Where shoud religious beliefs be based on if not the Bible...
I have ohter threads up right now where religious beliefs are discussed form many sides. Some have tried to derail those threads by posting arguments that the discussion is irrelevant becasue they are based on the Bible. A book that they claim is innacurate and unsupportable. So, in order to keep the other thread on topic and to give said people a place to vent about it, where should a persons religious beliefs come from? The bible according to you is off the table (I disagree and will explain why if I get any good responses here), so where should they come from. I am interested to see what kind of answers I get here, if any at all.
Comments
I'll go off on my own tangent. The Bible is a work of man. I am a Congregationalist and go to church almost every week, and have spent a good deal (probably too much) time reading the Bible for Confirmation class and for supporting arguments in my English essays. Even though I go through the motions of praying to my Lord Jesus and asking God for help whenever I need it, I don't believe that I will be answered or helped. Heard? Certainly. No point in honoring your ancestor's graves or bowing your head to the cross if no one is listening.
I believe that God made the universe about 15 billion years ago and let it run its own way.
I believe that most of the Bible, in a historical sense, is a crock. As a source of ways to behave, it's very nice. People need rules (even though many rules in the different chapters of the Book fly in eachother's faces).
I believe that there was a Jewish man from Nazareth who went around asking people to be nice to eachother, and promising eternal life to those who followed his rules. He was beaten, crucified, and buried alive, then nursed back to health by his followers, who managed to keep him alive long enough for him to convince them that he had died and come back.
Prophets are a dime a dozen. Most prophets today are locked away in happy places with white walls and backward jackets.
People who believe will point to the Bible (or the "book" of their religion) as their ultimate authority. As they should.
People who do not believe see the Bible as simply another text among the billions of other texts written over the centuries.
It's almost as if a lawyer from the US and a lawyer from Japan were to argue about property law as applied to a land claimed by no one. Antarctica, for example. Both would argue their case from their own paradigms, and from within their own paradigms, each would be correct and the other would be wrong.
I know that doesn't answer your question, but in issues like this, I think the only thing that can be done is to agree to disagree.
Still, it does make for some lively discussions, don't you think?
and
[quote]I believe that there was a Jewish man from Nazareth who went around asking people to be nice to eachother, and promising eternal life to those who followed his rules.<hr></blockquote>
There was so such place called "Nazareth" in the time that Jesus was alive. This is probably a mis-translation for "Nazarene" or "Nazerite", i.e. a member of that tribe. Even though there has been a settlement at the site where Nazareth exists since about 700 BCE, it wasn't called Nazareth until about 200 CE
[ 04-30-2002: Message edited by: Samantha Joanne Ollendale ]</p>
Furthermore, we should just go ahead and nuke Israel from orbit, and let whoever thinks it is still "holy" move back in if they so desire.
Yeah, I'm just a little fed up with it all. I'm an agnostic, not an atheist though. There's not a huge difference, but there is enough
Perhaps a new religion should be made. Based on the scripture codes, but written in plain English, no bullshit and without the 'you will go to hell' bollocks. Just explain in simple English what the consequences of bad actions are in terms of your life on earth. And explain why, even if there are no govn. imposed consequences, that there are still major consequences concerning your relationships with the rest of humanity/ your loved ones and friends.
Could humanity accept this. Hell no. Myself and others could, but then we/us are relatively intelligent, comfortable and not fighting for our survival every second of the day. To us, we can see the real reason of existance, and know and accept the new message as the next step of pushing humanity to the next level. (Not trying to sound superior to anyone). But if you have *issues* in your community, ie are struggling for existance, poor, uneducated etc all at once, taking away the scripture may be a bad thing, as the overriding desires then would be to look after number one at all costs, without the fear of going to hell (which is needed to force behaviour in a simple language they understand) which would be extremely detrimental to the community you lived in.
Just my thoughts
Why quote the bible? It's not a reliable source.
Why is the bible holy?
It's god's words.
How do we know it's god's words?
It's in the bible.
But why is the bible holy?
It's god's words.
But how do we know it's god's words?
It's in the bible.
Sorry, it's a circular argument. It doesn't work. It would be analogous to completly making up a research paper and the only thing in your works cited list is that very research paper. It doesn't work.
