Exactly HOW is religion supposed to give meaning to life?

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

08-16-2011, 09:36 PM
jocky

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mutatis-Mutandi

I just forgot to say "a lack of belief *in God*." You can see from other posts that I know the difference, I shouldve just clarified (though, I thought, in this case, it was sort of implied).

Implication, omission, unclarification. unimplication, clarification, differenciation, shouldveication where does it all end? Goodnight Mutatiscation. :biggrin5:
08-16-2011, 10:01 PM
Mutatis-Mutandis

Quote:

Originally Posted by WyattGwyon

You've misinterpreted my intentions: I do want it to mean that! And if the term only meant "having a lack of belief," I would call myself an atheist. Unfortunately, the term atheist is commonly defined as one who denies the existence of God or who professes disbelief in such an entity, and denial goes well beyond simply not believing. My point is that from the perspective of a nonbeliever, this putative act of denial gives more weight to the notion of God's existence than I think it deserves. By setting up the opposition in this way, one tacitly establishes theism as the norm and denial as exceptional (basic semiotics; unmarked and marked terms in an opposition respectively). I prefer not to make this tacit concession. Therefore, when asked about my religious views, I simply say: I don't believe in supernatural phenomena. If someone presses and asks specifically if I believe in God, I look at them quizzically and ask them what they mean by this term God. This puts the inquisitors in the position of having to define themselves and the results are often very funny. This is the way to approach the issue from a position of strength. By using the term atheist one unwittingly puts ground under the theists' feet.

I see what you're saying. My mindset is this, though: I know what atheism really means--simply a lack of belief--and if others don't understand that, that is their problem and not mine. It's sort of like when people complain about people using big words. "Why don't you just say 'showy' instead of 'ostentatious,' " they may say. Well, because I liked the word "ostentatious," and it was a better word for the usage. That you don't understand the word is not my problem.

And, if we want to get technical, I really describe myself as an agnostic atheist (that's what it says on my Facebook page, so you know I'm serious).

But, I have to concede that, on the whole, theism really is the norm. Last I heard, over 90% of the world's population believes in a god or some supernatural element to life.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jocky

Implication, omission, unclarification. unimplication, clarification, differenciation, shouldveication where does it all end? Goodnight Mutatiscation. :biggrin5:

:lol:
08-17-2011, 12:20 AM
BienvenuJDC

Quote:

Originally Posted by WyattGwyon

You've misinterpreted my intentions: I do want it to mean that! And if the term only meant "having a lack of belief," I would call myself an atheist. Unfortunately, the term atheist is commonly defined as one who denies the existence of God or who professes disbelief in such an entity, and denial goes well beyond simply not believing. My point is that from the perspective of a nonbeliever, this putative act of denial gives more weight to the notion of God's existence than I think it deserves. By setting up the opposition in this way, one tacitly establishes theism as the norm and denial as exceptional (basic semiotics; unmarked and marked terms in an opposition respectively). I prefer not to make this tacit concession. Therefore, when asked about my religious views, I simply say: I don't believe in supernatural phenomena. If someone presses and asks specifically if I believe in God, I look at them quizzically and ask them what they mean by this term God. This puts the inquisitors in the position of having to define themselves and the results are often very funny. This is the way to approach the issue from a position of strength. By using the term atheist one unwittingly puts ground under the theists' feet.

I agree with what you've said here. Usually those who claim to be atheists (and it's demonstrated here at this site) tend not only to have a lack of belief, but they are adamant to point out that anyone who DOES belief must be an idiot. They also usually try to demonize the majority of believers as fundamentalist nutcases. ...and yes, I am sure that this comment will get a demeaning offensive response.
08-17-2011, 01:00 AM
jocky

Quote:

Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC

I agree with what you've said here. Usually those who claim to be atheists (and it's demonstrated here at this site) tend not only to have a lack of belief, but they are adamant to point out that anyone who DOES belief must be an idiot. They also usually try to demonize the majority of believers as fundamentalist nutcases. ...and yes, I am sure that this comment will get a demeaning offensive response.

