Religion and Happiness [Archive]

apathy maybe

7th October 2003, 03:22

In New Scientist this week (4th October 2003), they have an artical on happiness. Aparently if you want to be happy you should get a belief system! It says that even if it is a belief in the lack of an after life and God it is still good. I quote

Believing in God or an afterlife can giver people meaning and purpose and reduce the fealing of being alone in the world.
and

Those who are deeply religious and those who are deeply irrelgious have described themselves as less fearful of death then others.
So if you are wondering whats going to happen when you die, DON"T make up your mind! And be happy.

Also it is yet another reason that we should ban religion in any post cappitalist society. For at least a quarter of the people will be unhappy with out religion.

(postscript) This was only one of 10 things to do to be happy. Find a copy of New Scientist if you want the rest. (I don't think the artical is on line at www.newscientist.com (http://www.newscientist.com)but it may be.

truthaddict11

7th October 2003, 04:35

been quite happy for over 5 years without religion

Dr. Rosenpenis

7th October 2003, 04:38

Most Americans don't think that capitalism should be destroyed, but they have no idea at all how much power they will be able to wield as a class independant from oppressive captalists. Does this mean we shoudl allow oppression to exist?

RyeN

7th October 2003, 04:46

Its coments like this that make me see how fast the christian faith is dying. The church is so hard for people to belive that they admit its all lies but say it'll make you happy so do it. Ahahahahahahaha. Seriously since when does the church need to advertise through the media.

Dr. Rosenpenis

7th October 2003, 04:51

Originally posted by apathy [email protected] 6 2003, 10:22 PM
In New Scientist this week (4th October 2003), they have an artical on happiness. Aparently if you want to be happy you should get a belief system! It says that even if it is a belief in the lack of an after life and God it is still good. I quote

Believing in God or an afterlife can giver people meaning and purpose and reduce the fealing of being alone in the world.
and

Those who are deeply religious and those who are deeply irrelgious have described themselves as less fearful of death then others.
So if you are wondering whats going to happen when you die, DON"T make up your mind! And be happy.

Also it is yet another reason that we should ban religion in any post cappitalist society. For at least a quarter of the people will be unhappy with out religion.

(postscript) This was only one of 10 things to do to be happy. Find a copy of New Scientist if you want the rest. (I don't think the artical is on line at www.newscientist.com (http://www.newscientist.com)but it may be.
SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM I can't hear you SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM I can't hear you SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM I can't hear you! :lol:

marxstudent

7th October 2003, 05:02

i'm on an unsure stage as to regarding religion- specifically christianity. i feel like the bible says things that contradict each other. for example, something like purgatory where one would go to for cleansing of the soul before meeting God himself. catholics say they believe in it and they show bible verses and christians say they don't and they show their verses. they both say they base their beliefs from the word of God- the bible but then how come they differ so greatly? isn't the word of God infallible?

on the other hand, jesus was a historical figure. they found evidence such as the dead sea scrolls. also, the bible has been here for thousands of years and it hasn't been officially proven wrong to where everyone would give up his faith.

i say religion is alright as long as it doesn't truly affect ur opinions. i am personally hanging by a thread as to my faith in God. yet even tho i am considered a christian, i'm not considered what you would say religious. if you punch me i will punch you twice as hard to teach you a lesson. i don't believe in turning the other cheek. that's an example of my way.

redstar2000

7th October 2003, 05:48

I once subscribed to New Scientist for a year or two...and I would not place a lot of credence in what they print. Some of the material was pretty good but some was just wacko--they did a piece once on "photographing ghosts" for example. And they were serious about it. :huh:

Also, I question the use of the word "happiness" in this context...or any other. What is it supposed to mean?

I think people mostly use the word to mean a kind of "contentment" with one's life, but if that is what they mean, I don't see it as uniquely valuable or desirable.

I prefer a more restless and questioning kind of life myself...that's what I'm "happy" with.

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas

Red Flag

7th October 2003, 06:12

this makes sense, and ive always figured this.. if you bury your head in the sand and believe only what you want to believe life is much easier and would probably make your feel more content...

thing is, happiness is relative, and subjective, so someone may feel happy buryingthere head, where as a person like me could never be happy hiding from reality.

Firestorm

7th October 2003, 07:52

Christianity is slowly erroding into dust. Judaism is becoming less and less. Islam, however is on the rise. Buddhism is very popular and I believe always will be "thank you!"...open, tollerant, and very moral.

