Archive for nglreturns.myfreeforum.org Nglreturns is a forum to discuss religion, philosophy, ethics etc...

NGLReturns Daily Quiz - Play here!
 



       nglreturns.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> All faiths and none
Boss Cat

Being wrong

I am a believer.  Even at times when I don't believe, like now, I still act as though I do.  Like most believers I have shallow times but I have faith that my faith will return, I would put money on that one.   Another reason I choose faith regardless is that it allows, it actually rests on, not knowing.

Right now though...I will go to church tomorrow because that's what believers do, I will make decisions pretending there is a God and I will say my prayers because I always do.  But I will be sitting there thinking 'how can any intelligent person actually believe this?  You have to be really unquestioningly moronic to actually believe it.'

Yet in my own church are some pretty bright people,  and you will find similar in many churches tomorrow.  Some of the greatest brains ever have believed in God in some form or other.

So I must be wrong about something; either I am wrong about some believers being clever or I am wrong about belief in God being for the - er - less intellectually gifted.  And another thing,  I have believed in God, and what's more I am pretty certain I will believe again.  So either I was wrong and will be wrong or I am wrong now.  

I know some unbelievers on here have been believers so the one thing they know is that they have been wrong so they can be wrong.   Yet they seem to KNOW they are right!

How on earth can people be so certain?
Leonard James

As I have just observed on another thread, nobody knows whether God exists or not ... and only a fool claims otherwise.

However, we have evolved an ability to reason far beyond that of other animals, and we are more or less powerless to contradict it. We can't reason ourselves into believing something that we know isn't true.

For things that we don't actually know the truth of, we can only let our reason assess the evidence for it, and that is where the great difficulty occurs. For some people the evidence for God is convincing, but for others it isn't, and there is nothing we can do to change that except search for more convincing evidence.

I lost my belief early in life, and in the sixty odd years since then have been presented by believers with all kinds of argument for God, but none have convinced me, and I remain a firm atheist.
Lexilogio

Belief is often reflected in the conviction that one is right - and by belief I refer to the wider sense of any conviction, such as who did the washing up last night etc...


Belief in God is not moronic. It doesn't mean rejecting science, or reasoning, or a sceptical nature. Belief in God is simply about the view that there is a spiritual power of goodness which may or may not nfluence humans from time to time. Christianity is a narrower band within belief, and reflects what I think are historical events, with a thoughtful reasoning of implications and building on earlier understanding. So if a is correct, then b and c must also follow.

Some of the greatest thinkers were religious - their belief shaped the directions of their thoughts. For example, St Augustine.

Karen Armstrong is well worth reading. She has lost her faith, but presents a fascinating history and view on why people believe.
Leonard James

Some people need to believe in a god of some sort to make their life fulfilled and happy. Atheists don't have that need, and live happy, fulfilled lives without it.
Boss Cat

Yes I think we should try to look at the evidence as objectively as we can.  Except that it's not evidence that is making my faith a bit feeble at the moment, I mean there's evidence that there's something about Jesus in the existence of the Church after all.    But we believe on many levels and I don't think turning it into an intellectual exercise gets us very far, really.

I don't believe in ghosts but I wouldn't spend a night alone in a haunted house, I'd be too scared whatever my reason tells me.  No it's other parts of me that have their say sometimes, we have to give our rational minds a bit of a rest, a chance to listen to the rest of us.

I think we should be careful about making judgements about other people's rationality.   If some mega brain believes in God - and many have and do - then we might ask ourselves if they haven't got something we've missed.

When we used to say 'Sir this doesn't make sense' my old Latin teacher used to say 'You mean you can't make it make sense'.  Good advice.

And for the record I'm glad I went to church today; maybe spirituality was a bit dormant but care and love were much in evidence.  Let not your heart be troubled as it says.
Leonard James

We can only use our own ability to reason, and accept its results. It isn't possible for us to reason the way somebody else does, and if our reason tells us that the evidence for God is valid or not valid, we can't decide to believe the opposite.
Lexilogio

Leonard James wrote:
Some people need to believe in a god of some sort to make their life fulfilled and happy. Atheists don't have that need, and live happy, fulfilled lives without it.


Only for a few. I do not need to believe. I simply can't rid myself of the conviction that God exists. So if God exists..... And on that is built the rest of my faith. It stems from what for me is an inescapable fact.

Belief in life after death is often what people need. For me, that is a later possibility built on God existing.
Ketty

Re: Being wrong

Boss Cat wrote:

Right now though...I will go to church tomorrow because that's what believers do, I will make decisions pretending there is a God and I will say my prayers because I always do.  But I will be sitting there thinking 'how can any intelligent person actually believe this?  You have to be really unquestioningly moronic to actually believe it.'


Why do you think you are just outwardly going through the motions?  Who are you fooling?

You're not fooling God, BC
You're not fooling yourself.

“I believe; help my unbelief!”

If you go to a church, have you confided in some mature Christians in your fellowship?  What about your minister?
Shrub Dweller

Boss Cat

As St Paul said,"When I was a child I spoke like a child ......"

I had a certain view point when I was a child and it looked to me to be true but when I grew up I could see that it was wrong and childish for a grown man to have such disposition. I have no wish to go back to that view point, I have grown up. All I see, for the most part, in my life is a progression in my understanding of life, though it hasn't been a straight line. That wrongness of my childhood does not cast doubts on the position I hold now. Being wrong then is of a lower order and therefore brings with it no doubts or unsureties to the present.

I wonder, from your OP, whether it is your belief that waxes and wanes or whether it's your need for the social integrity and comfort that the church gives you ?
Shrub Dweller

Boss Cat wrote:

If some mega brain believes in God - and many have and do - then we might ask ourselves if they haven't got something we've missed.

Those in the past were educated to believe that God/JC were a given and they then used their intelligence to work out the order of things from that standpoint. Their great minds didn't fathom the truth of God but only weaved what was left around it. It was this latter part that they are known for their greatness.
Shrub Dweller

Lexilogio wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
Some people need to believe in a god of some sort to make their life fulfilled and happy. Atheists don't have that need, and live happy, fulfilled lives without it.


Only for a few. I do not need to believe. I simply can't rid myself of the conviction that God exists. So if God exists..... And on that is built the rest of my faith. It stems from what for me is an inescapable fact.

Belief in life after death is often what people need. For me, that is a later possibility built on God existing.

How do you relate this inner conviction that God exists to your christianity ? Why not some other faith ?
Leonard James

Lexilogio wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
Some people need to believe in a god of some sort to make their life fulfilled and happy. Atheists don't have that need, and live happy, fulfilled lives without it.


Only for a few. I do not need to believe. I simply can't rid myself of the conviction that God exists.

I understand that, Lexi. You learned about God when young and became convinced that he existed, and your ability to reason is now not strong enough to overcome that instilled belief. That is the power of indoctrinating young people. Others come to believe later in life simply because they feel something is lacking, and need to fill the lack to live fulfilled lives.
Quote:
So if God exists..... And on that is built the rest of my faith. It stems from what for me is an inescapable fact.

Belief in life after death is often what people need. For me, that is a later possibility built on God existing.

