Religion

Discussion in 'General Philosophy' started by Comrade Temuzu, Feb 15, 2011.

  1. UnitRico Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Feb 14, 2011
    Message Count:
    4,737
    Likes Received:
    1,339
    Trophy Points:
    193
    Location:
    Pangaea
    Hmm...that would make sense, if we assume God exists, he would of course be the creator of aliens as well. But then why wouldn't God allow all his children to communicate with each other, or at least live near each other? Are we not yet ready to meet our brothers and sisters?
  2. D3VIL Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Feb 18, 2011
    Message Count:
    885
    Likes Received:
    82
    Trophy Points:
    78
    Location:
    UK
    Kalalification - how do you know that your god is trying to 'optimise' good?
  3. Lenin Cat Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Feb 14, 2011
    Message Count:
    2,591
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    108
    Location:
    New York
    Kulak, prove that your god even exists.

    Religion is, indeed, the self-consciousness and self-esteem of man who has either not yet won through to himself, or has already lost himself again. But man is no abstract being squatting outside the world. Man is the world of man—state, society. This state and this society produce religion, which is an inverted consciousness of the world, because they are an inverted world. Religion is the general theory of this world, its encyclopedic compendium, its logic in popular form, its spiritual point d'honneur, its enthusiasm, its moral sanction, its solemn complement, and its universal basis of consolation and justification. It is the fantastic realization of the human essence since the human essence has not acquired any true reality. The struggle against religion is, therefore, indirectly the struggle against that world whose spiritual aroma is religion. Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people. The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo. - Karl Marx
  4. Kalalification Guest

    Member Since:
    Message Count:
    0
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Because that's the goal of an omnibenevolent being. A non-optimal state of good isn't as good as the optimal state.
  5. Saito Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Message Count:
    646
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    68
    Location:
    Chicago
    Like this quote :D.
  6. Kalalification Guest

    Member Since:
    Message Count:
    0
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Not sure if that's directed at me, but as has been pointed out many times in this topic, there can be no proof in either direction for the existence of God. And I'm honestly not surprised by a such quote coming from the intolerable loon known as Marx.
  7. Lenin Cat Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Feb 14, 2011
    Message Count:
    2,591
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    108
    Location:
    New York
    Ah, but the question is then what is the default belief? The default as far as I am concerned is disbelief. When your friend tells you "I am really a reptilian from the planet x!", What do you say? You say hes lieing and you demand evidence.
  8. Kalalification Guest

    Member Since:
    Message Count:
    0
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Guilty until proven innocent? Well you can believe what you want, but there is no inherent superiority in your position.

    Religion and spirituality are inherently separate from the practices and methods of standard scientific work. Science cannot and does not seek to undermine religion, nor does religion have the ability to undermine science. They are different fields of thought, seeking different answers to different questions.
  9. CorB New Member

    Member Since:
    Feb 14, 2011
    Message Count:
    700
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Florida
    The burden of proof is on you to prove that a god exists, you are the one making the claim. Like Lenin Cat said, atheism is the default position.

    Religion makes claims that are incompatible with science.
  10. Kalalification Guest

    Member Since:
    Message Count:
    0
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Again, I don't claim to be able to prove the existence of God. It's impossible.
    Such as?
  11. C_G Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Message Count:
    2,447
    Likes Received:
    320
    Trophy Points:
    143
    Location:
    Wu Tang Province
    It is equally impossible to produce any evidence on the contrary. Therefore, if it is impossible to prove it either way then you have FAITH and that means that you follow a relgion by definition. You may not believe in a God but your belief is equally irrational as one that believes in a God.
  12. CorB New Member

    Member Since:
    Feb 14, 2011
    Message Count:
    700
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Florida
    The age of the Earth.
    The shape of the Earth.
    The efficacy of prayer.
    The authenticity of miracles.
    The historicity of the Bible.
    Even the question of whether or not a god exists is a question about the natural world and so hence a scientific question.

    I don't believe that there is no god, I simply lack the belief in one.
  13. Kalalification Guest

    Member Since:
    Message Count:
    0
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Not this tired spiel...
    1. Fundamentalist Protestant Christianity =/= Religion. In fact, Christianity =/= Religion. As has been stated so many times throughout the thread. And of course it should be common knowledge...
    2. Most of the Bible is taken as allegory, and this has been the position of the Roman Catholic Church (too many Protestants for me to count...) for centuries.
    3. The Bible is most certainly not the definitive religious text.
    4. Even in Christianity, the canon is known to have been assembled by Byzantine patriarchs, not by God.

    Atheism =/= Agnosticism. Lacking a belief in God is agnosticism, believing in the absence of God is atheism. Apologetics is what I'm being forced into because of a muddled debate on ill-defined topics.
  14. Lenin Cat Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Feb 14, 2011
    Message Count:
    2,591
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    108
    Location:
    New York
    Atheism, in a broad sense, is the rejection of belief in the existence of deities. - wikipedia.
  15. xXxLKxXx Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Mar 20, 2011
    Message Count:
    1,556
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    88
    Location:
    Des Moines, IA
    Im christian but not an average one I believe God abandoned us long ago.
  16. Kalalification Guest

    Member Since:
    Message Count:
    0
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    And yet you're still equivocating rejection with indifference. A negative charge is not the equivalent of a neutral charge.
  17. CorB New Member

    Member Since:
    Feb 14, 2011
    Message Count:
    700
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Florida
    Your definition of atheism is simply incorrect. I, like most people who call themselves an atheist am an agnostic atheist, which is both an agnostic and an atheist. The belief that there is no god is Positive Atheism.
  18. Kalalification Guest

    Member Since:
    Message Count:
    0
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ah, yes, the bastion of truth that is wiki. But seriously...

    Merriam-Webster
    Atheist. Noun. one who believes that there is no deity.

    Agnostic. Noun. a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god
  19. CorB New Member

    Member Since:
    Feb 14, 2011
    Message Count:
    700
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Florida
    Merriam-Webster got it wrong. Atheist literally means non-theist, meaning I'm not a theist, meaning I don't believe in god. It's like the word amoral, we have moral, amoral, and immoral, just as we have theism, atheism, and positive atheism.
  20. Kalalification Guest

    Member Since:
    Message Count:
    0
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No. Amoralism is not "not" morality. It is against morality as a concept. Just as atheism is against the concept of theism. To be "not" gives you an inherently contra-positive denotation. As an adjective and not in noun form, amoral could describe something outside of morality. But even this is merely supplementary to the idea of amoralism. Point is that when something is "a," it is the contra-positive of its root.

Share This Page

Facebook: