- This topic has 248 replies, 55 voices, and was last updated 15 years ago by Hairychested.
-
christian baiting
-
sootyandjimFree Member
I think that a few people are confusing ‘belief’ with ‘religion’.
I was brought up (indoctrinated?) CofE but have since grown up and cast aside such fairy tale nonsense, in part assisted by my experiences in Bosnia cleaning up the damage ‘good Christians’ did to other members of the human race, apparently in my name. But not believing in some tosh dreamed up as a way to control simple people and encourage them not to think too much for themselves doesn’t mean I don’t have belief at all. I believe in my friends and family, without the need of some medieval instruction manual to tell me why or how.
Belief is good, religion is bad.molgripsFree MemberOookay. Good morning debaters.
my point is that we use our own modern moral compass (to use your phrase) not that of the bible.
Your moral compass almost certainly comes from Western European or even British societal values, which are heavily based up on Christain teaching. So no valid point there 🙂
Which bits? A pick and mix approach? The miracles? Water into wine?
Sure – why not? The Bible as I see it is a bunch of stories and writings ABOUT God and Jesus, written many years ago without the standards of journalistic integrity we take for granted today. It contains a lot of interesting history and social history. The stories contained within it are viewed as parables by a lot of people. So yeah, take your pick. This isn’t a Bible study class, but if you are interested you should attend one (I never have btw – if there were secular Bible study classes I quite possibly would).
Okay then, where does the ‘highly developed’ sense of right and wrong come from?
Well that’s a good one. Animals have been shown in many experiments to have a sense of fair play – they are reported on the BBC regularly.
But why was it beautiful?
Good question mate, just about the best post on this thread. I don’t have a good answer for that. When I think of things as beautiful, I believe that it’s just my brain having been wired up that way. Something about plants, skies, open spaces and so on that reminds us of our past in the wilderness… I don’t know.
surely there’s something fascinating about reading a book (or books rather) written thousands of years ago?
Absolutely. I love reading ABOUT the Bible, if not the Bible itself 🙂
I am struggling a bit when you make assertions such as “truth being subjective” This is an interesting abstract concept but we shouldnt stoop to this when what we all agree as quantifiable facts dont say what we want them to.
Douglas Adams describes intelligence as the ability to hold and reconcile two mutually contradictory points of view at the same time. I like this definition 🙂 As for the subjectivity of truth being an abstract concept – I don’t think it is. If you accept that it underlies all of our pitiful human efforts at ‘finding meaning to everything’ then it all begins to make sense.
As for resorting to it when the facts don’t say what we want them to – that makes no sense. I don’t want the facts to say anything, that’s the point! They are what they are, I am what I am and anyone else is free to be or think what they want AS LONG as they don’t impune on others rights in the process. However the concept of what people’s rights should be varies a lot around the world, which further illustrates my point about the subjectivity of truth, doesn’t it?
Just to remind you surfer – I am not Christian, nor am I religious in any way.
surferFree MemberDouglas Adams describes intelligence as the ability to hold and reconcile two mutually contradictory points of view at the same time. I like this definition
I prefer the writings of scientists over Adams who was a science fiction writer.
However he also said
“I find the business of religion profoundly interesting. But it does mystify me that otherwise intelligent people take it seriously”Or the Adams quote used by Dawkins.
“isnt it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too”simonfbarnesFree Memberwithout the standards of journalistic integrity we take for granted today.
hollow laughter
mudsharkFree MemberGuilt and empathy are curious things. If I see you get run over I feel empathy, if I did it I feel guilt! But apparently care less and even would enjoy causing you the pain – e.g. psycopaths. My chickens, as with many animals, wouldn’t care if another chicken was killed and might even tuck into the free meal. Other animals seem to care – such as our old family dog who semeed to want to console my Mother when she was upset one time.
Why should anyone care about anyone else? I suppose it helps with life as we bond with others and life is improved in various ways; but some seems to be truly altruistic. It’s all a bit strange, perhaps, but I don’t think religion is behind any of it.