Yes, once belief is accepted, all sorts of emergent properties derive from it ... you only have to read all the different claims made by Christians to realise that.
cyberman

Leonard James wrote:
You learned about God when young and became convinced that he existed, and your ability to reason is now not strong enough to overcome that instilled belief. That is the power of indoctrinating young people. Others come to believe later in life simply because they feel something is lacking, and need to fill the lack to live fulfilled lives.


Do you believe that all theists come within one of these two categories, and that there are no other reasons for believing God to exist?

It all seems a little self-congratulatory to me! "I am a bit better and a bit stronger than you, so I am an atheist and you are not".
Boss Cat

I might be mistaken on this one but there does sometimes seem a smug, elitist arrogance among some atheists and I do find that unattractive.  I don't want to be part of that.  Interestingly, as we become more secular I predict that believers will start to attract the quality -  but that's a belief.  We'll wait and see.

But Ketty asks who do I think I'm fooling, God or myself.  Well I don't think I'm fooling God but I do seem to confusing myself.
Boss Cat

Shrub I am sure you are not being crass enough to equate your belief in God as being the sort of thing children believe but that you have grown out of are you?  You aren't specific as to the type of childish beliefs you are referring to  and I am sure you are too sophisticated not to say oh religious belief is something children do but grown ups grow out of.  If you are saying that that is absolute drivel.

However, you have a point if you are saying sometimes we do grow out of beliefs and thinking because we grow up.  However, I would add a caveat - you might think you are completely grown up now and can be certain you've got it all but many of us recognise that we have a lot of learning to do and in my case I was sometimes right the first time, eg, dad was a good man who gave me good advice because he loved me.  That's what I thought when I was a kid.   I thought he was a fascist git when I was in my teens twenties, wrong! (though like all of us he had his moments).

Anyway, do I go to church for social integrity and comfort? no I go because I always have,it's habit, and I enjoy the ritual, music, colour, drama etc.  I have some friends there and the vicar is pretty sound.  I don't think going to church gives you social integrity nowadays, do you?  It's generally a social no-no, most people assume I am some sort of simpleton when I tell them what I do on Sunday morning.  Well, actually, they normally know them by now so what happens is I see the look of surprise as they try to reconcile who they know with their assumptions about Christians.

As for comfort, yes there is some comfort to be had from, say Mother Julian's All will be well and injunctions not to worry.  But that's pretty sound advice generally, isn't it? And there are demands too you know.
genghiscant

Quote:
I might be mistaken on this one but there does sometimes seem a smug, elitist arrogance among some atheists


Are you saying that you've never seen this among Christians you've met?
cyberman

genghiscant wrote:
Quote:
I might be mistaken on this one but there does sometimes seem a smug, elitist arrogance among some atheists


Are you saying that you've never seen this among Christians you've met?


Yes, genghiscant wants to be sure you don't think he is arrogant and elitist. This is the chap who states that all religious believers are 'pathetic' - even specifically including Martin Luther King jr, and other prominent believers, among those he believes were pathetic men. The man who calls every single reader on the boards a "twat" via his signature.

Yes, genghiscant, you are the very model of humility and reason.
genghiscant

Quote:
Yes, genghiscant, you are the very model of humility and reason.


Thankyou.
cyberman

genghiscant wrote:
Quote:
Yes, genghiscant, you are the very model of humility and reason.


Thankyou.


A 'model' of course being a tiny little man with no organs.
genghiscant

Quote:
Yes, genghiscant, you are the very model of humility and reason.



Quote:
Thankyou.



Quote:
A 'model' of course being a tiny little man with no organs.


And a cyberman just does what he's told, in your case by some old git in Rome.
Ketty

Boss Cat wrote:

But Ketty asks who do I think I'm fooling, God or myself.  Well I don't think I'm fooling God but I do seem to confusing myself.




I don't have any smart answers for the fact you're confusing yourself - at least you recognise the situation.  Maybe that's the first step on the road to being less confused.

Do you have any trusted mature-in-faith Christians with whom you can be open?  People who can talk with you; accept who you are and where you are on your faith journey just now; who can study the Word with you; who can pray with you?
Lexilogio

Shrub Dweller wrote:
Lexilogio wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
Some people need to believe in a god of some sort to make their life fulfilled and happy. Atheists don't have that need, and live happy, fulfilled lives without it.


Only for a few. I do not need to believe. I simply can't rid myself of the conviction that God exists. So if God exists..... And on that is built the rest of my faith. It stems from what for me is an inescapable fact.

Belief in life after death is often what people need. For me, that is a later possibility built on God existing.

How do you relate this inner conviction that God exists to your christianity ? Why not some other faith ?


Interesting question. I did explore other faiths for a while. Buddhism, for example, has some very interesting aspects. The Dalai Llama's views on anger are well worth reading. Perfect antidote for road rage.

There is an element that Christianity was comfortable. Islam doesn't make logical sense to me (I studied the Pillars of Islam as part of my first degree), nor does Judaism. I can't accept that a loving God would rule people in or out of heaven based on their parentage.

And as for the rest? Well. There is one God. So pretty much went through the rest.
Lexilogio

Leonard James wrote:
Lexilogio wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
Some people need to believe in a god of some sort to make their life fulfilled and happy. Atheists don't have that need, and live happy, fulfilled lives without it.


Only for a few. I do not need to believe. I simply can't rid myself of the conviction that God exists.

I understand that, Lexi. You learned about God when young and became convinced that he existed, and your ability to reason is now not strong enough to overcome that instilled belief. That is the power of indoctrinating young people. Others come to believe later in life simply because they feel something is lacking, and need to fill the lack to live fulfilled lives.


But my parents didn't really believe when I was young - and my Gran was a confirmed atheist.

And I have a very strong reasoning ability. Belief is not about the ability to reason. We all hold beliefs. That is part of being human. Our requirement for speed of thought requires us to use the process of belief and assumption within our thinking (Reason, 1980)(Shultz, 2010)

You believe that the Universe was created by the Big Bang. I simply ask what happened before that, and why it happened.
Leonard James

Morning Cyber,
cyberman wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
You learned about God when young and became convinced that he existed, and your ability to reason is now not strong enough to overcome that instilled belief. That is the power of indoctrinating young people. Others come to believe later in life simply because they feel something is lacking, and need to fill the lack to live fulfilled lives.


Do you believe that all theists come within one of these two categories, and that there are no other reasons for believing God to exist?

No, of course not ... but I believe those are two of the principle reasons for belief.


Quote:
It all seems a little self-congratulatory to me! "I am a bit better and a bit stronger than you, so I am an atheist and you are not".

Most of us believe we are right in our conclusions, and for me, sitting on the fence is not a comfortable position.
Leonard James

Morning Lexi,
Lexilogio wrote:

But my parents didn't really believe when I was young - and my Gran was a confirmed atheist.

Nevertheless the idea of God obviously appealed to you enough to convince you.
Quote:
And I have a very strong reasoning ability.

Most believers have in all other respects.
Quote:
Belief is not about the ability to reason.

Of course it is. Your ability to reason has looked at the evidence and found it convincing.
Quote:
We all hold beliefs. That is part of being human.

Yes, indeed. But we can't make ourselves hold beliefs that our reason tells us are untrue.
Quote:
Our requirement for speed of thought requires us to use the process of belief and assumption within our thinking (Reason, 1980)(Shultz, 2010)

I confess to not understanding what this means, but speed of thought has nothing to do with believing. We can take as much time as we want considering the evidence.

