Forum menu
It is just made up stories to fool the unwary.
Sure, I don't believe in God, so it's not an issue. But like me you live in a society who's underpinnings in just about every branch of it's constructs (from law to education and everything in between) all the way from London to Moscow share a set of values/ethics and morals derived from the philosophical teachings of an off-shoot of Judaism collected and codified in the first centuries BCE after their leader was crucified, and it's earliest followers fled the scene .
That's a fact. I'm less in interested in the God thing if I'm honest with you.
To those people they all (for the first time) believed in the same God.
There must come a point where it becomes a groupthink numbers game. If everyone else believes and are hostile towards those who don't, what are you going to say? There's murkier corners of Islam like this today, where being a heretic could put your life at risk. So you get this weird situation where hypothetically none of them might believe it yet no-one dare speak out for fear of retribution from the other non-believers.
Wasn't there a famous experiment around this with monkeys? They press a button and something bad happens, then gradually all the monkeys get swapped out and they continue to aggressively defend the button despite none of them actually knowing why.
Not necessarily. Again, consider the watchmaker analogy. God could have created us, and then let us do whatever we wanted to do. Which would include powerful people persuading everyone else that they needed to to follow certain rituals or else. This is a pretty widespread concept with or without God being cited. The religious may not necessarily know any more than anyone else about the nature of God. After all, the concept of God varies quite a lot in the Bible itself, which is supported by historical evidence.
Lets say the watchmaker analogy is true. What difference does it make if we acknowledge the watchmaker's existence or not?
Isn't pretending to understand the watchmaker, at best, a waste of time and, at worst, something that is actually very harmful to society?
Is Saxonrider still here, or has he just given up 😕
You have been making claims that the way Europe turned out is due to Christianity.
Not quite. I'm making claims that Europe turned out the way it did because of the revolutionary philosophy behind Christianity. I'm perfect happy to accept that had another religion come along in late Rome that grabbed a hold of it's leaders, we might well have had a different society now.
why should Christianity be given the benefit for Europe as opposed to other factors?
Because there huge amounts of archaeological evidence to prove it in Europe.
So far god has not been observed. Hence how can anyone claim existence
As with some branches of science, the existence of something can be posited from known facts without it ever having been observed
Science then be seeks to prove that existence but it doesn't always go according to plan and might find other unknowns along the way.
don’t think primitive people sat around thinking ‘right, we’re meaningless without some other purpose so let’s set something up’.
I expect they'd have gone to the wise man or the village elder with such questions. "I don't know, son" is unlikely to have been the stock-in-trade of such a position.
the concept of God varies quite a lot in the Bible itself, which is supported by historical evidence.
Could you give us an example?
There must come a point where it becomes a groupthink numbers game
Probably, although I'm mostly convinced that lots of folks at the time saw Christianity as a pretty cool set of beliefs and changed voluntarily.
I expect they’d have gone to the wise man or the village elder with such questions. “I don’t know, son” is unlikely to have been the stock-in-trade of such a position.
So you think that religion or any kind of spirituality did not exist until a village elder made up a tall tale one day so that he could get people do what he wanted?
What difference does it make if we acknowledge the watchmaker’s existence or not?
Isn’t pretending to understand the watchmaker, at best, a waste of time and, at worst, something that is actually very harmful to society?
Both good questions. Maybe bring them up at the pub night? 🙂
As with some branches of science, the existence of something can be posited from known facts without it ever having been observed
Science then be seeks to prove that existence but it doesn’t always go according to plan and might find other unknowns along the way.
Indeed, like Hawing and black holes, what model is used to predict god and what other evidence is there to support the model?
The answer is nothing. NADA.
I'm perfectly willing to accept that it's possible we're living in a simulation in which case our God is a programmer who has built a group of AIs (that's us) that are simplified versions of itself and who controls the environment to a certain extent to see how we react.
What possible benefit is there for us to worship this programmer? Do you think they care if we praise them? I wouldn't.
