I wasn’t ignoring the rebuttals,I read them all.I wasn’t aware that you had to debate formally.
Having said that,I don’t believe I was attacking anyone’s beliefs (just as I don’t particarly feel anyone is attacking my non-beliefs)
It was just a dialogue.
I don’t mind if anyone calls me a troll.I seems like a good,less anally retentive way to be.
Never mind,I’m sure all you christians will forgive me.
Yes, but us Jews damn you to Hell!
[sub]psst…mumblemumble[/sub] WHAT? OK fine. Purgatory!
[sub]wahwah wahwaahwa wahwah[/sub] Great googly moogly, what the heck do we have? Really? OK, off to Florida, Crispbread!
Look, you want some clarification, quentin?
OK, first of all, you WERE attacking people’s beliefs. That in itself is actually OK. But to deny doing so after making comments like you have is kinda ridiculous.
Secondly, what in the world did you think a debate was? You spouting your opinion and we, with drool running off both sides of our mouth, nod in agreement? Heck, even good ol’ boy Bush realizes it doesn’t work that way.
Here’s the difference between trolls and regular posters.
Regular posters can take EXTREMELY unpopular stances on an issue as long as they’re willing to logically debate the merits of their beliefs. Sometimes this requires supporting evidence from experts. Most every time it at least requires a response to the responses that further elaborates their position.
Trolls, on the other hand, take an issue just to be inflamatory. They rarely cite evidence, rarely elaborate on their original concept, and rarely even post past the OP on the thread. If they do post again, it usually ignores everything everyone else says and just rehashes, in different words, what they said at the begining.
Get the difference now?
I’m in the wrong place,obviously.I like mindless emotional arguing.
What’s this nonsense about bringing evidence if needed,get over yourselves!It’s a message board,if you want to “bring in evidence” go and become a lawyer.
Again (sigh)I wasn’t attacking peoples beliefs,that’s one thing that is sacred,I was however attacking the institution and doctrines of religion.It’s not up to me to prove religion is bunk,it’s up to you to prove it isn’t,seeing as there is no tangible evidence out there to prove otherwise.
All of the arguments were emotional,including Satans,for whom the words "devil’ and “Advocate” must have been invented.
it is pointless talking about evidence.You try fronting up to a fundemaentalist with filecases full of evidence against god and he’ll probably show you the door (or more extremely) shoot you.
Present an atheist with the bible and he’ll do the same.
Like I said I’m probably in the wrong place.I like inflammatory arguments,jokes and colorful language…not dry replies and high-minded attitudes.
Americans…tch.
Yes now go away troll. (and I might add, idiot)
You wasted your 500th post on this guy! You’re gonna kick yourself in the morning
I will go away,eventually…but like I said before you can’t be that great if all you can do is call me an idiot.I may very well be an idiot (although my guess is that to an American “idiot” may translate as “person with well developed sense of irony”)but you’ll never know.
Ever thought of collecting all your posts in book form Asmo?
It could be eventually stacked in the library next to the bible “stuff they expected us to take seriously”.
See…you guys actually care about how many posts you’ve made.Anal.(For all your high-minded desire for covention you reveal youselves as verbose yet strangely empty vessels)
Nobody said you couldn’t participate in a serious discussion, quentin crispbread. However, if all you want to do is lure people into mindless shouting matchs, then go elsewhere because we don’t have much use for you here.
I’m betting that Quentin won’t last very long here unless he shows that he’s willing to dabate in a civilised manner.
Quentin: Mindless emotional arguments are fine. But there’s a time and a place for everything. This is neither.
This is an excellent forum for people who want to dicuss–in a fairly rational manner–attitudes, beliefs and opinions.
Personally, I agree with a few your opinions (doesn’t really matter which).
As far as keeping track of posts: no, it’s not anal, petty or immature. Those who have posted more often generally have a better idea of how this forum works, and are very good at accurately stating their positions. Those with seniority on the SDMB (unlike real life) generally deserve it.