Quote:
You believe that the Universe was created by the Big Bang. I simply ask what happened before that, and why it happened.

So do I ... but I am happy to accept that so far nobody knows.
Lexilogio

Leonard James wrote:
Morning Lexi,
Lexilogio wrote:

But my parents didn't really believe when I was young - and my Gran was a confirmed atheist.

Nevertheless the idea of God obviously appealed to you enough to convince you.
Quote:
And I have a very strong reasoning ability.

Most believers have in all other respects.
Quote:
Belief is not about the ability to reason.

Of course it is. Your ability to reason has looked at the evidence and found it convincing.
Quote:
We all hold beliefs. That is part of being human.

Yes, indeed. But we can't make ourselves hold beliefs that our reason tells us are untrue.
Quote:
Our requirement for speed of thought requires us to use the process of belief and assumption within our thinking (Reason, 1980)(Shultz, 2010)

I confess to not understanding what this means, but speed of thought has nothing to do with believing. We can take as much time as we want considering the evidence.

Quote:
You believe that the Universe was created by the Big Bang. I simply ask what happened before that, and why it happened.

So do I ... but I am happy to accept that so far nobody knows.


Speed of thought has everything to do with belief, as the authors point out. It is our ability, evolved through need, to think and act without waiting for empirical evidence. Without this, we would not have the capacity for belief itself.

Reasoning is done both with and without empirical evidence, as required. A hypothesis is made without empirical evidence, then to be tested. The existence of God cannot be proved either way. Which makes all views on the existence of God, belief. Which way that belief is held, for or against, is not an indicator of the persons ability to reason, for there is no empirical evidence available.
Leonard James

Lexilogio wrote:

Speed of thought has everything to do with belief, as the authors point out. It is our ability, evolved through need, to think and act without waiting for empirical evidence. Without this, we would not have the capacity for belief itself.

Reasoning is done both with and without empirical evidence, as required. A hypothesis is made without empirical evidence, then to be tested. The existence of God cannot be proved either way. Which makes all views on the existence of God, belief. Which way that belief is held, for or against, is not an indicator of the persons ability to reason, for there is no empirical evidence available.

No, Lexi, I'm afraid that is not how belief originates. It stems from the first information that you receive about God, the stories you hear and the things you read.

THAT is the evidence your reason accesses and weighs up, and the process takes some time. It has nothing to do with those split second decisions that we make in life or death situations ... when there is no time for reasoning and we act on basic instincts or intuitions.
cyberman

Leonard James wrote:
I'm afraid that is not how belief originates. It stems from the first information that you receive about God, the stories you hear and the things you read.


So belief in God stems from someone else's belief in God.... How did that all start, then?
Leonard James

cyberman wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
I'm afraid that is not how belief originates. It stems from the first information that you receive about God, the stories you hear and the things you read.


So belief in God stems from someone else's belief in God.... How did that all start, then?

Human imagination. Otherwise how do you account for the myriad of gods that have been believed to exist?
Shaker

Quote:
I have a very strong reasoning ability.


Quote:
Most believers have in all other respects.

And it's those "other respects" that make all the difference.
cyberman

Leonard James wrote:
cyberman wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
I'm afraid that is not how belief originates. It stems from the first information that you receive about God, the stories you hear and the things you read.


So belief in God stems from someone else's belief in God.... How did that all start, then?

Human imagination. Otherwise how do you account for the myriad of gods that have been believed to exist?


So belief doesn't always stem from the stories you hear and the things you read. It is good that you are able to adapt your theories on the hoof!
Lexilogio

Leonard James wrote:
Lexilogio wrote:

Speed of thought has everything to do with belief, as the authors point out. It is our ability, evolved through need, to think and act without waiting for empirical evidence. Without this, we would not have the capacity for belief itself.

Reasoning is done both with and without empirical evidence, as required. A hypothesis is made without empirical evidence, then to be tested. The existence of God cannot be proved either way. Which makes all views on the existence of God, belief. Which way that belief is held, for or against, is not an indicator of the persons ability to reason, for there is no empirical evidence available.

No, Lexi, I'm afraid that is not how belief originates. It stems from the first information that you receive about God, the stories you hear and the things you read.

THAT is the evidence your reason accesses and weighs up, and the process takes some time. It has nothing to do with those split second decisions that we make in life or death situations ... when there is no time for reasoning and we act on basic instincts or intuitions.


I'm sorry Leonard, but you really should read some of the academic psychologists on this issue. One individual's belief may be influenced by what they hear, but belief itself comes from the brain's capability in thinking quickly, requiring assumptions to be made. I would have thought you would have been eager to embrace the role of belief in evolution.

There has been considerable literature on the way the human brain thinks in the last 30 years.
Boss Cat

Thanks Ketty, I don't really mind having low periods of faith, as I say faith always returns and it never really goes away completely(well not since my early twenties really and even then I don't suppose it really did).  Neither does doubt ever completely vanish come to that!  I do and have discussed this with others, including vicars and priests and they seem to think this is pretty normal and healthy.

Even when I believe in God there are times when I don't really like him.

Actually when I have the times when I think what asinine rubbish! it tends to be part of a bigger picture and lead up to bigger insights.

Do you remember when you were learning maths and you suddenly got something and then you moved onto something else and had to kind of revisit the bits you thought you had all sewn up?  Or when you've gone wrong, like when you're knitting and have to unpick a bit to move on?  Sometimes the only way forward is backwards!
Boss Cat

Actually genghis, never is a big word and not only would it be inaccurate to say Christians are never elitist or arrogant or smug or whatever it would be actually against the faith to think being Christian meant you could not be those things.

However, I have to say that I have noticed a pretty nasty trend among some atheist writings.  Not all by any means, of course, and I have heard/read many atheists who recognise this and don't like it.

And I have to say your tag line does suggest that you don't really think much of other people does it?

I saw a ruder version in a card once; I thought it very funny and laughed my head off.  But wouldn't really want to send it to anyone I really didn't like, that would be cruel.  Friends, maybe.  But I certainly wouldn't want to be as indiscriminate with it as you are.

Funny the first time; after that it just tells us a lot about you but not much about anyone else.
genghiscant

Quote:
However, I have to say that I have noticed a pretty nasty trend among some atheist writings.  Not all by any means, of course, and I have heard/read many atheists who recognise this and don't like it.


Being elitist or arrogant or smug is part of the human condition, I don't see why you singled out atheists.

The nasty trend you've noticed in some atheist writings is a pretty mild burden for you to bear, compared to religion. You don't get many atheist suicide bombers. Muslim against Christian & visa versa, Muslim against Hindu, Muslim against Muslim & everyone against the Jews. Religion has left a trail of death, destruction & misery since it was invented. Millions of people have been slaughtered in the name of various Gods & still Christians claim that their God is loving & caring. Utter nonsense.

My signature tells you nothing about me or what I think of other people, except, the special contempt I have for the hypocrisy of religions.
Leonard James

cyberman wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
cyberman wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
I'm afraid that is not how belief originates. It stems from the first information that you receive about God, the stories you hear and the things you read.


So belief in God stems from someone else's belief in God.... How did that all start, then?

Human imagination. Otherwise how do you account for the myriad of gods that have been believed to exist?


So belief doesn't always stem from the stories you hear and the things you read. It is good that you are able to adapt your theories on the hoof!