New age religions are always being created....too

crazy comie

7th October 2003, 15:18

New scientist just prints varrious new theorys.
i thought that ghost thing was about how to fake them or was that a diffrent issue.
It said in the articall that happines means diffrent things for diffrent pepole.

apathy maybe

7th October 2003, 23:04

I was specifing any religion at all. I think you will find that it is the not knowing that is the problem. Not the believing in or believing in no god or afterlife.

And I find that New Scientist is one of the best magazines around.

commie kg

8th October 2003, 04:27

Religion will make you happy... If you enjoy living a life of constant repentance and fear. What that article is basically saying is that if you blindly accept a faith or other belief system, you will be a blissful individual for the rest of your life. It's probably right, but it's not something that I would want to do.

UnionofSovietSocialistRepublics

8th October 2003, 10:40

I believe in communism, the potential of such a great system keeps me happy and hopeful thats my dream. No one can take your dreams away.

Blackberry

8th October 2003, 11:51

Originally posted by apathy [email protected] 7 2003, 01:22 PM
In New Scientist this week (4th October 2003), they have an artical on happiness. Aparently if you want to be happy you should get a belief system! It says that even if it is a belief in the lack of an after life and God it is still good. I quote

Believing in God or an afterlife can giver people meaning and purpose and reduce the fealing of being alone in the world.
and

Those who are deeply religious and those who are deeply irrelgious have described themselves as less fearful of death then others.
So if you are wondering whats going to happen when you die, DON"T make up your mind! And be happy.

Also it is yet another reason that we should ban religion in any post cappitalist society. For at least a quarter of the people will be unhappy with out religion.

(postscript) This was only one of 10 things to do to be happy. Find a copy of New Scientist if you want the rest. (I don't think the artical is on line at www.newscientist.com (http://www.newscientist.com)but it may be.
I find that opium also works. :redstar2000:

--------------------
Participate in the Unofficial Che-Lives (Chit Chat) Community Census. (http://www.che-lives.com/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=12&t=17783)

Anastacia

8th October 2003, 12:49

Religion doesn't make me happy. Fath in Christ makes me really happy.

crazy comie

8th October 2003, 15:04

how here gets new scientist i was just wondering.

Invader Zim

8th October 2003, 15:37

Like they say Igonorance is bliss. So no wonder the religious people are happy.

Iepilei

8th October 2003, 17:40

"If ignorance is bliss, why do so many Americans take prozac?"

ComradeRobertRiley

8th October 2003, 22:57

Religion is for the weak minded and hypicrits.

Betances

9th October 2003, 01:18

although i'm communist I do belive in christianity so I do not think you should ban religion from a socialist country because even in my country where a lot of people are communist we still are very deeply religous so if it were to be banned you we would probably revolt.

redstar2000

9th October 2003, 02:38

Faith in Christ makes me really happy.

Although I'm communist I do believe in Christianity...

See how far we really have to go! :(

It's enough to make me want to go sacrifice at the Temple of Isis...if I could find one.

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas

crazy comie

9th October 2003, 12:49

funny post :lol:

ComradeRobertRiley

9th October 2003, 20:11

nobody can claim to be marxist and be religious (other than a religious drinker! :D )

El Commandante

9th October 2003, 20:22

Otto Maduro - a prominant Marxist sociologist - believes that religion can bring about happiness and even revolutionary change on a local level. He takes Latin America as his example stating that often the people turn to their local clergy to try to promote social change because they carry the most influence, respect and in rural villages may be the only literate members. This means that on a local level the church as a structure can be of positive uses but he states that on a large scale the church is a negative structure as it is as Marx states an opiate which dulls the pain and prevents change.

marxstudent

9th October 2003, 21:49

nobody can claim to be marxist and be religious

why can't you be marxist and be religious?

marxstudent

9th October 2003, 21:50

Does religious=Jesus freak? Or being Marxist means you aren't supposed to have faith in any religion?

redstar2000

9th October 2003, 23:30

Marxism is founded on a materialist analysis of human history, thus excluding any appeal to the "supernatural".

Anyone who says s/he is "communist" and also says s/he is "religious" is actually confused...or, in some cases, a charlatan.

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas

marxstudent

9th October 2003, 23:43

I thought there was no such thing as pure marxism that could be applied- that everyone adds his own theories though- so how come religion wouldn't be able to play in this as well? Something in Christianity where Jesus was a historical figure and the whole thing with the Dead Sea Scrolls- isn't that material- wise evidence? I understand the whole material analysis and that's how I make my mind on things. So far, no one has proved the Bible incorrect so I would have to say I do believe in it. I think it is contradictory at times because of the interpretation of the Bible. Again, I believe that if one were to have faith in a religion, that's great as long as it doesn't fuck up his view on things.

