Religion....
- Thread starter OllieNotts
- Start date
The path that leads to a dirty watering hole, disease and malnutrition is the one that needs the help of religion. While it has its endemic faults Catholic and Christian aid agencies have done a lot of work in educating and helping people to raise crops and be self reliant.
The Jesuit and Catholic Missions did a lot of good work to help humanity.
Phil_Dicko
Active Member
I'm not saying we should all be forced to chose a moral system and follow it. As you mention, the more intelligent, well-read of us are capable of finding our own path, explain things in our own way.
I'm saying that some people need that moral/doctrinal instruction from somewhere. It provides ready made answers to questions we all struggle with.
In the end, I like to separate the morality from the doctrine. If Jesus existed, and he probably did, he was a philosopher of the highest order. Of all the moral systems that exist (utilitarianism, Kantism etc.) the moral premise of 'do onto others how you would wish them to do onto you' is very difficult to pick holes in. It envokes empathy, sympathy, appreciation for suffering etc. Again, I'm not saying, intelligent people need this moral premise in order to live, I'm just saying that, as an agnostic and "former" Catholic, it's a moral system I have a great deal of respect for.
The doctrine that flows out from Christianity, (i.e. that the God of the Old Testament exists, that Jesus was son of that God, died for our redemption, eternal life etc.) is all the rubbish created by successive attempts firstly, to tell Jesus' story and secondly, to fill in the blanks to make it something you can institutionalise. When you read Jesus' story he does not strike me as the kind of guy who was trying to institutionalise anything. And it is interesting how in any walk of life an attempt to translate abstract beliefs into something with power structures, hierarchies and rituals breakes down into something fundamentally more dysfunctional, particularly over time.
Johnny Vodka
Well-Known Member
It's a great falsehood that people require religion to be moral. Surely morality springs from co-operation, a trait that aids survival? Anyway, if you don't believe in a God, it follows that all morality is man-made anyway.
Phil_Dicko
Active Member
It's a great falsehood that people require religion to be moral. Surely morality springs from co-operation, a trait that aids survival? Anyway, if you don't believe in a God, it follows that all morality is man-made anyway.
You'd be surprised, believe me. Napoleon was a leader in a God-less, anti-religious revolutionary movement yet when he became Emperor he reinstated the Church. Why? For control. Not necessarily proof that people need religion to be moral per se. Just an indicator that it can help rein people in where other society structures struggle. Or at least, it has in the past.
I think you're right, to an extent. Morality is to a large degree ingrained in our psyche from an evolutionary perspective. We need to get on, to survive. Co-operation, as you say. It's social intelligence. But not everyone is moral, and in some cases, religion helps fill a void where that element of the psyche is lacking a bit.
But, as I say, that doesn't change the fact that if you are purely analysing moral systems and comparing them against each other, religious ones and secular philosophical ones (and yes, they are all man-made), Christianity is strong. The dogma attached by the Church... utter nonsense.
The irony of Jesus is that at the time, he was a hippy yogi communist type (AND didn't have a female partner but 12 male followers so was obviously a raving homo).
Little wonder he was crucified as the same would happen in this day and age.
I agree with the above - except the part about moral instruction for the 'less intelligent' among us. Those people don't need a book rammed down their throat. What they need is community - something that dogma detracts from by its very nature.
It's a great falsehood that people require religion to be moral. Surely morality springs from co-operation, a trait that aids survival? Anyway, if you don't believe in a God, it follows that all morality is man-made anyway.
^^ yep.
Let it be said, I have NO respect for anything that stupid religion propagates.
Phil_Dicko
Active Member
I would just say to them, keeping treating others how you would wish to be treated yourself. Throw your Bible in the bin and stop going to church.
Johnny Vodka
Well-Known Member
I prefer the Buddhist idea of there being no black & white rule book when it comes to morality, but having to think through the consequences of your actions and how they fit with the whole.