You don't need the brain of Einstein to realise that all religions orginated from a single individual's mind.
Lexilogio

Leonard James wrote:
cyberman wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
cyberman wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
I'm afraid that is not how belief originates. It stems from the first information that you receive about God, the stories you hear and the things you read.


So belief in God stems from someone else's belief in God.... How did that all start, then?

Human imagination. Otherwise how do you account for the myriad of gods that have been believed to exist?


So belief doesn't always stem from the stories you hear and the things you read. It is good that you are able to adapt your theories on the hoof!

You don't need the brain of Einstein to realise that all religions orginated from a single individual's mind.


You have to be kidding? You seriously believe that? Despite the wealth of evidence to indicate that different religions began in separate areas, with completely different conceptual variances?

I'm sorry Len, but the academic evidence in anthropology and psychology is against you here. You are aware that tribes who have never been in contact with modern humans still have a belief system?
Leonard James

Sorry Lexi, I should have worded it differently ... but obviously I didn't mean they all stemmed from the same individual.

Every religion had a founder, and it was from that individual's mind that the religion began.
Boss Cat

Well Genghis you know yourself better than most people.  But you seem to be dividing the world into two types of people, the baddies who are responsible for all that's bad and who are smug into the bargain and the goodies including you.  Hmm.

If you think religion is the cause of all the ills, the wars, the suffering in the world and nothing good then perhaps you really must have a broader range of reading material.  If only to understand that there are several ways of interpreting events.

So your tag line is addressed only to those who don't agree with you then?  And that would tell us nothing about you?
cyberman

Leonard James wrote:
You don't need the brain of Einstein to realise that all religions orginated from a single individual's mind.


On the contraary, you need to be completely deluded to believe that this might be the case!
cyberman

genghiscant wrote:

My signature tells you nothing about me


It tells me you're a daft cunt
gone

What a pleasant turn of phrase you have, Cyberman!  I suppose it is a substitute for logical thought!
cyberman

floo wrote:
What a pleasant turn of phrase you have, Cyberman!  I suppose it is a substitute for logical thought!


No, it is as well as, not instead of...

I note that you are equally critical of genghiscant's bad language...

Oh wait.... no, you're not!
genghiscant

Don't worry Floo. After working on building sites for 40 years, I've been sworn at by experts. Compared to some of them, cyber is just a squirt.
genghiscant

Quote:
Well Genghis you know yourself better than most people.  But you seem to be dividing the world into two types of people, the baddies who are responsible for all that's bad and who are smug into the bargain and the goodies including you.  Hmm.

If you think religion is the cause of all the ills, the wars, the suffering in the world and nothing good then perhaps you really must have a broader range of reading material.  If only to understand that there are several ways of interpreting events.

So your tag line is addressed only to those who don't agree with you then?  And that would tell us nothing about you?


I suggest you read my post again. Nowhere did I say that there are only two types of people, And further, I haven't said that I am one of the goodies. I also didn't say that religion is the cause of all wars & suffering.
You're reading things into my posts that simply aren't there.

I have no problem with people believing in a God. If it brings them a sense of well being & comfort, good for them.
As I see it, the problems start when people of the same beliefs get together & form religions. They very soon start to tell people how to live their lives, what to wear, what to eat & when. Young girls & boys have their genitals mutilated because their "God demands it". Every religion there has ever been believes that it is the only true one, you probably think the same thing about your religion.
Ever since religions were first formed there has been strife between them, & it's still happening today. You only have to look at the history of the various religions to realise the horrors that have been done in the name of God.

You mention the breadth of my reading material. Might I suggest ' Holy Horrors' by James A. Haught. It will sicken you.

Of course I'm not saying that no good ever comes from religion, that would be untrue, but the sheer brutality & cruelty carried out by religions against people far outweighs any benefit gained.

In short, it's not individual people that I dislike, it's the hypocrisy of organised religions. I believe that religion is a kind of cancer on humanity.

These are my opinions.
cyberman

genghiscant wrote:
Quote:
Well Genghis you know yourself better than most people.  But you seem to be dividing the world into two types of people, the baddies who are responsible for all that's bad and who are smug into the bargain and the goodies including you.  Hmm.

If you think religion is the cause of all the ills, the wars, the suffering in the world and nothing good then perhaps you really must have a broader range of reading material.  If only to understand that there are several ways of interpreting events.

So your tag line is addressed only to those who don't agree with you then?  And that would tell us nothing about you?


I suggest you read my post again. Nowhere did I say that there are only two types of people, And further, I haven't said that I am one of the goodies. I also didn't say that religion is the cause of all wars & suffering.
You're reading things into my posts that simply aren't there.

I have no problem with people believing in a God. If it brings them a sense of well being & comfort, good for them.
As I see it, the problems start when people of the same beliefs get together & form religions. They very soon start to tell people how to live their lives, what to wear, what to eat & when. Young girls & boys have their genitals mutilated because their "God demands it". Every religion there has ever been believes that it is the only true one, you probably think the same thing about your religion.
Ever since religions were first formed there has been strife between them, & it's still happening today. You only have to look at the history of the various religions to realise the horrors that have been done in the name of God.

You mention the breadth of my reading material. Might I suggest ' Holy Horrors' by James A. Haught. It will sicken you.

Of course I'm not saying that no good ever comes from religion, that would be untrue, but the sheer brutality & cruelty carried out by religions against people far outweighs any benefit gained.

In short, it's not individual people that I dislike, it's the hypocrisy of organised religions. I believe that religion is a kind of cancer on humanity.

These are my opinions.


Genghis, are you equally angry about the fact that people hold political beliefs, and form organised groups around these beliefs?
Boss Cat

Thanks Genghis.  You are right, you didn't actually state those things but think about your tone.  You might understand why you might be perceived as having such views - your tag line is not against a vice, it is far more personal than that.  It's against people.

You might think that cyberman is a twat, you might think that I'm one come to that, but I think it a tad arrogant to assume everyone agrees with you.  

Have you quantified the good/evil committed by religious/non-religious?  Where did you do your research?  Isn't it hard to quantify some things or do you say a Cicely Saunders and a Desmond Tutu can knock out one IAN Paisley?  Have you done a body count of anti theist regimes v theocracies v secular regimes with or without a strong religious element (Sweden and Malta, that type of thing).  Incidentally, I thought the original suicide bombers were secular, weren't they?  If you are researching causes of violence you might look at other things too, such as money, land, oil, poverty and tribalism, that kind of thing.  Are there connections there?

Have you compared groups within populations:  are church goers more likely to be criminals/suffer from depression/less likely to give to charity than atheists?  You could ask people like me whether they join violent gangs when they're in a religious/non religious phase.

I think you should read my posts and have a think about the subject of this thread.  Does it sound to you like I think my religion is the only true one?
cyberman

Boss Cat wrote:
Thanks Genghis.  You are right, you didn't actually state those things but think about your tone.  You might understand why you might be perceived as having such views - your tag line is not against a vice, it is far more personal than that.  It's against people.

You might think that cyberman is a twat, you might think that I'm one come to that, but I think it a tad arrogant to assume everyone agrees with you.  

