Originally Posted By DlandJB "religion" is a human creation in response to belief. It is highly susceptible to flaws because it is a human response to something that is really hard to comprehend. So in this regard, I'll grant you that there those that would use it to control others. However, the faith I have believes in a gift of free will -- no one is trying to control you, but you choose the path and the consequences of the path you choose. Everyone has that same option. It is just the outcomes that will vary. Not everyone is going to be in a better place. All I can tell you is what I experienced and how it has affected my life. Make your own choice and take your own chances. And if you are firm in your convictions, then why worry if someone challenges them?
Originally Posted By johnno52 >However, the faith I have believes in a gift of free will -- no one is trying to control you, but you choose the path and the consequences of the path you choose.< Yes many people do get their faith from free will the door is always open for them. Once in then the Ministry, Laymen, Congregation etc. fine tunes it and then just guides, steers or indoctrinates them depending on the motives of the sect. People like the UU are still lost and searching for an answer! They might as well be in a religious group because they seem to be lost without leadership or someone telling them how to think. Great leaders can be either Religious or Atheists. People can also get self satisfaction without affiliation to any group. Any person can be good but usually interaction with many people and ideas can make a person better, happier and more learned as is evident on this site. It cannot always be one way is the right way, its like a railroad line there are main lines and branch lines (these usually are dead ends)loop lines (go around in circles), you can switch from one track to the other, sit in a yard somewhere, but eventually we could all end up on the main line again. My first job was in the RR thats why I know so much about it!
Originally Posted By DlandJB I give you props for being a RR person. I have great respect for railroad folks. You seem to be saying that we are all best on our own when it comes to what we believe. However, imo that runs counter to our instincts/God given center that draws us to community. We thrive as humans when we connect with others. We are better together. I will agree that some religions are more controling than others, but some are not as much as the media would like you to believe either.
Originally Posted By johnno52 Yes many people do fear radical religions as we are seeing now with the Islamists however the Christians at one time were just as radical and feared as has been written in history. The media especially are fearful but is it because their main objective is to "sell" their stories and make profit so mediocrity may be their goal to reach to the masses. I find that many of the US media is very connected to the White House directives and "tow the line" so to speak in regards to these attacks. The medias in Europe are trying very hard to not fear Islam by using free speech through publishing articles and movies about the abuses of that religion. See now we are getting into a new area and away from the topic which is a discussion branching out to other areas. Everything we do or say is always connected to each other in a way. Religion as we see with the Islamic one is connected to every thing in daily life. Nothing can be decided without its guidance. To many its the way the Christians believe without the violence but have had about 700 more years to refine it.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Do a little more reading. Not a cult. More like a group of humanists with really good choirs.> LOL, DlandJB! I have a good friend who's UU, and I dated someone for a while who was also. I've been to some services. In both the good and bad senses of the word, a more earnest group of people you'll rarely meet.
Originally Posted By DlandJB Most UUs come from religious traditions (in the congregation I was in we seemed to be about evenly split between former Catholics and non observant Jews), who still craved the fellowship of a service and a place to take their kids, a place to share values and, yes, even a place to share in song. They were indeed sincere in their journey. I dare say, they just keep missing the appropriate off ramp.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***They were indeed sincere in their journey. I dare say, they just keep missing the appropriate off ramp.*** Who are you to judge? I'm sorry, but when you get one religious proclivity criticizing some other religious proclivity, it just goes to show how ridiculous the entire dance really is. Can't you all see that? "We're right, they're wrong!", "no, you don't understand, WE'RE right, THEY must be wrong!", "no, no, they're CLOSER to right, but we're MORE right, and of course those people over there have NO clue!", "yes, I agree about THOSE clueless people, but you're nearly as clueless as they are!", "no, we're not!, you obviously don't understand!", "no, YOU don't understand, WE know the truth!", etc, etc, etc, etc, etc... *yawn*
Originally Posted By Mr X And still children are dying due to idiots and their stupid faith based neglect, aided by a society-at-large that supports and buys into that crap and how much "value" it has. Too bad for the kids, I guess. *sigh*