Look, I'm all for morality. It's a good thing. I live by the golden rule. That's all I need. What I don't need is a bunch of insecure weak-minded people telling me what I need to do in my life. The problem with religious people is that they have a holier than thou attitude. It's not enough that they are happy with the way they live. No, they have to try to force it on everyone else, regardless if those innocent people wish to be violated in such a manner. Religion served it's purpose. It gave control over the ignorant masses to a central power. There have been some beneficial side effects, however, religion by definition breeds intolerance. In order to truly believe in one religion, one must believe that all others are false. That "I'm right, you're wrong, even though I don't have any real proof I just quote from my sacred text because your sacred text can't be the real sacred text because my text is the real sacred text" attitude sickens me. It's the most intolerant, bigoted crap on the planet. Enough already. Live by the golden rule and take the rest of the crap and shove it.
[ 05-01-2002: Message edited by: Robertp ]</p>
Question: Where should religious ideas be based if not the bible?
Answer: On the fear that first spawned them.
<strong>I'm not exactly sure what the question is.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Many people (like Exercise In Frivolity for one stark example) think that the Bible is nothing more than a collection of stories and not worth basing any set of beliefs, religious or otherwise and should not be taken seriously in that way. So I put forth the question, if not the Bible, then what? What book? What systems? What thoughts? What person? Or do you just make it up as you go along? Does that explain the question better?
[quote]<strong>I'll go off on my own tangent. The Bible is a work of man. I am a Congregationalist <what is a Congregationlaist? THat is a new term on me.> and go to church almost every week, and have spent a good deal (probably too much) time reading the Bible for Confirmation class and for supporting arguments in my English essays.</strong><hr></blockquote>
So are you a Catholic? Your next point leads me to beleive this.
[quote]<strong>Even though I go through the motions of praying to my Lord Jesus and asking God for help whenever I need it, I don't believe that I will be answered or helped. Heard? Certainly. No point in honoring your ancestor's graves or bowing your head to the cross if no one is listening.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I am glad that you at least believe you will be heard. I read an interesting site on this subject that you might or might not agree with. <a href="http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Metro/1352/Identity.htm"; target="_blank">About God and how we view him.</a>
[quote]<strong>I believe that God made the universe about 15 billion years ago and let it run its own way.
I believe that most of the Bible, in a historical sense, is a crock. As a source of ways to behave, it's very nice. People need rules (even though many rules in the different chapters of the Book fly in eachother's faces).</strong><hr></blockquote>
I have no idea how old the earth is, and truthfully it does not matter all that much to me. I do beleive that God has pretty much allowed people to have free choice in how they wanted to live their lives, and has left the bible as His Word to us to know where he intended us to be.
How much of it is a crock? Did Jesus die on the cross for you and I? Did he rise again on the third day? Or is that all a crock along withthe rest of it? And if it is not a crock, why would any of the rest of it be so?
And lastly, which rules fly in the face of other rules in the bible?
[quote]<strong>I believe that there was a Jewish man from Nazareth who went around asking people to be nice to eachother, and promising eternal life to those who followed his rules. He was beaten, crucified, and buried alive, then nursed back to health by his followers, who managed to keep him alive long enough for him to convince them that he had died and come back.
Prophets are a dime a dozen. Most prophets today are locked away in happy places with white walls and backward jackets.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Ok, forget my previous question about Jesus. You do not beleive he died, you believe he faked his death. How would one make a roman, who crucified people all the time, believe you are dead when you are not? You don't think they would have checked this? And without Jesus death on the cross do you also not believe in forgiveness of sins, since there was no perfect sacrifice there can be no atonement, right?
<strong>C'mon everyone knows the only true text is Dianetics by L. Ron Hubbard.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I am hoping that this was intended to be written with one of the following smileys.
<strong>The Wall Street Journal is today's revered text, where the current religion is jungle-law corporate totalitarianism and the god is Mammon.</strong><hr></blockquote>
So then business and money [mammon] is where religion should come from? Or are you just stating that is what is and not actually answering the question with what you beleive?
<strong>I say we just outlaw religion alltogether. Mankind has had thousands of years to play with it, and if they can't play nice, I say they don't get to have it anymore.</strong><hr></blockquote>
So no religion. No holy texts. Where does your morality come from then? After all, teh ten commandments are not there anymore so all the thou shalt not's are gone. Where do you start? Who decides what is right and wrong? What is to say that they aare not basing it off of a religious belief and that they should be listened to? That would be illegal right? You cannot simply remove it. It is too deeply ingrained.
[quote]<strong>Furthermore, we should just go ahead and nuke Israel from orbit, and let whoever thinks it is still "holy" move back in if they so desire.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Next.
[quote]<strong>Yeah, I'm just a little fed up with it all. I'm an agnostic, not an atheist though. There's not a huge difference, but there is enough
So there is a God, or not... So there should be a religion, or not... <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
<strong>Personally I think that humanity no longer has a need for religious belief based on any text. <snip></strong><hr></blockquote>
Ok, so question answered.
