Does It Matter Whether God Exists/

[Telstra]

Alain de Botton makes a related point about the value of religion. He suggests that atheism plagiarise the rites and community life that goes along with the mystical nonsense; the former have pragmatic value in the lives of believers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Oe6HUgrRlQ

I am intrigued by his ideas. I am convinced that religions with billions of adherents have not sustained these numbers on the strength of their theological claims. Their support comes perhaps in part from inertia or ignorance, but mostly from the add-on benefits of being a part of a community. People want somewhere to get married. People want a reason for a feast. People who discuss being decent to each other once a week form a stronger more successful community.

None of those things require divine mythology, or even benefit from it.

Anyway yes of course it matters.

The video, a great speech.
People should adapt his ideas.

 

[kallipolis]

You can tell that to the religious leaders.
Its all about control (church, mosques ... etc).

That you say so, it must be so.

 

[youfiad]

It was promised to the Church by Christ that he will be with us to the end of time, and also promised to send another, ie; the Holy Spirit. The Keys spoken of by Christ, was given to Peter alone. This the reason why a Pope cannot change the core teachings of the church. All that is of the Church is derived from scriptures. Several Popes through History have tried to change them without any success what soever, and here we see that the promise that the Gates of Hell shall not prevail, and did not prevail. We will see more of this possibly sooner than we think.

That didn't really answer my question. It hardly addressed it.

 

[Slaveboy]

Yet it's fueled by the threat of hell. Right, not controlling at all. It has never mattered that any god or gods exist. They're all manifestations of egos and something people blindly accept to be "normal". They can be used to excuse ANY act. If god blames anything for an outcome he/she/it didn't want, he/she/it isn't an all knowing nor all powerful god. If god needs or wants credit for an act that took zero effort (supposedly creating the universe with limitless power), he/she/it is clearly not perfect nor all powerful considering an all powerful being wouldn't expect praise for any act. If creating the universe as a process, it took time yet time doesn't exist outside the universe so god had to exist during the big bang which should simply result in the realization that the only thing you could argue is a god, is the universe yet the universe never asks for shit nor does it blame it's creations on certain outcomes.

 

[kallipolis]

Yet it's fueled by the threat of hell. Right, not controlling at all. It has never mattered that any god or gods exist. They're all manifestations of egos and something people blindly accept to be "normal". They can be used to excuse ANY act. If god blames anything for an outcome he/she/it didn't want, he/she/it isn't an all knowing nor all powerful god. If god needs or wants credit for an act that took zero effort (supposedly creating the universe with limitless power), he/she/it is clearly not perfect nor all powerful considering an all powerful being wouldn't expect praise for any act. If creating the universe as a process, it took time yet time doesn't exist outside the universe so god had to exist during the big bang which should simply result in the realization that the only thing you could argue is a god, is the universe yet the universe never asks for shit nor does it blame it's creations on certain outcomes.

If religious people wish to live in fear, then that is of their own choice and is contrary to The Father's declaration to love one another.

At the birth of The Saviour the angels declared to the shepherds: Fear, not.

Throughout Holy Scripture there many proclamations not to be afraid.

The two great commandments invite people to love God, and love our neighbour, as our self.

34 “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. 35 By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” ~John 13

 

[Kulindahr]

When I say what I said, I mean that if you take the bible literally from verse to verse without cherry picking what things you want to follow and which things you don't want to follow, it can lead to huge social problems as can be seen right now with the right-winged nut jobs of the republican party. Their ideas about hating gays is not personal, it is biblical. Slavery was biblical. The list can go on, and on.

The right-wing religionuts hold those positions precisely because they do pick and choose. They start by choosing to pretend that some of the Bible isn't extremely ancient but was written by someone like their grandfathers, who thought pretty much the same way they do. And that's where they go wrong at the start, because from then on what they're reading isn't the Bible, it's a paraphrase done by no sound and reasonable rules of scholarship or interpretation, just by gut feelings about the way things should be.

 

[Kulindahr]

It was promised to the Church by Christ that he will be with us to the end of time, and also promised to send another, ie; the Holy Spirit. The Keys spoken of by Christ, was given to Peter alone. This the reason why a Pope cannot change the core teachings of the church. All that is of the Church is derived from scriptures. Several Popes through History have tried to change them without any success what soever, and here we see that the promise that the Gates of Hell shall not prevail, and did not prevail. We will see more of this possibly sooner than we think.

Except no promise of infallibility was made other than to all the apostles, so ever since 1054, the bishop of Rome has no possibility of making any infallible pronouncements.

So you as a Roman Catholic may hold the ex cathedra pronouncements of the pope as infallible, while I must look at it according to scripture and tradition and call those declarations what they are, private teachings.


This reminds me, BTW, of an item from the article, about religion being a matter of believing certain propositions. The business about the pope being able to teach falsely by example while teaching truly when the ex cathedra business is invoked highlights that, making it look very much like a form of gnosticism, where knowledge is what matters while actions aren't really that important.

Relating that to the title of the thread: it's very important if God exists, because if He does, He must find that very disgusting. God would know what was made clear in thee OSU education program: whatever you do, teaches. By all his actions in getting to this point, Ratzinger has taught an interesting set of things... some of them not very good at all.

 

[Kulindahr]

You can tell that to the religious leaders.
Its all about control (church, mosques ... etc).