Have you quantified the good/evil committed by religious/non-religious?  Where did you do your research?  Isn't it hard to quantify some things or do you say a Cicely Saunders and a Desmond Tutu can knock out one IAN Paisley?  Have you done a body count of anti theist regimes v theocracies v secular regimes with or without a strong religious element (Sweden and Malta, that type of thing).  Incidentally, I thought the original suicide bombers were secular, weren't they?  If you are researching causes of violence you might look at other things too, such as money, land, oil, poverty and tribalism, that kind of thing.  Are there connections there?

Have you compared groups within populations:  are church goers more likely to be criminals/suffer from depression/less likely to give to charity than atheists?  You could ask people like me whether they join violent gangs when they're in a religious/non religious phase.

I think you should read my posts and have a think about the subject of this thread.  Does it sound to you like I think my religion is the only true one?


Boss Cat it is pointless trying to reason with him. He believes all believers are pathetic. He is blinded by anger and lacks the ability to question his beliefs.
genghiscant

Quote:
Boss Cat it is pointless trying to reason with him. He believes all believers are pathetic. He is blinded by anger and lacks the ability to question his beliefs.


Tell me something. Are you ever going to raise your head above the trench & actually start a thread? All you can do is snipe about other peoples comments. I think you're either frightened of starting a thread or you don't have any opinions of your own.
Leonard James

cyberman wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
You don't need the brain of Einstein to realise that all religions orginated from a single individual's mind.


On the contraary, you need to be completely deluded to believe that this might be the case!

Perhaps you will be kind enough to cite one religion and show that its source wasn't a single individual.
Shaker

genghiscant wrote:
I believe that religion is a kind of cancer on humanity.

Isn't it just.
cyberman

Leonard James wrote:
cyberman wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
You don't need the brain of Einstein to realise that all religions orginated from a single individual's mind.


On the contraary, you need to be completely deluded to believe that this might be the case!

Perhaps you will be kind enough to cite one religion and show that its source wasn't a single individual.


You have stated that all religions started from a single individual. Who was this incredible person??
cyberman

cyberman wrote:
genghiscant wrote:
Quote:
Well Genghis you know yourself better than most people.  But you seem to be dividing the world into two types of people, the baddies who are responsible for all that's bad and who are smug into the bargain and the goodies including you.  Hmm.

If you think religion is the cause of all the ills, the wars, the suffering in the world and nothing good then perhaps you really must have a broader range of reading material.  If only to understand that there are several ways of interpreting events.

So your tag line is addressed only to those who don't agree with you then?  And that would tell us nothing about you?


I suggest you read my post again. Nowhere did I say that there are only two types of people, And further, I haven't said that I am one of the goodies. I also didn't say that religion is the cause of all wars & suffering.
You're reading things into my posts that simply aren't there.

I have no problem with people believing in a God. If it brings them a sense of well being & comfort, good for them.
As I see it, the problems start when people of the same beliefs get together & form religions. They very soon start to tell people how to live their lives, what to wear, what to eat & when. Young girls & boys have their genitals mutilated because their "God demands it". Every religion there has ever been believes that it is the only true one, you probably think the same thing about your religion.
Ever since religions were first formed there has been strife between them, & it's still happening today. You only have to look at the history of the various religions to realise the horrors that have been done in the name of God.

You mention the breadth of my reading material. Might I suggest ' Holy Horrors' by James A. Haught. It will sicken you.

Of course I'm not saying that no good ever comes from religion, that would be untrue, but the sheer brutality & cruelty carried out by religions against people far outweighs any benefit gained.

In short, it's not individual people that I dislike, it's the hypocrisy of organised religions. I believe that religion is a kind of cancer on humanity.

These are my opinions.


Genghis, are you equally angry about the fact that people hold political beliefs, and form organised groups around these beliefs?


I see genghis is nervous about answering this question, so has reverted to his comfort zone and is attacking me instead. What a wanker!
Leonard James

cyberman wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
cyberman wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
You don't need the brain of Einstein to realise that all religions orginated from a single individual's mind.


On the contraary, you need to be completely deluded to believe that this might be the case!

Perhaps you will be kind enough to cite one religion and show that its source wasn't a single individual.


You have stated that all religions started from a single individual. Who was this incredible person??

Already cleared up. Why are you pretending you still misunderstand?
cyberman

Leonard James wrote:
cyberman wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
cyberman wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
You don't need the brain of Einstein to realise that all religions orginated from a single individual's mind.


On the contraary, you need to be completely deluded to believe that this might be the case!

Perhaps you will be kind enough to cite one religion and show that its source wasn't a single individual.


You have stated that all religions started from a single individual. Who was this incredible person??

Already cleared up. Why are you pretending you still misunderstand?


Okey-dokey, I see what you mean.

So how do you reconcile your belief that each religion was started from the mind of an individual, with your belief that faith in the mind of an individual is there because of stories that individual heard as a bairn?
genghiscant

Quote:
Genghis, are you equally angry about the fact that people hold political beliefs, and form organised groups around these beliefs?



Quote:
I see genghis is nervous about answering this question, so has reverted to his comfort zone and is attacking me instead. What a wanker!


Not nervous, just didn't think it was worth answering.
Shrub Dweller

Boss Cat wrote:
I might be mistaken on this one but there does sometimes seem a smug, elitist arrogance among some atheists and I do find that unattractive.  I don't want to be part of that.  Interestingly, as we become more secular I predict that believers will start to attract the quality -  but that's a belief.  We'll wait and see.

If you are saying what I think you are saying, then don't you think that a major polarization is (and has been) going on now. There was a court case in the US in around the 1920's, I think, which kind of brought this process to light. Creationists on one side and the extreme atheists like Dawkings and Dennett on the other.
Shrub Dweller

Boss Cat wrote:
Shrub I am sure you are not being crass enough to equate your belief in God as being the sort of thing children believe but that you have grown out of are you?  You aren't specific as to the type of childish beliefs you are referring to  and I am sure you are too sophisticated not to say oh religious belief is something children do but grown ups grow out of.  If you are saying that that is absolute drivel.

However, you have a point if you are saying sometimes we do grow out of beliefs and thinking because we grow up.  However, I would add a caveat - you might think you are completely grown up now and can be certain you've got it all but many of us recognise that we have a lot of learning to do and in my case I was sometimes right the first time, eg, dad was a good man who gave me good advice because he loved me.  That's what I thought when I was a kid.   I thought he was a fascist git when I was in my teens twenties, wrong! (though like all of us he had his moments).

My point was about growing up or maturing. It is a difficult point to make clear and express well. When I was very young some kid broke my favourite toy. It felt like the end of the world for me and I was inconsolable, but now I just see it as a silly toy and not worth bothering about. Nothing of consequence; a trivial matter. My perspective has changed and it has changed because I have grown up and matured. What once looked like it was highly significant has evaporated away into nothing. I was hoping to provide an overview of things.

Quote:
Anyway, do I go to church for social integrity and comfort? no I go because I always have,it's habit, and I enjoy the ritual, music, colour, drama etc.  I have some friends there and the vicar is pretty sound.  I don't think going to church gives you social integrity nowadays, do you?  It's generally a social no-no, most people assume I am some sort of simpleton when I tell them what I do on Sunday morning.  Well, actually, they normally know them by now so what happens is I see the look of surprise as they try to reconcile who they know with their assumptions about Christians.

As for comfort, yes there is some comfort to be had from, say Mother Julian's All will be well and injunctions not to worry.  But that's pretty sound advice generally, isn't it? And there are demands too you know.

