Why does there have to be any reason for anything all? That to me is one of the great weaknesses in human thinking in my opinion - we cannot handle the idea of something not having a beginning or an end, or a raison d'etre. I mean who exactly said there has to be a meaning to all this? As regards consciousness and the idea of a soul and all that jazz, well one could just say it's all just electrical activity in the brain...have you ever tried to have a conversation with a heavily brain damaged patient? Not a whole lot of consciousness going on there i.e. take away the brain activity and you take away the personality and consciousness. It's no more wondrous than any other physiological phenomenon, just a lot more complex and harder to fully understand.topal63 wrote:
God is a possibility, regardless whether or not any particular belief about it, as a being, holds true. There are unsolved mysteries existing in this reality. At least two or three: why is there anything at all, what is consciousness in itself and what would God be if there is such a thing; being.
I understand as much about religion as the next person thank you very much - I was raised a catholic in the days when Ireland was still quite conservative and had to sit through mandatory religion class all the way through school; I have sat and read through the bible many times and have arrived at my current frame of mind after years of deliberation so don't just write me off as some dude who "just doesn't get it". My beef with religion in this thread relates in particular to branches of religion that try to fight their case on the grounds of science and facts when in fact their "evidence" and "facts" share the same traits as those put forward by conspiracy theorists. No concrete evidence is ever put forward in the name of religion, just allusions and faith-based half truths...in any other topic of debate such an argumentative technique would be blown out of the water but religion gets a free pass for some reason.topal63 wrote:
You denounce the whole of it; religion; yet you don't really understand it. Fine it's not for you. Fine Biblical Genesis is a literal impossibility, I agree. But, does that mean its' symbolic truths are all false? Every one? Or, that "image" could even mean an immaterial spirit being with a primate's face? You focus on literally interpreted absurdities then decry the whole of it is equal to the stupid ad hoc ad hominen label "conspiracy theory." The label is as unjust as the equating of a wide range of ideas to just one other label "religion."
I know they do, it's called philosophy and it's something I have a great interest in...try reading some Nietzsche, his thoughts would be particularly relevant to this topic.topal63 wrote:
Non-religious people, even atheists, ponder questions, ideals, consider and reflect/meditate about; on or upon; the mystery of being; existence.
I have read a fair bit on Buddhism and I have to say that of all the faiths it is the closest to my own philosophy on life. Buddhism places a lot of the focus on the individual and how they fit in to the world around them. It stresses the fact that we are actually all part of the one great cosmos i.e. we were all forged in the furnace of the sun and the idea of the self is, in a sense, illusory. Buddhism works quite well as a philosophy without the need for a God figure, you could strip it right down and still be left with a sound idea.topal63 wrote:
Am I to assume Buddhism and every form of Hinduism is contained in your assumption of it as a conspiracy theory. Am I to assume the Gnostic Christian is one and the same as a Fundamentalist Christian or Muslim, just another brainwashed idiot believing in a conspiracy theory?
Forget about all the absurd stuff in the ancient texts of all the faiths, when you get down to the nitty gritty there is still NO ACTUAL MEASURABLE PROOF in support of the existence God...not one scrap over the entire course of human history.topal63 wrote:
It's probably a hard thing for a Christian to elaborate on, as example, the idea of grace. Precision is probably difficult to achieve with words when saying they; or one; feels they sense and/or see grace in the world and in others and that emanates; flows; from an unseen force. They feel that they can see it - even if it's hard to describe. Are they right? Or, is it just a man acting (good) on his own accord singularly and disconnected based upon what he knows, even if what he knows is utterly untrue in a scientific/historical sense? We may or may not be disconnected consciousness beings, I wouldn't know, consciousness is an elusive mystery in origin. There is an ecumenical idea that exists - it translates loosely into trying to understand different religions, albeit from a Christian perspective (this is an attempt and that is important). Combine that with this: that the Catholics know that evolution is true. In their inner scholarly circles they have modified their theologies of God the creator, not being creator of that specific specie of toad or insect or whatnot, but rather as creator in relation to matter and space-time (the why is there anything at all?). Don't assume the interpretations of (or theologies surrounding) beloved, ancient or assumed to be "revealed" scripture are static - they aren't. When dealing with an utter mystery - all worldviews thereupon are an interpretation (semiotic and semantic), although some specific-ones can be reasonably ruled out (i.e. a fundamentalist literal overly specific; anti-scientific; anti-knowable-truth; one).
Religion is an artefact from mankind's past, it was a very convenient and effective way of ensuring the less critical thinking members of society adhered to "the social contract" that has enabled mankind to advance so dramatically when compared with the animal kingdom. Religion effectively dresses "the social contract" up in a fairy tale or myth (for want of a better term), complete with an angry bad guy Devil-figure who will punish those who do not follow the rules and a good guy God-figure who will reward anyone who follows the rules. It is obvious, even from this thread alone, that society is not ready to give religion up yet but it is my hope, and my sincere belief, that the day will come when religion will have done its job and will take its rightful place in the history books.topal63 wrote:
My general feeling is that one-day the Christian (or insert another religion here if you like) worldview will be re-interpreted and refocused away from absurd theologies and certain-faith altogether. They speak of love, self-sacrifice, forgiveness, acceptance, belonging (baptized into a connected community) and grace - maybe one day that is what the-many who call themselves Christian will stand for; and shy away from the literal or old theologies (as if suffering actually entered the world through an Adam that never existed until a latter grace through crucifixion redeemed us. O' the travesty of errors contained in this dogma).
Not at all, you have been quite articulate in your thinking and in your points and I commend you for that. However, I must say that none of your points have really swayed my opinion that the formation of religious belief follows a similar path to the "belief" formed by a conspiracy theorist. Sorrytopal63 wrote:
Part of what I say must seem obnoxious from a devout perspective; a perspective that is certain. Part of what I say must seem conciliatory and thus obnoxious from a certain atheistic perspective. My only defense is I am not certain about abstract ideals, concepts or mysteries - as those are very different from specific things that are knowable.
Last edited by Braddock (2008-08-19 18:26:33)