Not at all give me a cuddle, you have cherry picked some responses and have made some assumptions that you had before you posted. I do not believe for one minute that anyone thinks that because you disagree with some of the points made that your religion or your attitude makes you a nutcase.

I never admitted I was an atheist, all I did was to point out what it meant and despite some of the criticism it still boils down to the same thing, a rejection of the idea Of God or Gods, how hard is that to understand? I hope that was not demeaning or offensive.
08-17-2011, 01:56 AM
Vonny

Quote:

Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC

I agree with what you've said here. Usually those who claim to be atheists (and it's demonstrated here at this site) tend not only to have a lack of belief, but they are adamant to point out that anyone who DOES belief must be an idiot. They also usually try to demonize the majority of believers as fundamentalist nutcases. ...and yes, I am sure that this comment will get a demeaning offensive response.

But you called someone an idiot on the anonymous thread. It said "YOU are an idiot." Now, there must have been hundreds of people who wondered if that was intended for them. I'll admit I was one of them.

If I were you and people called me, or even my buddies - an idiot - I'd feel that I had it coming.

I'm not saying this to be demeaning or offensive. Just wishing I could bring a little awareness. I'd like a cuddle too!
08-17-2011, 07:45 AM
Paulclem

Quote:

Originally Posted by jocky

Thank you for taking the time to reply I appreciate that. Buddha's last words were similar to the point another literary giant made, by that I mean Shakespeare when he gave Polonius the line " to your own self be true "

My problem is simply this karma, relgion, and so on only refers to grown up sentient human beings. What happens to the children who die of starvation, the insane, the uneducated and all the rest who, without torturing the statisics, make up the majority of mankind ?

In the texts it talks of the Precious Human Life which is very rare - considering the multitudes of beings that there are on this planet, different realms and according to the teachings, different worlds.

We have a precious human life where we can live with a minimum of suffering and have the leisure to pursue a better life/ conditions/ spirituality. One of the reasons that it is precious is that so much can be achieved by one human through helping others etc etc. If you are starving, have mental problems or live unde a dictatorship - these aren't possible.

The Karma that results in a Precious Human Life depends upon the virtuousness of the being in the previous life/ lives ripening. The conditions are created by the being. The conditions required are the good human qualities. Otherwise, with no preparation it may be that a being ends up in one of the other realms or in a human life where condtions are bad due to a ripening of negative karma.

It seems to explain why it is that people can go bad, and do awful things and seem to be successful in one life. The conditions where they can wield power have been created - the results of what they do with that are stored up then, and unless there is purification, they will get a karmic result from that.

These are generalities. The Buddha said that an individual's karma is very complex, and it is difficult to draw conclusions about a person from what we see. So if we see a disabled person, we cannot come to the conclusin that in their previous life they were a bad person and deserve their punishment which is what Glen Hoddle implied before he was ejected from the England Manager post. Karma is accumulated from many lives previous.

You also can't say that the person in this life did bad things in a previous life. there is a relationship - but they are not the same personality/ individual because that part of a person - their character and individuality - is something that is impermanent, (though in our deluded view we consider it to be permanent). The teachings say that all beings want happiness, but are often deluded into thinking certain courses of action will bring it to them. In the short term it might - but in the long run suffering results from their actions.

What karma is not is a simple cause and effect from life to life, just as a being is related but different when they are reincarnated. reincarnation is certainly not the the same as that promoted by some westerners when the yclaim to be important people in the past. For a start it wasn't them on the individual/ personality level.

I hope that answers your question a bit Jocky. If you get me started I just go on and on! :biggrin5:
08-17-2011, 09:05 AM
Mutatis-Mutandis

Quote:

Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC

I agree with what you've said here. Usually those who claim to be atheists (and it's demonstrated here at this site) tend not only to have a lack of belief, but they are adamant to point out that anyone who DOES belief must be an idiot.

Yes, because atheists never get any flack.
08-17-2011, 05:39 PM
BienvenuJDC

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vonny

But you called someone an idiot on the anonymous thread. It said "YOU are an idiot." Now, there must have been hundreds of people who wondered if that was intended for them. I'll admit I was one of them.

If I were you and people called me, or even my buddies - an idiot - I'd feel that I had it coming.

I'm not saying this to be demeaning or offensive. Just wishing I could bring a little awareness. I'd like a cuddle too!

I'm sorry, but I use the Anonymous Thread in jest....because of what it is...it's an Anonymous thread. It has often been used for jesting. Sometimes it's just to relieve frustrations. I would hope that people would not use the thread for paranoia.

However, I have had some people deliberately direct implications (if not explicit comments) at me for the "idiocy of believing in God". There have even been threads started to ridicule me because I believe in certain Biblical accounts. I'm NOT saying that ALL atheists do this, but there is a large percentage that do.
08-19-2011, 09:52 AM
G L Wilson

It is in the perversity of dreams that a religious person gives meaning to life. It is a fiction with no ending, a nightmare in actuality.
08-19-2011, 06:18 PM
Paulclem

I'm happy.:biggrin5:
08-19-2011, 08:11 PM
G L Wilson

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paulclem

I'm happy.:biggrin5:

I'm sure you are!
08-19-2011, 08:16 PM
Varenne Rodin

I think something that religious and non-religious people can agree on is that good tasting food tastes good. Isn't that so nice?
08-19-2011, 08:19 PM
Paulclem

It is.:biggrin5:
08-19-2011, 09:46 PM
G L Wilson

What human being doesn't mind creating havoc to be happy? As Nietzsche says, "To forget one's purpose is the commonest form of stupidity." Religious people have no purpose in life other than self-destruction. Religion is the faith of nihilism.
08-19-2011, 10:23 PM
Drkshadow03

Ah, it's good to see this thread is still being productive and full of such profound wisdom from the usual suspects.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paulclem

I'm happy.:biggrin5:

Only in a person's most perverse dreams could they possibly want to be happy. Happiness is merely a fiction, in actuality a nightmare. Only weirdoes want to be happy.
08-19-2011, 11:08 PM
BienvenuJDC

Quote:

Originally Posted by G L Wilson

What human being doesn't mind creating havoc to be happy? As Nietzsche says, "To forget one's purpose is the commonest form of stupidity." Religious people have no purpose in life other than self-destruction. Religion is the faith of nihilism.

I have NO desire to create havoc just to support my own happiness. That is called selfishness. I have great purpose in life. If you want to generalize yourself, do so, but leave the rest of the world out of it.
08-19-2011, 11:28 PM
Vonny

Quote:

Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC

I have NO desire to create havoc just to support my own happiness. That is called selfishness.

Jesus didn't jest, He wept.
08-19-2011, 11:34 PM
BienvenuJDC

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vonny

Jesus didn't jest, He wept.

Who was jesting?
08-19-2011, 11:39 PM
Vonny

Quote:

Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC

Who was jesting?

John 11:35

Jesus wept
08-19-2011, 11:44 PM
BienvenuJDC

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vonny

John 11:35

Jesus wept

Yes, I am familiar with the account. He wept because His dear friend Lazarus had died. But what does that have to do with jesting?
08-20-2011, 12:06 AM
Vonny

Quote:

Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC

I'm sorry, but I use the Anonymous Thread in jest....because of what it is...it's an Anonymous thread. It has often been used for jesting. Sometimes it's just to relieve frustrations. I would hope that people would not use the thread for paranoia

Jesus wouldn't have called out "YOU are an Idiot" in a crowd and then said He was jesting and insinuated that whoever thought may have have been for her was paranoid.

He also wouldn't have said, "I don't care about your brother" to a woman and then sent her a friendship request.

And Jesus didn't jest.
08-20-2011, 12:41 AM
BienvenuJDC

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vonny

Jesus wouldn't have called out "YOU are an Idiot" in a crowd and then said He was jesting and insinuated that whoever thought may have have been for her was paranoid.

He also wouldn't have said, "I don't care about your brother" to a woman and then sent her a friendship request.

