What makes religion okay?

[lightgigantic]

Snakelord
“

To argue that because the worship of two scorpions is absurd, the worship of god is absurd, is not even a coherent argument
”
It's not clear how this is an answer to my question. Indeed it seems entirely irrelevant to it.

"Once again, what is it you think moral and social systems actually do to show that some claimed entity actually exists?"

maybe you could back track and see what three things (as opposed to two things) were indicated as enduring systems.
It could also indicate something that the worship of two scorpions lack in comparison to god

“
you don't think philosophy is a good tool to determine validity?
”
You will have to be more specific. Give me an example that determines validity.

I can easily indicate enduring social,moral and philosophical systems in regards to god.
When I take a cursory look at the belief of scorpion gods, perhaps I can scratch a few animistic examples, but otherwise, going from this thread, all I have to work with is a circle of sneering atheists offering rhetorical arguments.

“
meh
more rhetoric
”
You're wrong. Try answering the question, it would make a welcome change.

sorry
it's the nature of rhetorical questions that they don't warrant responses

 

[SnakeLord]

maybe you could back track and see what three things (as opposed to two things) were indicated as enduring systems.
It could also indicate something that the worship of two scorpions lack in comparison to god

Maybe you could back track to the question, work out what it is actually asking and then answer it relevantly.

I can easily indicate enduring social,moral and philosophical systems in regards to god.

Ok so... yet again: how do those systems actually show that some god entity exists?

it's the nature of rhetorical questions that they don't warrant responses

Indeed. My question wasn't rhetorical however. Waiting for the answer.

 

[Myles]

interesting question my friend!

To answer that we have to look at how factual claims are determined to be actually - well - factual!

Suppose I was making a particular claim in physics about electrons.
How would you determine the claims to be factual?

Nonsense, hogwash, rubbish. You are very close to trolling. Answer the question with what you regard as verifiable facts. We can ask questions if we do not understand your answer.

 

[Cris]

lg,

No religious belief has any basis in fact

is a statement of belief (of the absolute negative variety)

No. It is an undeniable statement of fact.

FACT - something that is actual.

FACT - no religion in the history of mankind has been able demonstrate that any of its claims are based on actuallity.

Are any of my statements falsifiable? Yes - it takes just one person to show that a religious claim is actual.

In science, "fact" can only mean "confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional assent." I suppose that apples might start to rise tomorrow, but the possibility does not merit equal time in physics classrooms. ~Stephen J. Gould

 

[visceral_instinct]

There are also obvious reasons why people worship god.

If you don't believe me just examine what enduring social, moral and philosophical systems they produce.

If you don't want to examine that, then you are simply offering an argument that has no requirement to examine obvious social, moral and philosophical reasoning (and as indicated it has somewhat hazardous implications)

Yup - there are obvious reasons why people worship God. That doesn't make God real.

As Snakelord keeps pointing out, it's not a question of those people's morals, it's a question of why it is more rational to believe in one hypothetical entity than another.

 

[Non-Logical-Idea-Guy]

I'm not the first person to ask this. But anyway.

If I believed that the world was ruled by 2 giant scorpions, was open about the fact that I believed in them and prayed to them, used expressions like 'Scorpion Gods only know...' etc. most people would at best take that as a joke, at worst ask me if I'd been taking some kind of narcotic.

But what makes my Scorpion Gods different from God, Allah, Yahweh or whoever?

Nothing more than the fact that many people believe in them, therefore it is considered normal.

Discuss?

i see where your coming from but there is a bit more to religions than just belief - there are genrally a few texts etc and various (supposed) eye witness accounts that have been recorded.

but i see where your coming from

 

[Revolvr]

I'm not the first person to ask this. But anyway.

If I believed that the world was ruled by 2 giant scorpions, was open about the fact that I believed in them and prayed to them, used expressions like 'Scorpion Gods only know...' etc. most people would at best take that as a joke, at worst ask me if I'd been taking some kind of narcotic.

But what makes my Scorpion Gods different from God, Allah, Yahweh or whoever?

Nothing more than the fact that many people believe in them, therefore it is considered normal.

Discuss?

There is a rather large book that contains thousands of years of writings detailing the development of Man's relationship with God. Giant scorpions don't have that.

There are eyewitness accounts of Jesus and the resurrection. People were murdered for what they saw and believed. Giant scorpions don't have that either.

 

[Cris]

Revolvr,

There is a rather large book that contains thousands of years of writings detailing the development of Man's relationship with God. Giant scorpions don't have that.

Almost correct. That book has lots of stories about an alleged god and not about GSs.

There are eyewitness accounts of Jesus and the resurrection.

Well unfortunately none of those stories can be verified.

People were murdered for what they saw and believed.

Makes for a great mythology that our poor GSs dont have.

 

[SnakeLord]

There is a rather large book that contains thousands of years of writings detailing the development of Man's relationship with God. Giant scorpions don't have that.

Purely out of interest, giant scorpion men appeared in the Epic of Gilgamesh which predates that bible of yours by over one and a half thousand years.

There are eyewitness accounts of Jesus and the resurrection

If you type in "abducted by aliens" in google you get around 1,070,000 hits. There are literally thousands, if not tens of thousands, of people that would claim they were abducted by aliens and anal probed. What is your point?

People were murdered for what they saw and believed.

People still are. There are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of soldiers that actually believe and are willing to die for things that many of us find completely worthless. It does not equate to the existence of gods.

 

[BlueMoose]

Purely out of interest, giant scorpion men appeared in the Epic of Gilgamesh which predates that bible of yours by over one and a half thousand years.

