[ARCHIVED DEBATE] A Civilized Debate on Religion

[Hakio]

Why does god need to talk through prophets? Why can't he talk to us directly? That would be demonstrable proof of god's existance.

Because he is unknowable. Are we as a species, ready to know god? Perhaps we need to evolve.

If he is unknowable how can we can we assert any knowledge about him/her/it? I.e. religion

[Benuty]

It has an agenda of profiting off all sides of the spectrum.

No, it simply recommends videos to people with similar qualities to other videos and searches they've made.

Doesn't hold up when your corporation owns the sites and whatnot.

[Personal Freedom]

Because he is unknowable. Are we as a species, ready to know god? Perhaps we need to evolve.

If he is unknowable how can we can we assert any knowledge about him/her/it? I.e. religion

Where do morals come from? Where does religion come from? Why do people believe in religion? I'm not saying he is necessarily real, or supernatural, but he exists in the minds and hearts of humanity.

[Hakio]

If he is unknowable how can we can we assert any knowledge about him/her/it? I.e. religion

Where do morals come from? Where does religion come from? Why do people believe in religion? I'm not saying he is necessarily real, or supernatural, but he exists in the minds and hearts of humanity.

Morals come from empathy and institutions of social standards.
Religion is hierarchal social institution to marginalize rhe population into similar beliefs.
People believe in religion because the hierarchal social institutions support indoctrination at a young age. It is no question as to why children often ask questions skeptical of religion.

[Hakio]

Christians often talk about planting the seeds of strong faith in children early on. It's completely child indoctrination into a moralistic strict conservative theological worldview

[Personal Freedom]

Where do morals come from? Where does religion come from? Why do people believe in religion? I'm not saying he is necessarily real, or supernatural, but he exists in the minds and hearts of humanity.

Morals come from empathy and institutions of social standards.
Religion is hierarchal social institution to marginalize rhe population into similar beliefs.
People believe in religion because the hierarchal social institutions support indoctrination at a young age. It is no question as to why children often ask questions skeptical of religion.

It is part of humanity. Religion allows us to be different from chimps, and my religion believes it will eventually unite us.
#Universalism

[Benuty]

Christians often talk about planting the seeds of strong faith in children early on. It's completely child indoctrination into a moralistic strict conservative theological worldview

Nonsensical or depraved assumption. This is due to the fact there are very devout liberal theologians as well.

[Hakio]

Morals come from empathy and institutions of social standards.
Religion is hierarchal social institution to marginalize rhe population into similar beliefs.
People believe in religion because the hierarchal social institutions support indoctrination at a young age. It is no question as to why children often ask questions skeptical of religion.

It is part of humanity. Religion allows us to be different from chimps, and my religion believes it will eventually unite us.
#Universalism

That's an appeal to popularity. Just because the world as a whole generally believes in religion doesn't mean that religion itself is right or just. It's the logical fallacy argumentum ad popularem, I believe.

[Hakio]

Christians often talk about planting the seeds of strong faith in children early on. It's completely child indoctrination into a moralistic strict conservative theological worldview

Nonsensical or depraved assumption. This is due to the fact there are very devout liberal theologians as well.

There is a growing disconnect between Catholic political values and the strict teachings of the Catholic Church. It still doesnt mean that religious institutions as a whole do not in general attempt to force this worldview on our children, especially in America.

[New Waterford]

Each of their own, I think. As long any religious belief does not harm anyone, it should be tolerated.

[Personal Freedom]

It is part of humanity. Religion allows us to be different from chimps, and my religion believes it will eventually unite us.
#Universalism

That's an appeal to popularity. Just because the world as a whole generally believes in religion doesn't mean that religion itself is right or just. It's the logical fallacy argumentum ad popularem, I believe.

Only if you take it that way. Religion is a focal point of humanity as a species. Religion and science are all that set us a part from lesser beasts. Unless science overshoots religion and erases from humanities mind, then it does exist though only to those that think it does.

[Hakio]

Each of their own, I think. As long any religious belief does not harm anyone, it should be tolerated.

Indeed, I would never call for the dissolving of all religious institutions. People should have the right to believe whatever they want to. This is purely a philosophical and political discussion here.

[Personal Freedom]

My belief is religion exists only as long as someone wants it too.

[Hakio]

My belief is religion exists only as long as someone wants it too.

So if we believe in it that makes it true?

[Personal Freedom]

My belief is religion exists only as long as someone wants it too.

So if we believe in it that makes it true?

To them..... It is part of human culture and until people are ready to move on, it must be accepted in order to unite people.

[Hakio]

So if we believe in it that makes it true?

To them..... It is part of human culture and until people are ready to move on, it must be accepted in order to unite people.

But is it better to formulate your own beliefs or to be unified with people of common beliefs?

[Personal Freedom]

To them..... It is part of human culture and until people are ready to move on, it must be accepted in order to unite people.

But is it better to formulate your own beliefs or to be unified with people of common beliefs?

Unity adverts bloodshed.

[Farnhamia]

But is it better to formulate your own beliefs or to be unified with people of common beliefs?

Unity adverts bloodshed.

Tolerance averts bloodshed, too, as does avoiding the mind-set that says, "Only I know the Truth."

[Personal Freedom]

Unity adverts bloodshed.