Originally Posted By RC Collins Yeah, if people disagree it means there can't really ever be any truth involved. ;-) johnno52 >>>God sometimes used human beings to carry out His judgment< The catch is "sometimes" yes! what about the other times?<< You mean like with nasty weather or simple smiting? What about them? Are you saying that you’re a better judge than God? >>>He cites a source he considers authoritative.< You say Tomato I say Tomayto! You say authoritative, I say indoctrination!<< I did say that I didn’t agree with him. However, you haven’t presented him with any reason why he shouldn’t consider that church to be authoritative. >>This is quite evident with the parents that let their daughter die while they waited for guidance from their God.<< As I started out this thread saying, that course of action on their part goes against the Bible. >>When people devote their complete lives to a dogma and live in walled communities, wouldn't this shield them from everyday problems?<< Not if we’re all sinners, no. >>would say there are many people in the Forbes 500 that hope he takes his time. How much better can it get for them unless they get to keep their riches.<< Yeah, rich people have no problems whatsoever. And, it’s not like they actually worked and struggled and took big risks to get to that point in life. Oops… actually, reviewing the list… very few of those people inherited their wealth. >>How many of the faithful are going to lose their homes this year?<< Plenty, if they bought homes they couldn’t afford. The Bible advises against such greed, by the way. >>We all have the knowledge to do the right things in life,<< You still haven’t told me WHO determines what is right or wrong? Most of us know that some things are right, but citing our parents as the source of that doesn’t answer the question. Where did they learn what is right? What do you tell someone who claims they do not agree with you or me that murder is wrong? Do you say “Well, my parents said it was wrong?†mele >>Most "real" Christians (for lack of a better term) don't have faith in God just to save themselves from bad things happening to them. The fact that a person is very faithful to God and their beliefs doesn't mean that they will never have something bad happen in their lives.<< Right. When all hell breaks loose, you may actually be doing something right. Why would the devil (or his minions) harass someone who is already in his camp? ecdc >>I often hear this argument of "no anchor" for atheist's and agnostics. Yet it's almost always made by people who themselves are not in those groups…The truth is, once they've gone through their struggle with loss of belief, most non-believers find their anchor in humanism or in their personal relationships.<< I would never argue that atheists do not have morals. However, if you do not base morals on something that is transcendent and unchanging (like God), then your morals tend to change based on you, rather than you changing based on your morals. I have struggled with the morals that God told me to live by. I will always struggle until I die. I don’t have the intellectually honest ability to toss any of those morals aside, because they are not set by a government or by a parent or my own decision. They were set by God and handed down to me. >>. My response would be that religion isn't an anchor at all, but rather, an attempt by humans to control that which they have no control over.<< I can see why one would come to that conclusion. However, aren’t some things right and other things wrong? And isn’t it possible that there is one religion whose ideals gets those morals more accurately than other religions? If so, what’s wrong with followers of that faith reminding each other of those morals? DlandJB >>"religion" is a human creation in response to belief.<< I agree. I have a Christian faith, and I can see that several religions spring up from that faith. johnno52: >>Great leaders can be either Religious or Atheists.<< While that may be possible, publicly professed atheists have made some lousy leaders. In the twentieth century they killed more people than any church ever has. Really, if someone does not believe in some form of “cosmic justiceâ€, I would never entrust them with much power.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>I would never argue that atheists do not have morals. However, if you do not base morals on something that is transcendent and unchanging (like God), then your morals tend to change based on you, rather than you changing based on your morals.<< Except of course, God is entirely changing. God changes depending on what attributes people want to assign to him. You of course will interpret it differently, but it's really just people projecting themselves and their own morals on god. I would, therefore argue, that God is a terrible way to base morals. God has been used to justify genocide, racism, sexism, etc. The notion that "well, those people got it wrong but I'm right!" is pretty laughable. I see those morals and the "morals" that keeps gays from pursuing their rights as equal. They're flawed, human made, and then blamed on God.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "Who are you to judge? *yawn*" Pretty much my thoughts when I read post 70. It does get boring.
Originally Posted By ecdc Getting back to this notion of faith and medicine, it doesn't bode well for the literalists that the things that work are things that can be seen as entirely naturalistic, and the things that don't are entirely religious or faith-based. As a non-believer, I seem to get the same benefits as the believers; prayer, it would seem, is not a pre-requisite to being healed through medicine. Indeed, all evidence would suggest that prayer and faith has nothing to do with health; one's culture, society, social status, and money seems to be what determines it. We see example after example of prayer alone not working, of fasting alone not working. Instead, religious people have to make up the excuse that God was somehow working through the doctor, or that god sent the sick person the doctor. Mighty convenient. It's a catch-22; the "true believers" like this family that didn't get her daughter medical care, are seen as crazies for relying only on faith. But those that don't do this have to come up with some explanation as to why God alone can't seem to cut it. It's a weak God that needs a skilled surgeon to do his work for him. (Yes, I'm aware of the argument that God works through people and could do it if he wanted. Again, mighty convenient.) Like I said before, it isn't exactly a ringing endorsement that religion is really only helpful for things with minor or no consequences. I don't begrudge anyone the right to feel comforted after the death of a loved one by believing in God or an afterlife. My mother and grandmother did this and still do this; most of my family are believers and I respect that. But we seem to invoke religion or faith when it can't cause much harm; believing a deceased relative is in heaven, while perhaps deeply comforting, is harmless. But when someone (again, like this family being discussed) decides to go with just the faith route, the consequences are dire and faith lets them down. People seem to do all the work then say "God blessed me." Again, I genuinely have no beef with that and how people view God's role in their lives. I'd just say that it doesn't help the literalist's cause when everything that gets blamed on God has a perfectly natural explanation as well. The old saying goes, "Why does God hate amputees?" Amputees, no matter how much they pray, never sprout and grow new limbs. Science has created artificial limbs for them, but the best religion can do is say God was working through these people. It's weak logic that no one would tolerate under other circumstances, but is abundantly accepted in religious circles.
Originally Posted By utahjosh edcd, you post is pretty well thought out. But to a believer, like me, your explanations and viewpoints, though valid and rational, do not change our faith. I know that prayer works, and I'm not talking just about for healing.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>But to a believer, like me, your explanations and viewpoints, though valid and rational, do not change our faith. I know that prayer works, and I'm not talking just about for healing.<< And like I've said elsewhere, I genuinely have no problem with that. I have tremendous respect for the faith often expressed here by those who simply say "I believe" and who've seen the value of that belief in their life. It's when someone says, "Hey, I prayed and it worked. It'll work for you too! You need to do it or you're somehow missing out." No, I'm really not. I can match the blessings and "miracles" others claim with my own "luck" and "hard work" or whatever else you want to label it.
Originally Posted By johnno52 So UJ how is faith used in healing? Is faith being used as a placebo effect for healing or does God actually intervenes in the healing or does he allow for the illness/disease progress and lets it take its own course? I came through lung cancer 2 years ago. A disease that very few survive more than 6 months. I am a non believer and I didn't pray. I'm curious how does faith play a part in healing. My uncle who was a believer and had spent many many hours with prayer groups and priests etc, he didn't last the 6 months. I'm serious about this "Why did I get spared and he didn't" I'm guessing the answer will be "Only God can answer that".
Originally Posted By Dabob2 For what it's worth, having a positive attitude has been shown by study after study to be tremendously helpful in getting through an illness. For many people, who take comfort in religion, that takes the form of praying and believing that God will get them through it. "God give me strength" and all that. For others, eastern-style meditation works, and for others, it's simply an optimism that they're going to make it. Studies have not shown that prayer in the western sense is any more effective than the other methods. What's important is keeping a good and optimistic mindset, however you do that.
Originally Posted By johnno52 >For what it's worth, having a positive attitude has been shown by study after study to be tremendously helpful in getting through an illness. For many people, who take comfort in religion, that takes the form of praying and believing that God will get them through it. "God give me strength" and all that. For others, eastern-style meditation works, and for others, it's simply an optimism that they're going to make it. Studies have not shown that prayer in the western sense is any more effective than the other methods. What's important is keeping a good and optimistic mindset, however you do that< So it works like a "Placebo" effect, is that what you are saying?
