Why Religion?

[DrZoidberg]

Humanists may consider themselves secular or religious. Many of us who grew up in a church may miss the spiritual support it provides. In college, I often went to the Unitarian Coffee House, an area for talks, games, and snacks on Friday nights.

When it was time to marry, we called on Reverend Gold from the UU church in Richmond who counseled us and performed the service in the park.

A church, any church, provides spiritual support for moral people seeking to be good and to do good. The camaraderie, the music, the message, all contribute to maintaining a “holy spirit”, that is to say, “feeling good about doing good and being good”.

And it helps to have that support in a world where the wicked often profit at the expense of the rest of us.

But a formal church is not a necessity. We also have the camaraderie of the authors we read, the discussions with like-minded people, and even discussions with people who disagree but help us clarify our faith.

And, yes, it is a matter of faith. All churches that claim to follow God, also declare God to be Good. And it is our faith in Good that sustains us.

I've stopped seeing religion as necessarily being about God or the supernatural. Today I see it in functional terms. A religion is any kind of nucleus to meet around. Could be ideological, a shared interest or a shared goal. The point is that it allows us to let go of our individuality for a bit and become part of a greater whole. We like it because we're a social species and it feels nice.

The point isn't to reach the goal. The point is to meet people and do stuff together. To create a space where we feel safe and we can express a part of ourselves.

The stuff we do creates a shared identity. We like putting symbols and names onto the identity.

For various reasons some of these we institutionalized.

The awesome feeling we get from being part of these associations have led some of us to insert magical reasons. So these are often, but not always, places for spiritual exploration. Which often leads to belief in gods. We also like being part of these groups that in part are mysterious. Which adds to the need to make it magical.

That's my view of religion. Super vague. Super open. Nebulous.

And most importantly, everybody with a functioning social life is religious in some way or another. It's unavoidable IMHO.

I've stopped slamming Christians for being religious. One day I realized my glass house was windy. I too have had (and probably still have) a bunch of beliefs I hold only because it grants me access to people I want to hang out with. I think it's normal for socially competent people

 

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

Humanists may consider themselves secular or religious. Many of us who grew up in a church may miss the spiritual support it provides. In college, I often went to the Unitarian Coffee House, an area for talks, games, and snacks on Friday nights.

When it was time to marry, we called on Reverend Gold from the UU church in Richmond who counseled us and performed the service in the park.

A church, any church, provides spiritual support for moral people seeking to be good and to do good. The camaraderie, the music, the message, all contribute to maintaining a “holy spirit”, that is to say, “feeling good about doing good and being good”.

And it helps to have that support in a world where the wicked often profit at the expense of the rest of us.

But a formal church is not a necessity. We also have the camaraderie of the authors we read, the discussions with like-minded people, and even discussions with people who disagree but help us clarify our faith.

And, yes, it is a matter of faith. All churches that claim to follow God, also declare God to be Good. And it is our faith in Good that sustains us.

I've stopped seeing religion as necessarily being about God or the supernatural. Today I see it in functional terms. A religion is any kind of nucleus to meet around. Could be ideological, a shared interest or a shared goal. The point is that it allows us to let go of our individuality for a bit and become part of a greater whole. We like it because we're a social species and it feels nice.

The point isn't to reach the goal. The point is to meet people and do stuff together. To create a space where we feel safe and we can express a part of ourselves.

The stuff we do creates a shared identity. We like putting symbols and names onto the identity.

For various reasons some of these we institutionalized.

The awesome feeling we get from being part of these associations have led some of us to insert magical reasons. So these are often, but not always, places for spiritual exploration. Which often leads to belief in gods. We also like being part of these groups that in part are mysterious. Which adds to the need to make it magical.

That's my view of religion. Super vague. Super open. Nebulous.

And most importantly, everybody with a functioning social life is religious in some way or another. It's unavoidable IMHO.

I've stopped slamming Christians for being religious. One day I realized my glass house was windy. I too have had (and probably still have) a bunch of beliefs I hold only because it grants me access to people I want to hang out with. I think it's normal for socially competent people

Yes yes.

We are all sinners, thank all the God like us.

We all share in singing with Christians of Adam's sin being a happy fault and necessary to God's plan.

You seem to forget that while you praise the good side of the god religions, those bastards continue to promote homophobia and misogyny and that a genocidal god is somehow a good God.

Gotta love um. Cant respect um; given the harm the right wing supernatural believing fools continue to do to us.

