nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Failing to see how ridiculous religion is until you escape it

liamw

I always found this one interesting, particularly becuase I guess I've been there before to some degree when I was a kid.

I'm constantly baffled by how some of my friends who are quite rational, logical and critical thinkers in general, don't laugh at the idea of heaven and hell and god and prayers and a resurrection and .... etc.

It really came to light yesterday while talking to a friend. I made a joke about how I had joined the Church of Scientology (he knows I'm atheist), and the conversation went like this:

'I've joined the Chruch of Scientology'
'haha have you booked a good seat on the spaceship? lol'
'yep, first class, only €150 extra per month, have you been saying your prayers so you can go to heaven?'

Needless to say, he did not take kindly to that remark. He said I need to stop joking about religion and how it isn't a joke. Apparently it's just my opinion that religion is ridiculous and not a fact...

Isn't this some proof of brainwashing? Ever since I stepped away from relgion and started studying the actual evidence for it, I gradually came to realise that heaven is just, if not, more ridiculous a concept than the spaceship.

On a related point, whenever I go to a mass now, I always notice how absolutely ridiculous the whole thing is. It's weird how you don't see it untilyou step outside of it. Anyone else feel this way?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Galvasean

PDN wrote: »

I think that of about 99% of the conversations and encounters that are reported in this forum.

Like the time when you told me Emmanuel Eboué was a great asset to Arsenal football club.

Actually, I remember reading a piece by Michael Crichton where he stated, for various reasons, that over 90% of the things you will be told in life are actually wrong. Very good read, I'll post it up if I ever find it.

silent sage

Wicknight wrote: »

Possibly but again they become My Own Personal Religion with Angels and Fairies, rather than Christian. Not atheist rather than Christian. You question the Christianity and become a Hindu instead. Or become a member of your own person religion.

If you leave a child to his own devices he will just make up his own religion. I would go so far as to say you need to see different religions around you to conclude that humans make religions up and thus become an atheist.

That is the thing, the nagging thoughts are already there. Religion is a reflection of the way our brains work, it is a result of this not the cause.

I see, I can certainly relate to all that. Even after rejecting christianity, I dabbled with taoism and played with some of the buddhist views. Maybe I could mix them together to form my own personal "religion", without the belief in a deity. Thus fulfilling my brain's innate attraction to such desires.

robindch

liamw wrote: »

how absolutely ridiculous the whole thing is.

Reminds me of the time I was at a catholic confirmation shindig down the country a few years back. After messing up a few times -- the guy looked dead bored -- the bish asked all the kids, in public, if they were there of their own free choice (in unison "Yes!"), and that "we're all unique!" scene from the Life of Brian sprung to mind. Then the bish toddled uneasily from the left side of the stage to the right and down onto the main floor, all the while somebody's mobile was ringing with the theme music to the Muppet Show. Myself and my brother-in-law lost it and we had to leave the service.

Anyhow, for silliness, it's hard not to laugh when a religious person -- who holds to a single interpretation of a single book -- calls an omnivore "closed-minded".

Smacks of, er, closed-mindedness.

robindch

Jakkass wrote: »

I like a lot of people who are vehemently against God.

Who are these people?

If you don't think there's a god up there to start with, it's really impossible to be "against" him, isn't it?

cavedave

FruitLover

Eh... wha? How can money possibly be compared to religion? Money buys tangible benefits and comforts. The flat I live in is rented with money. The computer you're reading this on was bought with money. Why not ask one of the many homeless currently freezing on the streets of Ireland how "worthless" these tokens are?

Religion gains tangible benefits and comforts. Religious people live longer for example.

Religion is among the factors that have been extensively studied. People who attend religious services are healthier, live longer and become less depressed as a result of illness, according to most studies, and they handle stress better.

In many bits of the world not believing in the ruling groups particular imaginary friend results in tangible deficits and lack of comforts.

Just because money makes your life more comfortable that is no more of a reason to believe in its tangibility than church soup kitchens should make you believe in god.

A nice big rolleyes to you and your attempt at mysterious post-modernism

A rolleyes isnt an argument and I hate postmodernism.

liamw

What the hell are you talking about...

I am mentioning another imaginary friend people have to see if some atheists get annoyed when the intangibility of some their beliefs is pointed out.

philologos

robindch wrote: »

Who are these people?

If you don't think there's a god up there to start with, it's really impossible to be "against" him, isn't it?

Apologies: Vehemently against the idea of God.

liamw

cavedave wrote: »

I am mentioning another imaginary friend people have to see if some atheists get annoyed when the intangibility of some their beliefs is pointed out.