Isn't social integrity only from the persons point of view, not what others think ? It just seems to me that you are saying here,in part at least, that the friendship you get and have at your church plays a significant part in your attendance. And that the doctrinal side is waning and causing some difficulties ?
Shrub Dweller

Lexilogio wrote:
Shrub Dweller wrote:
Lexilogio wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
Some people need to believe in a god of some sort to make their life fulfilled and happy. Atheists don't have that need, and live happy, fulfilled lives without it.


Only for a few. I do not need to believe. I simply can't rid myself of the conviction that God exists. So if God exists..... And on that is built the rest of my faith. It stems from what for me is an inescapable fact.

Belief in life after death is often what people need. For me, that is a later possibility built on God existing.

How do you relate this inner conviction that God exists to your christianity ? Why not some other faith ?


Interesting question. I did explore other faiths for a while. Buddhism, for example, has some very interesting aspects. The Dalai Llama's views on anger are well worth reading. Perfect antidote for road rage.

There is an element that Christianity was comfortable. Islam doesn't make logical sense to me (I studied the Pillars of Islam as part of my first degree), nor does Judaism. I can't accept that a loving God would rule people in or out of heaven based on their parentage.

And as for the rest? Well. There is one God. So pretty much went through the rest.

This inner conviction, was it there from when your were knee high or was it something that came later with age; say in the teens or something ?

And what was your background ? Was it God/christian free or was there religion at home when you were young ?

(what you say above seems to be the intellectual stuff that probably came later ?)
Boss Cat

Hello Shrub, thanks for that.

You are right the debate is polarised.  I think that there are some pretty vicious creationists particularly in the US but they tend not to be taken terribly seriously here.  But we do take Dawkins seriously - a bit too much if you ask me.  I think he makes a lot of some pretty thin stuff.  Ben Goldacre, one of yours I think, referred to how you get a knee jerk clap when you mention YEC's and as he says that's really a marginal issue in British schools.

The thing about the toy though, it was important to you.  Different things are important now.  When my partner started work he borrowed a senior colleague's car, it was one of these flash sports car.  Guess what happened?   Crunch!   He didn't really damage it badly but the guy didn't take it like a Stoic!  We don't always put away childish things.

I'm afraid in my down times church is a habit more than anything.  My socialising is mainly done elsewhere.  Not to say I haven't got a couple of friends at church, ie, my cousin and another cousin's ex-long term partner.  But last Sunday I had an interesting chat with the vicar and my cousin's ex; I have a bit of a thorny one on my hands at the moment.

It - faith - will be back; it's just not particularly strong at the moment.
Shrub Dweller

Leonard James wrote:
cyberman wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
cyberman wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
I'm afraid that is not how belief originates. It stems from the first information that you receive about God, the stories you hear and the things you read.


So belief in God stems from someone else's belief in God.... How did that all start, then?

Human imagination. Otherwise how do you account for the myriad of gods that have been believed to exist?


So belief doesn't always stem from the stories you hear and the things you read. It is good that you are able to adapt your theories on the hoof!

You don't need the brain of Einstein to realise that all religions orginated from a single individual's mind.

Leonard, I'm in your camp and all that but this is twaddle. Religion stemmed from rituals/symbolism that bound our ancestor's groups together so that they work peacefully together. This would have started off as an intuitive/unconscious process. Basic symbolism being found, I think, in artefacts of around 100,00 years ago. It was our consciousness and intelligence that has thought and re-thought these ideas over and over again that has produced the abundance of different doctrines.
Shrub Dweller

cyberman wrote:
genghiscant wrote:

My signature tells you nothing about me


It tells me you're a daft cunt

And that tells me a lot about you.
Shrub Dweller

Boss Cat wrote:

The thing about the toy though, it was important to you.  Different things are important now.  When my partner started work he borrowed a senior colleague's car, it was one of these flash sports car.  Guess what happened?   Crunch!   He didn't really damage it badly but the guy didn't take it like a Stoic!  We don't always put away childish things.

I never claimed to be fully mature, I still have my gripes, just that I can see the bigger picture that somethings will pass, and somethings are just not that important as I once thought they were. Of course the closer to the heart an issue/item is the more we will fight for it.
genghiscant

Quote:
This inner conviction, was it there from when your were knee high or was it something that came later with age; say in the teens or something ?


Completely agree. No child has ever been born believing in God, & that is the default position. Everyone who goes on to believe must have been indoctrinated.
Lexilogio

genghiscant wrote:
Quote:
This inner conviction, was it there from when your were knee high or was it something that came later with age; say in the teens or something ?


Completely agree. No child has ever been born believing in God, & that is the default position. Everyone who goes on to believe must have been indoctrinated.


Everyone? Including the first people to believe?

Belief stems from the human capacity to make speedy judgements, mixing data with reasonable assumption. Belief is about the ability to make a judgement without empirical evidence.

Whilst indoctrination happens, it is not the case for all believers. That's like saying "all atheists read Richard Dawkins".
genghiscant

genghiscant wrote:
Quote:
This inner conviction, was it there from when your were knee high or was it something that came later with age; say in the teens or something ?


Quote:
Completely agree. No child has ever been born believing in God, & that is the default position. Everyone who goes on to believe must have been indoctrinated.



Quote:
Everyone? Including the first people to believe?

Belief stems from the human capacity to make speedy judgements, mixing data with reasonable assumption. Belief is about the ability to make a judgement without empirical evidence.

Whilst indoctrination happens, it is not the case for all believers. That's like saying "all atheists read Richard Dawkins".


I don't know about the first people to believe. Rather a shortage of information on that. I think it credible that it wasn't a sudden conversion to faith. It probably started small with people thinking that thunder sounded a bit like very loud growling. Then when the crops failed they thought they must have displeased something or someone. This is how superstitions start, & this is what religion basically is.

Can you tell me what data you have for the existence of God or even reasonable assumptions?

As I said in my post, no child has ever been born believing in God. If there were no places of worship, no believers & no religious literature, do you think a child would grow up having faith in God.
Something happens to a child to bring the possibility of God into their lives. That something is subtle unconscious & conscious indoctrination from any manner or number of directions.

Do you think you would be a believer if you'd never heard of the possibility?
Leonard James

[quote="cyberman:63521"]
Leonard James wrote:

Okey-dokey, I see what you mean.

So how do you reconcile your belief that each religion was started from the mind of an individual, with your belief that faith in the mind of an individual is there because of stories that individual heard as a bairn?

Morning Cyber,

I'm going to assume that you are not just looking for holes in my posts due to imprecise wording.

Every religious belief is started by one individual, albeit from having 'experienced' divine contact or simply as an explanation for the existence of everything. Apart from those founding brains, all the followers of the various religions are people to whom the original idea has been communicated.

I hope that is clearer, and if you can tell me of a religion that does not conform to that description, I will certainly rethink my attitude.
Lexilogio

genghiscant wrote:


Quote:
Everyone? Including the first people to believe?

Belief stems from the human capacity to make speedy judgements, mixing data with reasonable assumption. Belief is about the ability to make a judgement without empirical evidence.

Whilst indoctrination happens, it is not the case for all believers. That's like saying "all atheists read Richard Dawkins".