If one were to listen and follow Marx's teachings such as religion, doesn't it make him a type of god too? He says we must not have religion, so we don't follow any religion or we're fucked. That's similar to what a Christian would say to a nonbeliever, "Believe or you're going to hell!" I don't think we have to follow Marx's teachings 100%. It's like how he got his housekeeper pregnant- that doesn't mean we have to go out and a housekeeper pregnant too.

redstar2000

10th October 2003, 01:17

I thought there was no such thing as pure marxism that could be applied- that everyone adds his own theories though- so how come religion wouldn't be able to play in this as well?

Because, to put it crudely, if you have "supernatural" entities running amok in human history, then no scientific or even rational understanding of anything is possible.

The mind of "supernatural" entities is "unknowable" and consequently nothing at all is "impossible".

To allow "supernatural" factors in explanation is the equivalent of allowing division by zero in arithmetic...it "allows" you to "prove" that any number is equal to any other number.

That's useless!

The very fact that we can prove things to be true using strictly materialist explanations at least strongly applies that there are no "supernatural" entities...otherwise a random "miracle" would fuck up the results every so often.

Something in Christianity where Jesus was a historical figure and the whole thing with the Dead Sea Scrolls- isn't that material- wise evidence?

The only "contemporary" references to Yeshuah of Nazareth are some lines in the history of the Roman war against the Jews, written by a Jew who defected to the Romans around 70CE. Many historians think this was an "interpolation" by a pious copyist, who could not imagine an educated Jew of that era not being aware of "Jesus". The "authentic" letters of Saulos of Tarsus--"St. Paul"--are dated around 50 to 60CE. The "gospels" were all written after 70CE. So there's actually nothing from Yeshuah's own time to even indicate he existed.

The "Dead Sea scrolls" were all written at least a century prior to the birth of Yeshuah...so are irrelevant except as evidence of the kinds of ideas that were circulating among the Jews of Palestine.

It's unlikely that Yeshuah ever read any of the scrolls...in fact, I'm not sure that there's any evidence that Yeshuah was even literate.

So far, no one has proved the Bible incorrect so I would have to say I do believe in it.

"Incorrect" about what? Certainly in a collection of documents that large, there are bound to be some factually true and verifiable statements.

Pontius Pilate really was a Roman governor in Judea. The Roman records prove it.

Yeshuah ben-Yosif, if he existed and if he was crucified, did not rise from the dead. We know that never happens.

Again, I believe that if one were to have faith in a religion, that's great as long as it doesn't fuck up his view on things.

It does.

If you "believe" in things that are not true, you will make mistakes based on your false "knowledge". Eventually, the accumulated errors will come back to bite you in the ass.

I've seen that often enough on this board. People start out saying "Jesus was a communist" and end up concluding that "women who have abortions should be stoned to death".

Yeah, that bad...and worse.

If one were to listen and follow Marx's teachings such as religion, doesn't it make him a type of god too?

The question is not "did Marx say that?", it's "was Marx right about that?". What does the real evidence show?

Marx actually was wrong about some things...and anyone who says "because Marx said it, it must be true" is treating Marx like a prophet and his words like scripture.

To be honest, that happens.

But it is not supposed to happen. Marxists are supposed to be scientific and objective in their analyses and judgments...and not act like secular "theologians".

I don't think we have to follow Marx's teachings 100%. It's like how he got his housekeeper pregnant- that doesn't mean we have to go out and [get] a housekeeper pregnant too.

I agree--:lol:--and in the highly unlikely event that I ever have a "housekeeper", I promise not to "get her pregnant".

I'm pretty skeptical about that story, by the way...not that it matters all that much.

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas

marxstudent

10th October 2003, 01:41

Nice. Thanks Redstar for all the detailed info. Again, I'll check into all the stuff you said (I go to a christian high school so maybe my teacher will know some more stuff about the stuff you said). One thing though... I still don't believe religion would influence ones thinking. It doesn't alter my thinking. For example, if I want something to be done I don't just pray and go "God give me a miracle!" I just go out and do it and pray on the side. From what I see, the CHristians overall at my school don't just sit there and do nothing and just pray for a miracle. Also, I'm not against gay rights and other stuff like that, whereas some strong Protestant would be like "they're sinners!" I don't know, man I'm still young so I guess I just gotta grow and see? You've got one thing for sure- I'm confused haha! :unsure:

apathy maybe

10th October 2003, 02:00

Because, to put it crudely, if you have "supernatural" entities running amok in human history, then no scientific or even rational understanding of anything is possible.
But if you have the entire world being a simulated universe inside another universe is that providing a scientific understanding of anything?

