I'll add: a question that I would like you to answer with your next post in this thread, if you make another.
The 2nd Great Christian Argument
- Thread starter Satya
- Start date
I'll add: a question that I would like you to answer with your next post in this thread, if you make another.
I am a Catholic, and I have no fear. And I don't want to sound all preachy or anything, but I believe that God loves all. Those with faith, and those without.
So....because I believe in a loving God...I'm going to hate others?
Racism stems from many things. yes, some people blame religion, but it is not the sole cause, and I'm actually offended by the above comment. Additionally, in many situations, it's only when religion has been distorted and pushed to the ultimate negative extreme, do you have such conflict. This thread is presenting quite a few generalisations.
I agree with you. I don't believe such a loving God would do that. Even the religious feel that way.
I think all he was saying is that religion has traditionally been a great means to dehumanize and scapegoat groups of people. For example, when the Conquistadors came to the New World, they were able to justify the atrocities they committed against the natives by labeling them as "sodomites".
As one of the modern "sodomites" of the day, I can relate to how religion is used to dehumanize entire groups of people. Just listening to preachers talk about the "gay agenda" on TV for example. You want to talk about generalizations. Even your Pope recently made some comments along the lines of homosexuals being as great a threat to the world as destruction to the rain forests.
Last edited:
Religion and faith are two separate things, yes. However, as I've explained and will further explain below, faith is very dangerous, but not as much as religion (religion's problems stem from the massive societal effects of groupthink + unjustified beliefs).
Satya has the idea. By believing things and acting on those beliefs while at the same time having no good reason for believing such things means that you can "rationalize" doing anything. Kill gays because it says to do so in the Bible. Kill Jews because the Koran says there is a Jihad...etc.
Rules like "don't murder people" are based on good reason. Everyone in society benefits from this rule (social contract). Murdering people is a violation of their rights (Kantianism). Having this rule prevents unhappiness (utilitarianism). Every major ethical theory has a good reason for having this rule.
These ethical theories also prevent other atrocities that religion/faith are inept to do. You don't kill gays because it's against their rights (Kantianism). Don't kill gays because it causes them unhappiness (utilitarianism). Don't kill gays because it does not benefit society, and actually harms society because we can pick out other minorities and kill them if we wanted to (social contract). There's a GOOD REASON in all these cases. There's a principle behind the rule. With religion, it's just a bunch of individual, arbitrary rules. You don't kill others because God says so. Oh, but it's ok to stone gays and kill non-Jews...
See, no principle...just arbitrary rules.
However, the same isn't in faith. With faith (as in, unjustified belief, not necessarily religious faith) you can justify killing Jews because you "have faith in Hitler's message." THERE'S NO GOOD REASON TO BELIEVE HITLER WAS RIGHT (and every reason to believe he was a sick minded person). The same is with religious faith...there's no good reason to believe the bible is right when it tells us to kill gays (and it does). It's blind, unjustified, and dangerous. You need a good reason to do things...not blind guesswork.
Last edited:
S
Shai Gar
Everyone calls Hitler sick. It's pathetic. Hitler had the same prejudices as 70% of the population of the day. He just had the power to act upon them without needing to worry about consequences. And the strategic brilliance to make effective, efficient disposal of an entire people more than just an idea but a reality. Sure race/religion based genocide is bad, but that doesn't mean GENOCIDE is bad (when a population reaches a certain level).
Also, I agree completely with the rest of it.
Also, I agree completely with the rest of it.
I would agree with pretty much everything you said except the last paragraph above. Spiritualistic faith in a monotheistic (or not) God isn't the same as blind faith in another human being. To me that is the same as religion, only you've elevated a person to the status of God. Hitler, Jim Jones, same difference, really. Absolute power corrupts absolutely, but if you have a personal relationship with a god of your understanding, your ethics and morals cannot be rationalized. You have something higher to answer to, regardless of what it is, for in creating the god of your understanding (rather than having it forced down your throat like in established religions), you have to put thought into it, and determine the mores and ethics you feel this god would want you to live by.
As for Hitler, he got away with what he did because most people had the same prejudice against Jews as he did. That doesn't, however, make him any less fucked up from a moral or ethical stand point. Truman was very anti-Semitic. Do you think he could have gotten away with it here? Or, conversely, do you think that he would have tried to, regardless of his personal feelings against the Jews? Just because a leader can, doesn't mean they will. There is something else missing, and that something is that Hitler believed it was his personal right and duty to cleanse the world of Judaism. In terms of narcissism and megalomania being mental illnesses, Hitler was, in fact, very much, one sick little bunny.