JunkyardFree MemberYour moral compass almost certainly comes from Western European or even British societal values, which are heavily based up on Christain teaching. So no valid point there
Morals are morals it is a pointless argument to claim that religion gives moral guidance as we have two choices here
1. Morals are right for a reason and anyone can see the reason eg do not kill or do not steal for example … I doubt you need faith to realise the reason why these are good values to live by
OR
2. God chose morals on a whim (sucha s those above) and there is no reason so you just blindly follow them becasue god said soWhich do you think is true. this is not even really seriously debated in theology/philosophy anymore as it is obvious which is true.
MrNuttFree Memberif a catholic exploded right next to a psychopath is it possible that the psychopath would feel a flash of guilt?
mudsharkFree Member“I find the business of religion profoundly interesting. But it does mystify me that otherwise intelligent people take it seriously”
The obvious answer would seem to be that there’s something in it!
surferFree MemberJust to continue with the theme of quotations for a little longer. I particularly like this one which I had to look up to get it right.
“Science has been accused of undermining morals, but wrongly. The ethical behavior of man is better based on sympathy, education and social relationships, and requires no support from religion. Mans plight would indeed be sad if he had to be kept in order through fear of punishment and hope of rewards after death”
Albert Einstein.
OllyFree Memberim not sure Junkyard.
i think morals are greatly affected by society values.
i felt empath for the rat i saw splattered in the road the yesterday, but sometimes wonder, if it was a few hundred years ago, when people traded in other people (slaves) would i feel empathy?
would i feel sad knowing that in a ship full of slaves, a good number died on the trip.
ignoring whether its right or wrong, but because its defined by social acceptance.in the same way, do you feel empathy for the cow you eat for dinner (assuming lack of veginess)?
i recognise its died so i can eat it, i bet it wouldnt choose to if it had the option, but im not on a mission to save it and let it choose for itself.
its social definitions that allow you to kill one species and eat it (cows) but not another (cats for instance)ide have no problem shooting a sheep or wringing a chicken
i couldnt shoot a dog for food i dont think (and i dont paticularly like dogs)simonfbarnesFree MemberThe obvious answer would seem to be that there’s something in it!
it’s more obvious to me that even clever people can be delusional :o)
mudsharkFree Memberit’s more obvious to me that even clever people can be delusional :o)
Well maybe but would they should delusion in other areas? Would they be deemed ‘clever’? Well I dunno, but I know some very bright Christians and I struggle with what’s really going on there.
miketuallyFree Member1. Morals are right for a reason and anyone can see the reason eg do not kill or do not steal for example … I doubt you need faith to realise the reason why these are good values to live by
If you kill someone, that’s one less bit of competition in passing on your genes. Stealing something might put you in a better position to procreate.
surferFree Memberit’s more obvious to me that even clever people can be delusional :o)
Well maybe but would they should delusion in other areas? Would they be deemed ‘clever’? Well I dunno, but I know some very bright Christians and I struggle with what’s really going on there.
Professor Robert Winston is a good example of this. Nobody would refute his oustanding intellect but he is a practising Jew.
He has been confronted by Dawkins in this, I understand they are friends. Winston was very vague and it bordered on the embarrassing as Dawkins questioned the ability to be a scientist on Friday and a Jew on Saturday etc. Dawkins didnt go too far but Winston evaded the question and refered to some abstract parts of his faith. Winston was also critical of Dawkins and I think called him confrontational etc.kimbersFull Memberi still maintain that in 2000 years scientology or something similar will be the dominant global religion
and christianity, hinduism, islam, judaism, whateva will have fallen by the wayside like so many other ancient religions, eg egyptian, roman, greek, aztec, mayan
i think some humans have a genetic tendency toward religion
new scientist
it seems pretty obvious that a sense of wellbeing, the endorphin release that has been assosciated with praying etc ritualistic behaviour from altruism to sacrificing your enemies to not eating pork in desert regions
could have helped our primitive ancestors survive in a scary hostile prehistoric environment, especially at times of extreme stress or during times of population bottlenecks, which may have left as few as 2000 humans alive at one time poulation bottlenecks
these few humans would leave a huge mark on our genetic makeup
as would extremely successful males, eg genghis kahn theorysurferFree Membermy point is that we use our own modern moral compass (to use your phrase) not that of the bible.