I would send a digital flood to destroy a digital town just to see how the AIs reacted. I wouldn't care if all the AIs had little digital shrines to me and said their prayers to me every night.
We can't prove to you that the Great Programmer doesn't exist. Can you at least tell us why we should worship this Great Programmer?
I expect they’d have gone to the wise man or the village elder with such questions. “I don’t know, son” is unlikely to have been the stock-in-trade of such a position.
You've just described Judaism; which is mostly old men going "Yeah...maybe, who knows?"
What possible benefit is there for us to worship this programmer?
What benefit is there for us to sing songs? Or to support a football team? Or post on STW?!
Can you at least tell us why we should worship this Great Programmer?
Me? No. I don't worship him/her/it.
Great Programmer
This is a new meme/tshirt. Love it.
We can’t prove to you that the Great Programmer doesn’t exist. Can you at least tell us why we should worship this Great Programmer?
Nope, I couldn't be less interested in that question at all.
I read page 1 and just skimmed page 6...
Looks like a thoughtful and considered proposal has followed a somewhat predictable trajectory.
I think I'll respectfully decline the original offer thankyou Saxon. That's not as a snub, it's simply that I am pretty much content with my own "More or less an Atheist" approach to religion, and don't actually want it challenged or to throw down against someone else's faith.
I respect others rights to their beliefs and I don't really relish or enjoy the whole "Battle of ideas" that these things inevitably turn into. I prefer not trying to unpick or undermine others faith or impose my own (or lack thereof), I suppose that's counts as a personal philosophy(?).
Anyway, I'd rather God(s) mostly stayed off of STW, but I understand if people feel they need a corner for it. would it maybe be an appropriate thing for the members only area?
I am pretty much content with my own “More or less an Atheist” approach to religion, and don’t actually want it challenged or to throw down against someone else’s faith.
I don't think that was the suggestion, and if I were modding such a thing I'd put a stop to it.
What possible benefit is there for us to worship this programmer?
There must be some benefit, given every human society I know of bar ours has some set of irrational beliefs that could be categorised as religious?
Any groups of humans who did not share common theories of the world/belief systems/related codes appear not to have made it through the last ice age if they made it that far. It could be that the ability to share information verbally, relay complex stories, invent theories/explanations, believe in other worlds beyond this one etc, however wrong they may actually be is deeply human, so selection pressure would be in favour of religiosity.
Not that this relates to the history of christianity and its ongoing cultural influence etc. Which are interesting topics but I'll not be going for the OP's generous paetron offer to the whole STW community. (Maybe all the other academics - 'academics'? - who post on here should make similar offers?)
There must be some benefit, given every human society I know of bar ours has some set of irrational beliefs that could be categorised as religious?
Logical fallacy appeal to the majority or something like it.
The Sun is the bestselling newspaper in the UK, does that make it the best?
The tories won the last election with a majority, in fact thay have been in power for the vast majority of the time in the Uk for the last 100 years? Are they the best? Or right, or correct?
so selection pressure would be in favour of religiosity.
Sounds like a Just So story to me. I think you're right in that humans tell each other stories, and probably did so in some way to impart lessons to kids about how to live, and how to tell our tribe apart from the godless halfwits who live across the valley.
This is of huge relavance here. Religiosty implies a lack of critical thinking skills, it always has. And now we are here.
It's odd that this thread is very similar in overall feel to the dog threads. It has previously occurred to me that the urge to believe in a god and the urge to own a dog come from very similar places. People feel that something is missing from their life. Sometimes I think that it's because something is a bit broken in their heads and/or their lives, and rather than fix the actual problem they choose to cover it up, with a god, or a dog, or even both. They are even similar in that many people are brainwashed into their position as children, rather than making a rational choice as an adult.
I’m mostly convinced that lots of folks at the time saw Christianity as a pretty cool set of beliefs and changed voluntarily.