I'm not getting annoyed, I'm just confused now. Are you suggesting that we 'believe' in money but it's imaginary?

robindch

Jakkass wrote: »

Apologies: Vehemently against the idea of God.

I don't think that's quite right either.

I'm not speaking for anybody else here, but for me, I'm not against the idea of god any more than I'm against the idea that there is a banana plantation on the rings of Saturn. I just don't think that the proposition is very likely, or worth considering as true. Being "for" or "against" something seems to imply some emotional connection and that simply isn't there for most non-religious people.

That said, I do think that the picture of the christian god that christians provide me with, is quite nasty. But again, that's me just thinking that a depiction is frightful and it's got nothing to do with being for or "against" it. If the deity is there, then its existence and properties are independent of whether I like it or not.

I am however, broadly, "against" irrational superstition, wishful thinking and the many other subtle and not-so-subtle things that prop up a religious belief. But they're largely unrelated to the object of the religious belief.

Apologies for being so -- uh -- jesuitical about it, but I think it's worthwhile to correct what seems to be a misunderstanding on your part of how us lot think.

cavedave

liamw

I'm not getting annoyed, I'm just confused now. Are you suggesting that we 'believe' in money but it's imaginary?

I don't think money is imaginary but it is something we just believe in. Money is anything that is generally accepted as payment for goods and services and repayment of debts. All it really is is what other people are willing to accept as money

Money is an abstraction, idea or concept, token instances

.

I cannot think of a better alternative than money we probably need it to keep some sort of order on things. Mind you many people still think we need to believe in god to keep some sort of order on things also.

Money is just an abstract entity that is used to decide who is worthy and who should be damned to "freezing on the streets".

Zombrex

Jakkass wrote: »

Apologies: Vehemently against the idea of God.

It is interesting that you use that phrasing, given that a major objection a lot of atheists have to theistic belief is this idea that God probably exists because it is better if he does

I hope your god doesn't exist, I would agree with Robin that he sounds evil and nasty. But that really has nothing to do with whether he does or not. He might exist and I would just have to put up with that. I probably still wouldn't worship him, but there would be no point denying he exists, any more than it achieves something by denying Hitler or Glenn Beck exists

God's existence is not a subjective philosophical idea. It is a reality of nature or it isn't. Being against it makes as little sense as being for it, and it would be certainly very inconsistent of me to rail against theists proclaiming that life is just better if God is real as if that means something yet then be against the idea of God existing as if that means something either.

Us wanting God to exist doesn't mean he does

Us not wanting God to exist doesn't mean he doesn't.

Zombrex

cavedave wrote: »

Money is just an abstract entity that is used to decide who is worthy and who should be damned to "freezing on the streets".

No, money is an abstract entity used to represent the value of goods for the purposes of easier transactions.

I used to give you a patato and you gave me a hammer. Then humans developed a system of commerse which allowed for a wider range of transactions by replacing the middle stage with an abstract notion of agreed value, ie money.

I give you 5 coins and you give me a hammer because you know that you can go to someone else with these 5 coins and exchange them for a patato. It no longer requires that I have what you specifically want so long as I have a representation of the value, in coins, of what you specifically want

What the heck you think this has got to do with religion and faith I've no freaking idea

Wheety

Sorry i haven't read all of this thread but the only time I ever step foot inside a church now is for a funeral or a wedding.

I have to stop myself from laughing at how ridiculous it is when everyone starts chanting prayers together and then look at each other to see if it's a stand, kneel or sit bit.

cavedave

Wicknight

What the heck you think this has got to do with religion and faith I've no freaking idea

We all believe in many things that don't really exist. Most of these we have to at least pretend we believe in because everyone else does.

God
Nationality
Race
Gender (not that makey uppy but a lot less testable than people think)
Star Sign
Mental illness

Probably loads more I believe in too deeply to notice they may not be real. Some of these you'll laugh at people who believe in them because there is no empirical test for them.

Zombrex

cavedave wrote: »

We all believe in many things that don't really exist.

Money really exists. I can show you the 5 euro I have in pocket if you like

What you mean, I think, is that it has no value other than the value we assign to it. But then nothing does. Value is a subjective judgement made by a person, rather than a property of the thing itself.

The colour of something is universal based on the properties of the thing itself, but the value of something depends on who is assessing it, it is a subjective judgement.

Something is only as valuable as what someone considered it to be valuable. Money is no more intrinsicly valuable than a potato is.

