Can People be the new religion?

gar32

Can People be the new religion?

I have being thinking about god & life from a long time as we all have. Putting the best of communist, religion & human rights idea’s together in a packet as to improve the people of the world. It’s an idea that many people have had before “how to make the world a better place?” Yes there is the human nature & culture of the world that would have to be work on to even start on a task so vast. Maybe people could start with the idea in mind & using the knowledge of the past to improve the future. Maybe I am giving more questions then answers but without questions we can not look for answers. I will start with this question. Can people believe in each other enough to not need god?

18AD

I'd say people could definately do this, as they already have the power to believe in reletively more abstract ideas, such as gods or good luck charms.

The problem arisies in the fact that they mightn't want to stop believing in whatever god they choose to believe in or is the only one they know about.
Often the belief in god can bring hope to a persons life in a time of need or be a result of people thinking that there is more to life than the physical world around us.

How do you mean to believe in eachother? Worship someone as if they were a god or believe that everyone has the capacity to be an amazing human being...?

Pocari Sweat

Can People be the new religion?

I have being thinking about god & life from a long time as we all have. Putting the best of communist, religion & human rights idea’s together in a packet as to improve the people of the world. It’s an idea that many people have had before “how to make the world a better place?” Yes there is the human nature & culture of the world that would have to be work on to even start on a task so vast. Maybe people could start with the idea in mind & using the knowledge of the past to improve the future. Maybe I am giving more questions then answers but without questions we can not look for answers. I will start with this question. Can people believe in each other enough to not need god?

Yes, I think we can. If we do not have any fundamental and collective self-belief, then of course we may be doomed. First of all, if any existing organised religion was looking upon to be improved, I think the written texts would have to be put to one side as there may be too much arguing as to what fundamental parts of the writings are appropriate to keep and what stuff is clearly out of date and harmful or subjective.

And even if it is agreed there is a god, then on the basic principle of being polite, especially to a god, it would still be a hard job to respectfully guess the right name they would want to be called themselves rather than use the various names we have used previously, if we don't have any established direct means of communication.

If there is no answer from any gods out there, then we don't really know if they are having a break or are not too interested, but in the meantime we could finally start looking at sorting out some sort of standards of thinking and living ourselves, rather than be half caught out by wondering whether there is going to be a second coming etc. Whatever the idea of a god is meant to be, surely they may understand that we have got a fairly tough job living together on this planet in a changing world and maybe we need to be cut a bit of slack in one way or another and not add to the difficult job unless of course there is some plan laid out, but this of course is where it all gets subjective.

Unless there is already some system of living or thinking where they have just about got it right, I think many could be improved upon or new ones tried out.

Buddhism and humanism seem good eggs in the choice of thinking systems, but often we have to make right cock ups and learn through experience before we better ourselves as individuals, and as many of the cock ups have been made in the last few thousand years, we should know enough now what is generally a bit dodgey and worth avoiding and what is good etc.

I think at the end of the day, if there is a god and they have certain demands, then it is fair to say that having to live on this planet and get along in a changing world is a tough aul' job, so its only fair to cut us a bit of slack and let us get on with the job, especially if no help is going to be handed out and by all means judge us on our results, taking into account the tricky job we have got.

I think there is a fair way to go on human equality issues yet, and the various jobs people end up doing seem to place some people more highly than others and this may cause humility and respect in top earners to often be questioned. Any big bosses of any firms should really share the responsibilty of cleaning the toilets for example with any other worker, they have no excuse, they use the bogs themselves, so once a week or even once a month or year, depending on how many workers there are or how big the firm is, they can get the gloves on and give the loo a right good once over.

Other physically or psychologically hard or dangerous jobs like deep sea fishing, coal mining, painting electric pylons etc or nursing people with disabilities or terminal illnesses etc, should also be shared, maybe by having other people taking time out from their core trades to spend a year or so to help out, and let the coal mining etc be shared out a bit and let them have a right cushy number like a doing a bit of pottery or helping out architects make those models for new buildings etc.