I don't know about the first people to believe. Rather a shortage of information on that. I think it credible that it wasn't a sudden conversion to faith. It probably started small with people thinking that thunder sounded a bit like very loud growling. Then when the crops failed they thought they must have displeased something or someone. This is how superstitions start, & this is what religion basically is.

Can you tell me what data you have for the existence of God or even reasonable assumptions?

As I said in my post, no child has ever been born believing in God. If there were no places of worship, no believers & no religious literature, do you think a child would grow up having faith in God.
Something happens to a child to bring the possibility of God into their lives. That something is subtle unconscious & conscious indoctrination from any manner or number of directions.

Do you think you would be a believer if you'd never heard of the possibility?


As I said, belief doesn't use empirical data. If it did, it wouldn't be belief, it would be science.  It stems from the human capacity to make decisions.

If ,I had never heard of God, it is probable I would still believe in something. The "what" is more subject to cultural influence
genghiscant

Quote:
The "what" is more subject to cultural influence


Indoctrination?
Leonard James

Lexilogio wrote:
genghiscant wrote:


Quote:
Everyone? Including the first people to believe?

Belief stems from the human capacity to make speedy judgements, mixing data with reasonable assumption. Belief is about the ability to make a judgement without empirical evidence.

Whilst indoctrination happens, it is not the case for all believers. That's like saying "all atheists read Richard Dawkins".


I don't know about the first people to believe. Rather a shortage of information on that. I think it credible that it wasn't a sudden conversion to faith. It probably started small with people thinking that thunder sounded a bit like very loud growling. Then when the crops failed they thought they must have displeased something or someone. This is how superstitions start, & this is what religion basically is.

Can you tell me what data you have for the existence of God or even reasonable assumptions?

As I said in my post, no child has ever been born believing in God. If there were no places of worship, no believers & no religious literature, do you think a child would grow up having faith in God.
Something happens to a child to bring the possibility of God into their lives. That something is subtle unconscious & conscious indoctrination from any manner or number of directions.

Do you think you would be a believer if you'd never heard of the possibility?


As I said, belief doesn't use empirical data. If it did, it wouldn't be belief, it would be science.  It stems from the human capacity to make decisions.

If ,I had never heard of God, it is probable I would still believe in something.

Possibly, Lexi, but if the 'supernatural' hadn't been invented, you would more than likely accept a natural cause for the universe and life that was as yet unknown. Just like me, in fact!  
Quote:
The "what" is more subject to cultural influence.

Absolutely!
The Boyg

genghiscant wrote:
Completely agree. No child has ever been born believing in God, & that is the default position.


No child has ever been born with a belief in the existence of quarks, does that make sub-atomic physics a human fabrication as well?
Shaker

The Boyg wrote:
genghiscant wrote:
Completely agree. No child has ever been born believing in God, & that is the default position.


No child has ever been born with a belief in the existence of quarks, does that make sub-atomic physics a human fabrication as well?

The names and concepts involved certainly are. Obviously.
The Boyg

Shaker wrote:
The Boyg wrote:
genghiscant wrote:
Completely agree. No child has ever been born believing in God, & that is the default position.


No child has ever been born with a belief in the existence of quarks, does that make sub-atomic physics a human fabrication as well?

The names and concepts involved certainly are. Obviously.


So the fact that no child is born believing in "God" (or "Vishnu" or "Allah" or "Thor") is only really relevant to the names that they are given not to the actual existence (or otherwise) of supernatural beings.

Babies don't believe in anything when they are born. That doesn't mean that the things that they acquire a belief in during their lives are necessarily wrong as a result though.
genghiscant

Quote:
No child has ever been born with a belief in the existence of quarks, does that make sub-atomic physics a human fabrication as well?


Does a child of 5 years old learn to worship quarks, to pray to them, believe that quarks love them & will protect them? Does the child learn that if they don't believe in quarks then they are not saved & won't go to heaven when they die?

At what age would you expect children to learn about quarks?
The Boyg

genghiscant wrote:
Quote:
No child has ever been born with a belief in the existence of quarks, does that make sub-atomic physics a human fabrication as well?


Does a child of 5 years old learn to worship quarks, to pray to them, believe that quarks love them & will protect them? Does the child learn that if they don't believe in quarks then they are not saved & won't go to heaven when they die?

At what age would you expect children to learn about quarks?


All of which is irrelevant to determining whether or not religions are based on wholly manmade concepts on the basis of whether or not we are born with innate religious beliefs.  
cymrudynnion

genghiscant wrote:
Quote:
This inner conviction, was it there from when your were knee high or was it something that came later with age; say in the teens or something ?


Completely agree. No child has ever been born believing in God, & that is the default position. Everyone who goes on to believe must have been indoctrinated.
No child has been born believing in anything so if a child has been indoctrinated into beiklieving in faith or God it surely applies they have been indoctrinated not to believe.
Leonard James

cymrudynnion wrote:
genghiscant wrote:
Quote:
This inner conviction, was it there from when your were knee high or was it something that came later with age; say in the teens or something ?


Completely agree. No child has ever been born believing in God, & that is the default position. Everyone who goes on to believe must have been indoctrinated.
No child has been born believing in anything so if a child has been indoctrinated into beiklieving in faith or God it surely applies they have been indoctrinated not to believe.

You need to edit that, Cym ... it doesn't make sense.
genghiscant

Quote:
All of which is irrelevant to determining whether or not religions are based on wholly manmade concepts on the basis of whether or not we are born with innate religious beliefs.


What? I thought I was talking about indoctrination of children.
The Boyg

genghiscant wrote:
Quote:
All of which is irrelevant to determining whether or not religions are based on wholly manmade concepts on the basis of whether or not we are born with innate religious beliefs.


What? I thought I was talking about indoctrination of children.


I see, so the old "children are born atheist" schtick wasn't offered as proof of anything other than the fact that children are taught about religion, just as they are taught about everything else.  
genghiscant

Quote:
No child has been born believing in anything so if a child has been indoctrinated into beiklieving in faith or God it surely applies they have been indoctrinated not to believe.


No. It just means they haven't been indoctrinated into religion. You can't indoctrinate someone into disbelieving something they already have no belief of.
genghiscant

Quote:
I see, so the old "children are born atheist" schtick wasn't offered as proof of anything other than the fact that children are taught about religion, just as they are taught about everything else.


No, it's not the same. With religion (as in a faith or Sunday school) you're teaching children that God & Jesus & all that stuff is fact. But it's not fact, it's faith.
The Boyg

genghiscant wrote:
Quote:
I see, so the old "children are born atheist" schtick wasn't offered as proof of anything other than the fact that children are taught about religion, just as they are taught about everything else.


No, it's not the same. With religion (as in a faith or Sunday school) you're teaching children that God & Jesus & all that stuff is fact. But it's not fact, it's faith.


Yes (although Credo actually mean "I beliveve" not "this is a fact"), but the fact that babies start off as a "blank slate" with relation to everything means that you cannot attach any significance to their lack of knowledge at birth of any particular information.
Shrub Dweller

genghiscant wrote:
Quote:
This inner conviction, was it there from when your were knee high or was it something that came later with age; say in the teens or something ?


Completely agree. No child has ever been born believing in God, & that is the default position. Everyone who goes on to believe must have been indoctrinated.