Regards
DL

 

[DrZoidberg]

Humanists may consider themselves secular or religious. Many of us who grew up in a church may miss the spiritual support it provides. In college, I often went to the Unitarian Coffee House, an area for talks, games, and snacks on Friday nights.

When it was time to marry, we called on Reverend Gold from the UU church in Richmond who counseled us and performed the service in the park.

A church, any church, provides spiritual support for moral people seeking to be good and to do good. The camaraderie, the music, the message, all contribute to maintaining a “holy spirit”, that is to say, “feeling good about doing good and being good”.

And it helps to have that support in a world where the wicked often profit at the expense of the rest of us.

But a formal church is not a necessity. We also have the camaraderie of the authors we read, the discussions with like-minded people, and even discussions with people who disagree but help us clarify our faith.

And, yes, it is a matter of faith. All churches that claim to follow God, also declare God to be Good. And it is our faith in Good that sustains us.

I've stopped seeing religion as necessarily being about God or the supernatural. Today I see it in functional terms. A religion is any kind of nucleus to meet around. Could be ideological, a shared interest or a shared goal. The point is that it allows us to let go of our individuality for a bit and become part of a greater whole. We like it because we're a social species and it feels nice.

The point isn't to reach the goal. The point is to meet people and do stuff together. To create a space where we feel safe and we can express a part of ourselves.

The stuff we do creates a shared identity. We like putting symbols and names onto the identity.

For various reasons some of these we institutionalized.

The awesome feeling we get from being part of these associations have led some of us to insert magical reasons. So these are often, but not always, places for spiritual exploration. Which often leads to belief in gods. We also like being part of these groups that in part are mysterious. Which adds to the need to make it magical.

That's my view of religion. Super vague. Super open. Nebulous.

And most importantly, everybody with a functioning social life is religious in some way or another. It's unavoidable IMHO.

I've stopped slamming Christians for being religious. One day I realized my glass house was windy. I too have had (and probably still have) a bunch of beliefs I hold only because it grants me access to people I want to hang out with. I think it's normal for socially competent people

Yes yes.

We are all sinners, thank all the God like us.

We all share in singing with Christians of Adam's sin being a happy fault and necessary to God's plan.

You seem to forget that while you praise the good side of the god religions, those bastards continue to promote homophobia and misogyny and that a genocidal god is somehow a good God.

Gotta love um. Cant respect um; given the harm the right wing supernatural believing fools continue to do to us.

Regards
DL

I didn't say it was good. I said we do it because it feels nice, and that it is unavoidable for our species. I also said that it often leads us to compromise on what we should know is true. Which is bad.

 

[atrib]

I think the story of Abraham being asked to sacrifice his son, and then given a sheep to sacrifice instead, is about putting an end to human sacrifices. I suspect that many religions, even Judaism, may have practiced human sacrifice in the earliest times. Ending that practice would be a step forward in the evolution of morality.

The best way to end human sacrifice is by asking a person to sacrifice their son? Or by creating a clone that is brutally sacrificed to allow god to forgive all the broken humans he created? How could any of this be consistent with a step forward in the evolution of morality?

The actions of the Hebrew God could be justified by omniscience. Having foreknowledge of the ultimate result of his actions, that the final ends were better than they would be had he not taken these steps, could be taken to justify his actions. These steps could not be taken by mortals, without such foreknowledge.

An all-powerful god has no way to achieve his objectives without harming humans? Sounds like a weak-ass god to me.

And the plagues upon Egypt's Pharaoh were specifically aimed to free the slaves. There were rules in the OT about how long a person could be held as a slave, and I think some rules required offering marriage to female slaves after a period of time, or if the slave chose not to marry she would be released.

Instead of providing rules to slave-owners about how slaves should be treated, why not just say "Slavery is immoral. No human shall ever own another human as a slave"? I mean he did ban eating shellfish and wearing clothes made from mixed fabrics, but he couldn't tell us not to own slaves?

 

[atrib]

For example if Jews were e preferred people of a god, why did they end up as a slaves to begin with? What were they doing wrong? Did they offend god?

Good point -- the OT puffs up the might and 'chosenness' of Israel, then brings in psalms and prophet after prophet to tell them that their woes are the result of turning their backs on God -- setting the stage for our televangelists today, interpreting hurricanes in terms of LGBTQ acceptance. You can still make a living out of it.

That shows how many gullible and downright stupid people we still produce.

