Believing in God doesn't make me happy or a better person. — Gregory

Some people actually need god to be happy and ethical; they need the threat of eternal damnation and have masochistic cravings for vicarious and literal-minded redemption in the eyes of a creator who would see us suffer.

Some people actually need god to be happy and ethical; they need the threat of eternal damnation and have masochistic cravings for vicarious and literal-minded redemption in the eyes of a creator who would see us suffer. — ToothyMaw

One of the reasons that religion is meaningful is that man needs something above himself to base his morality on. With this foundation, he rationalizes every damn thing and ends up committing great atrocities in the name of his intellectual depravity.

"without this foundation" above

One of the reasons that religion is meaningful is that man needs something above himself to base his morality on. — synthesis

That is assuming god exists; if god does not exist then revelation is merely another morality devised by men, wholly like any other ethical theory people might come up with and perpetrate injustices in the name of - except religion cannot have any competitors.

Btw, you can click on the dots below your comment then the pencil and then you can edit what you have written.

That is assuming god exists; if god does not exist then revelation is merely another morality devised by men, wholly like any other ethical theory people might come up with and perpetrate injustices in the name of - except religion cannot have any competitors. — ToothyMaw

The beauty of it is that it does not matter whether God exists or not. If you believe in a power higher than yourself, this supplies a moral compass (higher than what man is capable of) to follow. Otherwise, man uses his intellect to cook-up all kinds of mischief.

Thank you!

The beauty of it is that it does not matter whether God exists or not. If you believe in a power higher than yourself, this supplies a moral compass (higher than what man is capable of) to follow. Otherwise, man uses his intellect to cook-up all kinds of mischief. — synthesis

My point is that an ethical accepted on faith is no more valid than an ethic arrived at through reason. In fact, I would say the one arrived at through reason is superior.

My point is that an ethical accepted on faith is no more valid than an ethic arrived at through reason. In fact, I would say the one arrived at through reason is superior. — ToothyMaw

Look at human history. It's not the case. When God disappears, all Hell breaks loose.

In fact, I would say the one arrived at through reason is superior. — ToothyMaw

So you believe that mortal man can derive an ethic that is superior to God, (who happens to be all-everything)? That's reaching a bit, no?

The mysticism of the world can provide a ground for morality. The word "dead" refers to a mammal that has died. I don't see matter as "dead" but having all kinds of reality. I just don't get how people can be motivated to struggle on in order to spend the future worshipping a God who didn't struggle but had everything given him by reality. It just doesn't make sense

Look at human history. It's not the case. When God disappears, all Hell breaks loose. — synthesis

Just because some tremendously evil despots were atheist doesn't mean that atheism, or just a lack of belief in god, is a system of beliefs that motivates people to do evil things. That requires actual, enshrined beliefs, such as ultranationalism.

The mysticism of the world can provide a ground for morality. — Gregory

How so?

I just don't get how people can be motivated to struggle on in order to spend the future worshiping a God who didn't struggle but had everything given him by reality. It just doesn't make sense — Gregory

That's not what it's about which is why it doesn't make sense to you. You are treating this as it is some kind of contest. God provides a framework. You aspire to live your life the best you can using the Ideal as a mentor (so to speak). If doesn't matter whether God is real or imagined, just that S/He has laid down what is the proper path (which is a bit different from culture to culture, but pretty much the same).

That's what Kant said and I like his philosophy.

Just because some tremendously evil despots were atheist doesn't mean that atheism, or just a lack of belief in god, is a system of beliefs that motivates people to do evil things. That requires actual, enshrined beliefs, such as ultranationalism. — ToothyMaw

Perhaps, but man has demonstrated that he needs guidance. On his own, he comes up with all kinds of ways to rationalize every damn thing. Just look at what the elite and their lackeys in the professional/administrative classes have been doing over the last 50 years or so in the West.

I like people, but get more than two of them together and its no so wonderful. Even if you believe that individuals can get it together, certainly groups cannot. This is why the U.S. Constitution was written to work for a God-fearing people only. The Founders knew it would not work for those who believed they could figure it out on their own...and this has been known for a long, long time.

