I love religion!

[Zagreus]

Take away people and there is no art, philosophy, literature, etc. either. Religion is just ideas and beliefs, nothing more. You might as well have a go at philosophy, or to an extent, economics, or some other theoretical belief system our species has come up with.

Yes? and that disproves my original point how?
And I will have a go at philosphy. And especially economics.

Religion’s a theory and a belief system. It doesn’t do anything. You are taking the subject very literally and basing it on people’s actions; the only people you have cited so far are fundamentalists, and I have repeatedly said I am not really interested in their literalist views.

Religion can be regarded as an abstract construct, and a branch of philosophy. THAT is what I find interesting and am saying I love, not the ravings of some red neck whose mum is his sister.

My point was that it was a subject matter, not an actual thing. Having a go at philosophy is like shouting at thinking! You can have a go at philosophical ideas, and you can disagree with people’s economic views, but would you label geography in the way that you do religion? “Geography, you’re stupid” or “I laugh at geography.”

Religion isn’t simply there to control people, no matter how much you insist it is. Guru Nanak was not simply trying to control people; something more complex is involved, like social issues, thought, belief, and so on.

Maybe not this particular person, but can you say the same about the Catholic church or Islam?
or any of the nutbag cults like the branch dividians or the Scientologists?

Look, there’s a big difference between most religious people of significance, and the subsequent cults that developed after them. People, by and large, are herd animals and do not necessarily question what they are told. Many aren’t intelligent enough to grasp the ideas that are presented to them, and just do as they are told. That’s a problem with humanity, not some of the ideas our species has.

To put it into context, Jesus taught basic benevolence, not the guilt ridden dogma of the Catholic Church. Scholars have attempted to strip away these original ideas from the later bits that were added on. It is believed Mark was based upon an older text, usually named Q. This has all the stuff like ‘Love your enemies.’ The historical Jesus would have had a set of ideas that he taught. Over the years after, as the church developed, these ideas were built upon and often distorted, for various reasons. Theological developments, political ones, and so on. Some of this was also due to individual desires for power, money, and so on. The concept of Jesus being God is added in a little later, and later still the concept of hell develops. Eventually we have Christ’s words being hate yourself from the moment you are born, you naughty sinner, and don’t even think about touching that!

---

Humans have, for better or for worse, changed these original ideas. Many of these ideas, from the original ones, through the developments, to the ones we have ended up with, I find interesting. That does not mean I share their views, but I like to see what other people think.

The way you lump things together is to miss the detail and complexities involved. Region does not equal Islam, or Christianity. Yes, there are many people who might use their dogma to control others, but there are also many others who do not. It’s just a bit shit when the former get into power.

I’m not defending the actions of the people within the Catholic Church or Islam (far from it, I fundamentally disagree on many, many issues) but that does not mean I shouldn’t take an interest in their ideas or histories. The development of Catholicism is directly tied into the fabric of the history of Europe and elsewhere.

Nutbag cults are interesting too, as I am intrigued why some people believe such things. Scientology especially, seeing as I’ve heard that Hubbard said he was doing it for money! He was a sci fi writer for God’s sake! Even Aleister Crowley thought he was dodgy!!! I have a copy of Dianetics, but am yet to read it.

You say that people use it as an excuse not to think, but that’s the person’s flaw, not a theoretical construct’s problem.
[quote='Zagreus' pid='50114' dateline='1263429279']
You are very critical of theology, but yet you are repeating the same basic things over and over, and then ignoring the comments that disagree with you. You’ve even tried to ignore the dictionary and re-define what a religion is! You are essentially just trying to make things fit your world view regardless of the evidence that is presented, which is as bad as what you accuse fundamentalists of doing.

How have I tried to redefine religion? And I've yet to see any evidence presented, just your point
of view.And of course I'm critical of theology, what were you expecting?

You tried to redefine it by saying Buddhism isn’t a religion. That was a bit of a silly statement. Just because YOU equate religion with the belief of a big Santa in the sky, does not mean everyone else does. You can’t just make up a definition that is different to the one in the dictionary!

Being critical of theology is fine, if you are disagreeing with specific ideas. Saying you laugh at it because they think you shouldn’t have a wank is hardly insightful, is it? If we actually looked sensibly at some of the ideas I suspect we would agree, but the difference here is that I’m willing to look at other view points, not just dismiss tem outright as silly.

---

I'm not asking you to take religion seriously. I'm not actually asking you to do anything at all. I was simply stating that I think there is more to religion than I think many atheists give credit to. You are proving me right with every post.

---

One question my friend.

If you think religion is wonderful, why are you an atheist?

I don’t have to believe something is right to find it interesting. I have an imagination, and don’t take everything so literally.

If you are so dismissive of faith, why do you label yourself an atheist and hang around a religion section of an atheist forum?

Can I ask a bit of a personal question? Were you raised religiously? Strict Catholic or anything? I’m not meaning that one as a dig, I’m genuinely interested, as I’ve spoken to people before, and often the dislike of religion can stem from a religious background and the idea that you were fed lies.

I hated religion when I was a kid (even though I was raised atheist) and thought it a load of rubbish. Haven’t even got a GCSE in the subject. My interest developed when studying philosophy at college, and then blossomed when I was at university, as I still maintain religion can be viewed as a branch of philosophy. I say this only to explain my interest in it a little more.

---

Don't we all wish we were Jedi's? I sure as hell do. lol

---

According to the 2001 census, I am a Jedi.

I was also a very witty student at the time. How I laughed... There's only me and Oscar.

Just found something interesting the topic of Buddhism and whether it actually is (or is not) an actual religion.

And it continues with the history of Buddhism and the different types etc, but I thought that this extract was somewhat relevant and quite insightful.

Yep, it's definitely relevant, but I don't think we need to prove one of the six major religions is actually a religion. I don't think ZB thought that one out when he wrote it.