I suppose then the question becomes, what did it supplant? If we ignore bribery and coercion as major factors then it must've been seen as superior to what was before. I genuinely don't know but I suspect it's "lots of different things". Doesn't Western Christianity have at least some of its roots in paganism? "Alright you lot, you can keep dancing round the maypole and giving each other eggs at springtime, but it's 'god' and not 'Earth mother' now, alright?"
So you think that religion or any kind of spirituality did not exist until a village elder made up a tall tale one day so that he could get people do what he wanted?
Of course I don't, as you know full well. But do you think this scenario wasn't a plausible factor?
Societies have been inventing belief systems for as long as there has been societies, developing and spreading over millennia. Isn't monotheism a relatively recent construct? The ancient Egyptians revered cats, that's a religion I could get behind.
the urge to believe in a god and the urge to own a dog come from very similar places
Christianity is an autocorrect error?
Sometimes I think that it’s because something is a bit broken in their heads and/or their lives, and rather than fix the actual problem they choose to cover it up, with a god, or a dog, or even both.
There might be something in this (though I may have tried to express it a little more gently). In so far as, someone is having a bad day, they pray to their deity of choice and then they feel better. It's kind of a placebo effect I guess, but a "god" as the bit of the brain that tells you to pull your socks up and it'll all be OK in the end rather than a god who's the creator of all things and yadda yadda, that makes a degree of sense.
I’m mostly convinced that lots of folks at the time saw Christianity as a pretty cool set of beliefs and changed voluntarily.
Yeah, not really how Christianity came to Norway.
I think one of the keys to the spread of Christianity in Norway was that it was imposed from above, often by the sword. Kings and Earls weren't necessarily devout believers, but monotheistic Christianity offered a much more structured hierarchy than the disorganised old gods.
Having a single God meant that it was possible to say that you were above the people below you by divine proclamation rather than just because you were the one with the most soldiers.
Christianity spread because it made the populations easier to control and anyone who didn't want to be Christian was tortured until the accepted Christ or simply killed.
Norway is not Christian because they thought it was a cool groovy way of life.
Norway is not Christian because they thought it was a cool groovy way of life.
In most places it was imposed.
And yet it didnt happen in other cultures dominated by Christianity.
What didn't?
Maybe all the other academics – ‘academics’? – who post on here should make similar offers?
Would be awesome.
Societies have been inventing belief systems for as long as there has been societies, developing and spreading over millennia.
Well there's a difference between spirituality and an organised belief system, isn't there?
Sometimes I think that it’s because something is a bit broken in their heads and/or their lives
Is it really that? I mean take me, I frequently go out into the little woods near my house and sit on a fallen tree by the stream, and I feel loads better. Does that make me deficient, if I am less happy when I don't do that? Should I be expected to be as happy as can be without this? I suspect that such an activity would be well understood by the people on this forum, along with riding singletrack through bluebell woods and all. But what's the difference between doing this to make yourself feel better and going to church for the same?
But what’s the difference between doing this to make yourself feel better and going to church for the same?
Does your fallen tree and stream ask you for money?
Does it try to influence debate and government policy, mostly to resist progressive ideas?
There's a big difference between looking after your mental health and taking part in (and giving legitimacy to) organised religion.
Well there’s a difference between spirituality and an organised belief system, isn’t there?
Well, yes, but I very much doubt that the Venn diagram would be two discrete circles.
Logical fallacy appeal to the majority or something like it.
The point is that believing in shared explanations for things we can't see and don't understand is deeply human. It's certainly not logical but so what? Peacocks could fly better and evade predators if they didn't have the fancy big tail. However selection pressure worked to favour the males who put on the best show and so had the most offspring. At some point in human evolution the same thing appears to have been the case for the factors that underpin being religious. It's just very common across societies, like music or visual art.
This is a description of humans generally, that's all, not a justification for religion.
But what’s the difference between doing this to make yourself feel better and going to church for the same?
The former you can go see the stream. The latter someone will tell you about this great stream they've heard about.
