There also is a chance that Jesus is actually the Son of God, and the purpose of His Church is our salvation. Just sayin. — Rank Amateur
And the same can be said for some atheist ideologues. The mindset you are reasonably objecting to isn't a function of religion particularly, but the human condition more generally. It's very important to some of us to possess The Answer, whatever the chosen answer may be. — Jake
And the same can be said for some political ideologues. — S
(Nuclear weapons, cough cough). — S
But it is a requirement of some religions according to the testimony of many adherents of these religions themselves. Ram is a good example of that. — S
Some religions are just another example of ideological certainty. This forum, all philosophy forums, are filled with comments from those who suffer from atheist certainty. — Jake
Paul didn't have a problem per se with Philosophy (neither did Tertullian), but he held different schools to be in conflict with his view, and inferior to revelation. — All sight
the role of Greek thought on Christian is not only paramount but foundational. That is why evangelical theology seems so patently ridiculous, the rich vein of philosophy hidden under the sentimental display of "enthusiastic prayer". In fact many Chrurch Fathers condemn such "enthusiasm" as part of an old orgiastic pagan way of worshiping unfit for the Christian, who should use contemplation (theoria) and the intellect (nous) to know God, a God who is simultaneously hidden and revealed, transcendent and immanent, known through his energies in creation but whose essence is fundamentally unknowable--finally God is an awe inspiring living fire not for the fainthearted. The ideal is both an individual philosophical understanding, and a community of the spirit (pneuma).
What do you think religion's purpose is & how does one interact with it? — MountainDwarf
Most other monotheistic religions say the same thing about their god and religion.There is no God but Allah. Islam is the true religion, Allah is our Creator. — Ram
Who said that it came out of nowhere randomly? How anyone can believe that a universe can't just exist, but a god can, baffles me. What makes god so special that is doesn't need a creator, but the universe does?How anyone can look at creation and believe it all just came out of nowhere, randomly- baffles me. — Ram
But you have insulted us (our intelligence) with your incoherent post with no evidence or logic. When you do that, expect to be rejected and insulted yourself.People insult me for believing in God and act like I'm a neanderthal.... I am wary of posting here and think I'll be met with a bunch of belligerant liberals. But whether you agree with my views or not- I represent a viewpoint which might not be otherwise represented here. — Ram
You have a perfect right to believe it, but it's not really that relevant in a philosophy forum. — Wayfarer
Never actually had the privilege of reading it myself.Have you ever encountered a Carl Jung book called Man and his Symbols? — Wayfarer
So basically it is whatever it says to you?They are symbolic expressions of all manner of existential and cultural meanings. — Wayfarer
You make the multi-faith movement sound really cool. :up:I wasn’t addressing what is “good” about religion, but it is good to consider the “other.” By “other” I mean everything that isn’t self: the external world, other people, etc. This is better than narcissism. Interactions with other people doesn’t have to be about common goals; I think we benefit (both individually and collectively) from positive socialization. So there’s a lot of good that can come out of religion. Some bad comes out as well (e.g. child molestation, organizing hate against gays, …) but on balance, I think there is more good than harm. — Relativist
Right, and I would agree. I think that mainline churches make a lot of sense in a post truth age.There also is a chance that Jesus is actually the Son of God, and the purpose of His Church is our salvation. Just sayin. — Rank Amateur
I even find that there are some aspects of non-religion that can be satisfying.Religion is to offer a unifying vision of human life. One interacts with a religion (and its adherents) if one finds its vision of human life inspiring, or even merely satisfying. — Janus
You're not, you're a highly developed neanderthal blessed by the God of creation with the ability to believe.People insult me for believing in God and act like I'm a neanderthal.... — Ram
True, truth can be hard to take in. I know that's not what you mean but I just thought I'd just add to the argument.I'm against special treatment for religion. All religions, like all philosophies, have their pros and cons. — S
This is why I believe Christianity went through a reformation.Yet some religious folks would have you believe that their religion is the one true religion that everyone should follow, that's it's wrong to be critical of their religion, that their religion gets a special exemption, and should not be viewed in a similar vein to philosophies or even other religions. — S
Right, and I would agree. I think that mainline churches make a lot of sense in a post truth age. — MountainDwarf
I wonder if it's just natural for religious leaders to abuse people or if it's a product of the modern church. — MountainDwarf
The proposition that God is, and the purpose of religion is salvation, is as valid a proposition as the others proposed here. And although agreed, the ultimate belief would be based on faith, it is a proposition that can be tested by reason. — Rank Amateur
For me, it is very simple. I believe what I believe. Others believe the same, others don't believe the same. — Ram
I even find that there are some aspects of non-religion that can be satisfying. — MountainDwarf
I also think you are misusing the term, "liberal". The people that are commonly called "liberals" in America are actually authoritarian socialists, not liberals at all. Libertarians are the only true liberals. — Harry Hindu
The essential or primary purpose is to provide a system of meaning that can bind a community in common values and purpose, like a kind of glue that holds a tribe together.
— praxis
Surely this is a big factor. An essential purpose of religion? Ok, agreed.
But the primary purpose of religion is ultimately personal. — Jake
Religions don't go on for thousands of years based on abstractions like "binding a community together in common values and purpose". — Jake
Given the above, we necessarily interact with religion socially. Glue has no purpose without things to bind.
— praxis
So religion is only good if it brings people toward a common goal? — MountainDwarf
You could make the same arguments for the other religions, so you haven't yet differentiated yourself from any other religion.Furthermore, the whole concept that a theist has to be able to provide some sort of "proof" that other people can see is absurd.
I've never seen Alaska. Alaska exists whether I've seen it or not. — Ram
I used to be a theist. Now I'm an atheist. I know what theists believe because I used to believe. Knowing what I know now, it would be absurd for me to go back to believing it. Think about as trying to go back and believe in the Tooth Fairy - which has the same amount and type of evidence as the existence of any god.The non-theists don't know why the theists believe. You don't know what the person has experienced to make them believe. I've read Bertrand Russell, Dawkins, Sagan, etc. I've studied the atheist side and I know it pretty well. — Ram
Then we believe what we believe based on his will and therefore are not responsible for own actions or beliefs. We believe what we believe because he wills it. You have no independence and are not in control of your own actions.We are not disembodied minds. We are people and we have experiences. Allah guides whom He wills — Ram
No. You haven't even made any argument that is any different from any other religious belief or the result of a delusion.Epistemology from an Islamic perspective is totally different from most Western epistemology and Western-minded people will likely attack it because the epistemologies are alien to each other. My thinking won't necessarily fit into someone else's preconceived framework (frequently based on the presuppositions of the Enlightenment). — Ram
Then we believe what we believe based on his will and therefore are not responsible for own actions or beliefs. We believe what we believe because he wills it. You have no independence and are not in control of your own actions. — Harry Hindu
.I used to be a theist. Now I'm an atheist. I know what theists believe because I used to believe.
.Knowing what I know now, it would be absurd for me to go back to believing it.
.Think about as trying to go back and believe in the Tooth Fairy - which has the same amount and type of evidence as the existence of any god.
No, you don’t.
.
You know what some Theists believe.
.
You know what you used to believe, and what your acquaintances and co-worshippers, you pastor, and your Bible said. — Michael Ossipoff
So then you must be an Aggressive Atheist against the Greek and Norse gods, or the Hindu gods, or Egyptian gods, and Muslim gods, even Tooth Fairies and unicorns, elves, hobbits, dragons, demons, angels, etc., because you make claims of disbelief in such things, no? Strange that you seem to be an "Aggressive Atheist" yourself when it comes to all these other things. We both agree that those things do not exist. I am just declaring my disbelief in one more thing than you do - your particular god that you claim exists while rejecting all the others that have been claimed to exist. Why the particular preference for the god of the Jews? What does Ram say about the existence of the god of the Jews?Alright, if the Tooth-Fairy “has the same evidence and existence as” the God that you used to believe in, then speak for yourself when you talk about Theists.
.
As I’ve said many times, the aggressive Atheist’s God, his One True God that he fervently and loudly believes in disbelieving in, is always the God of the Fundamentalist Biblical-Literalists.
.
In that sense, it isn’t an exaggeration to say that the aggressive Atheist is a Fundamentalist Biblical-Literalist. — Michael Ossipoff
Uh huh. If it is so complex, and Allah's intentions are beyond our understanding, how is it that you have come to understand? Are you not making similar claims that one with delusions of grandeur would make?It is more complex than that. Allah chooses who He guides and Allah is Just. — Ram
Social or personal doesn’t speak to purpose, and in any case, pretty much anything could be construed as ultimately personal, so I’m not sure what you’re trying to say here. — praxis
.”No, you don’t.
.
“You know what some Theists believe.
.
“You know what you used to believe, and what your acquaintances and co-worshippers, you pastor, and your Bible said.” — Michael Ossipoff
.
After over 20 years of being a theist and then the next 26 years of being an atheist that interacted with theists, I have yet to meet one theist that didn't make the same kind of arguments and make the same mistakes in logic.
.You and Ram are making the same claims. They are no different than any other theist's claims.
…rather more than one :D”Alright, if the Tooth-Fairy “has the same evidence and existence as” the God that you used to believe in, then speak for yourself when you talk about Theists.
.
“As I’ve said many times, the aggressive Atheist’s God, his One True God that he fervently and loudly believes in disbelieving in, is always the God of the Fundamentalist Biblical-Literalists.
.
“In that sense, it isn’t an exaggeration to say that the aggressive Atheist is a Fundamentalist Biblical-Literalist.” — Michael Ossipoff
.
So then you must be an Aggressive Atheist against the Greek and Norse gods, or the Hindu gods, or Egyptian gods, and Muslim gods, even Tooth Fairies and unicorns, elves, hobbits, dragons, demons, angels, etc., because you make claims of disbelief in such things, no? Strange that you seem to be an "Aggressive Atheist" yourself when it comes to all these other things. We both agree that those things do not exist. I am just declaring my disbelief in one more thing than you do
.- your particular god that you claim exists…
.…while rejecting all the others that have been claimed to exist.
.Why the particular preference for the god of the Jews?
.It is not fundamental to be open-minded to reasonable and logical solutions. You and Ram have yet to provide any.
Simple. Claims that are made without any evidence (like the claims of the existence of some god (like the god of the Jews)) are placed in the heap with all the other claims with no evidence (like the claims that some other god exists (like the god of the Muslims). They both carry the same amount of evidence - none. Which one should I believe in? Or should it be some other god? Please help me determine which claim with no evidence I should go with. Why would I choose one over some other? Isn't it the existence of evidence that drives us one way or the other?You aren’t being very clear with us about what kind of a reasonable and logical solution you have. What is your reasonable and logical solution? — Michael Ossipoff
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.