Philosophically speaking, religion is a hoax

[karrie]

We know religions and religious authorities etc exist, you are being asked for proof of God, or whomever. The foundation, of what these religions are based on is what is being called into question, not their desire for power and control.

Actually, the original post simply said that religion is a hoax, and anyone who wanted to chat about it ought to chime in. So I did. Like I said, not all religion is based on God. Not all religion is based on something that can't be proven. Atheism and science, in and of themselves are a form of religion. A common ground around which people gather to discuss similarities, moral implications of their beliefs, and how those beliefs ought to govern their society. Atheism is becoming the new oppressor, putting 'those who believe in flying spaghetti monsters' in their place and denouncing them as unbelievers of the new reality. If you stand back and look at the pattern all throughout history, it's really quite intriguing.

 

[darkbeaver]

Why would I need to tell you what my beliefs are to disagree with your assertion regarding religion? I could worship the dirt for all difference it makes in the purpose of a debate.
The fact is, that religions exist outside of what they are worshipping. As Said pointed out, many throughout history have been corrupt, many have been there to control. But they've always been there. There's always been a need, a spot in human society for them. They appear to be very vital (regardless of what they are worshipping), to human interaction. Thus, I would assert they are not hoaxes at all. They are simply natural, inevitable forms of human interaction.

Religions have not always been there, they are products of the rational mind which hasn't always been here.Nor are they natural or inevitable forms of human interaction.The vital thing they hope to control is reverance for life and the powers that do exist in the natural setting, religions are aberations of that reverance for the life sustaining power of the natural world.IMO:wave:.

 

[Said1]

Actually, the original post simply said that religion is a hoax, and anyone who wanted to chat about it ought to chime in. So I did. Like I said, not all religion is based on God. Not all religion is based on something that can't be proven. Atheism and science, in and of themselves are a form of religion. A common ground around which people gather to discuss similarities, moral implications of their beliefs, and how those beliefs ought to govern their society. Atheism is becoming the new oppressor, putting 'those who believe in flying spaghetti monsters' in their place and denouncing them as unbelievers of the new reality. If you stand back and look at the pattern all throughout history, it's really quite intriguing.

I was not addressing you're original post.

Anywho. Like the beav said, religion is a by product of man leaving the proverbial state of nature and consenting to be ruled. I never consented though!

 

[darkbeaver]

Well, I can't say I often warm a pew but I can say I have a lot of respect for the religious. Certainly, looking back over my 55 years on the planet some of the best folk I have known have been devout. They believed in something and that conviction governed their conduct in the larger community. I like that. Doesn't mean there aren't great agnostics out there or likeable atheists. Someone else will have to vouch for that. I simply want to say to the great ladies and gentlemen of the Church I have know for so many years: thanks for being good neighbours, thanks for being generous to others, thank for being community minded. You do make the world a better place.

But were they good people because they were good or because they were good religious people, no one doubts the goodness of many religious people but it is my belief they were good without the religion, certainly there have been evil people despite thier affiliation with and adherance to dogmatic idealization of invented dietys.:wave:

 

[darkbeaver]

Well, I can't say I often warm a pew but I can say I have a lot of respect for the religious. Certainly, looking back over my 55 years on the planet some of the best folk I have known have been devout. They believed in something and that conviction governed their conduct in the larger community. I like that. Doesn't mean there aren't great agnostics out there or likeable atheists. Someone else will have to vouch for that. I simply want to say to the great ladies and gentlemen of the Church I have know for so many years: thanks for being good neighbours, thanks for being generous to others, thank for being community minded. You do make the world a better place.

But were they good people because they were good or because they were good religious people, no one doubts the goodness of many religious people but it is my belief they were good without the religion, certainly there have been evil people despite thier affiliation with and adherance to dogmatic idealization of invented dietys.Good people make the world a better place, you'll get no argument about that from me.Thank god for good people.:wave:

 

[karrie]

Religions have not always been there, they are products of the rational mind which hasn't always been here.Nor are they natural or inevitable forms of human interaction.The vital thing they hope to control is reverance for life and the powers that do exist in the natural setting, religions are aberations of that reverance for the life sustaining power of the natural world.IMO:wave:.