The very fact that we can prove things to be true using strictly materialist explanations at least strongly applies that there are no "supernatural" entities...otherwise a random "miracle" would fuck up the results every so often.
But things do happen that "fuck up the results every so often", never mind it was bug that will be fixed in the next release.

Basically, people have always been asking themselves (when they have had enough to eat and are safe etc), where did we come from? Why is the universe here? Today many scientists have come up with explanations of why the universe is here, that to the non-believer, sound like rubbish. The first sentence is an example of this.
People have also (under similar conditions), been asking themselves what happens when they die. Religion has provided one (rather quite a few but we will pretend it is one) answer to this question. Science has not provided any answer and probably never will. It is not knowable. But that doesn't stop atheists and others from claiming that it is unscientific to say that when we die our souls go to heaven or get reborn.
People are happy (or happier) when they know or think they know the answers to these two questions. To some people saying we just die and that is it, doesn't sound right.

What this thread was started to show was that people need plausible (to them) explanations as to why there is a universe and what happens when they die. Religion is one thing that helps people with the answers. Science cannot provide either answer. Atheism (in the sense of a non-belief in any religion as I don't know the term for someone who has no belief in a religion at all), generally says 'just because' and 'you cease to exist'. Many people don't think that those two answers are plausible.

marxstudent

10th October 2003, 02:02

One more thing, how do we all exist too? Big bang theory? That means everything had to be so exact the sun couldn't be an inch closer to earth, an inch farther away, etc, etc. For these types of things this is where I would believe God was involved too.

there are still a lot of things that can't be explained.

RyeN

10th October 2003, 04:48

People cant understand the beging of the universe. In respect to the universe we are oblivious. As humans cant even use half our brain power. How are you going to understand the begining of the universe when your minds cant even comprehend the fact that it has no beging. If religion makes you happy do it as much as you want but I tell you now that there are more satisfying ways to spend your life than trying to please a god who isnt there.

marxstudent

10th October 2003, 04:57

How are you going to understand the begining of the universe when your minds cant even comprehend the fact that it has no beging. If religion makes you happy do it as much as you want but I tell you now that there are more satisfying ways to spend your life than trying to please a god who isnt there.

Exactly I don't know and science doesn't know either. Therefore, I'm assuming it to be something supernatural. Religion makes me think, not necessarily happy. I don't know about ther religions, but as a Protestant, I don't spend my time trying to please God. I'm not some representative of God, nor am I a very religious person. I'm just saying I believe in God because there are supernatural things that often at times. Science and common sense doesn't explain everything.

RyeN

10th October 2003, 05:05

Simply beliving in god according to you prodestant values doesnt mean salvation. The only way to heaven, according to the bible is through salvation in christ. In order to be saved in christ you have to accept him into your heart. This doesnt mean you belive in a god, or go to church sundays. To accept jesus into your life means to live according to the ways of christ. This means following all sorts of crazy belifs that dont aply to todays modern life. I dont mean to sound mean but religion just isnt applicable to actual life.

marxstudent

10th October 2003, 05:20

Yes to go to heaven one has to believe that Jesus died on the cross for our sins and rose again. I wouldn't say it is impossible to apply it to our lives it's just hard because of our human nature.

Anastacia

10th October 2003, 09:12

I don't see christianity as a religion. It's a "way of life" or something. Being a christian is not a religional accomplishment. It's loving each other as yourself. And of course loving God, because He has created all that you can see and all that you can't see. He has created you and gave you life and so on. Just like buddhism. Buddha didn't want it to be religion. Jesus wanted us to bring love in the world. But he is also the only one who can bring us total freedom.

redstar2000

10th October 2003, 12:10

But if you have the entire world being a simulated universe inside another universe is that providing a scientific understanding of anything?

This sounds like some cosmologist in a bar after he's had a few, blowing smoke out of his ass.

It doesn't have anything to do with science.

But things do happen that "fuck up the results every so often", never mind it was bug that will be fixed in the next release.

Yes, the bug is a material cause.

In a universe of "supernatural" entities, truly "miraculous" things would happen that could not, even in principle, be traced to material causes.

Most of the time water would boil at 100 degrees Centigrade; now and then, for no apparent reason, it would boil at some other temperature.

Every so often, the dead would rise.

And so on.

Those things don't happen.

People have also been asking themselves what happens when they die... Science has not provided any answer and probably never will. It is not knowable.

It is obviously "knowable". Your mental/emotional existence ends when your brain stops functioning.

People may not "like" this answer...but no rational person could seriously question it.

People are happy (or happier) when they know or think they know the answers to these two questions.

Yes, humans will often take the "easy" way out of "difficult" problems if it is available.

We communists propose to make it unavailable.
There is no reason in principle to connect "happiness" with ignorance and superstition. To simply assert that "it's always been so" ignores the temporal limitations of our understanding. What has "always been so" will not necessarily "always be so".

What this thread was started to show was that people need plausible (to them) explanations as to why there is a universe and what happens when they die.

Except they don't. If people truly "needed" such explanations, then atheists could not exist.

Atheism generally says 'just because' and 'you cease to exist'. Many people don't think that those two answers are plausible.

Because they have been indoctrinated as children to think that those are "real" questions and that religion provides "real" answers.

Once defenseless kids are protected from such verbal nonsense, they will have no interest in the "matter".

Are you worried about your neighbor possibly being a "witch"???

There are still a lot of things that can't be explained.

But you can hardly deny that more is being explained with every passing day by science.

Religious "explanations", on the other hand, have a track record of universal failure whenever we've been able to actually test them.

Science is often wrong...and corrected by better science. Religion is always wrong and is never "corrected" except by some other religion that is also always wrong.

Einstein "corrected" Newton with better science; is Mormonism a genuine improvement on Christianity?

I'm just saying I believe in God because there are supernatural things that often [happen?] at times. Science and common sense doesn't explain everything.

So far everything that has been rigorously examined has proven to have material causes.

I have no idea what "supernatural things" you are referring to, but if they happened at all, there is a material explanation.

You've heard of those crying/bleeding statues in Italian churches? Frauds. They've even found some of the tubing in place...the priest was not quick enough to remove it.

Being a christian is not a religional accomplishment. It's loving each other as yourself. And of course loving God, because He has created all that you can see and all that you can't see.

Like the AIDS virus. What a sweetheart!

:redstar2000:

As a public service to those who are still believers, I offer the following for your consideration...

http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/r...gt;&start_from= (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/theory/show_news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1053102811&archive=1054467213&cnshow=news&ucat=>&start_from=)

http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/r...gt;&start_from= (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/theory/show_news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1055691778&archive=1057041165&cnshow=news&ucat=>&start_from=)

http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/r...rt_from=&ucat=& (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/theory.php?subaction=showfull&id=1060354889&archive=1062413506&cnshow=headlines&start_from=&ucat=&)

http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/r...rt_from=&ucat=& (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/theory.php?subaction=showfull&id=1062867055&archive=&cnshow=headlines&start_from=&ucat=&)

The rest of you already know this stuff.

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas

RyeN

11th October 2003, 06:54

Iepilei

11th October 2003, 07:28

Agnostic all the way! Don't know, don't care.

shakermaker

11th October 2003, 09:20

Happiness I cannot feel 'cos love to me is so unreal

apathy maybe

12th October 2003, 08:33

If people truly "needed" such explanations, then atheists could not exist.
Here I was thinking the answer an atheist gave as to the exist of the universe is "because" and what happens when you die is "you die". You think you know, and others think they know. I am saying that if you (some random person) don't know you probably are not as happy as someone who does.
OK the title isn't the greatest it should say belief and happiness.

marxstudent

12th October 2003, 11:00

Yes, I'm not sure if Christianity is real or not and unlike some on this board, I'm not happy with that. I'd rather just have something happen, have found out what's real and what's not and then live my life happily from there. Unfortunately, nothing of that sort has happened yet.

Anastacia

13th October 2003, 11:48

Religion or a way of life, it all doesnt matter. Why do you need to follow the way somone else lived. It is good to have a values system but make up your own mind, dont live according to someone else. Only you can live your life. Why would you love a god that created you. He would have also created the world, the capitolists, and evil. Your god is more sadistic than satan because I guese he would have had to creat satan too eh! The bible story of jesus is being used to make you conform to a capitolist world. Bhudism isnt a religion its a way of life. There are thousands of ways to live I sugest the one that is best for you. It all ends up in the same place after all. Death hahahah

I do live my own life. I believe that God created the world because this just can't happen randomly. There is not such a thing. And man isn't able to create life. How can it happen "randomly"? In the very beginning, I believe, things were really fine. Everybody lived in peace with each others. Then a man wanted more. And you all know where it leads. He has created everyone but people choose themselves what they do with they lives. Jesus really spoke about loving each other and I don't see anything wrong about that. I confess that everyone makes mistakes and that's not God's will. So that's the part were we need Jesus. And I believe my life doesn't end up in death.

Yeshuah ben-Yosif, if he existed and if he was crucified, did not rise from the dead. We know that never happens.

How can you say that so sure? How can't a God who created human rise him from dead?

Like the AIDS virus. What a sweetheart!

Again, people chose the wrong way.

Agnostic all the way! Don't know, don't care.