The intelligent and moral know that the god religions are selling an evil theology with homophobia and misogyny as staples.

Religiosity - the willingness to believe in fantastical man-made stories and live a life dominated by these stories has little to with intelligence, in my experience. I think some of us are naturally predisposed to believe in gods, while some of us aren't. There may be/may have been some evolutionary benefit to our species for holding such beliefs, or it may be a side effect of some other characteristic, we don't know for sure.

 

[atrib]

How intriguing to see desperate biblical misrepresentation. Has anyone ever noticed that there's also hetrosexual 'fornication' on the list, also not accepted? Few more on the list for you... Drunkards, thieves and liars too.

Why should fornicators be placed in the same bucket as drunkards, thieves and liars? While drunkards, thieves and liars may be harming others or themselves through such activities, fornication between consenting adults can and does increase the well being of humans. Why should fornication be banned? What is wrong with two or more consenting adults having sex?

 

[ideologyhunter]

It helps if your parents haven't drunk of the Flavor Aid. (refers to post #25.)

 

[atrib]

I suppose biblical misrepresentation could apply to those televangelist too. You'll witness that I won't be promoting or going with that notion.

Whose fault is that the Bible can be easily misrepresented/misunderstood? Couldn't your God have written a better book, one that was impossible to misunderstand? Couldn't your God show up and instruct people on how the Bible should be correctly interpreted?

 

[ideologyhunter]

I suppose biblical misrepresentation could apply to those televangelist too. You'll witness that I won't be promoting or going with that notion.

Whose fault is that the Bible can be easily misrepresented/misunderstood? Couldn't your God have written a better book, one that was impossible to misunderstand? Couldn't your God show up and instruct people on how the Bible should be correctly interpreted?

God couldn't keep factual mistakes out of "His Book", i.e., Mark 1:2 saying Isaiah when he should have said Malachi. He also didn't act to get correct attributions on about half the NT books, let alone preserve definitive original manuscripts. Why, it's almost like this was just done by humans.

 

[Learner]

I suppose biblical misrepresentation could apply to those televangelist too. You'll witness that I won't be promoting or going with that notion.

Whose fault is that the Bible can be easily misrepresented/misunderstood? Couldn't your God have written a better book, one that was impossible to misunderstand? Couldn't your God show up and instruct people on how the Bible should be correctly interpreted?

Strange you ask..

Atheists used to argue to some Christians like "Jesus never said this or that (written as saying literally) about gays... in the bible etc.." Has this method of textual scrutiny changed? Have you (plural) become lazy?

In regards to when I mentioned misrepresentation. I meant it as... the misrpresentation it seems to me, is a desperate attempt to add whats not there, willy nilly for that "extra effect."

 

[Learner]

How intriguing to see desperate biblical misrepresentation. Has anyone ever noticed that there's also hetrosexual 'fornication' on the list, also not accepted? Few more on the list for you... Drunkards, thieves and liars too.

Why should fornicators be placed in the same bucket as drunkards, thieves and liars? While drunkards, thieves and liars may be harming others or themselves through such activities, fornication between consenting adults can and does increase the well being of humans. Why should fornication be banned? What is wrong with two or more consenting adults having sex?

Missed this one...

Well you don't seem to know the context of two consenting people and the biblical concept relating to marriage and loyalty of two people. Besides its also placed there, because fornication can cause harm too e.g. a tool for blackmail, or persuasion such as sex has that power to get people to do all sorts of things from bribery, espionage, betrayals, suicides to even murder... Lusts of all kinds from fornication, I refer to, as described in the bible.

 

[atrib]

I suppose biblical misrepresentation could apply to those televangelist too. You'll witness that I won't be promoting or going with that notion.

Whose fault is that the Bible can be easily misrepresented/misunderstood? Couldn't your God have written a better book, one that was impossible to misunderstand? Couldn't your God show up and instruct people on how the Bible should be correctly interpreted?

Strange you ask..

Atheists used to argue to some Christians like "Jesus never said this or that (written as saying literally) about gays... in the bible etc.." Has this method of textual scrutiny changed? Have you (plural) become lazy?

I don't give a fuck what you think some atheists might have said in other threads. That is completely irrelevant to what I am saying.

In regards to when I mentioned misrepresentation. I meant it as... the misrpresentation it seems to me, is a desperate attempt to add whats not there, willy nilly for that "extra effect."

My point was that the Bible is clearly ambiguous in its message, or there would not exist hundreds of different denominations of Christians who hold dramatically different views on what the Bible says. Why could an all-powerful god not create a document that would be impossible to misunderstand? Why does this god not make any effort to make its message clear to every human? The message is clearly important to this god, since it will send you to hell for eternity if you misunderstand the message and do shit this god doesn't want you to do. Can you please answer the question instead off wandering off into irrelevant tangents.

 

[atrib]

How intriguing to see desperate biblical misrepresentation. Has anyone ever noticed that there's also hetrosexual 'fornication' on the list, also not accepted? Few more on the list for you... Drunkards, thieves and liars too.

Why should fornicators be placed in the same bucket as drunkards, thieves and liars? While drunkards, thieves and liars may be harming others or themselves through such activities, fornication between consenting adults can and does increase the well being of humans. Why should fornication be banned? What is wrong with two or more consenting adults having sex?

Missed this one...

Well you don't seem to know the context of two consenting people and the biblical concept relating to marriage and loyalty of two people. Besides its also placed there, because fornication can cause harm too e.g. a tool for blackmail, or persuasion such as sex has that power to get people to do all sorts of things from bribery, espionage, betrayals, suicides to even murder... Lusts of all kinds from fornication, I refer to, as described in the bible.

Lets assume a scenario where none of these things happen - where two consenting adults who are not married get together to have sex and then move on without resorting to any of the negative or criminal behavior that you cite. Which is how sex usually works between consenting adults in the real world. What is your objection to adults having consensual sex under such circumstances? I don't give a fuck what the Bible says - I want objective reasons that form the basis for you wanting to take away the right of consenting adults to have sex.

I also don't understand why you lump in thieves and liars with consenting adults who have sex outside marriage. The actions of thieves and liars are usually done without the consent of the parties who may be harmed by such actions, but that is not the case for consenting adults having sex outside marriage. Would you be offended if I were to lump you in with pedophile priests just because you are Christians?

 

[steve_bank]

Marriage in a n ancient tribe or group would be meant to reduce conflict and male competition.

Abraham essentially pimped out his wife for personal gain.

I believe the ancient Hebrews allowed multiple wives.

The Christian family historically was often based in spousal abuse. Wife and children as property of the male.

It is not just us 'immoral' fornicating atheists. Prominent Christians divorce and remarry, according to Jesus a crime.

 

[ideologyhunter]

Religiosity - the willingness to believe in fantastical man-made stories and live a life dominated by these stories has little to with intelligence, in my experience. I think some of us are naturally predisposed to believe in gods, while some of us aren't. There may be/may have been some evolutionary benefit to our species for holding such beliefs, or it may be a side effect of some other characteristic, we don't know for sure.

For a while, back in the 80s/90s I think, there was media chatter about the "god gene" that explained how religious belief was in some way imparted to human nature. Some media preachers got excited about it, as in, "See? That's God drawing us close and giving us the chance to take part in his wondrous grace", etc., etc. But I have never felt drawn to any god, and even as a kid none of it seemed as real as a crayon or a licorice stick or the sidewalk. I do wish I'd been one of those kids who I hear about every so often who are endowed as young as 9 or 10 with a withering scorn for religious notions. Those kids are happening! They don't let the poor Sunday school teachers get away with anything. The kids who demand that you back up your stories -- I think they often go on to interesting lives, certainly independent lives.
But the strong believers -- I can't even imagine how one develops such a faith in invisible characters judging us from an invisible realm without thinking, "Hold it, am I a nutburger?" Today I was in a little grocery store in Oak Harbor, Ohio. This is a dinkburger with the same entertainment rating as, say, Tutwiler, Missisippi. If you go there, bring your word search magazine. Also shopping was a stout woman whose t-shirt read "Not Today, Satan!" I had two thoughts; first, if you wanted to find my exact opposite, she's got to be close. Second, should I go up behind her, and in my deepest voice go, "I am your dark father!"? I thought better of this -- she was so religious she was probably packing heat. She'd pull a Glock out of her purse, plug me, and recite the t-shirt over my dead body.

 

[Swammerdami]

Humanists may consider themselves secular or religious. Many of us who grew up in a church may miss the spiritual support it provides. In college, I often went to the Unitarian Coffee House, an area for talks, games, and snacks on Friday nights.

When it was time to marry, we called on Reverend Gold from the UU church in Richmond who counseled us and performed the service in the park.