-This dates in the Age of Gemini ~ twins ~two (scorpion)

If you type in "abducted by aliens" in google you get around 1,070,000 hits. There are literally thousands, if not tens of thousands, of people that would claim they were abducted by aliens and anal probed. What is your point?

:roflmao:

People still are. There are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of soldiers that actually believe and are willing to die for things that many of us find completely worthless. It does not equate to the existence of gods.
-Sad but true.

 

[Medicine*Woman]

There is a rather large book that contains thousands of years of writings detailing the development of Man's relationship with God. Giant scorpions don't have that.

*************
M*W: Neither does that large book contain anything factual.

There are eyewitness accounts of Jesus and the resurrection. People were murdered for what they saw and believed. Giant scorpions don't have that either.

*************
M*W: Sorry, but no. That's all myth. No one actually saw anything. That was the lies that were told in the large book.

 

[C1ay]

There are eyewitness accounts of Jesus and the resurrection.

Not exactly. It would be more correct to say that there are hearsay writings of alleged eye witnesses of Jesus and the resurrection, none of which are credible evidence of anything.

 

[Revolvr]

Well unfortunately none of those stories can be verified.

Makes for a great mythology that our poor GSs dont have.

Indeed, believe me I understand you believe it is all mythology. If any of the New Testament were true, your faith would collapse like a sneeze on a house of cards.

So just what kind of verification do you need? What is enough? Does everything you believe need to be verified? Are you sure your mother is your mother? Have you verified it?

And while you are thinking of what verification would be sufficient, let me ask you: what does the following paragraph describe? Something rather terrible is happening to someone. Can you tell me what it is?

My strength drains away like water; all my bones are dislocated; my heart is like wax; it melts away inside me. The roof of my mouth is as dry as a piece of pottery; my tongue sticks to my gums. You set me in the dust of death. Yes, wild dogs surround me — a gang of evil men crowd around me; like a lion they pin my hands and feet. I can count all my bones; my enemies are gloating over me in triumph. They are dividing up my clothes among themselves; they are rolling dice for my garments.

 

[lightgigantic]

lg,

No. It is an undeniable statement of fact.

FACT - something that is actual.

have you actually examined all religions and verified that they don't have any facts - or do you believe that they don't and have never really bothered?

FACT - no religion in the history of mankind has been able demonstrate that any of its claims are based on actuallity.

once again, cite your references or back down from making absolute negative claims

Are any of my statements falsifiable? Yes - it takes just one person to show that a religious claim is actual.

Why is it that your statement is exempt from this standard of fact?
If you cannot show any reference that all religions from all periods of history were not based on fact, what does that make you?
This is called critical reflexivity
This is symptomatic of absolute negative statements

In science, "fact" can only mean "confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional assent." I suppose that apples might start to rise tomorrow, but the possibility does not merit equal time in physics classrooms. ~Stephen J. Gould

Did you notice how his statement is not a negative absolute?

 

[lightgigantic]

Maybe you could back track to the question, work out what it is actually asking and then answer it relevantly.



Ok so... yet again: how do those systems actually show that some god entity exists?

has the question officially drifted off why the worship of god is not on par with the worship of two scorpions?

Indeed. My question wasn't rhetorical however. Waiting for the answer.

if you are an atheist pretending to believe in a leprechaun on the strength of the book of lenny, it certainly is rhetorical

 

[TW Scott]

lg,

No. It is an undeniable statement of fact.

FACT - something that is actual.

FACT - no religion in the history of mankind has been able demonstrate that any of its claims are based on actuallity.

Are any of my statements falsifiable? Yes - it takes just one person to show that a religious claim is actual.

In science, "fact" can only mean "confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional assent." I suppose that apples might start to rise tomorrow, but the possibility does not merit equal time in physics classrooms. ~Stephen J. Gould

Religious Claim: There was a King David and King Solomon.
Reality: There was a King David and King Solomon.

Religious Claim: That a man laying with a women begets a child.
Reality: Men and Women having sex does make babies.

There is two claims right there. Sure they aren;t the big beliefs in any religion, but you did not stipulate that they major beliefs, just beliefs. So shut up already.

 

[lightgigantic]

Yup - there are obvious reasons why people worship God. That doesn't make God real.

As Snakelord keeps pointing out, it's not a question of those people's morals, it's a question of why it is more rational to believe in one hypothetical entity than another.

As far as I am aware, I never used the words "morals" by themselves

What I did say was "enduring social, moral and philosophical systems"

if a culture (say a culture of devotion to god) can produce valuable things (like the enduring things mentioned above) and if a culture (say a culture of devotion to two scorpions) can not produce a single thing, I would hesitate to say that the value behind them is ultimately the same and any differences is simply a numbers game.
If you don't believe me, just try and indicate something like the worship of two scorpions (or lenny the leprechaun if you pelase) that has produced anything enduring (the only thing I see with lenny is activity books for kids on st patricks day)

 

[USS Exeter]

i see where your coming from but there is a bit more to religions than just belief - there are genrally a few texts etc and various (supposed) eye witness accounts that have been recorded.

but i see where your coming from

Mohammed, Jesus, and Sidharda (Buddha) did exist in reality, but has the "god" been proven?

 

[lightgigantic]

Mohammed, Jesus, and Sidharda (Buddha) did exist in reality, but has the "god" been proven?

if a person is outside of the practice of their instructions (or if their instructions have been corrupted or commonly habituated to be followed badly), you wouldn't expect it to be proven to such persons anymore than someone outside of the proper practice of physics can have an electron proved to them

 

[Myles]

Can you write that in English and I'll respond ? Hint: you can remove half the words.