Tolerance averts bloodshed, too, as does avoiding the mind-set that says, "Only I know the Truth."

Which is why I believe in unity of religion.

[Farnhamia]

Tolerance averts bloodshed, too, as does avoiding the mind-set that says, "Only I know the Truth."

Which is why I believe in unity of religion.

You'll have explain that. Do you mean that tolerance can only be attained when everyone believes the same thing and worships the same way?

[Personal Freedom]

Which is why I believe in unity of religion.

You'll have explain that. Do you mean that tolerance can only be attained when everyone believes the same thing and worships the same way?

No, I believe tolerance can only be achieved when all religion is seen as stemming from a common source and that everyone has a right to a different view. Its very complicated.

Although human cultures and religions differ on their conceptions of God and his nature, Bahá'ís believe they nevertheless refer to one and the same Being. The differences, instead of being regarded as irreconcilable constructs of mutually exclusive cultures, are seen as purposefully reflective of the varying needs of the societies in which the divine messages were revealed.[8] No single faith, and associated conception of God, is thus considered essentially superior to another from the viewpoint of its original social context; however, more recent religions may teach a more advanced conception of God as called for by the changing needs of local, regional or global civilization. Bahá'ís thus regard the world's religions as chapters in the history of one single faith, revealed by God's Manifestations progressively and in stages.[9] Bahá'u'lláh writes on this subject:
All-praise to the unity of God, and all-honour to Him, the sovereign Lord, the incomparable and all-glorious Ruler of the universe, Who, out of utter nothingness, hath created the reality of all things, Who, from naught, hath brought into being the most refined and subtle elements of His creation, and Who, rescuing His creatures from the abasement of remoteness and the perils of ultimate extinction, hath received them into His kingdom of incorruptible glory. Nothing short of His all-encompassing grace, His all-pervading mercy, could have possibly achieved it.[10][11]

[Farnhamia]

You'll have explain that. Do you mean that tolerance can only be attained when everyone believes the same thing and worships the same way?

No, I believe tolerance can only be achieved when all religion is seen as stemming from a common source and that everyone has a right to a different view. Its very complicated.

Although human cultures and religions differ on their conceptions of God and his nature, Bahá'ís believe they nevertheless refer to one and the same Being. The differences, instead of being regarded as irreconcilable constructs of mutually exclusive cultures, are seen as purposefully reflective of the varying needs of the societies in which the divine messages were revealed.[8] No single faith, and associated conception of God, is thus considered essentially superior to another from the viewpoint of its original social context; however, more recent religions may teach a more advanced conception of God as called for by the changing needs of local, regional or global civilization. Bahá'ís thus regard the world's religions as chapters in the history of one single faith, revealed by God's Manifestations progressively and in stages.[9] Bahá'u'lláh writes on this subject:
All-praise to the unity of God, and all-honour to Him, the sovereign Lord, the incomparable and all-glorious Ruler of the universe, Who, out of utter nothingness, hath created the reality of all things, Who, from naught, hath brought into being the most refined and subtle elements of His creation, and Who, rescuing His creatures from the abasement of remoteness and the perils of ultimate extinction, hath received them into His kingdom of incorruptible glory. Nothing short of His all-encompassing grace, His all-pervading mercy, could have possibly achieved it.[10][11]

That's admirable but rather idealistic. I still don't get it, though. When Hakio asked if it were "better to formulate your own beliefs or to be unified with people of common beliefs," you said you favor unity but now you say that that unity is only in an acknowledgement of a common basis for religion. That strikes me as too vague to practical.

[Personal Freedom]

No, I believe tolerance can only be achieved when all religion is seen as stemming from a common source and that everyone has a right to a different view. Its very complicated.

That's admirable but rather idealistic. I still don't get it, though. When Hakio asked if it were "better to formulate your own beliefs or to be unified with people of common beliefs," you said you favor unity but now you say that that unity is only in an acknowledgement of a common basis for religion. That strikes me as too vague to practical.

The religion goes into great detail on contradiction and why religion disagrees.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bah%C3%A1%27%C3%AD_Faith
I really am not able to describe it, our holy book is entirely dedicated to describing this.

[Hakio]

That's admirable but rather idealistic. I still don't get it, though. When Hakio asked if it were "better to formulate your own beliefs or to be unified with people of common beliefs," you said you favor unity but now you say that that unity is only in an acknowledgement of a common basis for religion. That strikes me as too vague to practical.

The religion goes into great detail on contradiction and why religion disagrees.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bah%C3%A1%27%C3%AD_Faith
I really am not able to describe it, our holy book is entirely dedicated to describing this.

I believe that there are multiple indicators of mental illnesses in these prophets that can be derived from their actions and explain their supposed connection to god. For instance, Jesus shows several instances of random outburts of anger in the Bible. In the temple he flips over merchant tables in a fit of rage and he curses and condemns a fig tree for not bearing him fruit. C. S. Lewis said in his book "Mere Christianity" that Jesus is either Lord, a liar, or a lunatic. Many have posed a fourth option, that he is a legend and that the facts of his character have been greatly exaggerated amongst early Christians. I believe Jesus was both lunatic and legend, but that's just me.

[Personal Freedom]

You're inclined to think that way, fine. Just don't go around insulting Christians.