That is not what I said, and you are seeing this in your light because of your biases. Instead of reading God as a mere intuitive notion you are reading it in the context of the organised religions, which I'm not in this case; hence the term inner conviction of the young child (prior to any external manipulation ?) . In fact my post on page 7, 3 above yours quoted here, gives an explanation of where religion came from and which would imply that a child could have this notion of God/god.
genghiscant

Quote:
Yes (although Credo actually mean "I beliveve" not "this is a fact"), but the fact that babies start off as a "blank slate" with relation to everything means that you cannot attach any significance to their lack of knowledge at birth of any particular information.


The significance is that a child is born without knowledge of God. If the child is born into a religious family then the chances are that it will be taught that the parents religion is fact. If the child then goes on to faith school & Sunday school, then the teaching is reinforced. The child isn't told that "this is what we believe but we have no proof" is it? This "teaching" will stay with the child & right through adulthood.

Take the case of JamesJah's children. He says he has ten children & none of them would ever have blood transfusions. Where do you think they got this from?
genghiscant

Quote:
In fact my post on page 7, 3 above yours quoted here, gives an explanation of where religion came from and which would imply that a child could have this notion of God/god.


I disagree. I think the notion of God is learnt behaviour.
The Boyg

genghiscant wrote:
Quote:
Yes (although Credo actually mean "I beliveve" not "this is a fact"), but the fact that babies start off as a "blank slate" with relation to everything means that you cannot attach any significance to their lack of knowledge at birth of any particular information.


The significance is that a child is born without knowledge of God. If the child is born into a religious family then the chances are that it will be taught that the parents religion is fact. If the child then goes on to faith school & Sunday school, then the teaching is reinforced. The child isn't told that "this is what we believe but we have no proof" is it? This "teaching" will stay with the child & right through adulthood.


None of which tells us anything about the existence or otherwise of God and offers no evidence of whether religion is entirely man made.
genghiscant

Quote:
None of which tells us anything about the existence or otherwise of God and offers no evidence of whether religion is entirely man made.


I didn't say it did provide evidence. did I?
The Boyg

genghiscant wrote:
Quote:
None of which tells us anything about the existence or otherwise of God and offers no evidence of whether religion is entirely man made.


I didn't say it did provide evidence. did I?


So what was it's relevance to Lexilogio's faith then?

(That was the point under discussion at the point at which you introduced your comment about babies being born without religious belief).
genghiscant

Quote:
So what was it's relevance to Lexilogio's faith then?


It started with this post from Lexilgio. To me it suggested that she was most comfortable with Christianity because that was the religion she was used to, indoctrinated in.


Quote:
There is an element that Christianity was comfortable. Islam doesn't make logical sense to me (I studied the Pillars of Islam as part of my first degree), nor does Judaism.
Lexilogio

genghiscant wrote:
Quote:
So what was it's relevance to Lexilogio's faith then?


It started with this post from Lexilgio. To me it suggested that she was most comfortable with Christianity because that was the religion she was used to, indoctrinated in.


Quote:
There is an element that Christianity was comfortable. Islam doesn't make logical sense to me (I studied the Pillars of Islam as part of my first degree), nor does Judaism.


Hmm. I wasn't indoctrinated into Christianity. My parents barely went to Church until I was 14. It was me who brought them into church, not the other way around.

I have been interested in religion as long as I can remember, and have taken opportunities to question those I knew.

Christianity was more comfortable because I could speak to people about it more easily. But no one brought it up with me - I brought it up with them.

But I wasn't looking for a comfortable religion - I have actively investigated others, and have been at services of other religions.
The Boyg

Lexilogio wrote:
genghiscant wrote:
Quote:
So what was it's relevance to Lexilogio's faith then?


It started with this post from Lexilgio. To me it suggested that she was most comfortable with Christianity because that was the religion she was used to, indoctrinated in.


Quote:
There is an element that Christianity was comfortable. Islam doesn't make logical sense to me (I studied the Pillars of Islam as part of my first degree), nor does Judaism.


Hmm. I wasn't indoctrinated into Christianity. My parents barely went to Church until I was 14. It was me who brought them into church, not the other way around.

I have been interested in religion as long as I can remember, and have taken opportunities to question those I knew.

Christianity was more comfortable because I could speak to people about it more easily. But no one brought it up with me - I brought it up with them.

But I wasn't looking for a comfortable religion - I have actively investigated others, and have been at services of other religions.


Looks like you made a boo boo there Genghis.  

Better luck next time.  
genghiscant

Quote:
I have been interested in religion as long as I can remember


Did you take part in religious assemblies at infant/ junior school. How about Brownies/Guides. All of these things must have had at least an unconscious influence on you. Would you agree with that?
Leonard James

Lexilogio wrote:

I have been interested in religion as long as I can remember, and have taken opportunities to question those I knew.

Are you sure, Lexi, that you didn't hear of Jesus and God long before you became old enough to be 'interested in religion'?

I would think that such an academic type interest is extremely unlikely to be taken up by a young child.
Lexilogio

genghiscant wrote:
Quote:
I have been interested in religion as long as I can remember


Did you take part in religious assemblies at infant/ junior school. How about Brownies/Guides. All of these things must have had at least an unconscious influence on you. Would you agree with that?


Assemblies at school weren't religious, and I joined brownies, but apart from one word in the promise, God wasn't"t mentioned, plus my Gran was an avowed atheist.
genghiscant

Quote:
Assemblies at school weren't religious, and I joined brownies, but apart from one word in the promise, God wasn't"t mentioned, plus my Gran was an avowed atheist.


What types of school did you attend? Didn't your Brownie group have church parades? How did you hear about religion before you started enquiring about it?
genghiscant

Quote:
Looks like you made a boo boo there Genghis.  

Better luck next time.


It's a shame that sneering isn't an Olympic event. I reckon you'd be in line for gold.
The Boyg

genghiscant wrote:
Quote:
Looks like you made a boo boo there Genghis.  

Better luck next time.


It's a shame that sneering isn't an Olympic event. I reckon you'd be in line for gold.


Aw diddums. Did the bad man say something that upset you?  
Lexilogio

genghiscant wrote:
Quote:
Assemblies at school weren't religious, and I joined brownies, but apart from one word in the promise, God wasn't"t mentioned, plus my Gran was an avowed atheist.


What types of school did you attend? Didn't your Brownie group have church parades? How did you hear about religion before you started enquiring about it?


I went to a bog standard state school. And the Brownie group did a parade once a year. I didn't go.

How did I hear about religion? No idea. I had an uncle who was a vicar. We'd go and see them on Boxing Day, but he was the only one who ever went to church.
Shrub Dweller

genghiscant wrote:
Quote:
In fact my post on page 7, 3 above yours quoted here, gives an explanation of where religion came from and which would imply that a child could have this notion of God/god.


I disagree. I think the notion of God is learnt behaviour.

This gives you an infinite regression. Who was the first person to teach this and where did they get it from ?
Leonard James

Shrub Dweller wrote:
genghiscant wrote:
Quote:
In fact my post on page 7, 3 above yours quoted here, gives an explanation of where religion came from and which would imply that a child could have this notion of God/god.


I disagree. I think the notion of God is learnt behaviour.

This gives you an infinite regression. Who was the first person to teach this and where did they get it from ?

The originator differs between religions, and he got it from his imagination.

       nglreturns.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> All faiths and none Page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum