Creation Myths Of The World

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

Wizzy
 
Reply Tue 12 Feb, 2008 01:06 pm
@Didymos Thomas,
Boagie wrote:
Wizzy,

:)There is no point to abuse the believer, but, the believer must realize that his belief does not in and of itself warrant respect. The political power Christianity seeks is not dissimilar to the power enjoyed in Muslim countries. In Muslim countries tolerance of the disbeliever is non-existent and there is no separation of church and state. These world religions have a totalitarian character, they are quite simply, dangerous.

Boagie

Don't think that I have abused any beliver in my latest post as all I said was that people who follow the pact are like the sheep in the herd lead by the shepard, in other words, if churches make people vote as they want them to vote, the people are sheep and doesn't choose what they want and think, but what somebody els are choosing for them.

Didymos Thomas wrote:
Have I truly read posts here where people claim this religion or that religion has some nasty tendency and is therefore dangerous? Did I really read that belief is emotional, as opposed to rational, and that believers are, in short, deluded by their emotional responses?

Thomas

A lot of religious fanatics and extremists are dangerous, don't matter if they are chrisitan, muslim, jewish or any other religion. What makes them dangerous is just their belives of "god's will" and a life after this one, when you have that guarentee, why would you even be afraid to loose your life? You'll just come to heaven won't you? Thus I feel that atheists are allways more responsible of their own actions, cause if it leads to their death, they are dead and everything goes black.

Didymos Thomas wrote:
The totalitarian bent of some Christians and Muslims (and people of every other faith on the planet, including those without faith, and everything in between) is a reflection on those particular Christians and Muslims. That some X's are Y does not mean all X's are Y. Especially when those X's are as different as any two people - oh, that's right, we are talking about people.

Of course you can't say that ALL of anything is anything except for when it's true, not saying that it is in this debate though.. Although I don't really understand where this outburst came from as I don't think we have pulled all of anything over any line yet atleast...

Didymos Thomas wrote:
Whatever you may think of various spiritual notions, many (if not most) have a rich history of serious consideration. You might claim that Christian belief (whatever that is) is irrational, founded in some emotional need or response and not founded on good reason. Thomas Aquinas would disagree.

My personal theory of how most world religions came too are a two part theory:
1. Reason - Yes, reason, I do belive that the founders of religion saw the world around them and due to lack of better knowledge they assumed that the world had to have been created by some sort of mystical creature and inteligence, while we now know that it was just a bunch of coincidences and the basic elements that caused creatures to appear, in other words: we are all here cause of everything and nothing.
2. Law - Picture a society at the year 0, barbariaism was the lawsystem (survival of the fittest, the biggest and strongest ruled, we where animals) and if you could take it, it was yours. Somebody had to put a stop to this and make everybody function as they wanted to, they said that god wanted them to act like this, do that and don't do that. Just think of how just the ten comandments are just as most laws of a functional society.
So I belive that it was really rational when they came too, but today, they are holding most people back and doesn't want people to think freely, so there for, religions are now irrational.. Of course this is what I think, you are free to have your own oppinon...
 
Didymos Thomas
 
Reply Wed 13 Feb, 2008 11:40 am
@Wizzy,
Quote:
A lot of religious fanatics and extremists are dangerous, don't matter if they are chrisitan, muslim, jewish or any other religion. What makes them dangerous is just their belives of "god's will" and a life after this one, when you have that guarentee, why would you even be afraid to loose your life? You'll just come to heaven won't you? Thus I feel that atheists are allways more responsible of their own actions, cause if it leads to their death, they are dead and everything goes black.


Not all religious people share those same views, though.

Quote:
Of course you can't say that ALL of anything is anything except for when it's true, not saying that it is in this debate though.. Although I don't really understand where this outburst came from as I don't think we have pulled all of anything over any line yet atleast...


You do exactly this in your last post when you claim atheists have a greater sense of personal responsibility than believers.

As for your statements about religion being rational or not, the rational of various religious stances does not lose value because of it's source.
If the guy next to me comes up with some religion so that he can dominate others, his folly does not prevent me from teaching religion for the sake of others.

Simply: broad statements about religion are almost always wrong.
 
Wizzy
 
Reply Wed 13 Feb, 2008 12:30 pm
@Didymos Thomas,
Didymos Thomas wrote:
You do exactly this in your last post when you claim atheists have a greater sense of personal responsibility than believers.

Thomas
Yeah I did but ofcourse that was exaggerated to get my point thru... It shouldn't be "allway" but "in most cases", atleast from my experiances...

Didymos Thomas wrote:
As for your statements about religion being rational or not, the rational of various religious stances does not lose value because of it's source.
If the guy next to me comes up with some religion so that he can dominate others, his folly does not prevent me from teaching religion for the sake of others.

Simply: broad statements about religion are almost always wrong.

Nooo it doesn't prevent you from that, and I haven't claimed that either.. But that isn't a reflection of the religion, but of the person.. As you can call yourself what ever you want to, if you call yourself a Raiders fan but don't know anything about them and talk about Steelers alot, are you really a Raiders fan? For example: the old testament talk alot about slavery in a possitive form or atleast in a neutral form, the new testament also talks a little about this and as all three major religions have the old testament (judaism, christianity and islam), shouldn't preists, rabbis and whatever-islamic-preists-are-called mention this atleast a few times during their life time while preaching? And how many do you think acctually have mentioned this?

And ofcourse I agree with you (not that it stops me from doing it myself): broad statements about anything are almost always wrong, at least not true too 100%, but there are usually some truth in there...
 
Didymos Thomas
 
Reply Wed 13 Feb, 2008 04:00 pm
@boagie,
Even if we refine the statement to "most cases", what good is the statement? We certainly cannot take a poll and find out who feels a greater sense of personal responsibility.
The problem remains - blanket statements about religion and religious believers do not take into consideration the fact that beliefs vary so widely.

But, just for fun, let's look at your claim, that atheists will take more personal responsibility than the religious. I could just as easily, and with as much force, argue that the religious will take more personal responsibility because they believe a higher power will hold them responsible, and that atheists will take less personal responsibility because they do not think there is anything/anyone to be responsible to.
Both arguments are groundless. Let's not make them.

Quote:
But that isn't a reflection of the religion, but of the person..


And isn't this the issue? There is no Christianity without believers. 'Christianity', 'Islam', ect, and the way we view these faiths, is a reflection of the faithful, not of some religion that exists without believers.

That's the thing. Blanket judgments about groups of people, especially groups so diverse, a doomed to be inaccurate and misguiding.
 
Wizzy
 
Reply Wed 13 Feb, 2008 04:28 pm
@Didymos Thomas,
Didymos Thomas wrote:
Even if we refine the statement to "most cases", what good is the statement? We certainly cannot take a poll and find out who feels a greater sense of personal responsibility.
The problem remains - blanket statements about religion and religious believers do not take into consideration the fact that beliefs vary so widely.

But, just for fun, let's look at your claim, that atheists will take more personal responsibility than the religious. I could just as easily, and with as much force, argue that the religious will take more personal responsibility because they believe a higher power will hold them responsible, and that atheists will take less personal responsibility because they do not think there is anything/anyone to be responsible to.
Both arguments are groundless. Let's not make them.

Thomas
Ofcourse you can make the opposit claim, and you are free to do that. But as I added: from MY experiances
And nevertheless, you can't deny that religious extremists are dangerous (not limited to religious extremists but history shows that religion have been the foundation to alot of pain and suffering.. Crusades, church executions etc. etc.)

Didymos Thomas wrote:
And isn't this the issue? There is no Christianity without believers. 'Christianity', 'Islam', ect, and the way we view these faiths, is a reflection of the faithful, not of some religion that exists without believers.

That's the thing. Blanket judgments about groups of people, especially groups so diverse, a doomed to be inaccurate and misguiding.

These religions we have discussed now are all based on holy texts and books, which is the foundation of that religion, the rules and moral of that god. This is the base of the religion and ofcourse, they need the followers. But when the followers don't question the leader, they are sheep and not alot more. This isn't exclusive for religions, but is the best example in modern times...
 
Didymos Thomas
 
Reply Wed 13 Feb, 2008 04:35 pm
@boagie,
Quote:
Thomas
Ofcourse you can make the opposit claim, and you are free to do that. But as I added: from MY experiances
And nevertheless, you can't deny that religious extremists are dangerous (not limited to religious extremists but history shows that religion have been the foundation to alot of pain and suffering.. Crusades, church executions etc. etc.)


I didn't make the claim because I think it is true. In fact, I reject the claim, just as I reject yours. My point was that your claim is extreme, without solid foundation and useless to any serious conversation about religion.

Sure, religious extremism is dangerous - all extremism is dangerous. Never the less, broad statements about diverse groups of people run into serious problems.

Quote:
These religions we have discussed now are all based on holy texts and books, which is the foundation of that religion, the rules and moral of that god. This is the base of the religion and ofcourse, they need the followers. But when the followers don't question the leader, they are sheep and not alot more. This isn't exclusive for religions, but is the best example in modern times...


Sort of. Christians have different Bibles. The OT varies a great deal from sect to sect. Some Christians place greater emphasis on certain parts of the NT, while others embracematerial not found in the NT or OT as scripture.

Again, religions do not exist independently of believers. The interpretation of texts, and the decision about which texts are useful and how create vast differences in views - even among those who go to the same church.

Sorry, Wizzy, but blanket statements about religion are bound to run into significant problems.
 
Edvin
 
Reply Mon 25 Feb, 2008 07:09 am
@boagie,
I'm just going to put this out here because it is worth reading up on when it comes to the mythos. The 'mythos over logos' argument. The ancient greeks believed that our rationality is shaped by the myths and that all our knowledge today is in relation to these legends.
 
 

 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.08 seconds on 05/19/2019 at 01:35:19