God is transcendent because he is immanent and vice verse. But when theists make it out as if God exists like a scientific object, out there watching us, or that he is dark energy, the whole picture changes for me and it sounds rather ridiculous

It's been a long time since I've read any Kant, but I believe that people need to see themselves as part of the whole (part of Nature) instead of above Nature. Our intellect is pretty rudimentary, at best.

But our independence is important. To be a sheep can become a disease

I think for most. The folks who are most enlightened on the subject take it to the next level because God and religion are just the intellectualization of what it really is (the spirituality). It really begins to make more sense once you approach it from a non-intellectual perspective.

To me, independence means freedom from all forms of intellectual oppression (distortion). EVERYBODY wants you to think like they do (actually, they would rather cut to the chase and just have you send them a check, but they have to take it in a stepped fashion).

Perhaps, but man has demonstrated that he needs guidance. — synthesis

Guidance from a god that would have us suffer for no apparent reason? A god that would have us stone a woman to death for being an adulteress? That would have us discriminate against LGBTQ people?

How about no.

I like people, but get more than two of them together and its no so wonderful. Even if you believe that individuals can get it together, certainly groups cannot. — synthesis

Yes, tribalism is an issue, but if anything religion reinforces tribalistic thinking; quite a few Jewish people, for instance, seem to believe that it is okay to steal Palestinian land on the basis that it was given to them by god.

the U.S. Constitution was written to work for a God-fearing people only. The Founders knew it would not work for those who believed they could figure it out on their own...and this has been known for a long, long time — synthesis

No, the constitution was written precisely for the people who thought that they could figure it out on their own; the point of the constitution was to guarantee equality before the law, freedom of speech/the press, etc. These are all measures to protect the vulnerable and allow for dissent. You seem to be describing a theocracy, not a constitutional republic.

Well God for me is the reason I had for being good as a child. I don't like when people try to prove God

Perhaps, but man has demonstrated that he needs guidance.
— synthesis

Guidance from a god that would have us suffer for no apparent reason? A god that would have us stone a woman to death for being an adulteress? That would have us discriminate against LGBTQ people. — ToothyMaw

God is not man's creation of God. You have to transcend the stories and get into the heart of the matter. The stories were written for another time. I am sure somebody could write contemporary stories that you would like better, but that's not the point.

God is two things. One, He provides a moral ideal, a place to seek guidance when the weaker parts of us want to dominate. More importantly, all religion implores its followers to go beyond the words and seek those deeper things that vex us all.

God has been around for a long time and looks like He isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

Religions fight each other

People have been fighting each other over every damn thing forever, as religion (wealth and power) is always at the top. Much (if not most) of the Middle East feuding is about resources and wealth.

God is not man's creation of God. You have to transcend the stories and get into the heart of the matter. The stories were written for another time. I am sure somebody could write contemporary stories that you would like better, but that's not the point. — synthesis

Yes, I'm sure we could write some contemporary stories about, for instance, supremacists stealing the land of the dehumanized based on a belief in being the chosen people. Or maybe about forcing raped women to carry their babies to term? Or perhaps about all of the LGBTQ people in the more grim corners of the world who chafe under the yoke of Christian oppression?

But then why do people try to prove there is a God instead of keeping it in personalistic terms? When I hear these people it's like they are forcing their father on me and insisting he is looking at me with actual eyeballs all the time. I act morally, I have a sense for the spiritual, and I love my actual dad. But then they go trying to prove that it's a historical fact that Jesus is God and I'm like "I tried Christianity and it's not helping my life anymore" but they say I must be bad. Instead of denying their Jesus they will throw other people under the bus and accuse them. This is the face of most religion

But then why do people try to prove there is a God instead of keeping it in personalistic terms? — Gregory

Because the prospect of ruling over the world is so attractive.

I would also add that Christians don't think Jesus died just as an example of love or to give us strength. It's about atonement for them. God becomes man they say so that man can become God, which means taking on God's merits. They take a highly personal thing (sin and goodness) and believe bad people (who they think is everyone) can swap their demerits for God's merits just by having faith. It's an enticing doctrine but is clearly demonic. Christians aren't authentic. I bet even Jesus doesn't truly believe in Jesus. It's all play acting and the opposite of humility because Christianity is not authentic