In which context? I often use "faith" and "religion", interchangeably, as do many people, theists and others. "Faith" sometimes connotes a more personal and accordingly informal perspective than "religion", and is accordingly sometimes seen as broader than "religion", but the distinction is something which is made or isn't made in a given context, and the distinction doesn't matter when it's out of context or we're speaking broadly.
Is Scientology a faith to whom? I can imagine that there might be at least some there who are just in it to benefit from the company or revenue, etc., and have no faith in it as a faith, and the very same can be said of most religions. I can imagine there are some Christian priests for whom the faith is really gone and it has become a job more than anything else. Similarly for those who go to church just for the social benefits.
At the same time, I have no doubt that there are some in Scientology and Christianity alike for whom it is a real living faith from their own perspective. Scientology also likely borrowed from other religions, so is likely to have elements which are as compelling as are the other religions, to some.
Wikipedia's entry on "bigot" is amusing and illustrative in context. The word apparently has a rich and varied history, and at one time connoted religious hypocrisy. So it has had multiple meanings, and also ties to the question "what is or isn't faith?". At present, I think that many people don't make any distinction between "bigot" and "racist", and this is to be expected, by large, as the two notions coincide in many cases. Moreover, there is in many instances not much of a difference in the mind of the speaker between "bigot" and "racist", as the bigotry is itself objected to, and although the term "racist" might not apply, it is used to mean "bigot", because "bigot" is not well understood.
I'll grant that the distinction might matter more to you, and that you have the right to make that distinction in the ideas you discuss, but the distinction doesn't hold the same importance to some others.
Interpreting "religion" or "faith" is not hard, and these are terms which are generally used loosely and broadly. The question of "what is faith" goes far beyond the meaning of the word in use by many to something which ultimately becomes entirely personal, the experience of which is meaningful as an experience, not as a word, however used by others. That word then has meaning only as far as the specific case goes, and the broader term can have no more general import than as a broad term with multiple interpretations.
Religion is how I conquer your civs without going to war.
* Taoism has spread to Happypuppyville *
* Taoism has spread to Happypuppyville *
Originally posted by: HappyPuppy
May I call for a lock on this thread? In my innocence I thought that just maybe we could have an an intelligent disussion, but I was wrong. I am up for it if others want it to continue, but otherwise just lock it down.
yep
Sea Moose
Diamond Member
- May 12, 2009
- 6,933
- 7
- 76
Religion started out as a means to explain the unexplainable. For example, early humans worshiped the sun, and gave it an entire back story. At some point the leaders worked out that they could use religion as a means to controlling the rest of the village. for example, all the villagers has to make a "sacrifice" keep the sun god happy. From here the "god" has evolved to Ra the sun god and many other versions. Edit: The yellow ring you see around pics of jeebus represents the sun, i believe.
No matter where you look in history, religion is about Control and Power. Back in the early days the village chief used religion to control. Today the pope uses religion to control.
This is why science and religion clash. Science is about understanding and learning. Religion is about CONTROL AND POWER. When people learn that the Sun god is not the center of the universe and that it is just a big hot ball of gas and bits, they start sayings, why should i give sacrifice. This undermines control and power.
Science has given man the ability to perform Heart transplants. (An american army doctor did this during or after WW2 i think)
Science has given us the light globe.
Science put a man on the moon.
Religion is still about Control and Power. Look at the worlds problems today or watch the evening news. The whole middle east problem is a squabble over religion. The day humans leave this ancient shackle behind, we can get on with solving the worlds problems, that religion failed to solve. (Heal the sick, feed the hungry ie Africa)
No matter where you look in history, religion is about Control and Power. Back in the early days the village chief used religion to control. Today the pope uses religion to control.
This is why science and religion clash. Science is about understanding and learning. Religion is about CONTROL AND POWER. When people learn that the Sun god is not the center of the universe and that it is just a big hot ball of gas and bits, they start sayings, why should i give sacrifice. This undermines control and power.
Science has given man the ability to perform Heart transplants. (An american army doctor did this during or after WW2 i think)
Science has given us the light globe.
Science put a man on the moon.
Religion is still about Control and Power. Look at the worlds problems today or watch the evening news. The whole middle east problem is a squabble over religion. The day humans leave this ancient shackle behind, we can get on with solving the worlds problems, that religion failed to solve. (Heal the sick, feed the hungry ie Africa)
Religion and science both are about discovering truth, but in different spheres of reality.
Science pertains to physical observation of the universe, religion is concerning morality and faith in what brought the physical universe into being.
It isn't "Science is good, Religion is bad", both are potentially good or bad depending on how they are used and whether or not the specific science or religion is based solidly on truth. You say science (or technology, the application of science) gave use the ability to perform Heart transplants, but it also gave us nuclear weapons, guns, biological and chemical weapons...need I go on?
Anyone who doesn't think that science, technology, religion, politics, and any form of knowledge can all be abused and interpreted for evil is fooling himself or herself. You don't honestly think it is just religion that is used to manipulate and control? True religion isn't for that purpose, but then again neither is any other pure form of knowledge. All knowledge (and false knowledge) can be a double edged sword.
No, true religion is about discovering the truth. The truth about existence, about purpose, about human nature. Science is very useful, but it cannot delve into the human mind (the brain, yes, but mind =/= brain), nor philosophies of life.