And Jesus didn't jest.

So much taken out of context.

"I don't care about your brother" was to mean that "I'm not about to judge your brother in his situation."

"YOU are an idiot" was not meant to be anything but me releasing my frustrations....not to be taken seriously.

I sent you a friend request, because I see a sincere individual. Why do you judge me so harshly?
08-20-2011, 12:57 AM
Vonny

Quote:

Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC

So much taken out of context.

"I don't care about your brother" was to mean that "I'm not about to judge your brother in his situation."

"YOU are an idiot" was not meant to be anything but me releasing my frustrations....not to be taken seriously.

I sent you a friend request, because I see a sincere individual. Why do you judge me so harshly?

I don't think I judged you, but if I'm confused it's because I've been caused to stumble by people many years older than myself.

Romans 14:21 It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor anything whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak.

You didn't say, "I don't want to judge" you said "I don't care." So to say that I'm taking out of context is twisted.

Why don't I assume you are sincere?

Christians don't do things anonymously, they live in the light. 1John 2:10

Also, why do you assume you will receive a negative response? It could be a cuddly person like Jocky who comes along after you.

Ephesians 4:32
And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you.
08-20-2011, 01:00 AM
G L Wilson

Quote:

Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC

Yes, I am familiar with the account. He wept because His dear friend Lazarus had died. But what does that have to do with jesting?

For Pete's sake, think about it. Vonny is saying to mind your footsteps.
08-20-2011, 01:04 AM
Vonny

If Jesus wept over Lazarus he may also weep if Christians go into Heaven like an ash pressed into the hole in the palm of His hand.
08-20-2011, 01:07 AM
BienvenuJDC

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vonny

If Jesus wept over Lazarus he may also weep if Christians go into Heaven like an ash pressed into the hole in the palm of His hand.

What do you mean?
08-20-2011, 01:20 AM
Vonny

Quote:

Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC

What do you mean?

In high school my friend's brother could always debate the LDS until they were speechless. They consequently went after his younger sister.

It's like my friend said after sustaining much worse head injuries than the LDS kids ever did on on the soccer field, "I wonder what will happen some day when they die and learn the truth?"
08-20-2011, 01:29 AM
G L Wilson

Quote:

Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC

What do you mean?

For pity's sake, do I have to translate everything into words that you can understand? Vonny is saying that you should be careful not to hurt the wounds of Christ.
08-20-2011, 01:42 AM
BienvenuJDC

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vonny

In high school my friend's brother could always debate the LDS until they were speechless. They consequently went after his younger sister.

It's like my friend said after sustaining much worse head injuries than the LDS kids ever did on on the soccer field, "I wonder what will happen some day when they die and learn the truth?"

I'm not familiar with the acronym, LDS.
08-20-2011, 01:50 AM
Vonny

Quote:

Originally Posted by G L Wilson

For pity's sake, do I have to translate everything into words that you can understand? Vonny is saying that you should be careful not to hurt the wounds of Christ.

Thanks for helping me out Wilson.

LDS - The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

frustrations:

psalm 37:8 Cease from anger and forsake wrath: fret not thyself in any wise to do evil.

1John 2:10 He that loveth his brother abideth in the light and there is none occasion of stumbling in him.
08-20-2011, 02:24 AM
Varenne Rodin

In case you are wondering why two atheists would feel more compassion for one Christian than another, it's because one seems kind, caring and sensitive. The other appears to be seeking to inflict pain on just about everyone. The type of Christian I can coexist with the most easily believes that their faith is based on peace, love, and empathy. The Christian who hates is sick indeed, and dangerous. Open up those eyes, man.

Like someone else recently said, there's something about Vonny that makes me want to give her a hug.
08-20-2011, 03:32 AM
Vonny

Quote:

Originally Posted by Varenne Rodin

In case you are wondering why two atheists would feel more compassion for one Christian than another, it's because one seems kind, caring and sensitive. The other appears to be seeking to inflict pain on just about everyone. The type of Christian I can coexist with the most easily believes that their faith is based on peace, love, and empathy. The Christian who hates is sick indeed, and dangerous. Open up those eyes, man.

Like someone else recently said, there's something about Vonny that makes me want to give her a hug.

A hug to you Varenne
08-20-2011, 05:02 AM
Paulclem

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drkshadow03

Ah, it's good to see this thread is still being productive and full of such profound wisdom from the usual suspects.

Only in a person's most perverse dreams could they possibly want to be happy. Happiness is merely a fiction, in actuality a nightmare. Only weirdoes want to be happy.

I know. Isn't it awful - I mean good... in a nightmarish way that is.
08-20-2011, 01:19 PM
Vonny

Quote:

Originally Posted by Varenne Rodin

In case you are wondering why two atheists would feel more compassion for one Christian than another, it's because one seems kind, caring and sensitive. The other appears to be seeking to inflict pain on just about everyone. The type of Christian I can coexist with the most easily believes that their faith is based on peace, love, and empathy. The Christian who hates is sick indeed, and dangerous. Open up those eyes, man.

Like someone else recently said, there's something about Vonny that makes me want to give her a hug.

I actually had another thought along with the hug, but I didn't say it because it sounds a bit naughty, but I'll go ahead...

Maybe someday we'll have a threesome, in the tradition of the Latter-day Saints aka Mormons. (It's a joke, but not one that hurts anyone.)
08-20-2011, 02:09 PM
Varenne Rodin

Hahaha.
08-20-2011, 06:07 PM
jocky

Quote:

Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC

Yes, I am familiar with the account. He wept because His dear friend Lazarus had died. But what does that have to do with jesting?

There is a wee bit of ironic humour in that. Why would JC weep when he knew he could ressurect his mates anytime he felt like it ?

For Gods sake big man why did you wait four days to bring me back ?

To prove my ways are unknowable and confuse future generations. You really need to go and have a shower. :skep:
08-20-2011, 06:14 PM
G L Wilson

Quote:

Originally Posted by jocky

There is a wee bit of ironic humour in that. Why would JC weep when he knew he could ressurect his mates anytime he felt like it ?

For Gods sake big man why did you wait four days to bring me back ?

To prove my ways are unknowable and confuse future generations. You really need to go and have a shower. :skep:

It's a wee bit more complicated than that, jocky. Jesus was weeping because he was being forced to resurrect Lazarus.
08-20-2011, 06:32 PM
jocky

Quote:

Originally Posted by G L Wilson

It's a wee bit more complicated than that, jocky. Jesus was weeping because he was being forced to resurrect Lazarus.

That is the problem G L everything in the scriptures has been poured over by the God squad ad infinitum and simple teachings that most humans can relate to have been obscured and turned into intellectual debates. I may not be the sharpest knife in the drawer but I can relate to the Sermont on the Mount story which reflects the very best qualities of religion. This, in my opinion, is humanity at its finest but it is not divine. Cheers.
08-20-2011, 09:05 PM
G L Wilson

Quote:

Originally Posted by jocky

That is the problem G L everything in the scriptures has been poured over by the God squad ad infinitum and simple teachings that most humans can relate to have been obscured and turned into intellectual debates. I may not be the sharpest knife in the drawer but I can relate to the Sermont on the Mount story which reflects the very best qualities of religion. This, in my opinion, is humanity at its finest but it is not divine. Cheers.

I too find it intolerable for my interpretation of Scripture to be judged incorrect when there is no one way of reading anything. Why should Scripture be judged a special case? The Bible like any other book should be used without fear in any way we see fit. As a humanist, I find that the most annoying people are mostly my fellow humanists who lack any sense of proportion and come down hard on any transgressions in fashion as if humanism was somehow a cult.
08-20-2011, 09:22 PM
cl154576

I find that some people force their beliefs onto the text. If they believe, for instance, they interpret scenes that seem offensive on a deep, highly symbolic level that erases all the offense. If they don't believe sometimes they nitpick or twist.

It is very irritating. I am atheist but I will not force myself to believe that everything in the Bible is bad or wrong.

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page