That does not mean that money is not "real". It doesn't even mean that the value of money is not really, simply that you cannot divorce the value from the valuer. The value of something is dependent on the judgement of the person making the assessment

But again none of this has anything to do with religous faith. God is not a subjective judgement call.

cavedave

Wicknight

Money really exists. I can show you the 5 euro I have in pocket if you like

5 euro is legal tender in this country its not money to someone outside Europe. Many people have bits of paper they claim are pictures of god that does not mean he exists.

The colour of something is universal based on the properties of the thing itself, but the value of something depends on who is assessing it, it is a subjective judgement.

The frequency of light something reflects is a universal property. Its color is a human subjective judgement.

God is not a subjective judgement call.

What is god and belief in her then?

chop86

The frequency of light something reflects is a universal property. Its color is a human subjective judgement.
FAIL.

read the top of your link, "what is the relationship between wavelength and colour appearance?"
Colour IS the frequency of reflected light, for instance your own scource states that red is 620-730nm, wavelength is inversley proportional to frequency.

Sorry bout going off topic, but no-one denounces physics!!!

Sam Vimes

cavedave wrote: »

What is god and belief in her then?

God can quite often mean pretty much whatever the person using the word wants it to mean. The word itself can be subjective but the correctness of any particular interpretation is not.

To use your money example, if everyone got together we could decide that 50 euro is now worth 100 and that's because money only has the value we assign to it but for example if one person thinks that god is male, another thinks female and a third thinks genderless then at least two of them are wrong. It's not up for debate, it can't be put to a vote and how strongly each of them feels about it is irrelevant. We can decide that 50 euro is worth 100 but we can no more decide that god is male than we can decide among ourselve that Brian Cowen is a 3 foot tall asian woman. Our desires and decisions don't change objective facts

liamw

Wheety wrote: »

Sorry i haven't read all of this thread but the only time I ever step foot inside a church now is for a funeral or a wedding.

I have to stop myself from laughing at how ridiculous it is when everyone starts chanting prayers together and then look at each other to see if it's a stand, kneel or sit bit.

Do you kneel down during those parts? I'm not going to do it anymore. I might just stand at the back of the Church at a funeral

cavedave

chop86
Colour IS the frequency of reflected light, for instance your own scource states that red is 620-730nm,

Do you see the squares a and b as the same color? They are the same frequency. If you see them as different colours then colour is a subjective judgement not entirely based on the frequency of the light coming into your eye.

chop86

Sorry bout going off topic, but no-one denounces physics!!!

I do not denounce physics.

Sam Vimes
We can decide that 50 euro is worth 100 but we can no more decide that god is male than we can decide among ourselve that Brian Cowen is a 3 foot tall asian woma

People have decided god is male. The christian god and the muslim one I have only ever seen depicted as male (except in dogma). Is the actual god male? I dont think the actual god exists at least in the knocking up young jewish girls and doing magic tricks way. But then again i dont think money actually exists 'money only has the value we assign to it' (obviously tokens we treat as money exist).

liamw

cavedave wrote: »

But then again i dont think money actually exists 'money only has the value we assign to it' (obviously tokens we treat as money exist).

"Money is a good that acts as a medium of exchange in transactions. Classically it is said that money acts as a unit of account, a store of value, and a medium of exchange."

It exists. The fact that we print pieces of paper and assign monetary values to them, doesn't mean money doesn't really exist..

MagicMarker

cavedave what exactly is your point of posting here? +

cavedave

liamw

"Money is a good that acts as a medium of exchange in transactions. Classically it is said that money acts as a unit of account, a store of value, and a medium of exchange."

So i agree to pray for you if you give me food. That is a barter between prayer food. Now suppose I give you an IOU for 10 hail marys because i cannot pray now but will when you redeem your coupon. You then go off and exchange the hail mary's for bread with the baker who badly needs some prayers.

Prayers become an agreed unit of exchange, they are money. Prayers really exist no one could claim they don't. That doesnt mean you should really believe they have inherent value.

Then you would class any abstract concept as existing? That is a pretty Platonic worldview. Existing in the sense of being out there in some platonic heaven not just there because we agree it is.

cavedave

MagicMarker

cavedave what exactly is your point of posting here? +

We all believe crazy abstract concepts and we don't see how riciculous they are until we escape them.

MagicMarker

I see.

*puts cavedave on ignore list*

irishconvert

liamw wrote: »

I always found this one interesting, particularly becuase I guess I've been there before to some degree when I was a kid.

I'm constantly baffled by how some of my friends who are quite rational, logical and critical thinkers in general, don't laugh at the idea of heaven and hell and god and prayers and a resurrection and .... etc.