And if someone disagrees with you, putting forth coherent arguments stating the facts as they see them, it’s not a good idea to tell them that they’re not arguing the point. That’s a great way to have them tear you a new virtual asshole.
This isn’t even an argument! It’s just contradiction!
-Monty Python
Hear, hear!
We prefer our shouting matches to be mindful. The enemy is ignorance. Not each other. If you want to learn from us and thereby be entertained, go ahead. Be aware that learning from us does not imply that you necessarily agree with anyone else – just that you understand. We’re a diverse group, insofar as beliefs of any sort are concerned, and are happy to discuss almost any topic. We are not, however, happy to provide you with amusement that consists of your perceived rattling of our cages just to see our reactions.
If you seek to amuse yourself by provoking outrage then you, sir, are a troll.
~~Baloo
Ok…all ribbing aside,this is how I see it.I started the thread not to be a nuisance but because these questions genuinely concern me.Now a few people tried to answer me rationally and without emotion,cool.Then a couple of people used a derogatory term toward me just because I didn’t quite grasp the way the board worked.I haven’t quite worked out how to pull quotes just yet so that’s why I didn’t address people point by point,hey I’m a newbie,I admit it.
P.S. I actually like Americans.
Again let me clarify…I didn’t start the rancour that developed on this thread.I was just on the other end of the common intolerance shown in cyberland to newbies.People are,and will always be territorial.(but that’s another thread innit?
(BTW, neat name)
If you just managed to get on the wrong foot, then perhaps it might be wise to restate your question in more neutral terms. Since this thread seems have gotten somewhat side-tracked, it might be a good idea if you paraphrased the OP so we might more clearly understand your question.
You still might not like/agree with the answers, but you stand a good chance of defusing accusations of trollish behavior.
~~Baloo
Thanx Baloo.
I just went back to the original post,and hand on heart I beleive the points are pretty clear (aside from the smartass bookends)
In fact the main question is in the title…“what is religion for?”
Maybe someone could start by answering that.I know what it does,but what is it for?
There are several meanings to religion. Depending on who you ask, you will get several answers. Here’s one of mine (there are several, but this one comes to mind right now):
Religion is a way to conceptualize G-d (and/or the supernatural) and his/it’s relationship to your your life and the world at large. Note that by this definition, a belief in the absence of G-d and/or the supernatural (athiesm comes to mind) constitutes a religion. To my thinking, everyone has a religion, even if they might not subscribe to a body of beliefs and doctrines shared by others and formally recognized as a “established religion”, or even if they don’t recognize their own body of beliefs as such.
Some folks believe that religion is a path to power; that people with a better understanding of it have a degree of supernatural control over events and temporal authority over those within the religious heirarchy whom they outrank. Others believe that religion is a path to a deeper understanding of the world around them and their relationship to it. I subscribe to the latter view.
In either case, religion provides the believer with standards that they honestly try to uphold (or, conversely, standards they cynically believe they should appear to uphold, even if they don’t), guidance or suggestions on how to deal with good or ill fortune, and what their duties and responsibilities are to themselves, others, and G-d (or whatever supernatural authority their religion espouses).
What it’s for, is to give the individual a framework of thought, ethics, and behavior to draw upon that is larger than their own personal experience. Just as you might ask your mechanically-inclined friends what that funny noise is your car makes when you start it on cold mornings, you consult religious authorities, scriptures, and your own experience within the religion’s framework to resolve problems or seek direction in your own life.
[editorial comment]
There are quite a few people, in my experience, who use religion as a means to justify doing things that one might consider evil. Just as some folks use the law to obtain questionable ends (for example, a small community that uses a speed trap to increase revenue), some use religion to justify evil ends (or questionable means). For example, in one case Jesus berated the pharisees for not caring for their elderly parents on the grounds that whatever wealth would have been used for that purpose was already dedicated to G-d. Another example is using one or another scriptural passage to claim that one race or other group of people is cursed by G-d, allowing, or even requiring “true believers” to perform any barbarity against them as a “judgement of G-d”, as if G-d doesn’t know what to do and needs help.