See, this is why I asked the OP to give a definition of what he was trying to discuss. Because to me, a tribe of Africans who revere the snakes in the grass around their huts, are practising a religion. They're not away from nature, they are not irreverant of its power. Would you say the first nations people were irreverant toward nature? I wouldn't by any means. yet they had a religion, a collection of beliefs that helped govern how they interacted, how they treated the earth, how they treated animals, how they treated eachother.

 

[westmanguy]

As a Christian, some of these comments deeply disturb me.

You can't ask for proof of God. Religion is based on faith. I don't have blind faith. God sent Jesus and worked through profits to Christianity some basis and truth through miracles and such. But he left the rest to faith.

2 important things:

Science will NEVER answer these 2 things:

1) Origin of everything. That can't be answered.. I could go in depth, but *yawn* these debates tire me out. Just think.. you can't come up with an answer for the origin of everything.

2) Fate after death. Science can't answer if there is a Heaven, Hell, or nothing after death.

For that religion, will always live on. As the world gets more advanced the church has less effect, but the belief of more to our life and death will always be there.

Quite frankly I could never accept that our origins and fate come to nothing. To me that says my life and everything else has no purpose. I try not to be ignorant, but I can't grasp atheism. Even listening to all the arguements, I just can't grasp any human being that accepts their was nothing before us and nothing after us. It stuns me.

Anywaysd.. my thoughts. I like these discussions. But, once again, asking for "proof" is just silly. You know darn well I can't go at this debate like that.

 

[Ariadne]

Religion is not a hoax.

Just because some people don't believe in God doesn't mean He doesn't exist ... obviously. Furthermore, religion is the documented history of the philosophy of morality. It is not any kind of a hoax that I can imagine.

 

[westmanguy]

Thank you. Its just a try to comprehend this and I can't.. I never have been able to understand people choosing atheism.

Now I am not intolerant.. I only get ticked when they start trying to remove religion from everything. Like, no Christmas ceremonies, and public displays of religion..

 

[Ariadne]

Look Karrie, if alligators or the sun have more meaning to you than some sky fairy called god then spit it out. Otherwise you are wasting my time and cyberspace on my thread.

As Richard DAwkins says, God almost certainly does not exist. I believe likewise. And although I cannot prove entirely that he doesn't exist, I offered you my evidence to say that my assertion is backed by being beyond a reasonable doubt as being the facts. If religion is of any importance to you at all, and Dawwwg knows it should be if you are going to waste your life in believing in sky fairies and all that implies, I suggest it's worth your while to investigate it further.

Now go do your homework and come back when you have prepared yourself with an informed rebuttal of 'my' beliefs.

Error. Incorrect. Sky Fairy is Christianity. Buddhism seeks to rid the mind and body of the material trappings of life and experience inner enlightenment. This would suggest that God is within rather than a fairy in the sky.

Regardless of which religion is being discussed (for those that couldn't distinguish between religion and not religion), religion is still not a hoax.

Anyone that thinks religion is about Sky Fairies didn't graduate from pre-school Sunday school.

 

[darkbeaver]

See, this is why I asked the OP to give a definition of what he was trying to discuss. Because to me, a tribe of Africans who revere the snakes in the grass around their huts, are practising a religion. They're not away from nature, they are not irreverant of its power. Would you say the first nations people were irreverant toward nature? I wouldn't by any means. yet they had a religion, a collection of beliefs that helped govern how they interacted, how they treated the earth, how they treated animals, how they treated eachother.

