions. I know for a fact that what we call science now will not even be a word used in the future for studying reality because it is loaded with so much dogma, spiritualism, and airy metaphysical delights that it would contaminate the more objective methods of the future, similar to how Christianity and Alchemy and spiritual pseudosciences gave birth to the less subjective sciences we have today, but we don't call them Alchemy or Shamanism today, even though that is was Isaac Netwon considered himself, a spiritualist that could fuse matter with soul.

This is the trend with humanity and we know this will happen, no doubt about, just as the apple falls to the earth for certain, the trajectory has too much inertia. We will always think we are being less subjective and then later come to find out that we were always as subjective as before, just with more intensity and penetration. Nothing will change. The magic will always be there. Why do you think so many young kids in the 2000's worshiped Harry Potter, praying every day to the god who they devoted their life energies too, objectively speaking here. Of course we call it recreation, and the squirrels call stashing their nuts recreation, but in the end it's worship. What you devote your attention to is what you devote your love too and worship. If you watch netflix alot, if you are passionate about science, you are worshiping it. The question is are you conscious of it or do you disdain religion so much that you are ignorant to yours?

 

[Tomb1]

Jesus is history's greatest con-man.

 

[Lark]

Jesus is history's greatest con-man. In other words, all religion is scientology at the end of the day.

Yeah, I struggle with the idea that "love your neighbour as yourself" or "love your enemies" is such a bad idea or remotely equivocal to the core beliefs of scientology.

Although, if you want to present an argument about it I'd consider it. Could be growing up in a culture with a Christian heritage contributed to that mindset but you know.

 

[???]

Socio-cultural morality trumping individual morality.

Accepting core tenets or beliefs or values, without knowing if they "should" be accepted or not or if it even really matters.

Questioning usually ends up leading to statements like "God works in mysterious ways" or just asserts general axioms like "God loves you" and things like "If the people who have turned their back on Me [Allah] knew how much I love them to come back they would have died out of joy."

It's just there to fill a philosophical void of what should we do with our lives, why are we here, how we should treat one another, and what does it all matter. But maybe those things shouldn't be filled, unles we actually know.

 

[Tomb1]

Yeah, I struggle with the idea that "love your neighbour as yourself" or "love your enemies" is such a bad idea or remotely equivocal to the core beliefs of scientology.

Although, if you want to present an argument about it I'd consider it. Could be growing up in a culture with a Christian heritage contributed to that mindset but you know.

Well, Jesus was a better con-man than L. Ron Hubbard. I don't know what else to tell you.

 

[Lark]

Well, Jesus was a better con-man than L. Ron Hubbard. I don't know what else to tell you.

Well, your post tells me you cant tell the difference between apples and oranges so it'll do fine.

 

[Wunjo]

Any ideology, organization, or profession that prevents you from becoming a transcendant libertarian should be discarded; unfortunately, religion is a major obstacle to rational thinking for many people.

It's spelled "transcendent". Your statement is utterly senseless when we take libertarianism's open-minded approach towards thoughts if they are not in general causing a paradox of tolerance. It is quite possible to practice a faith while adhering to libertarianism and a person to have a rational train of thought while they believe in a religion. Transcendentalism, philosophilcally speaking is in lieu with "belief" and a prioric knowledge; that is, if you are using the word correctly as if in Philosophy of Hegel, etc.

 

[Lark]

Socio-cultural morality trumping individual morality.

Accepting core tenets or beliefs or values, without knowing if they "should" be accepted or not or if it even really matters.

Questioning usually ends up leading to statements like "God works in mysterious ways" or just asserts general axioms like "God loves you" and things like "If the people who have turned their back on Me [Allah] knew how much I love them to come back they would have died out of joy."

It's just there to fill a philosophical void of what should we do with our lives, why are we here, how we should treat one another, and what does it all matter. But maybe those things shouldn't be filled, unles we actually know.

I suppose its like how children learn to walk before they've given a walking tour much thought.

Or that everyone learns to speak a language instead of free stylingly inventing one on the spot.

Sometimes its hard to admit that someone other than you could've asked all the difficult questions already and come up with some pretty good answers already. You know. Independently of you or your input. Then it becomes an enduring tradition which everyone relies upon, often without even acknowledging they're doing so.

Innovation and novel ideas are fine but think of them as the football teams and tradition is the pitch they're playing on.

 

[Tellenbach]

Your statement is utterly senseless when we take libertarianism's open-minded approach towards thoughts if they are not in general causing a paradox of tolerance.

Like I said, "for many people". I didn't say for everyone.

It is quite possible to practice a faith while adhering to libertarianism and a person to have a rational train of thought while they believe in a religion.

So where are all the libertarians? What are the obstacles? I think religion is a major obstacle.

 

[Tomb1]

I actually agree with Tellenbach. Rationality means reasoning logically from facts and evidence. Given that the Bible/Koran/[pick your book] is not sufficient evidence of God, belief in God requires a suspension of rationality. I've said it before, no intelligent argument can be made for God, because the assumption of the supernatural is baseless. The ancient Greeks had Zeus who lived on Mt. Olympus, Christians have Jesus who lives in Heaven.