Viewing 40 posts - 241 through 280 (of 283 total)
  • "I am a practising member of the Church of England and so forth"
  • slowoldman
    Full Member

    Religion formulated and created a social code.

    Which it then sought to impose on everyone.

    jamj1974
    Full Member

    I’m eagerly awaiting the explanation for ‘homosexuality being an abomination’ being understandable at the time…..

    Maybe when one key to survival was having a large population – sex without procreation was an issue…? Speculation on my part.

    5thElefant
    Free Member

    The Greeks were pretty enthusiastic about it. Wasn’t murdering homosexuals just middle east thing?

    Tom_W1987
    Free Member

    Sums up my view of Religion and it’s derivation as primarily a social code for living together. I see religion leading directly to the establishment of civilisation and the basis of the social and government structures we enjoy today. I have that book on a list to buy.

    So thats why were living in a world with so many authoritarian dictators as opposed a libertarian paradise :p God.

    Ruling ancient authoritarians invent authoritarian god, what a surprise.

    molgrips
    Full Member

    As has been demonstrated many times altruism is seen throughout nature

    Oh?

    Cougar
    Full Member

    Religion formulated and created a social code.

    I wonder if rather than religion creating these things, rather it was a byproduct of civilisation at the time?

    From what I’ve read today, prehistoric “religion” was totally different from what we call religion today. It would’ve been a common set of values, laws if you like, which organised groups agreed to adhere to (or were coerced into). The god-bothering aspect would’ve been things like worshipping the sun, which seems to be a fairly rational thing to worship when you’re not convinced it’ll come back tomorrow. Religion didn’t create a moral code, rather a moral code created religion?

    Douglas Adams posited that there were three stages of social evolution which he termed “how, why, where.” 1) How do we eat? 2) Why do we eat? 3) Where shall we have lunch? We’re at stage 2 here, people are starting to wonder about their world, ask proto-philosophical questions, and once you’ve got a group of people together asking that sort of question all manner of speculative answers will propagate and flourish. Pretty soon you’ve got a dominant idea and hey, religion.

    Cougar
    Full Member

    Maybe when one key to survival was having a large population – sex without procreation was an issue…? Speculation on my part.

    I’d say that’s a pretty good guess.

    And of course by the time you get to the Abrahamic religions we’ve got another compelling reason. The best way to get more believers is for current believers to reproduce in large numbers and tell their offspring their facts. So much easier than converting someone who might already have strong beliefs to the contrary. Every sperm is sacred, no bum fun or condoms for the devout.

    anagallis_arvensis
    Full Member

    I like to think that religion was born out of the evolutionary need for humans to have cooperation within populations and monogamy.. its all just a more complicated version of swans dancing.

    Northwind
    Full Member

    kimbers – Member

    I’m eagerly awaiting the explanation for ‘homosexuality being an abomination’ being understandable at the time….

    Maybe something to do with “creating a common identity”, nothing ties a room together quite like having someone to hate, fear, or look down on. It was thousands of years before the birth of the first dole claimant, Poland hadn’t been invented, nor the road bike, and there were too many arabs and jews to want to **** with them. So, gays are the obvious choice. If you’re ever inventing an ideology, nation or movement, remember the very first thing you want to do is find your Carthage and tell everyone it needs delending.

    Unless, and this is important, you are Carthage. Schoolboy error that.

    The other explanation is population expansion but homosexuality doesn’t put much of a dent in that really, especially since it’s not mutually exclusive with reproduction.

    yunki
    Free Member

    slowoldman
    Full Member

    8

    teamhurtmore
    Free Member

    8 yes well done, it stalled briefly, but service resumed fortunately.

    funkmasterp
    Full Member

    Bit late to this, what have I missed?

    Cougar
    Full Member

    If only there was some way of reading previous discussion…

    funkmasterp
    Full Member

    😀 should have put that on the last post. I assume it’s the usual religious thread. I’d have brought biscuits I’d have noticed it sooner 🙁

    jambalaya
    Free Member

    should have put that on the last post. I assume it’s the usual religious thread. I’d have brought biscuits I’d have noticed it sooner

    It started out as usual but the last few pages have been more balanced imo, see discussion started by Molgrips of the book he’s reading.

    @Cougar I suppose we will never be sure how or why it started, a lot of social history is just an educated guess for obvious reasons. It’s my belief as mankind’s brains developed they sought a “meaning of life” (queue obvious jokes) and this was combined with a social code. I can see how those against religion see this as authoritan and controlling but we struggle to get along today when we live in a world of relative plenty I can only imagine what things where like thousands of years ago. As you say religion and “the law” are synonymous.

    edenvalleyboy
    Free Member

    The whole social history, progressive society thing is only the Christian perspective.

    For example, in Thailand ladyboys I.e. transexuals, are revered as being the closet to the gods in that culture. They have a positive, mythical status. The complete opposite to the (historical) Christian attitude towards transexuals being deviant.

    My point being, if you wish to suggest Christianity has helped the world organise and civilise itself you are looking at the world through a very narrow, and probably biased because of your personal faith, perspective.

    molgrips
    Full Member

    My point being, if you wish to suggest Christianity has helped the world organise and civilise itself you are looking at the world through a very narrow, and probably biased because of your personal faith, perspective.