I see your point and I agree with it so far, take christianity for example, it has always maintained that we were given dominion and stressed the separation between the rest of the life forms and man, it has stressed our exclusivity not our collective belonging with the rest of nature but our dominion over nature.This cannot be the natural way of things.Second to disease religion has been the destroyer of mankind, history proves the divisive qualitys inherant in the practice of religion, it has always been used as a qualifyer and an insturment of exclusion.Reverance for a snake or a fish or a potatoe is grounded in the reality of the life sustaining qualitys of food or fuel or medicine religion is grounded in faith and that's signifigantly different than a full belly and a warm arse.:wave:

 

[Ariadne]

Ya right, maybe I'm god, I'm a total something but I'm smart enough to know it ain't genius.

I'v had a big hate on for religions since I was a little beaver, especially the ones that come with service manuals.:love9:

I don't know ... I kind of like it when I know what song page to turn to before everyone starts singing ... service manuals do come in handy when you need them.

So you say: "Ya right, maybe I'm god, I'm a total something but I'm smart enough to know it ain't genius."

I don't think you're God. We're all a totally something. We're all smart enough to know if it ain't genius, thankfully.

Jehovah Witnesses came with a service manual ... did you have to miss Christmas when you were a little beaver?

 

[karrie]

I see your point and I agree with it so far, take christianity for example, it has always maintained that we were given dominion and stressed the separation between the rest of the life forms and man, it has stressed our exclusivity not our collective belonging with the rest of nature but our dominion over nature.This cannot be the natural way of things.Second to disease religion has been the destroyer of mankind, history proves the divisive qualitys inherant in the practice of religion, it has always been used as a qualifyer and an insturment of exclusion.Reverance for a snake or a fish or a potatoe is grounded in the reality of the life sustaining qualitys of food or fuel or medicine religion is grounded in faith and that's signifigantly different than a full belly and a warm arse.:wave:

The main problem as I see it, is that any religion is, after all, practised by humans. It's not the fault of the belief set, it's the human application of that belief that is so susceptible to flaws. Especially, as we've learned and have taken steps to correct, human application of religion to politics. Religion practised on the grand scale can be a dangerous thing indeed. But, its basis, its origins, can't be blamed for that. In the end WE'RE the religion, no matter what it started out as, and it reflects our own faults. As I was saying earlier, atheism is the new religion if you look at the way they evolve. It's the up and coming belief set. it's gathering 'churches' of people in its support, who speak out to try to change the ways of people who do not believe as they do. Any core belief around which a group of people gather is a religion, and no religion is free of fault.

 

[Ariadne]

Thank you. Its just a try to comprehend this and I can't.. I never have been able to understand people choosing atheism.

Now I am not intolerant.. I only get ticked when they start trying to remove religion from everything. Like, no Christmas ceremonies, and public displays of religion..

I don't think Atheism is a choice. I think there must be some people that don't have the mental capacity (sorta like monkeys) to undestand Religion: It's the History of Morality thiang, but to deny that there is such a thing as religion means something like a frontal lobotamy or bump on the head. Religion exists as a human artifact, like witchcraft, ESP, UFOs, and God. Whether religion is a hoax or not depends on who is talking. Obviously, some people are unaware of religion; like Atheists, while others; both Eastern and Western religious people, have a concept about an original, superior existence. Religious values are all about morality, health and socialization so it that's a hoax, I guess there's nothing left to debate but money.

 

[darkbeaver]

I don't know ... I kind of like it when I know what song page to turn to before everyone starts singing ... service manuals do come in handy when you need them.

So you say: "Ya right, maybe I'm god, I'm a total something but I'm smart enough to know it ain't genius."

I don't think you're God. We're all a totally something. We're all smart enough to know if it ain't genius, thankfully.

Jehovah Witnesses came with a service manual ... did you have to miss Christmas when you were a little beaver?

Beavers don't do christmas we get presents every day anyway, what I meant by the service manual crack if the damn religion were so self evident you wouldn't think it would need a tedious book to explain the intricate workings of a supposidly obvious truth, why not just command obediance, like my sun, now that's power short and sweet if you break the rules your dead. no cerimonial judgements, no ifs ands or buts, your condemned and executed on the spot, what could be fairer than that.:wave:

 

[selfactivated]

Philosophically speaking, religion is a hoax

I disagree whole heartedly. If you said Scientifically religion is a hoax Id agree or Logically but Philosophy is subjective not concrete.