Ignorance is bliss!

praxis1966

13th October 2003, 12:55

First of all, the ignorance question has been examined several different ways here. Atheists apply it to Christians, Christians apply it to agnostics, yada yada yada. Just for the record, my high school English teacher once said that a pig is only happy living in slop because he is unaware of any better way to live. If he were to realize some better and more comfortable existence and were forced to continue on in the slop, he would grow unhappy.

This could be analyzed from both perspectives. Believers might become depressed after becoming aware of a hereafter and the knowledge of continued suffering. They might also be joyful knowing that something better awaits on the other side. It's a mixed bag no matter what way you look at it.

As for the evil question, Redstar mentioned the creation of AIDS. The argument is that if God created all existance, evil is part of the package. Lets get something clear right away. This is only within the context of the Christian world view. It's not something universal. For example, in Tdaoism, the terms good and evil do not exist. There are only positive and negative energies which are like to gravity; what goes up must come down.

It has always been my view that dichotomal relationships between any to things are detrimental to both. Not only that, but anyone who's been on this planet for longer than 5 minutes will realize that black and white only explain about 10% of life. The other 90% is occupied by shades of grey in which the ethical problems we are faced with are complex and unclear. Good and evil may exist (and I'm not so sure about that), but one begets the other. We run into trouble when the option(s) we may utilize for solving ethical questions have no obvious opposite.

This is why it has always bothered me that certain people on this board are perennially claiming that you are either religious or communist but not both. I'm just not sure the two are necessarily at odds with one another.

Lastly, I'd just like to leave everyone with a bumper sticker that pretty accurately describes my personal feelings on the matter:

Militant Agnostic: I don't know and you don't either

praxis1966

13th October 2003, 12:58

P.S. To whomever said that Jesus is the only way, piss off! Don't insult my intelligence.

redstar2000

13th October 2003, 14:56

I believe that God created the world because this just can't happen randomly. There is not such a thing.

Why not? The temporary emergence of order from disorderly conditions is, in fact, commonplace in this universe.

We've already found nearly 100 planets that circle other stars besides ours. It's clear that worlds are common.

We have no reason to believe that when "earth-like" planets are discovered, that life will not also exist on them...it seems to be one of those things that naturally happens when conditions are appropriate.

And man isn't able to create life.

Actually, we've already created new forms of life; a bacterium that makes human insulin, for example.

It is obviously only a matter of time until we "create" a living organism from completely dead matter.

Some people call this "playing God"...but it's actually pretty hard work.

How can't a God who created human rise him from dead?

Well, the technical answer is that brain cells are very sensitive; after four minutes or so of oxygen deprivation, they start to die in large numbers. "Raising" someone "from the dead" even after only ten minutes or so would simply result in a living body with a dead brain...it would never recover consciousness.

The common sense answer comes from one of the old British utilitarians, who said: "When I am told that Jesus rose from the dead, two things occur to me. The first is that I have never known a man to rise from the dead. The second is that I have often known men to lie."

You've been lied to.

Again, people chose the wrong way.

Are you suggesting here that AIDS is "God's punishment" for "sin"?

And, if so, just how do you square that with all that "love" crap that you were speaking of earlier?

This is why it has always bothered me that certain people on this board are perennially claiming that you are either religious or communist but not both. I'm just not sure the two are necessarily at odds with one another.

Why wouldn't they be "at odds with one another"?

You have, on the one hand, a hypothesis about human societies that excludes "supernatural" causes altogether. The implication is clearly that the "supernatural" does not exist.

On the other hand, you have a hypothesis that postulates the "supernatural" as the "central cause" of human existence...and much else besides. According to the Christian "holy book", our rulers are "appointed by God" and rebellion is "sin".

This seems to me to be about as clear an "either/or" choice as can possibly be imagined.

To be sure, there are those who take refuge in the more esoteric faiths (deism, buddhism, taoism) and claim that those religions are "different". In some ways, they are different from the monotheistic faiths that we are most familiar with.

But let's be honest here. Either there "is" some kind of "supernatural realm" that interacts with the material world in which we live...or there isn't.

If there "is", then compelling evidence must be shown for its existence, the mechanism(s) by which it interacts with the material world must be demonstrated, we have to be shown how it works.

And works reliably.

They never do that. They can't do that...because what they're talking about doesn't exist.

What they can do is make up stories...miracle stories, tales of marvelous deeds, strange and inexplicable events, bizarre coincidences, blah, blah, blah.

None of which can withstand critical examination.

Thus I maintain that any supernatural belief is in total contradiction to communism. You can be one or the other...but not both.