If the net result of both is that you feel better and aren't bothering anyone else then yeah, I suppose there's little difference at that level.
Does your fallen tree and stream ask you for money?
Does it try to influence debate and government policy, mostly to resist progressive ideas?
Religions do those things. Spirituality or divinity does not, nor does God.
The point is that believing in shared explanations for things we can’t see and don’t understand is deeply human.
Isn't it just a combination of the survival instinct and imagination?
Humans know that they are going to die. Our imaginations and the capability of abstract thought mean that we have to come up with an explanation of how we are going to continue to live despite the knowledge that we won't.
It's a tough thing to accept that one day you will simply cease to exist. Religions offer a simple way of avoiding this question about ourselves and our place in the universe.
This is a description of humans generally, that’s all, not a justification for religion.
And the flipside to that is "othering". There is (for want of a better word) an instinct within us to fit into society, to conform. There are exceptions of course, but we do it constantly and continually. Most people on STW have a common interest, or we wouldn't be here in the first place. We gravitate towards people like us (little colonies of ex-pats eating fish and chips in the Rose & Crown on the Costa Del Retirement) and shun those who are different (immigrants coming over here with their smelly food and talking funny) with no sense of irony. We have racism, homophobia... why? Because they aren't like us. They're different. They're wrong.
Then we wonder how the notion of being nice to each other evolves into an organised religion. "We're all 7th Day Advent Hoppists... and you're not. Brother Malcolm, go fetch the Stones of Percussive Persuasion." But people are inclined to fall into line with the majority because who wants to be that one guy who didn't get a party invite?
Religions do those things. Spirituality or divinity does not, nor does God.
I don't have a problem with people believing what they believe.
The problem is, if you have a belief, you can either keep it to yourself or you can tell people about it.
If you choose to tell people about it then you're just a nutter. If you and a few other people share the same belief then you're a cult. If you an a few thousand people share the same belief then you're a weird religion. If a few million people share your belief then you are a member of a 'legitimate' religion and can do things like demand to be heard based on your beliefs. There are also tax benefits, I understand.
Beliefs need others to believe the same thing to give them legitimacy. That's is the fundamental reason why so many religions try to convert people. The more people believe the same thing as you the less likely you are to be written off as just another nutter.
Can I just pop my head back up to say that it is precisely this sort of stuff that I was/am hoping we might discuss at the virtual 'pub night'. 🙂
Consider it groundwork. (-:
I don’t have a problem with people believing what they believe.
The problem is, if you have a belief, you can either keep it to yourself or you can tell people about it.
If you choose to tell people about it then you’re just a nutter. If you and a few other people share the same belief then you’re a cult. If you an a few thousand people share the same belief then you’re a weird religion. If a few million people share your belief then you are a member of a ‘legitimate’ religion and can do things like demand to be heard based on your beliefs. There are also tax benefits, I understand.
Beliefs need others to believe the same thing to give them legitimacy.
@BruceWee - if I was to say that is basically what I currently feel about Trans issues, would you understand? I'd like to seek enlightenment based on firm scientific evidence but so far haven't seen anything to convince me. I remain open to suggestions though. (Someone I have known for years is currently transitioning so it would mean a lot to me).
I don’t have a problem with people believing what they believe.
The problem is, if you have a belief, you can either keep it to yourself or you can tell people about it.
If you choose to tell people about it then you’re just a nutter. If you and a few other people share the same belief then you’re a cult. If you an a few thousand people share the same belief then you’re a weird religion
But enough about cryptocurrencies!
I'm here all week
@BruceWee – if I was to say that is basically what I currently feel about Trans issues, would you understand? I’d like to seek enlightenment based on firm scientific evidence but so far haven’t seen anything to convince me. I remain open to suggestions though. (Someone I have known for years is currently transitioning so it would mean a lot to me).
Same.
However. Lets not derail.
Yeah, not really how Christianity came to Norway
The Northern Crusades were very much a powerful person saying that someone else's land could be yours if you made it Christian