Im my opinion religion and Faith are two different things. I abhore religion I applaud and respect Faith.

 

[L Gilbert]

Atheism is in a minority, it is a small group in human history. which is the hoax?

Numbers of followers of philosophies do not signify hoaxes.
As far as hoaxes go, I'm not exactly sure of religions can qualify as hoaxes unless they were designed to fool people rather than be of assistance to them. That's a tough accusation to prove.
Are religions based on fantasies? I'd have to say yes: on hoaxes, I can only say maybe.

 

[talloola]

As a Christian, some of these comments deeply disturb me.

Science will NEVER answer these 2 things:
There will come a day when science will answer these questions, but i'm sure, even then, that
believers in god still won't believe them. Science has a pretty good start allready.

2) Fate after death. Science can't answer if there is a Heaven, Hell, or nothing after death.
But, common sense can, the good use of our intelligence.

For that religion, will always live on. As the world gets more advanced the church has less effect, but the belief of more to our life and death will always be there.
For people to think that there is some entity who is going to allow them to live somewhere else
after death, I find to be very very arrogant, and just a crutch, because the idea of dying just as
all other living species on earth dies, is something they can't face, so they pretend they will live
on, in some other form, "nonsense".

Quite frankly I could never accept that our origins and fate come to nothing. To me that says my life and everything else has no purpose.
I am an athiest, and I could never think that my life has no meaning, that is sad and pitiful, I am
a child of the earth, this is my birth place, and my place after death, and it will always take care
of me, not some silly god, or a bunch of angels flying around, my earth is real, and supplies me
with all I need to live and be happy.
I try not to be ignorant, but I can't grasp atheism. Even listening to all the arguements, I just can't grasp any human being that accepts their was nothing before us and nothing after us. It stuns me.
The idea that you think there is nothing , stuns me.

Of course noone can prove there is a god, and they never will, it is a fantasy, BUT, I can see that
many people "do" much better on earth if they think they have their god to "lean" on, so if they
need that in their life, then go for it. I notice that all religious people, at least the ones I have
noticed, have no particular connection to our earth, as I do, they look out beyond what is right
under their noses, the one thing that provided them with life, and will sustain them till death,
and will hold them close, and care for them forever, after death. And, we do live on, in our
offspring and other family who stay behind, and on it goes.

 

[Ariadne]

Beavers don't do christmas we get presents every day anyway, what I meant by the service manual crack if the damn religion were so self evident you wouldn't think it would need a tedious book to explain the intricate workings of a supposidly obvious truth, why not just command obediance, like my sun, now that's power short and sweet if you break the rules your dead. no cerimonial judgements, no ifs ands or buts, your condemned and executed on the spot, what could be fairer than that.:wave:

Sadly, children raised in cults are not projected to understand religion. Manipulation is different from religion; which is a choice, so people that get presents everyday are probably manipulating their environment, n'est pas?

You ask: "If religion were so evident, why do you need a manual?"

Why does anyone need a "manual" for the World Wars? Why does anyone need a "manual" about the depression or 'being in the black'? Books about religion are like history books ... eh. That is not to imply that religion could be a hoax or that God doesn't exist. Simply stating that manuals about religion are like manuals for political and economic stategies except they target morals ... way lower calibre than politics and international finance.

Why you jump from discussions about religion to being dead 'without any ifs ands or butts' ... eludes me.

And then: "your condemned and executed on the spot, what could be fairer than that."? You're not upset about the head choppings in Iraq are you ... I mean ... what did anyone expect by invading a country where they chop off the heads of bad people: Obviously their leader would get his head chopped off without any ifs and or butts and on the spot. ... or did you mean something else?

 

[L Gilbert]

lol
This atheist is positive that the purpose of life is to live it; no more, no less. I have no problem with being dead for millions of years, being born, living 70 or so years, dying, and being dead for millions more years. Being dead is absolutely no inconvenience to me at all.