If that seems "harsh", well, the universe we live in is harsh. Those who believe in the "power of prayer" to heal sickness get to watch their kids die, for example.

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas

Lardlad95

13th October 2003, 15:17

First of all Redstar, don't fuck with Deism....*throws up Deism gang sign*

If that seems "harsh", well, the universe we live in is harsh. Those who believe in the "power of prayer" to heal sickness get to watch their kids die, for example.

Not always, we've both seen those remarkable stories of how "faith" pulled thier child through. Granted it could have just been the antibiotics, but hey lets give them the benefit of the doubt :D

If there "is", then compelling evidence must be shown for its existence, the mechanism(s) by which it interacts with the material world must be demonstrated, we have to be shown how it works.

One question that I"VE GONE TO LONG WITHOUT ASKING.

Please explain in great length and detail just what you would consider compelling evidence? I mean do you want a National Enquirer article? A personal one on one interview with God? Or perhaps you would like Jesus to take his show on the road, performing miracles all the time.?

We've already found nearly 100 planets that circle other stars besides ours. It's clear that worlds are common.

Very true planets are very common

We have no reason to believe that when "earth-like" planets are discovered, that life will not also exist on them...it seems to be one of those things that naturally happens when conditions are appropriate.

NOOOOOO! Not appropriate, Perfect. No kinda perfect, not almost perfect, not Damn near perfect. PERFECT.

Now sure "life" can be suported, like some bacteria. But the conditions needed for Sentient life to evolve? Conditions have to be completely on point.

redstar2000

13th October 2003, 16:33

Please explain in great length and detail just what you would consider compelling evidence? I mean do you want a National Enquirer article? A personal one on one interview with God? Or perhaps you would like Jesus to take his show on the road, performing miracles all the time?

Options one and three are out, for obvious reasons. Option two I would consider convincing.

But surely you have some knowledge of what constitutes compelling evidence in the context of scientific effort.

The most obvious requirement is that you can repeat the experiment and get the same results.

I said in an earlier post that if any religion were true, it would show. There are lots of possible ways it would show, none of which have ever been observed.

The pious believers in the "true faith" would exhibit symptoms of "divine favor" that others rarely or never display. They would be "happy" and "healthy" all the time. They might never be rich, but they would never be poor. Unfortunate accidents would never be a factor in their lives; somebody else's plane would crash, not theirs. The earthquake that destroyed ten thousand homes would leave theirs standing, undamaged. War and disease would "pass by" without ever touching them. Traffic lights would turn green when their vehicle approached.

And so on.

In the extreme cases, having lived for well in excess of a century, they would not even die like ordinary mortals, but would bodily ascend into "Heaven" to the astonishment of atheists and false believers alike. It would be televised!

Use your imagination! What would the world be like if the "supernatural" existed and interacted with the material world? Everything would be unpredictable, perhaps wildly so. With angels and devils, gods and goddesses, ghosts and vampires and werewolves, etc. running loose, anything might happen. Tomorrow the sun might rise in the west...or you might be seduced by an elf-maid...or fatally gored by a unicorn.

The National Weather Service might issue "dragon warnings".

If the "supernatural" existed, you'd expect to see at least some of these things happen, but they never do.

The compelling evidence, at this point, is that the reason none of those things ever happen is that the "supernatural" doesn't exist.

But the conditions needed for Sentient life to evolve? Conditions have to be completely on point.

How "Terra-centric" of you! Are you some kind of "species-ist"?

I think a contemporary astro-biologist (yes, they exist now) would say something to the effect that intelligent life can probably evolve on any planet that can support multi-cellular life at all. Perhaps this applies to one out of 1,000 planets or only one out of 1,000,000 planets...it doesn't really matter. Our own galaxy probably contains 400,000,000,000 stars...we are not alone...though our nearest intelligent neighbors may live 1,000 light-years away.

Of course, if living bacteria are discovered on Mars or in the oceans of one of the Jovian satellites, then the conclusion is inescapable: life is common. Once could be a wild act of pure chance...more than once, in nature, means it happens all the time.

...but hey let's give [the faith healers] the benefit of the doubt.

No!

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas

Anastacia

14th October 2003, 11:14

Are you suggesting here that AIDS is "God's punishment" for "sin"?

And, if so, just how do you square that with all that "love" crap that you were speaking of earlier?

It's not God's punishment of sin. For example hate and violence causes hate and violence. Then it's not God's punishment. Many fundamentalists see it as a God's punishment but it's just a natural result.

Those who believe in the "power of prayer" to heal sickness get to watch their kids die, for example.

That's right. The point isn't living in a wonderland where everything happens when you cross your hands. The point is to work too.

