quote:

Originally posted by MNSIG:
I'm not ridiculing religion, but think it's over the top when any one group claims to have the correct answers to questions that are beyond human understanding.

You most certinly did miss his point. I notice that you quoted him, but you left out this part:

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:
Many conclude that religion in some form is essential to motivate humans to some form of morality. You'll be "good" if you risk going to hell.

You are talking about everyone thinking that they have the correct answer to the mystery of our existence. Let me ask you- do you think people will believe something they don't believe? Of course they think their answer is the right answer. Just what else would they think? Good grief. This statement you've made is, in my experience, a prelude to deriding religion.

And, again, that was not the man's point. That was your point, and I'm telling you that you don't need to quote anyone. Just state your case.

quote:

Originally posted by Joe123:
Many of us humans base our morals on religion. Without morals where would we be?

A classic mistake. We don't need a deity to have a system of morality.

Historically, church and morality have been intertwined, and so we make the mistake of thinking that the two need each other and that morality comes from the church. But they could be separated, and all you would lose is the threat of the deity punishing you in some way (being cast into a fiery pit, or being reincarnated as a bug, for example) for violating the moral code.

As a substantive matter, look at some of the things that some churches now enforce as morality. Jews can't eat clams. Sikhs have to wear a turban. A Buddhist can't kill a bug. Baptists can't go to a dance. Even religion can't agree on what moral behavior is, and each religion makes some moral choices that seem very odd to the rest of us. It sort of puts a damper on their ability to claim any real insight into moral behavior.

Many religions do agree on broad moral codes - no murder, no stealing, etc. I think that is because those are moral codes that benefit us as human societies, not because a deity has told us they are the law. Those have gotten drawn into religious codes, but their actual origin is actually far more fundamental than that.

If you believe there is a deity, you may believe that the deity built those basic rules into us. And maybe it is true. (Or maybe those are more biological/social imperatives.) But the fact that those cross almost all of human societies indicates that you don't need a religious institution to enforce them. They seem a part of human nature, whatever the source of nature may be.

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:

Many conclude that religion in some form is essential to motivate humans to some form of morality. You'll be "good" if you risk going to hell.

I mean no criticism of you, JAllen, but that threat doesn't even work. In the middle ages, people apparently did believe they would be condemned to eternal damnatation if they murdered and stole, but the King was still required to have a system of courts and punishment to enforce morality.

People give a lot of lip service to the commandments of their gods, but it doesn't really seem to prevent a fair amount of bad behavior.

Same old song and dance from the Godless heathens

No, it would be much worse.

I will leave my favorite Blaise Pascal quotes for the Godless Heathens..

Belief is a wise wager. Granted that faith cannot be proved, what harm will come to you if you gamble on its truth and it proves false? If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing. Wager, then, without hesitation, that He exists. - Blaise Pascal

quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:

Many conclude that religion in some form is essential to motivate humans to some form of morality. You'll be "good" if you risk going to hell.

I mean no criticism of you, JAllen, but that threat doesn't even work. In the middle ages, people apparently did believe they would be condemned to eternal damnatation if they murdered and stole, but the King was still required to have a system of courts and punishment to enforce morality.

People give a lot of lip service to the commandments of their gods, but it doesn't really seem to prevent a fair amount of bad behavior.

No criticism at all, jhe. I'm reporting what I have been reading. It is what some philosophers and more rulers have advocated. That it is imperfect or inefficient is scarcely surprising.

Throughout history, those who have been the most scrupulous and tireless and strict in their observances of their chosen beliefs, Greeks, Romans, Chinese, Egyptian, Persian, etc. have been the most despised, tedious, disadvantaged. Those who put on a good show, with a wink and a nod but go ahead and do as they please are often more tolerable.

When I think about the largest organizations comprised of people freely donating their time and resources to helping the needy and destitute, I always think of the greats of atheism: Red Cross, Boy Scouts, YMCA, etc. Sure, maybe they get grants here and there, but most importantly at their core, they're built on a deep rejection of both a creator and a sense of serving something greater than their own needs.

What about 8,000 years ago? Where were these benevolent, Godless organizations when the foundations of human history were being built?
Where was religion 8,000 years ago? 5,000 years ago? 500 years ago? It was right there, down in the mud of human history.

All these things we're talking about that we now have in our modern society, just how do you think we got here? In 8,000 or so years, only the last few have been Godless. You have to take the long view, and when you do that, you'll see the answer, and the answer has nothing to do with the Red Cross or the Boy Scouts.

No God? No civilization. As we sit here on top of the millennia of human history, think about how we got here.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:Let me ask you- do you think people will believe something they don't believe? Of course they think their answer is the right answer. Just what else would they think? Good grief. This statement you've made is, in my experience, a prelude to deriding religion.

I completely agree with your comment about people believing what they think is correct.

In this case, I think it will be my prelude to stepping back from the thread. I'm not doing a good job of expressing myself.

quote:

Originally posted by Veeper:
When I think about the largest organizations comprised of people freely donating their time and resources to helping the needy and destitute, I always think of the greats of atheism: Red Cross, Boy Scouts, YMCA, etc. Sure, maybe they get grants here and there, but most importantly at their core, they're built on a deep rejection of both a creator and a sense of serving something greater than their own needs.