Maybe to help charities we should have 5% put aside from our taxes as standard and we could even get the governments to implement us spending a week every year helping out a donkey sanctuary or a hospice for the terminally ill etc.

There is stuff like that, which might balance out a few things that need a bit of extra help, and maybe we could collectively spend a little less time in church, or in the pub and go out and do a few extra good deeds.

Being what we are, there are still going to be prisons and a bit of crime going on, but once people are sent off to do a spell of porridge, there could be web cams fitted everywhere in the prisons, recorded and monitored on the net by anyone wanting to go online and check that no dodgey business is going on, so that prisoners get the chance to come out better than getting out more coked up and worse than they went in.

All suggestions of course, but I think we have to sort our selves out because it often appears to many that no one else is offering to do it for us, and I for one don't mind helping you out with your quest. Every credit.

gar32

Some good idea's and answers there for sure making things as complicated as they are & I know they are. Moving on for them very good & thought out ideas, I heard something good said in a movie last night. Believe brings people together, religion separates us apart. Maybe the whole point is to compromise in all parts of life by doing what we can for the good of man without stopping what we are. Changes take time & mistakes are made for sure. Seems like the people in the world that are a head in making things good on this planet are also the ones holding the rest back from doing the same.(No country names).
My dream or wish is that like human rights, which is a great start for improvement of this world. Maybe some standards above that could be set for the next level of fairness. Human rights being work on & improved all the time too. Building up on what we have, without taking things away. Setting a minimum standard for life much like the minimum wage for work we have in Ireland. Could be we are doing this already & focus for fast improvement is need. Wanting to add to my thoughts as I know this is a never ending topic. Please help me there!!

pbsuxok1znja4r

gar32 wrote:

Can people believe in each other enough to not need god?

Your question is rendered pointless by the implicit and false assumption that all people 'need' to believe in a God. Some people intellectually believe in the existence of something called a 'God', regardless of whether they even like (or as you say, "need") the idea or not. The there are those who have never investigated the idea in the same way but latch on to the belief, in their "neediness". Of course someone such as yourself hoping to achieve some bastardized kind of secular humanism/communism/ whatever will always be quick to assume all believers belong to the latter category. Remember that equally there are a number of people who, on nothing even approaching an intellectual level, hate the very idea of a God so much that they never succeed in bringing themselves to honestly examine the possibility or likelyhood of one existing.
Second of all, your question begs this one: Can people believe in themselves enough so as not to need each other? Can people believe in something still less abstract and external so as not to need themselves, even?

"Improve the people of the world" - What's that supposed to mean? How about we try to agree on a definition of human "improvement" before we go postulating grand plans as to how to achieve it. You've jumped about a million miles ahead of yourself here and of course Pocari and to a lesser extent 18AD are all nodding heads.

18AD wrote:

The problem arisies in the fact that they mightn't want to stop believing in whatever god they choose to believe in

There are certain things you just don't "choose" to believe in. You look at the facts and make for yourself the conclusion that seems to you to be most likely to be true, regardless of whether you want it to be true or not. Of course on the flipside of that, there are people who don't think through things in this way too, so just remember not to generalise when you say "they".

As for forcing everyone to take a turn at deep-sea fishing, while you may see the idea as 'fair' (whatever that is), it would be laughably inefficient and basically foolish. Pocari, OP, your ideas are half-baked at best.

Pocari Sweat

I reckon the half baked approach is probably worth having a crack at, because the organised religious approach so far has been a big bag of shyte.

Look at those nutters having a pop at each other for example, jews / muslamics etc.

Doctor Fell

Well what you describe already exits, and its called Christianity.
Christianity is socialist, comprehensivley humans rights oriented, and incorporates God. "Love your neighbour as yourself" is basically what socialism tries to accomplish, and it also celebrates the importance and right to life and equality of every human - so human rights are most definitely covered.