It really came to light yesterday while talking to a friend. I made a joke about how I had joined the Church of Scientology (he knows I'm atheist), and the conversation went like this:

'I've joined the Chruch of Scientology'
'haha have you booked a good seat on the spaceship? lol'
'yep, first class, only €150 extra per month, have you been saying your prayers so you can go to heaven?'

Needless to say, he did not take kindly to that remark. He said I need to stop joking about religion and how it isn't a joke. Apparently it's just my opinion that religion is ridiculous and not a fact...

Isn't this some proof of brainwashing? Ever since I stepped away from relgion and started studying the actual evidence for it, I gradually came to realise that heaven is just, if not, more ridiculous a concept than the spaceship.

On a related point, whenever I go to a mass now, I always notice how absolutely ridiculous the whole thing is. It's weird how you don't see it untilyou step outside of it. Anyone else feel this way?

I don't think you can announce that religion is rediculous when you have only experienced of one religion, Catholicism (I assume). Until you investigate all of the religions in the world you can't possibly come to this conclusion. Maybe there is a religion out there that you might find sensible and believeable. It's like me only ever watching Rochdale football matches and concluding that all football is crap when I have never seen the likes of Brazil.

I used to be a Catholic myself and found many of the practises you mention rediculous also. I stopped practising it totally. But then I found a different religion that made so much more sense to me.

Spark Boy

Don't know if this adds to the above chatter, but perhaps to the original posting. I've heard this said before and find it quiet a good question "if people didn't exist then would there be a God/Whatever?" the simple answer appears to be that humans created God and not the other way around..

Sam Vimes

cavedave wrote: »

Do you see the squares a and b as the same color? They are the same frequency. If you see them as different colours then colour is a subjective judgement not entirely based on the frequency of the light coming into your eye.

I do not denounce physics.

People have decided god is male. The christian god and the muslim one I have only ever seen depicted as male (except in dogma). Is the actual god male? I dont think the actual god exists at least in the knocking up young jewish girls and doing magic tricks way. But then again i dont think money actually exists 'money only has the value we assign to it' (obviously tokens we treat as money exist).

Cavedave, you are conflating the objective and the subjective. Money is an abstract concept, we have invented it and it can be whatever we want it to be. Believing that a 5 euro note is worth 10 potatoes is not crazy because it is worth 10 potatoes for no other reason than we as a society have decided it is. If we decided tomorrow that it was only worth 5 potatoes it would be

But we as a society cannot decide that a cat is a dog. We can stick the label dog on it if we want but that does not give a cat the properties of a dog. A cat is not an abstract concept invented by man that only has the meaning that we decide it has, it is a physical being that will stay as it is regardless of what people believe about it. Christians and muslims may have decided that they think god is male but deciding that neither makes god male nor makes him exist in the first place.

Zombrex

cavedave wrote: »

5 euro is legal tender in this country its not money to someone outside Europe. Many people have bits of paper they claim are pictures of god that does not mean he exists.

No but it means the pieces of paper with a picture of God on them exist.

The value of the money is arbitary depending upon whether or not the person places value on it, but that doesn't stop the money existing.

You are confusing the physical money and the value we place in it. Value is a judgement, and no one ever claimed judgements exist as physical things.

cavedave wrote: »

The frequency of light something reflects is a universal property. Its color is a human subjective judgement.

Correct. As is whether the colour is nice or not. But no one is claiming these are physical things. Money is a physical thing. The value someone puts on the money is a judgement not a property of the universe (unless you get into the idea that it is a property of the physical state of our brain, but that is a different matter).

The difference between that and God is that theists do claim that God is an actual entity that exists.

cavedave

Wicknight

The value of the money is arbitary depending upon whether or not the person places value on it, but that doesn't stop the money existing.

Money is a physical thing.

Could you hand me some money in the same way you could hand me a cat*? Not the paper (or gold) that we use as money, actual money.

Here is a ten billion dollar note for sale. The money that was represented by the earlier notes has inflated away as the faith in the currency went.

Sam Vimes I agree with your last post other then where you claimed i was "conflating the objective and the subjective". Where did i do this?

*with a cat almost anyone on earth could agree what you handed me was a cat. With euro notes most would not see what you handed me as money.

Sam Vimes

cavedave wrote: »

Sam Vimes I agree with your last post other then where you claimed i was "conflating the objective and the subjective". Where did i do this?

You're saying that we believe in concepts as ridiculous as god because we accept the value of money. You're conflating the subjective value of money with the objective existence of god

cavedave wrote: »

*with a cat almost anyone on earth could agree what you handed me was a cat. With euro notes most would not see what you handed me as money.

Anyone in the world can bring a euro note to a currency exchange where they are given the subjective value of the note