[quote]<strong>Perhaps a new religion should be made. Based on the scripture codes, but written in plain English, no bullshit and without the 'you will go to hell' bollocks. Just explain in simple English what the consequences of bad actions are in terms of your life on earth. And explain why, even if there are no govn. imposed consequences, that there are still major consequences concerning your relationships with the rest of humanity/ your loved ones and friends.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Its called the law. If you break the law you will go to jail, get the chair, hang from the gallows, be lethally injected, etc... However if you just try to put it in terms of, if you do that it will hurt the other emotionally you will have very limited results without any real accountability.
[quote]<strong>Could humanity accept this. Hell no. Myself and others could, but then we/us are relatively intelligent, comfortable and not fighting for our survival every second of the day. To us, we can see the real reason of existance, and know and accept the new message as the next step of pushing humanity to the next level. (Not trying to sound superior to anyone). But if you have *issues* in your community, ie are struggling for existance, poor, uneducated etc all at once, taking away the scripture may be a bad thing, as the overriding desires then would be to look after number one at all costs, without the fear of going to hell (which is needed to force behaviour in a simple language they understand) which would be extremely detrimental to the community you lived in.
Just my thoughts</strong><hr></blockquote>
So you are sufficiently enlightened that you are beyond the need for religion and laws. Without either you would still be a good person and if more were just like you there would be much fewer problems in the world today. Did I sum that up right?
<strong><cut out cross post>
Look, I'm all for morality. It's a good thing. I live by the golden rule. That's all I need. What I don't need is a bunch of insecure weak-minded people telling me what I need to do in my life. The problem with religious people is that they have a holier than thou attitude. It's not enough that they are happy with the way they live. No, they have to try to force it on everyone else, regardless if those innocent people wish to be violated in such a manner. Religion served it's purpose. It gave control over the ignorant masses to a central power. There have been some beneficial side effects, however, religion by definition breeds intolerance. In order to truly believe in one religion, one must believe that all others are false. That "I'm right, you're wrong, even though I don't have any real proof I just quote from my sacred text because your sacred text can't be the real sacred text because my text is the real sacred text" attitude sickens me. It's the most intolerant, bigoted crap on the planet. Enough already. Live by the golden rule and take the rest of the crap and shove it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
A bit judgmental there. Lets pick out the finer points. People who follow the scriptures are:
- a bunch of insecure weak-minded people
- they have a holier than thou attitude
- they have to try to force it on everyone else, regardless if those innocent people wish to be violated in such a manner
- religion by definition breeds intolerance
- It's the most intolerant, bigoted crap on the planet
Do you stay up a night thinking up this stuff? Once more, I am the intolerant one and you are not? <img src="confused.gif" border="0"><strong>So no religion. No holy texts. Where does your morality come from then? After all, teh ten commandments are not there anymore so all the thou shalt not's are gone. Where do you start? Who decides what is right and wrong? What is to say that they aare not basing it off of a religious belief and that they should be listened to? That would be illegal right? You cannot simply remove it. It is too deeply ingrained.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I really ought not to get involved in these religious debates. I had to leave the last one (Some might say due to an act of the gods), and I don't really have the time to devote to another, but I'd like to raise just one question relating to the above:
What evidence do we have that many people didn't live to a (currently) acceptable standard of morality before the creation of the ten commandments, the bible, or any other religious text for that matter?
perhaps you should change your sig to, "Misery. Looking for company."
stating that is what is and not actually answering the question with what you beleive?<hr></blockquote>
It is not where it *should* come from, no. But unfortunately it is. The (understated) aim of organized religion is to make money while manipulating and standardizing thought patterns, outlooks and perceptions under the pretext of moral, spiritual, civil and humanitarian causes. I am not saying there is anything wrong with that: I just wish that religious leaders would come clean about it instead of trying to pull the wool.
Regarding capitalism and the worship of material accumulation, which is America's prime religion now: at least the prime movers of that faith are more honest in not making such bogus claims.
The purest and most honest 'religion' is uncompromised private communication between a human and the universal consciousness; that requires no books written by humans. A biblical scholarship, memorizing all the scriptures or a degree in theology will not necessarily help a human in his/her spiritual quest, but may offer some pointers.
Unfortunately, since private and individual spirituality isn't going to make big bucks, it will never catch on.
Let the record show that most religions aren't based around the thought that if you do bad you're going to hell. That may be a factor for some religions, but it's hardly the main focus.