Pocari Sweat

Its not all its cracked up to be, when Dubya and the yanks get going with the bible shyte and christian values waffle. The bible is pointless when its just a bunch of words written on paper, its how it is used thats important, and so far in the last 1000 years, its been a big bag of shyte.

Doctor Fell

I agree about Dubya and some American fundamentalists alright. Always amazes me that he thinks he's a Christian. I mean he supports the death penalty , and is a war-monger who apparently has no problem with the taking of innocent life (collateral damage, unfortunate but necessary my arse). He also sees no need to stop the killing of civilians in Lebanon either. So I don't see how those views are Christian at all.
This probably isn't the Forum for debating this, but I would not agree with the last 1000 years being a "big bag of shyte" in terms of the bible. I'm not even sure what you mean exactly. Of course interpretation of any document is fundamentally vital for a person to derive a meaning from it. Not sure what you're getting at! Do you mean some people have mis-interpreted it? That's inevitable though, isn't it?

pbsuxok1znja4r

Pocari Sweat wrote:

Its not all its cracked up to be, when Dubya and the yanks get going with the bible shyte and christian values waffle. The bible is pointless when its just a bunch of words written on paper, its how it is used thats important, and so far in the last 1000 years, its been a big bag of shyte.

"It" hasn't been anything. It's people that have been, as you so eloquently put it; big bags of shite. (Though, truth be told, as Doctor Fell pointed out, most of these 'shitebags are not genuine/good christians at all).
You claim the bible as just words on paper is impotent; pointless. Let's hope you don't turn around at any later stage and try to claim that the bible has, in spite of this, somehow 'caused' religious people to do evil. I'm glad you've admitted the bible itself as ineffectual enough not to be the actual source of any wrongdoing. People interpret it in ways that serve their own ends. As they will do with any charter, constitution or set of rules that was originally designed to keep peace.

If people can be diabolical enough (Or in your layman's terms; big enough bags of shite) to abuse something like the bible, just imagine what an easy time they'd have with your 'half-baked' approach. You seem to think human nature is inherently 'good', or something and that consequently, 'goodness' would prevail in society if we just got rid of all that 'religious claptrap' and allowed humanism or 'human decency' to take it's natural course. Because sure it's only religion that's the source of all evil. :rolleyes: Ironically enough, you'd probably be the first person to criticise religion in general as being 100% man-made - not emanating with any genuine deity - and then simultaneously claim that it's "evil, eeeevil I tell you" is somehow not inherent in human nature.

You blame "religion" for Jewish-Arab conflict? What's to stop different peoples or countries from developing their own differing brand of your new humanist 'religion'? Nothing. Unless you plan on forcing it upon them. Sooner or later they attach enough importance to their own ideology above all others that they're prepared to fight any others that oppose it. This won't change.

So, like I said, I've yet to see from you a better idea than that of say, properly-practiced Christianity, for example.

seamus

scouser.tommy, I don't think I've seen it put much better.

The most interesting thing about the existence of any deity is that there is zero evidence to suggest that we are required to believe in one. And no, books written by humans about their experiences with deities don't count as evidence.

Playboy

seamus wrote:

scouser.tommy, I don't think I've seen it put much better.

The most interesting thing about the existence of any deity is that there is zero evidence to suggest that we are required to believe in one. And no, books written by humans about their experiences with deities don't count as evidence.

Just as an interesting side point - why dont you think that millions of people's personal experience of God(s) over countless generations does not count as evidence? Do you think that the world has always been and still is full of deluded people and the small minority of people with no belief in God(s) are the only enlightened ones. If millions of people still say and have said something exists and they experience it in their lives daily and a small few say they dont experience it and say it doesnt exist then why do you think the minority is right?

pbsuxok1znja4r

TBH I think human experience is one of the best clues we have in detecting the existence of any deity. As for whether human experience is recounted or recorded accurately or truthfully, that's another matter. Personally, I'm far from being an atheist.