A church, any church, provides spiritual support for moral people seeking to be good and to do good. The camaraderie, the music, the message, all contribute to maintaining a “holy spirit”, that is to say, “feeling good about doing good and being good”.

And it helps to have that support in a world where the wicked often profit at the expense of the rest of us.

But a formal church is not a necessity. We also have the camaraderie of the authors we read, the discussions with like-minded people, and even discussions with people who disagree but help us clarify our faith.

And, yes, it is a matter of faith. All churches that claim to follow God, also declare God to be Good. And it is our faith in Good that sustains us.

I like this post.

I have never been a "believer", but I DO believe in the power of spirituality to promote well-being and good deeds. And it is often more likely to succeed at this than secular alternatives.

It may be difficult for a modern science-oriented person like myself to embrace spirituality and its virtues, but I've regarded this difficulty as a matter for regret, and not a matter for pride.

Many or most religious teachings or teachers are forces for GOOD. (White Christian evangelicalism in America is a grotesque exception, but why extrapolate to condemn sane ideas of religion in sane countries? Buddhism is key to my wife's life, happiness and well-being.)

Today, educated people know that the Earth orbits around a large fusioning ball, and that no matter how far you travel in any direction, you will not reach a "Heaven." But ancient people had no way of knowing that. When I read posts deriding the "silly ignorance" of ancient people, I form my own ideas of just who is silly, and who is ignorant about early attempts to understand nature and ignorant about human spirituality.

 

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

Yes yes.

We are all sinners, thank all the God like us.

We all share in singing with Christians of Adam's sin being a happy fault and necessary to God's plan.

You seem to forget that while you praise the good side of the god religions, those bastards continue to promote homophobia and misogyny and that a genocidal god is somehow a good God.

Gotta love um. Cant respect um; given the harm the right wing supernatural believing fools continue to do to us.

Regards
DL

I didn't say it was good. I said we do it because it feels nice, and that it is unavoidable for our species. I also said that it often leads us to compromise on what we should know is true. Which is bad.

We live under dualistic systems.

You should recognize the good in bad.

As to your last, an example as a proof oc concept would be required for agreement.

As is, you are way to vague.

Regards
DL

 

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

Instead of providing rules to slave-owners about how slaves should be treated, why not just say "Slavery is immoral. No human shall ever own another human as a slave"? I mean he did ban eating shellfish and wearing clothes made from mixed fabrics, but he couldn't tell us not to own slaves?

You and I would not argue much, but we might on slavery in the old days.

If you were to badmouth slavery back then, something no ancient wise man ever did, what would you offer the slave as an option, other than begging of starving to death?

I see slavery back then as the only available safety net.


That is why individuals freely, if we can even say freely, chose slavery over freedom to beg or die.


Regards
DL

 

[DrZoidberg]

Yes yes.

We are all sinners, thank all the God like us.

We all share in singing with Christians of Adam's sin being a happy fault and necessary to God's plan.

You seem to forget that while you praise the good side of the god religions, those bastards continue to promote homophobia and misogyny and that a genocidal god is somehow a good God.

Gotta love um. Cant respect um; given the harm the right wing supernatural believing fools continue to do to us.

Regards
DL

I didn't say it was good. I said we do it because it feels nice, and that it is unavoidable for our species. I also said that it often leads us to compromise on what we should know is true. Which is bad.

We live under dualistic systems.

You should recognize the good in bad.

As to your last, an example as a proof oc concept would be required for agreement.

As is, you are way to vague.

Regards
DL

Yeah, let's all be grateful for the gifts of rape and murder. There's a silver lining in everything

 

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

That shows how many gullible and downright stupid people we still produce.

The intelligent and moral know that the god religions are selling an evil theology with homophobia and misogyny as staples.

Religiosity - the willingness to believe in fantastical man-made stories and live a life dominated by these stories has little to with intelligence, in my experience. I think some of us are naturally predisposed to believe in gods, while some of us aren't. There may be/may have been some evolutionary benefit to our species for holding such beliefs, or it may be a side effect of some other characteristic, we don't know for sure.

We are programmed to seek, fear and wish to eliminate the unknown, thanks to our selfish genes. Not stupidly believe it is real.

We are the most insecure animal on the planet and that allows some fools and liars to posit a real supernatural.

Fools will always be with us as well as liars.

Nice that religions are dying thanks to modernization.

I cannot see that trend changing.

Regards
DL