Your moral compass almost certainly comes from Western European or even British societal values, which are heavily based up on Christain teaching. So no valid point there [:)]
I think you will find that there is.
molgripsFree MemberI prefer the writings of scientists over Adams who was a science fiction writer.
Mmm, yeah, I was quoting it as an interesting point for discussion. I take most authors, scientists or otherwise, as such. You give the impresssion of reading books and then treating them as righteous facts because they were in a book…. and then discounting those that are popular fiction writers in favour of scientists, despite what insights they could be giving to the thoughtful reader… that’s just an impression tho 😉
1. Morals are right for a reason and anyone can see the reason eg do not kill or do not steal for example … I doubt you need faith to realise the reason why these are good values to live by
As Olly says. Morals vary hugely from country to country even in the present day. In some countries it’s morally right to treat Women as chattels, and not in others. This is very difficult for us Brits to swallow, but there you go. A more ambiguous example would be democracy. Some folk in the West think it’s morally wrong to use any other system, however in other countries it’s perfectly acceptable not to use it.
We have three choices, not two anyway. The third option you don’t list, Junky, is probably closer to the truth. The “morals” our society adopts have come from Christian teaching which in turn are derived from the Bible. Of course, the Bible was written by human beings who were in turn influenced by the Jewish society in which they lived. So on deeper analysis, morals come from society but they are heavily influenced by the religious writers through the ages. And of course other philosophical and theological thinking that’s evolved along the way. In any case our societal values are considered Christian or Judao-Christian, and they are not the same as those around the world. Are you going to maintain that those in the Middle or Far East are just WRONG WRONG WRONG even though they would say the exact same about you? Are you sure of your own race’s absolute correctness? You can’t really divorce yourself entirely from your own social upbringing, can you?
it’s more obvious to me that even clever people can be delusional :o)
Just like Simon is convinced he’s always right. He comes up with creative reasons to justify this in the face of intelligent and reasoned opposition. Remind you of any Christians? 🙂
It is rather ironic that the science-is-king types are in many ways treating science as their religion and behaving just like the religious types.
mudsharkFree Memberi still maintain that in 2000 years scientology or something similar will be the dominant global religion
and christianity, hinduism, islam, judaism, whateva will have fallen by the wayside like so many other ancient religions
But Judaism is pretty old isn’t it? Christianity stemmed from that so they’ve lasted pretty well so far.
anagallis_arvensisFull MemberI used to have one of those darwin stickers on my car, but someone nicked it, I cant but hope it was a disgruntled christian breaking his commandmants.
simonfbarnesFree MemberJust like Simon is convinced he’s always right
had you read what I’ve written, you would know that I question everything. It’s just that I see no reason to invent spurious 3rd parties not actually accessible to perception. We have enough trouble with those we CAN sense without bothering with anything else.
I’ve previously said I’m content to accept any number of gods between zero and infinity – I just don’t care.
miketuallyFree MemberIt is rather ironic that the science-is-king types are in many ways treating science as their religion and behaving just like the religious types.
I’ve said this before. The God Delusion is their bible and Richard Dawkins their messiah.
(It really winds them up too, just wait 😉 )
surferFree MemberI prefer the writings of scientists over Adams who was a science fiction writer.
Mmm, yeah, I was quoting it as an interesting point for discussion. I take most authors, scientists or otherwise, as such. You give the impresssion of reading books and then treating them as righteous facts because they were in a book…. and then discounting those that are popular fiction writers in favour of scientists, despite what insights they could be giving to the thoughtful reader… that’s just an impression tho [;)]
No not at all my reading is very broad. The point ref Adams was that his reference to holding alternative viewpoints at the same time may have been related to science fiction as I certainly struggle to find logic in what he says. I may be simplistic but if one person tells me the earth is round and another that it is flat. I couldn’t believe both of them.
I find it ironic given your viewpoint that you are criticizing me for a literal interpretations of books!
surferFree MemberI’ve said this before. The God Delusion is their bible and Richard Dawkins their messiah.