On another side point:
I think one could argue that in this uncertain world, what's true for the majority is simply true. Meh, I personally wouldn't argue that, though. For some people, God is a lot like U2 - a matter of taste (if you'll pardon the crudeness of my analogy). For those who find the idea distasteful, the fact that millions of people worldwide worship U2/God (please don't get the idea that those two words are interchangeable!) does nothing to convince/convert them (not that it necessarily should, in the case of U2, at least). It only reinforces their disdain/disbelief. But the truth is, it's not a matter of taste, it's a matter of fact and to regard it as anything other than that will lead you to folly, whether you're for or against believing in a God, it would be for the wrong reasons.

Anyway, christianity & socialism FTW. There, I said it.

Pocari Sweat

There is no being for or against believing in god, if there is a suggested absent landlord of the universe and a lot of people don't care to waffle about what flavour of gods are out there and ignore it all, they are not necessarily athiest, they are very likely to be classed as agnostic, unless just like the bible boffs they go actively concluding that there ain't any gods, and then they are just as bad concluding the impossible that something unprovable does or does'nt exist.

Anyway in the last 1000 years, all attempts at christianity has been a big bag o' shyte in all corners of the world, just look at it fer feck's sake.

Doctor Fell

scouser.tommy wrote:

christianity & socialism FTW. There, I said it.

Couldn't agree more! I think it'd be a great system, I've never heard of a better system in terms of equality of people, protection of human life or justice for all. In all fairness it is hard to beat the simple "love your neighbour as yourself". That one statement really is a blueprint for fair and just living I think.

Pocari, u sure you're not trolling - "all attempts at christianity has been a big bag o' shyte in all corners of the world". With respect, that statement is a pure bag o'shyte.
Now where's my beer....I know I drank it somewhre...

Also, "There, I said it. " - its amazing in today's culture that people are almost afraid to admit to being Christian, or are apologetic if they state their beliefs (not having a go at you Tommy btw). I think its because as Tommy alluded to, parts of society ridicule such beliefs for no good reason - e.g Pocari's "bag o' shyte" theory about Christianity. Its funny that in today's "liberal" society often belief or faith in anything is tolerated except belief in God.

pbsuxok1znja4r

Well, you're not wrong there. I do now find myself feeling pretty reluctant to divulge/discuss the subject of my own beliefs/religious beliefs etc, because it seems the vast majority of people my age (+/-20) simply aren't open to (or even tolerant of) that kind of thing. The more crude amongst them would say it's all utter bollocks and that anyone who believes in it for a second hasn't an ounce of sense in their head (or their two heads, which they're liable to be viewed as having). Besides, the last thing I want to do is give anyone the slightest cause to claim that I'm just another Christian forcing propaganda down their throats. So I generally keep my mouth shut. (Except on certain internet forums, I guess )

Of course the stigma seems to be attached to Christianity/Catholicism above all others. It's just a part of youth and pop-culture at this stage. I'm reminded of that idiotic Irish Times advert they had on bus stops last year "Does the catholic church deserve absolution?" (with the obvious yet subtle insinuation that there must therefore be serious doubt/question as to whether it does :rolleyes: ) But I digress. I'm more than capable of defending my beliefs in debate against even the more well-versed atheists (TBH it's always the un-versed ones that are most difficult), but frankly I don't want to have to. It's a pain in the hole and just breeds bad feeling. It doesn't bother me when someone criticizes Christianity or Catholicism with genuine vehemence; when they take it seriously. It's the casual, thoughtless and invariably ignorant Catholic/Christian-bashing that does my head in.
*end of rant*

Pocari wrote:

Anyway in the last 1000 years, all attempts at christianity has been a big bag o' shyte in all corners of the world, just look at it fer feck's sake.

This is where someone who is actually worth arguing with would voluntarily point out examples and generally back up their own brash statement with evidence rather than saying "just look at the world, fer feck's sake" :rolleyes:

Karl Hungus

gar32 wrote:

Can People be the new religion?