Did you not read the Da Vinci Code
Tom Hanks said he had a torrid relationship with Mary Magdalene who bore him a child whose royal bloodline is entombed in ParisPlus Fishermen dont rank highly in the most popular gay jobs category
One of lifes most basic and simplistic rules........
I would just say to them, keeping treating others how you would wish to be treated yourself. Throw your Bible in the bin and stop going to church.
All just words though...admittedly delivered with good intention but it's still plain old dogma.
People need to be held in a space where they can work through their own stuff, not be told how to live or think.
What if the person in question had a $htty childhood and doesn't particularly want to treat people well?
No two people are the same and there's no one size fits all solution - how can we ever proclaim to know what another person needs?
The best gift you can give someone is your full attention.
Life is beautifully complicated and humility is what's needed.
kimajy
Well-Known Member
How very well put 8) !
Great replies
I'm not a fan of religion or doctrines
I am a fan of Love and Kindness; love everflowing, pure love from within
So be loving and kind to oneself and that will overflow out to others
Love is the only reality in which we may know the divinity within us and this universe we inhabit
love is the only reality in which we have a direct experience of oneness & when we have that it's possible to truly be with ourselves, be authentic and bring all the shadows of duality to light, to oneness
The Vigyan Bhairav Tantra Text ; 112 techniques for meditation/life are magnificent for getting loved up with oneself and life
I'm not a fan of religion or doctrines
I am a fan of Love and Kindness; love everflowing, pure love from within
So be loving and kind to oneself and that will overflow out to others
Love is the only reality in which we may know the divinity within us and this universe we inhabit
love is the only reality in which we have a direct experience of oneness & when we have that it's possible to truly be with ourselves, be authentic and bring all the shadows of duality to light, to oneness
The Vigyan Bhairav Tantra Text ; 112 techniques for meditation/life are magnificent for getting loved up with oneself and life
matt collins
Active Member
IF there is a higher power it certainly has nothing to do with any of these organised religions - of that I'm certain.
Now they are no longer relevant maybe its time to come up with some new ideals... Let's keep the good stuff like love your neighbour, do unto others etc but drop all the dogma
Now they are no longer relevant maybe its time to come up with some new ideals... Let's keep the good stuff like love your neighbour, do unto others etc but drop all the dogma
Phil_Dicko
Active Member
I don't disagree with any of that.
My point is merely that, as moral systems go, Christianity's main moral premise, is a very strong one and stands up pretty well against all the other secular theories devised before and since. And my point to Christains and, in particular Catholics, is that if you want to keep any part of your religion, the actual moral teachings of Jesus Christ are the bits to keep. It ain't a bad or sinister way to live if you cut it away from all the other crap.
But as you say, even that isn't a solution for absolutely everyone. It's not a one size fits all world. And if you wish to dismiss all moral theorising on that basis then fine. That's a different philosophical point.
Pedantic I know but I say drop the lot.
Including enforced loving of neighbours.Some people need to be held in anger to work through their stuff. I say that's fine too.
matt collins
Active Member
Pedantic I know but I say drop the lot.
Some people need to be held in anger to work through their stuff. I say that's fine too.
Nothing enforced about it in the new 'religion' just an ideal to strive towards. If you need anger then fair enough as long as it doesn't cause harm to others.
(I'm going quite zen in my latter years)
It's a great falsehood that people require religion to be moral. Surely morality springs from co-operation, a trait that aids survival? Anyway, if you don't believe in a God, it follows that all morality is man-made anyway.
Ex-f u c k ing - actly! The human race had been living in relative harmony for thousands of years before religion reared its ugly head.
Do people seriously not believe that murder and theft were not immoral and punishable acts at the dawn of mankind?!
It's illogical to suggest humankind were anarchaic until religion showed up. Being kind to the fellow man, scratch-your-back-if-you-scratch-mine if you will, is simply part of our EVOLUTION!!!
as a species. Homosapiens and Neanderthals before us lived in perfectly moral, if not advanced societies, LONG, LONG before there are even any mentionings of Christ, Mohammed & Co.