[/editorial comment]
~~Baloo
P.S.: What I meant by my request that you rephrase your original post was that since the original post elicited so many hostile responses, you may have phrased it poorly. Just because you have a perfect understanding of what you mean does not guarantee others will understand what you said the way you meant it. Religious or not, one should keep in mind that some hostile reactions are not the result of intentional hostility on your part, but the perception of hostility by others. Since so many responded defensively to your original post, you obviously must have pushed somebody’s buttons. If you did not mean to, it’s easier to examine what you said and learn to say things differently, rather than to expect everyone else to just learn how to interpret what you said.
You have it backwards… the question is what are YOU for?
If a supreme diety exists, by definition it has no utilitarian purpose. He/She is the ground of all reality, not some sort of cog in the wheel. Religion is just the attempt to know/understand said diety.
Conversely, if a diety exists, then it seems incumbent on you to find YOUR purpose in relation to said diety; if diety is absent, it is your job to more or less breed and die. Or don’t. Your thoughts and feelings are rather irrelevant to the Cosmos.
For me, I am a Christian because I believe it is the truth. Not because it makes me a better person (though it does), not because it makes me feel good (sometimes does, sometimes doesn’t), not because I am illiterate hillbilly. But rather, I have concluded, based on my observation, my reason, my personal experiences, and the wisdom and experiences of people I trust, that God exists and has revealed himself in the person of Christ and in the Bible.
If you don’t believe, that’s OK. But an intelligent Christian (or any other religion) is not going to get suckered into a debate with you when you say patently silly and illogical things like “it’s up to you to prove it isn’t bunk.”
I would advise you:
- Go back through the old threads on this site and see how Christians answered the many, many similar questions. I especially commend Polycarp’s postings to you.
- Go read one of the many book written by Christians for skeptics.
- Stroll into your local church and ask the vicar/priest/whatever to help you out. I will caution that you should make sure you’re talking to someone who himself believes in the historic doctrines of the Christianity.
“If a supreme diety exists, by definition it has no utilitarian purpose. He/She is the ground of all reality, not some sort of cog in the wheel. Religion is just the attempt to know/understand said diety.”
From where I stand religion seems to be a controlling mechanism,and there seems to be little attempt to know or understand anything.
“if diety is absent, it is your job to more or less breed and die”.
I couldn’t agree more,it is my job to breed and die (and create,destroy,consume,enjoy).But yes,ultimately thats all we do,just like all the other animals.
“I have concluded, based on my observation, my reason, my personal experiences, and the wisdom and experiences of people I trust, that God exists and has revealed himself in the person of Christ and in the Bible”.
Well,I’m happy for you,that’s your story.It’s about as valid as mine isn’t it?
"an intelligent Christian (or any other religion) is not going to get suckered into a debate with you when you say patently silly and illogical things like “it’s up to you to prove it isn’t bunk.”
Sorry why not? I’m a straight down the line unbeliever,I feel no supernatural prescence,either in my heart or in the world,how am I supposed to motivate myself to find something I know doesn’t exist.You guys are supposed to be the fishers of souls.I’m not trying to sucker anyone,and if I was I wouldn’t do it here.
“Go read one of the many book written by Christians for skeptics”.
That would be about as much in my interest and you doing the opposite.(or do you actively seek proof of non-existence?)
I’ve spoken with many devout christians in my time,and they all,to a man tried to sell me on the Jesus idea.See…that’s where they had me at a disadvantage,they really wanted to convert me,but I had no interest whatsoever in unconverting them.It just aint fair.
Balloo:
“To my thinking, everyone has a religion, even if they might not subscribe to a body of beliefs and doctrines shared by others and formally recognized as a “established religion”, or even if they don’t recognize their own body of beliefs as such”.
Thanks for this post,it was kinda what I was hoping for in the first place.Sure I have beliefs.I believe in love,art and brotherhood,if you want to call that religion,that’s cool,although it seems very broadbased.