I wonder what the "C" in YMCA stands for.

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:

quote:

Originally posted by Veeper:
When I think about the largest organizations comprised of people freely donating their time and resources to helping the needy and destitute, I always think of the greats of atheism: Red Cross, Boy Scouts, YMCA, etc. Sure, maybe they get grants here and there, but most importantly at their core, they're built on a deep rejection of both a creator and a sense of serving something greater than their own needs.

I wonder what the "C" in YMCA stands for.

I was wondering if he was joking or really meant the post?

The Christian Origin of the Red Cross

Boy Scouts are actually required to affirm their belief in God

And you covered the YMCA, it's right there in the name of the organization.

I think he was being sarcastic or joking maybe?

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:

quote:

Originally posted by ulsterman:
If it wasn't religion, it would be something else.

...which would then, by default, become one's religion.

Global warming.

You're bringing politics into this thread?

Had a friend at church relate this story about three months before dropping dead of a massive heart attack while golfing with the minister (paraphrased):

"If a Christian dies and is wrong about God, he dies a good man.

"If an atheist dies and is wrong about God, he dies."

Something that stuck with me many years now.

quote:

Originally posted by Veeper:
When I think about the largest organizations comprised of people freely donating their time and resources to helping the needy and destitute, I always think of the greats of atheism: Red Cross, Boy Scouts, YMCA, etc. Sure, maybe they get grants here and there, but most importantly at their core, they're built on a deep rejection of both a creator and a sense of serving something greater than their own needs.

I hope it's just that my sarcasm meter is out of calibration.

quote:

Originally posted by BamaJeepster:

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:

quote:

Originally posted by Veeper:
When I think about the largest organizations comprised of people freely donating their time and resources to helping the needy and destitute, I always think of the greats of atheism: Red Cross, Boy Scouts, YMCA, etc. Sure, maybe they get grants here and there, but most importantly at their core, they're built on a deep rejection of both a creator and a sense of serving something greater than their own needs.

I wonder what the "C" in YMCA stands for.

I was wondering if he was joking or really meant the post?

The Christian Origin of the Red Cross

Boy Scouts are actually required to affirm their belief in God

And you covered the YMCA, it's right there in the name of the organization.

I think he was being sarcastic or joking maybe?

Obviously being sarcastic. Zero of those organizations were founded upon atheist tenants.

Would the world be better without Religion/faith?

Faith and religion have brought many a person out of the nasty, brutish and short world of philosophy into lives of meaning and service.

Even in terms of influence in the world, I refer to President George Washington's view:

"Of all the dispositions and habits, which lead to political prosperity, Religion and Morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of Men and Citizens. The mere Politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them.

A volume could not trace all their connexions with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked, Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths, which are the instruments of investigation in Courts of Justice?

And let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect, that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.

It is substantially true, that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who, that is a sincere friend to it, can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?"

Beyond the utilitarian social value of religion/faith, many have found a deeply meaningful and satisfying connection with the divine, fulfilling a personal longing within.

The world would not be better without religion/faith.

What should exist as tolerance often gets replaced with monolithic absolutism. One person can believe that he/she is completely right without needing to destroy all other views/beliefs. But, that is the more difficult path.

Blaming religion for the conflicts started in its name is like blaming the murder on the gun imo.

Some people are simply asshats. If they weren't killing "for religion" they'd be killing for something else.

So no, I don't think it would be any better at all.

I do think it would be worse. Is religion the ONLY form of moral compass? Of course not. Is is necessary for morality? Nope. Does it serve as the basis for a moral compas for a meaningful percent of our world? Yep.

quote:

Originally posted by esdunbar:
Blaming religion for the conflicts started in its name is like blaming the murder on the gun imo.

Some people are simply asshats. If they weren't killing "for religion" they'd be killing for something else.

So no, I don't think it would be any better at all.

I do think it would be worse. Is religion the ONLY form of moral compass? Of course not. Is is necessary for morality? Nope. Does it serve as the basis for a moral compas for a meaningful percent of our world? Yep.

Threads like these I tend to wait a bit and then someone will say exactly what I think.

I echo your comments Mr. Dunbar.

------------------------------------

That's the point. Morality was driven by religion. People wouldn't adhere to an set of moral precepts for the sake of public civility, they had to be threatened with eternal damnation in order to get them to do it.

Of course we understand a lot more about how things work in the universe now. We're far from understanding everything, or even a small fraction of everything. But we do understand independently much more about things where the major religions attempted to establish a monopoly of understanding, and those religions have been shown to be wrong. This has much of the population questioning the validity of those religions themselves. And the more their validity is questioned, the more the morality those religions imposed, breaks down.

So if people won't believe that god (whoever that might be) demands they adhere to moral code, how do you keep civilization from breaking down?

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:
Many conclude that religion in some form is essential to motivate humans to some form of morality. You'll be "good" if you risk going to hell.