I don't see how, it's a decent magazine, but it's no bowl of Special K.

seamus

Playboy wrote:

Just as an interesting side point - why dont you think that millions of people's personal experience of God(s) over countless generations does not count as evidence? Do you think that the world has always been and still is full of deluded people and the small minority of people with no belief in God(s) are the only enlightened ones. If millions of people still say and have said something exists and they experience it in their lives daily and a small few say they dont experience it and say it doesnt exist then why do you think the minority is right?

I didn't say I thought anyone had had it right.

The very fact that millions of different people believe different things and have "experiences" which breed broadly different beliefs and are even sometimes completely at odds with eachother suggests that human experience isn't reliable - however because each experience is unique, then it does suggest something about the link between religion and personality, i.e. about "God" being unique for each individual.

If everyone was having the same experiences of God and religion, then we would have something concrete.

muesli_offire

Originally Posted by Seamus:
human experience isn't reliable - however because each experience is unique, then it does suggest something about the link between religion and personality, i.e. about "God" being unique for each individual.

Interesting suggestion. Its strange that people will talk a lot about religion and the anthropormhisation of the nonhuman and not the animorphisation or reomorphisation of the human - not that the latter is a better characterisation, just interesting thats all.

McGinty

I haven't read the other threads, only the original post, can people be the new God or replace God, in order to answer that question we have to define what is/who is God? What is a person? We know what is a person on a material basis, Ie: a human being born of another human being, made of bone, blood, muscle, who is a thinking sentient being, the material aspect of a human is easy, we can see, touch, smell, and feel that person, but we cannot see their thoughts, thinking or predict their thinking, we can guess or surmiss. As for God, well that is an even bigger mystery than the thinking brain of a human being, so when you can equate/define God along the same lines as a person/human being, maybe then you can ask your question but until you or someone else can truly define God, and the mystery surrounding God, then, and only then can you ask can people replace God.

ps: In my opinion God is not some bearded guy sitting on a white cloud ready to strike us for any misdemeanour, for a deeper reflection of the msytery of God read some works by Thomas Aquinas (who remained silent once he knew what/who God was) the "cloud of unknowing" (unknown author), the bible (don't read it just in a literal sense) any later books after the "Road less Travelled" by M.Scott Peck, I could go on, there are scores of writers who talk about the mystery of God, and as you delve in deeper to find God, you realise how little we know and intangible God is.

Playboy

seamus wrote:

I didn't say I thought anyone had had it right.

The very fact that millions of different people believe different things and have "experiences" which breed broadly different beliefs and are even sometimes completely at odds with eachother suggests that human experience isn't reliable - however because each experience is unique, then it does suggest something about the link between religion and personality, i.e. about "God" being unique for each individual.

If everyone was having the same experiences of God and religion, then we would have something concrete.

Maybe people are right on the concept of a God but wrong on the detail. The thing is people experience something. Maybe they don’t understand what they are experiencing and the concept of God is the only or the closest explanation they have for what they experience. For me personally the reason I am agnostic and not an atheist is because I cant convince myself that millions of people will devote their lives to a religion unless they experience something God-like in their lives. I don’t experience it but I cant discount it if other people say they do and they are in the large majority. Maybe something happened in my development as an individual that prevented me from understanding or experiencing God or maybe some of us really are enlightened and the rest of the world are deluded. I can’t put it down to education, intelligence or psychological development because I know people who are much smarter and more together than I who believe passionately in a God.

Thoughts?

Doctor Fell

Playboy wrote:

Maybe something happened in my development as an individual that prevented me from understanding or experiencing God or maybe some of us really are enlightened and the rest of the world are deluded.

I don't think anything has "prevented" you or anybody from understanding or experiencing God. I think the majority of people believe in God, they don't understand or experience God so much.
Yet you yourself choose not to believe in God.
People don't have to understand, or experience God to believe in God. (I don't think anyone can fully understand God anyway, else they would be divine themselves!) Basically it boils down to belief, or faith. You can believe or not believe in God- nobody or nothing is stopping you from making up your own mind.