“Some folks believe that religion is a path to power; that people with a better understanding of it have a degree of supernatural control over events and temporal authority over those within the religious heirarchy whom they outrank. Others believe that religion is a path to a deeper understanding of the world around them and their relationship to it. I subscribe to the latter view”.
Is this you saying that your particular path is preferable? I agree,but there are factions on either side of you who would not.This constant fracturing is one of my main problems with religion,it seems more to do with human nature…hey yours does too.
The good side.
“In either case, religion provides the believer with standards that they honestly try to uphold”
But can’t man manage that quite well by himself?And doesn’t he do it every day?
“… you consult religious authorities, scriptures, and your own experience within the religion’s framework to resolve problems or seek direction in your own life”.
Even you must admit that there are mechanisms out there that do the job just as well,I would say that morally I’ve learned as much from the comedy of Lenny Bruce and Bill Hicks as I have from any religious tract.
Bal,I expected people to respond defensively I wasn’t really after dry debate,although that seems to be the done thing.
Thanks.
in my opinion one needs to distinguish between SPIRITUALISM and RELIGIOUS POWER GAMES. people use knowledge and hide knowledge to exercise power over others. i distinguish 5 major power games. Economic, Political, Military, Religious and Sexual.
if there is a metaphysical aspect to the universe and people are using knowledge about it to play power games there is naturally going to be a lot of confusion. some people are so alienated by religious nonsense that they trash the whole concept and become atheists.
if you are interested try:
http://www.childpastlives.org/oldsouls.htm
http://www.near-death.com/origen.html
Dal Timgar
“…there seems to be little attempt to know or understand anything.”
Hmmm… does this seem to you to be just a wee bit inflammatory and insulting? Arrogant? Condescending? Starting to see why you’re getting called a troll?
Dostoyevsky, Newton, Pascal, TS Eliot and on and on; rabid Christians and brilliant minds. One of last year’s Nobel winners in one of the hard sciences (forget which one) was a deacon in a baptist church. Deal with it. If you read the threads on this site and conclude that all religious people are ignorant boobs, it says more about you than about them.
Personally, I have met dumb atheists and smart ones, dumb Christians and smart ones.
“That’s your story. It’s about as valid as mine isn’t it?”
I never said it wasn’t. Obviously, one of us is right and the other wrong, and it is a subject that can be productively debated. If you want to retreat into “you believe what you want and I’ll believe what I want,” that’s fine too. But YOU started this conversation.
If you just want to flame believers, go to the BBQ pit.
And yes, I have read books by atheists arguing for their positions, especially when I was going through the period when I was trying to figure out what I believed. Some of them I thought were nitwits, but some were quite challenging. Of course, I went into it with an open mind, actively seeking out the truth. Your comment that this would “not be in my interest” indicates that you are unwilling to do the same.
“Dostoyevsky, Newton, Pascal, TS Eliot and on and on; rabid Christians and brilliant minds. One of last year’s Nobel winners in one of the hard sciences (forget which one) was a deacon in a baptist church”
I know there has been some brilliant discourse about religion,by hundreds of great minds,many of whom were /are christians,excuse me but that’s not the point.The area I’m talking about is the one where reason must be discarded and the big leap of faith made.There is no room for discussion there.
“If you want to retreat into “you believe what you want and I’ll believe what I want,” that’s fine too. But YOU started this conversation”.
Hey,you guys are the sticklers for conventional debating.Your story is subjective and therefore irrelevant.(I know,I know I did it too,but I don’t purport to be any good at this and call anyone a troll.)
" Of course, I went into it with an open mind, actively seeking out the truth. Your comment that this would “not be in my interest” indicates that you are unwilling to do the same".
Well of course you did,but you were(at worse) an agnostic.I’m saying that for me there is no point.There is a mountain of text out there designed to make a man change his mind about anything(not just religion).
I think"Go away and read…" is a schoolteachers comment,designed to keep the class quiet.