    Absolutely, but no-one’s suggesting anything of the sort.

    edenvalleyboy
    Free Member

    @molgrips…read through the thread. The words used imply a Christian narrative of history and there is very little mention of other religious history.

    molgrips
    Full Member

    Certainly wasn’t my point – but people seem to have assumed it was…

    seosamh77
    Free Member

    funkmasterp – Member
    Bit late to this, what have I missed?

    Jamba sported some impressive bait, but had no takers. Got to be a first! I think the boys losing his touch! 😆

    kimbers
    Full Member

    molgrips – Member
    As has been demonstrated many times altruism is seen throughout nature
    Oh?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altruism_(biology)

    evolutionary biologists can get all in a tiz about altruism, it can be very hard to quantify in a fitness and survival sense, but its seen extensively in apes and monkeys (even between tribes and species) and allegedly all the way down to bacteria

    http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2014/08/human-altruism-traces-back-origins-humanity

    molgrips
    Full Member

    In biology, altruism refers to behaviour by an individual that increases the fitness of another individual while decreasing the fitness of the actor.[1] Altruism in this sense is different from the philosophical concept of altruism, in which an action would only be called “altruistic” if it was done with the conscious intention of helping another.

    Bazz
    Full Member

    Didn’t that go well? May this be the measure of all future STW religion threads.

    Cougar
    Full Member

    If we can just deal with the people complaining about other people having a discussion that they’re not actually taking part in themselves, and others playing the Windows 95 argument, we’ll have cracked it I reckon.

    molgrips
    Full Member

    And where’s SaxonRider?

    julianwilson
    Free Member

    If we can just deal with the people complaining about other people having a discussion that they’re not actually taking part in themselves

    Shame, as he seems to be one of the few ‘out’ christians on here I would have been really interested in his thoughts on how one reconciles TM’s policy/actions with the teachings and acts of Jesus.

    piemonster
    Full Member

    In biology, altruism refers to behaviour by an individual that increases the fitness of another individual while decreasing the fitness of the actor.[1] Altruism in this sense is different from the philosophical concept of altruism, in which an action would only be called “altruistic” if it was done with the conscious intention of helping another.

    Some would argue there’s no such thing as true altruism. As in there’s always a reward somewhere, and often not material.

    Tom_W1987
    Free Member

    Edenvalleys point is definately valid considering some of the posters in this thread molgrips.

    kimbers
    Full Member

    If true?

    These allegations tell you how her faith has failed to make our PM a ‘better’ person

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38165395

    miketually
    Free Member

    If true?

    These allegations tell you how her faith has failed to make our PM a ‘better’ person

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38165395

    Luke 18:16 – “But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God.”

    Perhaps she only read the “Suffer little children” part?

    Northwind
    Full Member

    kimbers – Member

    If true?

    These allegations tell you how her faith has failed to make our PM a ‘better’ person

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38165395

    Exodus innit, she has to punish them unto the 4th generation. She’s probably not happy about it, being a sunny and lovely person at heart, but hers is a jealous god and not to be ****ed with so what can she do? Given the choice, she’d have them all round number 10 for pudding.

    jambalaya
    Free Member

    The words used imply a Christian narrative of history and there is very little mention of other religious history.

    @eden The author is Jewish, I think it’s likely to be a Jewish narrative if anything (have not read the book yet). Judaism underpins Christianity (old and new testament etc, Jesus was Jewish). As Judaism is also the oldest real religion it seems natural that if you subscribe to the “religion is the foundation of society theory” then Judaism is the initial base. As an aside Judaism is the oldest Abrahamic religion (5000 years?), with Christianity (2000) and Islam (1400) coming later but sharing the same roots (eg there is an Angel Gabriel in Judaism, Christianty and Islam plus of course a single God). Christians believe Jesus is the son of God and Muslims that Mohammed was his Prophet but the God is the same (other interpretations exist !)

    Anyway I subscribe to the theory religion in its various forms has formed the basis of the society we have today

    Junkyard
    Free Member

    Judaism is also the oldest real religion

    😆

    Brilliantly funny and top trolling

    Cougar
    Full Member

    If by “real” you mean modern, I think the Hindus might have something to say about that.

    If not then plenty of others for that matter: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_religion

    molgrips
    Full Member

    “religion is the foundation of society theory”

    You know that’s not what he’s suggesting, right?

    jambalaya
    Free Member

    I haven’t read it yet so I don’t know, that’s just my view. I will read the book when I have finished this, which is excellent btw

    [video]http://youtu.be/buXwTo7FB1k[/video]

    molgrips
    Full Member

    Looks good for another non-fiction option Jam thanks.

    Harari’s book is a bit.. waffly, so far. He does that thing a lot of American authors seem to do (yes I know he’s not but he writes like one) which is go on and on about the same point. Still, means you don’t have to concentrate that hard on the text and you don’t miss much 🙂

    Points so far are good though and it’s readable.

    jambalaya
    Free Member

    Thanks, repeating something works for me for the reasons you say. I have had a few friends recommend it.

Viewing 40 posts - 241 through 280 (of 283 total)

The topic ‘"I am a practising member of the Church of England and so forth"’ is closed to new replies.

Thanks for popping by - why not stay a while?IT'S FREE

Sign up as a Singletrack Member and you can leave comments on stories, use the classified ads, and post in our forums, do quizzes and more.

Join us, join in, it’s free, and fun.

This $10 Drink Gadget is Pretty Cle...
Singletrack Video Archive: This $10 Drink Gadget is Pretty Clever plus Q&A