(It really winds them up too, just wait [;)] )
Your right there!
miketuallyFree MemberViewpoint 1: You consist mostly of nothing. You are atoms bound by various forces into a body that requires sustenance through chemical reactions. Stimulus causes electrical signals to cause reactions. Upon dying, the matter will pass into other forms. Your purpose is to pass on DNA to your descendants.
Viewpoint 2: That sunset is beautiful. I like beer. I love my wife and kids. Bikes are ace. Freedom is good, oppression is bad.
molgripsFree MemberThe point ref Adams was that his reference to holding alternative viewpoints at the same time may have been related to science fiction as I certainly struggle to find logic in what he says. I may be simplistic but if one person tells me the earth is round and another that it is flat. I couldn’t believe both of them.
Okay.. if you like 🙂
Btw, there doesn’t have to be logic in everything. Or rather, there can be, but not necessarily the same logic you are expecting!
I find it ironic given your viewpoint that you are criticizing me for a literal interpretations of books!
Yeah? Go on.. (interested)
Btw I’m not criticising you that way – I just said that was the impression that you were giving off to me in that post.. I honestly don’t know you from my next door neighbour (you could be my next door neighbour for all I know). I’m happy to accept that the medium of STW is as obstructive as any other when it comes to carrying points of view across :0
If you like to speak science, then have a look at Quantum Physics. It’s full of “illogical” things that aren’t “common sense”. How can particles be waves at the same time? What exists depends on how you look at it.. not just what you see but what is actually there. It’s a lovely world of uncertainty and certainty at once. I certainly found it all very profound when I was studying it. Not profound enough to do well in the exams mind 🙂
I am he
As you are he
As you are meI am the Walrus, goo goo gajoo
miketuallyFree MemberIf you like to speak science, then have a look at Quantum Physics.
I gots me a first in that module at uni. It is, as you say, well weird.
molgripsFree MemberI formulated a concept of Quantum Philosophy at the time – shortly afterwards I saw a book with that exact title in a shop.. which took the wind out of my sails a bit 🙂
jimmerhimselfFree MemberI may be simplistic but if one person tells me the earth is round and another that it is flat. I couldn’t believe both of them.
Sorry to jump in here, but to me there’s a simple answer here – go find out for yourself. In my experience even if someone believes they are telling you 100% truth, whatever they say always has their own slant on it – it’s a human trait:-)
surferFree MemberIf you like to speak science, then have a look at Quantum Physics. It’s full of “illogical” things that aren’t “common sense”. How can particles be waves at the same time? What exists depends on how you look at it.. not just what you see but what is actually there. It’s a lovely world of uncertainty and certainty at once. I certainly found it all very profound when I was studying it.
Thanks for that I’ll give it a look.
I would also recommend (as well as the obvious Dawkins!) Sam Harris “The end of faith” also “Letter to a Christian nation” Both good reads.
Then Christopher Hitchins, “God is not great” written in his own style! Daniels Dennets work, “Breaking the spell” is also very accesible.Enjoy!
miketuallyFree MemberSam Harris, Christopher Hitchins and Daniels Dennets are the lesser prophets.
molgripsFree MemberCan’t recommend a specific book about Quantum Physics, but maybe something by John Gribbin. He usually write about Astrophysics but I think there’s something about the smaller side of things too.
I have a copy of the God Delusion at home waiting to be read – I thought I’d better read it so that I could properly comment. I am not really looking forward to it though as from what I can tell it’s a bit of a savage attack on selected parts of religion. The book may have a use as a weapon against ignorance, but I feel it’s never going to be read by anyone religious as it’s too easily dismissed. In these kind of arguments, you don’t win anyone over by attacking them ruthlessly over something that’s really personal.
But I will read it (and have a look for those others too) and change my mind if necessary – he does make some excellent and pithy points in the quotes that’ve been used in arguments against so-called Christian “Science”.
but to me there’s a simple answer here – go find out for yourself.
Along with everything else on this thread, it’s a bit more complicated. You can’t always find things out for yourself. There was this programme on telly a while ago about these two scientists that were debating about something to do with Venus. Let’s say they were trying to work out if there was any recent volcanism – I can’t remember exactly what it was. They argued and argued over the evidence, and they agreed they would have to wait for this probe to go there and map the surface. Well the probe went there and sent back the data, and they both concluded that the data supported their theories. They were totally adamant that they were right.
Both scientists, both looking for truth in a simple logical way, and both very much in the same philosophical camp. What they each saw in the evidence told them different things.
Now of course, in their case there was only really one answer. But then what if you have this cat, in a box…
miketuallyFree MemberThe book may have a use as a weapon against ignorance, but I feel it’s never going to be read by anyone religious as it’s too easily dismissed.
There’s a whole raft of Christian books about the God Delusion. It’s a mini industry. Here’s one: http://www.amazon.com/Dawkins-Delusion-Atheist-Fundamentalism-Denial/dp/083083446X/ref=pd_bbs_8?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1236175319&sr=8-8
mudsharkFree Memberbut I feel it’s never going to be read by anyone religious as it’s too easily dismissed.
Well religious people do read it but Dawkins seems to aim it at agnostics as a way of pushing them into atheism – failed with me. I found it lacked the academic feel I hoped and seemed more ‘bloke down pub’ level at times. I suppose he was just trying to get a best seller and get lots of commited atheists to buy it so they can agree with him….
crazy-legsFull MemberI have a copy of the God Delusion at home waiting to be read – I thought I’d better read it so that I could properly comment. I am not really looking forward to it though as from what I can tell it’s a bit of a savage attack on selected parts of religion. The book may have a use as a weapon against ignorance, but I feel it’s never going to be read by anyone religious as it’s too easily dismissed. In these kind of arguments, you don’t win anyone over by attacking them ruthlessly over something that’s really personal.
It’s not a personal attack, it’s just a reasoned debate on the topic of religion, yes it concentrates mostly on Christianity but applies to most religion, it’s also got some fascinating insights into the human psyche, the “need” for religion and various arguments for and against the existance of ‘God(s)’
BUT – it’s not an easy read, none of Dawkins stuff really is. The only way I could read it was to dip into it in an almost random fashion, for me at least trying to read it cover to cover just didn’t work. I’ve just finished Richard Dawkins book Climbing Mount Improbable which is about evolution and how it happens, again good read but tough going at times.miketuallyFree MemberAsking them for money, you mean? Wow, atheism is just like a religion!
surferFree MemberI challenge you to read or listen to anything by McGrath. Dawkins did him a huge favour and increased his profile no end.
McGraths book has been grasped by believers all over as they hope for a reasoned response to Dawkins. It pales in comparions but thats hardly important when your pushing on an open door!jimmerhimselfFree MemberAlong with everything else on this thread, it’s a bit more complicated. You can’t always find things out for yourself.
I know, but it illustrates some of the reasons for faith/belief/religion/other working so well. If you can’t find out something for yourself you have to form your own opinion based on what others tell you or believe what one source tells you is the truth. The problem I think a lot of people have is that they blindly believe what others say, rather than agreeing but leaving their mind open to other opinions.
I almost said “other facts” there, but then facts are invariably opinion too because scientific fact is invariably tweaked or just shown to be utterly incorrect over the course of time.
If you think about it, it’s pretty cool that almost every aspect of our existence is constantly changing and very little is ever entirely certain…..
molgripsFree MemberThe problem I think a lot of people have is that they blindly believe what others say, rather than agreeing but leaving their mind open to other opinions
Absolutely, and that goes for both sides too. Sciencies and Goddies.
If you think about it, it’s pretty cool that almost every aspect of our existence is constantly changing and very little is ever entirely certain…..
Agreed 🙂
miketuallyFree MemberAlong with everything else on this thread, it’s a bit more complicated. You can’t always find things out for yourself.
Can you not? I’ve been firing peas into each other, to try to split them. (I kept losing quarks under the fridge, so had to use something bigger.)
The topic ‘christian baiting’ is closed to new replies.