UU

Yes. Of course. People can be the new religion. That's actually what Humanism is all about.

gar32

UU wrote:

Yes. Of course. People can be the new religion. That's actually what Humanism is all about.

Just back from holidays & see people think about if there is a god or not? Also if people can love each other. But does anyone have a suggestion too cut the ****e & make it simple for people of the world to get along in the name of "GOD or humanity". Be faithful to the person you love &/or live with would be a good rule. Would stop a lot of problems in this world. Dealing with real life issues that people experiance seems to me more important then if god can help them with them problems. Hoping for like minded people to help in a down too earth way without bringing my way is better then yours into it. Basic rules people from any mind set could life & be happy with. Could call them the new commandments or better the new requests.

Happy Thinking.

Scigaithris

Playboy wrote:

Just as an interesting side point - why dont you think that millions of people's personal experience of God(s) over countless generations does not count as evidence? Do you think that the world has always been and still is full of deluded people and the small minority of people with no belief in God(s) are the only enlightened ones. If millions of people still say and have said something exists and they experience it in their lives daily and a small few say they dont experience it and say it doesnt exist then why do you think the minority is right?

Did not millions of people "over countless generations" believe the world was flat? Or that the earth was the centre of their universe? Did many of the major theological systems of belief originate during these times?

_patchouli

Playboy wrote:

Just as an interesting side point - why dont you think that millions of people's personal experience of God(s) over countless generations does not count as evidence?
...If millions of people still say and have said something exists and they experience it in their lives daily and a small few say they dont experience it and say it doesnt exist then why do you think the minority is right?

It's exaggerating to say that millions of people "experience" "something (that) exists" etc.
For most it is blind faith which is underpinned by simple hope and fear, tradition, lack of imagination etc.
Evidence is a scientific concept. You can't validly apply it to philosophising about God.
To echo what scouser.tommy said, it isn't a matter of majority rules or the most popular vote wins.

gar32

God as an idea or believe is fine with me as long as it helps people. Differences in believes have been the problem & still the biggest problem in our world. Just pushing the idea that there is a way & hope that people can look after each other without lossing out in live. Equal rights are still not all over the world yet this is a main idea pushed in christianity any way. If not other relious movements. I want it clear that I hope for something utopian in form to be set as a goal for the world not sure if we get there but lets die trying!!!!! Come on the people!!!

Playboy

_patchouli wrote:

It's exaggerating to say that millions of people "experience" "something (that) exists" etc.
For most it is blind faith which is underpinned by simple hope and fear, tradition, lack of imagination etc.
Evidence is a scientific concept. You can't validly apply it to philosophising about God.
To echo what scouser.tommy said, it isn't a matter of majority rules or the most popular vote wins.

You say for most people a belief in God is due to blind faith. How do you know this to be true? Do you know what the word faith means because it certainly isnt blind trust if that is what you mean by blind faith. Faith is based on evidence that an individual gathers from a number of sources. There is a leap invloved but it isnt without reason.

Playboy

Scigaithris wrote:

Did not millions of people "over countless generations" believe the world was flat? Or that the earth was the centre of their universe? Did many of the major theological systems of belief originate during these times?

That isnt a valid analogy. People claim to experience God in their lives in a number of different ways now and then. I dont think anyone experienced the world being flat, they just made an assumption based on a lack of knowledge.

gar32

Ok this is a strange one. i was in Portugal in fatima. I was at a Mass (Don't ask) done by for an Irish group in english. I was listening etc & we where given a moment to pray. I said to myself "if you are there God give me a sign." just after the Mass i went to see a part of the Berlin wall. As i walk up to see it there was 1 name wrote on it. "gary" As I read it thunder came from the sky as it started to rain. what do you think about that?????

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/coincidence

simu

You resurrected the thread for that?!

Locked!