I've only ever been to one church where I would venture that was true, and that's out of dozens.

Faith is the opposite of reason, and reason is the food of our brains.

I don't know where you're getting your definition, but the faith the Bible speaks of demands reason, and reasoning.

 

[Kulindahr]

I highly recommend "Fides et Ratio" by Blessed John Paul II, Pope.
Fides et Ratio - John Paul II - Encyclical Letter (September 15, 1998)

That's a fairly good read. One thing it reminded me of that is an error among fundamentalists: the Bible claims to teach us one thing, and nothing else; it does not claim to be a sourcebook for all things knowable. So when morons use it to try to gauge the age of the world, they're asking it to do something it wasn't equipped for.

Though I've often thought it would have been fun if suddenly, in the middle of, say, the scroll of Ezra, a rudimentary set of trigonometry tables had been set down, it still wouldn't justify what the fundamentalists try to do, because even those would have been asserting only that the little bit of mathematics shown was valid.

Of course the flip side is also true: trying to impose science or demand scientific knowledge from a document which makes no claim to be giving any is just as foolish.

 

[Kulindahr]

If religious people wish to live in fear, then that is of their own choice and is contrary to The Father's declaration to love one another.

At the birth of The Saviour the angels declared to the shepherds: Fear, not.

Throughout Holy Scripture there many proclamations not to be afraid.

For many of those, the translation would be better as, "STOP being afraid!" It's one reason I like a certain scene in Quest for the Holy Grail, mostly the start....

 

[palbert]

kallipolis: (to GiancarloC) "your predictable rant is duly noted."

GiancarloC: (to kallipolis) "I can say the same about the content of your posts."

Why thus gentlemen? Each of you have well-held, but doctrinaire, positions. I think "rant" is dismissive and unnecessary; But kallipolis of late has taken on a sneer more befitting to me than him. Kallipolis, where is the teacher you would emulate?

Neither of you will ever convince the other, but you set no good example for the student.

 

[kallipolis]

kallipolis: (to GiancarloC) "your predictable rant is duly noted."

GiancarloC: (to kallipolis) "I can say the same about the content of your posts."

Why thus gentlemen? Each of you have well-held, but doctrinaire, positions. I think "rant" is dismissive and unnecessary; But kallipolis of late has taken on a sneer more befitting to me than him. Kallipolis, where is the teacher you would emulate?

Neither of you will ever convince the other, but you set no good example for the student.

Can you miss me that much ?

 

[Telstra]

That you say so, it must be so.

Yes, it is ALL about control.
If not, they would give me the keys for the building to do hot activities LOL

 

[canesnbeach]

Authentic faith in God is never about control for free will ensures that the faithful person retains control over their life's choices to live that faith, or not.

Do not confuse political, and ideological influences with a personal faith in God.

This.

Faith provides meaning, science provides evidence. An intelligent man might do well do pursue both, it's no surprise that the greatest scientists of all time were also men of faith (in one way or another). I love this quote from the greatest of them all:

'Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.' -Albert Einstein

Re: organized religion, the modern incarnations of hardcore Zionism, Christianity, and Islam are in direct conflict with the overriding message of their prophets. But that's to be expected, because religion -as all human institutions- can be easily corrupted to fit political and social agendas, so it's become a cause of all the evils it was created to combat in the first place. The interesting thing is that modern-day atheists have a lot in common with ancient religious patriarchs, both groups embrace(d) social equality, and the personal freedom needed to act according to their conscience.

 

[bankside]

"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it." From a letter Einstein wrote in English, dated 24 March 1954.

I think Einstein tips his hat a little more clearly above.

 

[Jacquemar]

^^ Yup. That sounds closer to the truth than the other quotation.

 

[kallipolis]

I think Einstein tips his hat a little more clearly above.

These words are much more accurate, in reflecting his understandings when Einstein spoke to the matter of God:

Do you believe in God? "I'm not an atheist. I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. The problem involved is too vast for our limited minds. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws."

Einstein & Faith - TIME

 

[Kulindahr]

This.

Faith provides meaning, science provides evidence. An intelligent man might do well do pursue both, it's no surprise that the greatest scientists of all time were also men of faith (in one way or another). I love this quote from the greatest of them all:

'Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.' -Albert Einstein

I like this revision of that:

Science without religion is lame; religion without science is missing the other foot.

I don't remember who came up with that, but it was during a night of drinking and studying physics.

 

[canesnbeach]

These words are much more accurate, in reflecting his understandings when Einstein spoke to the matter of God:

Do you believe in God? "I'm not an atheist. I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. The problem involved is too vast for our limited minds. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws."

Einstein & Faith - TIME

All 3 quotes are really saying the same thing. The man wasn't crazy about religion, but neither did he discount faith altogether. I think for him faith = wonder, and the intuition that not all of human experience can be explained by science alone. In any case, looking to Einstein for spiritual guidance is as myopic as looking to the pope for scientific advice. The point is that faith and science are not mutually exclusive, never have been. The rift is entirely artificial, created to justify political agendas rather than to expose anything valuable about reality. The way I see it, people like Richard Dawkins and Pat Robertson are equally guilty of fanaticism.

 

[Kulindahr]

The way I see it, people like Richard Dawkins and Pat Robertson are equally guilty of fanaticism.

Has Dawkins come out against the "war on drugs"? Just asking.