Everything would be unpredictable, perhaps wildly so. With angels and devils, gods and goddesses, ghosts and vampires and werewolves, etc. running loose, anything might happen. Tomorrow the sun might rise in the west...or you might be seduced by an elf-maid...or fatally gored by a unicorn.

Everything is predictable because nothing happens randomly. There is not such a thing. Then how would the world have been born randomly? If anything happens randomly then you could see things like you mentioned tomorrow. That's not a proof that supernatural doesn't exist. You are very naive. I was talking about one and only God, not "gods and goddesses, ghosts and vampires and werewolves". God doesn't act like you mentioned. Maybe he sometimes puts his finger on things like what people call conscience.

redstar2000

14th October 2003, 14:38

You are very naive.

Yes, in some ways I am indeed naive. It seems quite obvious to me that a "good God" would proceed to alleviate human pain and suffering at once...indeed, that "He" would not allow such a thing at all, much less create a special place called "Hell" where human souls can be tortured for "eternity".

What sort of "love" is this? When humans behave like this, we call it hate, do we not?

How then do you avoid concluding that either "God is evil" or "God does not exist"?

If you accept the premise that the supernatural "exists", then the logical conclusion is that "God" is evil.

Surely you won't fall back on that old bullshit that pain and suffering "is good for the soul"? If you've ever seen real pain and suffering, then you know that all it does is reduce a human to the level of an animal, screaming in distress.

How many billions of "souls" are in that condition at this very moment in your "God's" "Hell"?

Do you really understand the logical consequences of your own beliefs?

A universe without the supernatural is a far better place, harsh though it is in many ways.

If there are no "supernatural" causes of evil, then it follows that humans can overcome evil, if they wish to do so.

We can do what your "God" never bothered with...alieviate at least some pain and suffering.

If you indeed have a conscience, the choice should be obvious.

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas

Anastacia

16th October 2003, 09:09

What sort of "love" is this? When humans behave like this, we call it hate, do we not?

If someone does a crime he should be punished, right? God gave us life and what have we done with it? Not what God wanted us to do. God created man to live in peace with others and the nature. He saw that man was evil and wanted to give a change (Jesus). This isn't leading anywhere. None of us is changin opinions...

If there are no "supernatural" causes of evil, then it follows that humans can overcome evil, if they wish to do so.

Yes. Do they want?

A universe without the supernatural is a far better place, harsh though it is in many ways.

I think there got to be something that made the world. There are so many things. If they were a little different thigns just wouldn't work. And I don't mean the diseases, weapons etc. People are just really stupid greed and selfish.

shakermaker

16th October 2003, 09:27

how God can be good if God forces you to believe?
like if you won't accept God and Jesus as your savior and believe in them you go to hell.

redstar2000

16th October 2003, 12:28

God created man to live in peace with others and the nature. He saw that man was evil and wanted to give a change (Jesus).

In other words, "He" fucked up.

That is, "He" created a sentient entity (human) that was imperfect. Just as if we made an airplane that always crashed on takeoff.

Is "He" incompetent? Did "He" do it out of spite? Does "He" enjoy the idea that most of "His" creatures are going to scream in agony forever?

People are just really stupid, greed[y] and selfish.

And that's a good illustration of where the religious outlook takes you in the end.

People are shit...and all the rhetoric about "loving" them is just camouflage. To be religious is to hate, at the deepest level, your own species.

It's a form of mental illness.

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas

Anastacia

17th October 2003, 07:43

how God can be good if God forces you to believe?
like if you won't accept God and Jesus as your savior and believe in them you go to hell.

If you don't want to believe then it's your own business. Nobody forces you. If you don't believe it you don't believe in hell and you have nothing to worry about. God offered a change. You don't believe in God then why do you complain if you go to hell? It's your decision. God doesn't demand you anything but belief. Shouldn't be too hard.

That is, "He" created a sentient entity (human) that was imperfect. Just as if we made an airplane that always crashed on takeoff.

He created a human that lives in peace with other humans and the nature. But the first humans wanted more than that. And they broke the only command. At the beginnig they were really ignorant. But when they knew more they came more and more stupid. Like you see nowadays. People really know how to exploit other people. And not many gives a shit. I think it's good for us not to know anything and things would be really good. But when everything have gone bad it's good to know about the world's situation. Hope you get my point.

Is "He" incompetent? Did "He" do it out of spite?

I don't know why he created us. Even when he knew what it would be. I can't give you answer.

You are right. People are shit. But should we be? I think we shouldn't. I think we shouldn't hate. Hate doesn't lead anywhere. It just causes more and more hate. But love can really change people. "True revolutionary is motivate by love, not hate" - el Che.