Question:
Where did your theistic ethical beliefs come from? As in...where did you learn them?
Your answer is either a book written by men, or a pastor/priest/parent/etc. You're putting your faith into a human being being right about God and being right about morality any way you look at it.
Like I said guys you better pack a lunch!! That's why I don't get into such conversations. They bore me. Everybody has an opinion and yet nobody can prove it.
Duty your my hero!
Duty your my hero!
Actually, no. I formed my own conclusions. That's what I'm trying to say. Everyone forms their own ethical beliefs, usually from parents and teachers, usually by age 7. Yet they can continue to develop and change them as they go. If you're smart, you'll question and analyze what works and what doesn't and adapt. As for religion or spirituality, I feel it's incredibly wrong just to blindly accept religion because your parents do it, or because your priest says it's this way or that way. I think it's much too personal and private a relationship to simply rely on the words of others. I guess what I'm saying, Duty, is that you don't have to dismiss them entirely, simply because someone else thought them up first, but rather, pick and choose based on what feels right for you, and then go further.
How did you form the conclusion "God exists?"
I formed the conclusion "I don't know if God exists, I have no way of knowing whether he exists or not, and so therefore even proposing it is meaningless" after years of study in philosophy. Such knowledge of the existence or non-existence of metaphysical entities like Gods and souls and whatnot is just beyond me and I would highly suspect it's beyond any human (if they have a mind even remotely structured like mine...I can't know that for sure either I understand, but the first hand reports of people seem to heavily suggest that their mind's basic structure is very similar to mine).
It just doesn't seem that God's existence can be proven by any intellectual or empirical method...and if you "feel" God then that "knowledge" is incapable of being communicated...making it effectively worthless for study or in any scientific investigation beyond the psychological effects.
Hence...Since God is something that can only be felt, and since the psychological effect of feelings on the body is something that can be measured. Would a coorelation of the health of ones personal spirituality and the health of ones body indicate the exsistance of the Divine?
Would it be possible to measure the health of ones spiritual life?
This is rhetorical people! I'm not deliberately kicking the hornets nest.....
This time at least!
No, only that such a belief has X effect.
Replace "God" with the famous Flying Spaghetti Monster. If belief in the FSM improved health, is that proof it exists? If belief in the Matrix being real improved health is that evidence that it exists?
In all these cases, no, it's not proof at all. It's only proof that such a belief has such an effect on the body, but not evidence of the belief's truth. Asserting that it is evidence of God's existence commits a non sequitur.
Objectively, I'd doubt it, as to define what is healthy you have to claim some things as unhealthy...and people are going to say religion is unhealthy because it causes delusional beliefs, and some are going to say non-religion is unhealthy because religious people tend to by physically healthier.
However, it may be possible.
Agreed. This is a clear evidence of our Ni/Fe dominance and one of the reasons NFs are referred to as 'idealists'. We believe what we believe and feel that we are right, whatever we believe, and cannot be talked into thinking differently.
Trying to talk an INFJ out of what they believe is futile.
...unless you believe in miracles. *wink*
The only way to change an NFJs beliefs is to get them to change how they feel. This can never be accomplished by disagreeing with them, as it will cause them to feel as if the new possibility is a threat against them personally, since our beliefs are so intrinsically tied to who we are. To change how someone feels always requires first agreeing with them to earn their trust, then proving competence in the area to be discussed to gain respect, then slowly communicating differences of opinion one at a time on an emotional level without appearing as a threat to their emotional being, allowing them the time to adjust their paradigm before moving on to the next point. Over time, the person's feelings will adjust how they think about the subject. However, this will never work in reverse for Feeling dominant personality types.
Honestly, I actually just act however I want and when it "just happens" to fit with the bible I get a nice feeling about myself. I never stop and think about the story of Jonah and the Whale or anything before I go do whatever. But I do believe in God and the Bible is what I was raised with and I have to start somewhere.
I AM.
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God;
Morals, huh?
God is love. Love your neighbor. Morals.
It is not so difficult to base my morals on the Bible; it is filled with wisdom, based on understanding. Best-selling book of all times still today.
Do I wish to argue about it with someone like me that will not change? Nope.
Back to back they faced each other....
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God;
Morals, huh?
God is love. Love your neighbor. Morals.
It is not so difficult to base my morals on the Bible; it is filled with wisdom, based on understanding. Best-selling book of all times still today.
Do I wish to argue about it with someone like me that will not change? Nope.
Back to back they faced each other....