You are right that some religions and teachings are about making stuff up, but that applies to science, as well. You think that every single thing ever taught in science over the millenia has been true? You don't even have to look that far back to see how many bogus and disproven theories have come and gone.
Sea Moose
Diamond Member
- May 12, 2009
- 6,933
- 7
- 76
Science doesnt burn women at the stake, nor does it imprison people for not conforming (galileo)
Scientists are always questioning conventional knowledge, this is how text books are re written. I think an electrical text book would have changed every ten years.
How often does the bible change? This is how cults crop up, they want to get in on the exploitation.
You can't lump all religions together anymore than you can lump all individuals together.
Religion isn't guilty of burning people at the stake, people are. That kind of logic is like saying science enabled Hitler to systematically kill Jews by way of gas chambers and guns. Religion in general does not compel people to commit atrocities any more than science does. They both might enable people, when used as tools by evil individuals and organizations, but neither science nor religion are by themselves evil. It takes willful misinterpretation, and that speaks of the evil of man, not religion or science.
Saying science changes doesn't mean it is automatically better or good. In fact, that means what you learn today may not be true. That's the inherent nature of science, and I see no problem with that so long as it is applied to physical discoveries that are both observable and testable. The Bible deals with human nature more than anything else, and that doesn't change. Read accounts of individuals like David, or Moses, or Peter, and you see that humanity remains unchanged. The surroundings change, but humans don't.
I'm not a science hater: I love science, when it is correctly done and not misused by people. I feel the same way about religion. As long as you accept and practice what is true, there is no reason to decry either.
What's the point about talking about 'true religion' when it's never actually existed (in a widely spread form).
To me it's like communism vs democracy.
Communism sounds awesome in principle, but it's application usually ends up sucking.
Democracy works towards the same end as communism (power to the people), and it's application isn't always awesome, but it's pretty good.
Religion sounds awesome in principle, but it's application usually ends up sucking.
Science works towards the same end as religion (discovery of the world around us), and it's application isn't always awesome, but it's pretty good.
Another parallel to be found is the structure. Applying both Religion and Communism require a structure in which the bottom wholly trusts the top, and it is ultimately where it's downfall is found, as few people can be truly trusted with that much power. Democracy/Science encourage people to rethink/rediscover, but their major weakness is the ability of money to shift things away from what would be society's ideal.
Sea Moose
Diamond Member
- May 12, 2009
- 6,933
- 7
- 76
This, Religion is an ancient burden. Communism has been controlled, perhaps the same same should be applied to religion.
I mean, look at stem cell research. It has the ability to cure cancer. It is being held back by the scared old men in religion. A guy posted in another thread that his sister has cerebral palsy. What if stem cell research could cure her? Why are they fucking holding this research back! <-- Religion is reinforcing itself; control and power. We don't want you to research stem cell cures, so many must die.... Ring a bell? We think that women could be a witch lets burn all women.
Communism = control and power + scared old men
Religion = control and power + scared old men
Mr. Lennon
Diamond Member
- Jul 2, 2004
- 3,492
- 1
- 81
Look at that boy with cancer that fled from the police with his mother because they didn't want to take the chemotherapy due to religious reasons. People are always going to be stupid...religion just helps people justify their stupidity.
hanoverphist
Diamond Member
- Dec 7, 2006
- 9,867
- 23
- 76
its also the light in the fog
religion as a word can also mean the act of doing something on a schedule. I read an old dictionary while in college and came across a few words that have morphed into new meanings. if you do something religiously, you arent doing it with god. youre doing it without question over and over. i religiously brush my teeth. we back up our servers religiously.
when you change the meaning of the word to only relate to "supernatural" or a system of beliefs you cheapen the word.
Hayabusa Rider
Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
- Jan 26, 2000
- 50,879
- 4,268
- 126
And you thoughts = straw men
Have you considered that there are a lot of people who would like stem cell research that do have religious beliefs?
Ok,
High Crime = Inner cities + lazy black men.
You would be fine with that?
I wouldn't.
But again, I don't have to make them into strawmen to climb aboard the bus.
Stop lumping people into groups like this or give up any hypocrisy regarding how you find it offensive when people do it to others.
As far as controlling religion, Mao and Stalin tried that. Some no doubt are sorry they didn't try harder.
zerocool84
Lifer
- Nov 11, 2004
- 36,041
- 472
- 126
JM Aggie08
Diamond Member
- Jan 3, 2006
- 8,423
- 1,009
- 136
This is insanity, really. What evidence have you given that shows the mind is something more than simple brain activity? Or better yet, if you want to get into the philosophical bullshit of the argument, what makes us humans and our minds something more, while ants and rats are not?
Have you ever heard the phrase "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence"?
Ideas are fine, but that's not what religion is built on. It's built on bullshit fairytales, stories and fear, and then used to control people. When ideas become backed up by evidence and then form theories, they are then in the realm of science and cannot be easily abused, and will change based on new evidence and discoveries. ANY time an idea that perhaps was even once ridiculed gains traction through findings and evidence, it is then scientific to investigate said idea. Science can and will, given time, give you the answers you seek. Religion will not, faith will not, belief will not, and philosophy will not.
*disgust*
There is no truth in religion, only "Truth" with a capital "T", which is an illegitimate word. There is only facts and fiction, we just need to figure out the facts and stop having faith in fiction.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter