How atheists can enjoy religion

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Finally I meet here someone who also has seen the light that is anime. By the way Boru is also an anime fan, its just he is shy to admit it.

Boru is also an administrator with access to a rather large ban hammer. Just saying.

Boru

[brewer]

[WinterHold]

What good is a religion that doesn't try to make life less painful?

What good is a religion that takes itself so seriously that there's no fun allowed?

It provides objective truth, it is never meant to be a subjective matter.

If I wanted to have fun, first I'll consult myself to see what is the most fun thing to me, then I will consult the objective constitution that I follow to see if the fun "I'm trying to have" is legal".

A lot of religions claim to have objective truth, but I've yet to see one that can empirically demonstrate that they have objective truth.

One also does not need religion to make rational choices about balancing enjoyment with morality.  (If an action exposes someone else to potential harm, it's probably not something that I would enjoy doing.)

In my opinion, the stressing on the "design of the universe" is what makes Islam stands out from the reset of religions; the steps for "discovering the design" are in the story of Abraham peace be upon him:

Sura 6. The Quran:
https://quran.com/6:78?store=false&translations=

Translator: — Dr. Ghali

(75) And thus We show Ibrahim (Abraham) the dominion of the heavens and the earth that he may be of the ones of constant certitude.

(76) So as soon as the night outspread over him, he saw a planet. He said, "This is my Lord." Then, as soon as it set, (Literally: waned, faded) he said, "I do not love the setting (things)."

(77) Then, as soon as he saw the moon emerging, he said, "This is my Lord." Yet as soon as it set, he said, "Indeed unless my Lord guides me, indeed I will definitely be of the erring people."

(78) Then, as soon as he saw the sun emerging, he said, "This is my Lord, this is greater." Yet as soon as it set, he said, "O my people, surely I am quit of whatever you associate (with Allah).

(79) Surely I have directed my face to Him Who originated (i.e., created) the heavens and the earth, unswervingly upright, (i.e., by nature upright) and in no way am I one of the associators." (i.e., those who associate others with Allah)

Other religions do not provide such logical explanations for belief like this simple, straightforward way. In mathematics it is called the "Base Case":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recursion#In_mathematics

God is the "Base Case" of this universe, and the story of Abraham shows it clearly.
Other religions fail in giving anything logical like this.

[Astreja]

Other religions fail in giving anything logical like this.

Believe that if you want, WinterHold. I think you're wrong.

I think what you have in Islam is bits and pieces of knowledge "borrowed" from neighbouring cultures, seen through the eye of the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy by modern-day believers - trying to tie Quranic mythology to science by liberally reinterpreting poetic phrases in the context of things that were discovered long after the Qur'an was written.

There's nothing the least bit divine in the passage you quoted. Humans have known about the sun, moon and planets for a long, long time.

[WinterHold]

Other religions fail in giving anything logical like this.

Believe that if you want, WinterHold.  I think you're wrong.

I think what you have in Islam is bits and pieces of knowledge "borrowed" from neighbouring cultures, seen through the eye of the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy by modern-day believers - trying to tie Quranic mythology to science by liberally reinterpreting poetic phrases in the context of things that were discovered long after the Qur'an was written.

There's nothing the least bit divine in the passage you quoted.  Humans have known about the sun, moon and planets for a long, long time.

1-I place my source for ideas as being the Quranic verses (quoting them in process), 
2-then I mention my interpretation for them and what made me conclude & believe in that interpretation to be the true one.

I also use my native fluency in Arabic language and ability to read Arabic by birth.

Borrowing "sources to support my interpretation" (step 2) in producing the interpretation, is fine by me and actually an eye opener too: under the conditions of the sources be authentic (like documented scientific articles from Wikipedia/other authentic sites).

Don't forget that I'm a globalist individual who believes that humans "are all the same specie with mere differences in color". So borrowing a credit fact from another culture is very legal for me.

[Astreja]

So borrowing a credit fact from another culture is very legal for me.

I think you misunderstood me. As I see it, the Qur'an authors borrowed already-existing information (e.g. the known existence of the sun, moon and planets.)

Fact: The sun, moon and planets exist. I've observed all three myself (only planets in the solar system I haven't observed are Uranus and Neptune - I've seen all the others.)

Unsupported assertion: A god created the sun, moon and planets.

[Ahriman]

So borrowing a credit fact from another culture is very legal for me.

I think you misunderstood me.  As I see it, the Qur'an authors borrowed already-existing information (e.g. the known existence of the sun, moon and planets.)

Fact:  The sun, moon and planets exist.  I've observed all three myself (only planets in the solar system I haven't observed are Uranus and Neptune - I've seen all the others.)

Unsupported assertion:  A god created the sun, moon and planets.

This might be a little abstract, but I would argue all words/concepts are unsupported assertions, until they are argued for. So if you're willing to argue for the idea that there are planets, stars, moons, etc., then those things become real. Likewise, if you're willing to argue for the idea that there are gods, who created planets, stars, moons, etc., then gods become real.

[Astreja]

This might be a little abstract, but I would argue all words/concepts are unsupported assertions, until they are argued for. So if you're willing to argue for the idea that there are planets, stars, moons, etc., then those things become real. Likewise, if you're willing to argue for the idea that there are gods, who created planets, stars, moons, etc., then gods become real.

Perhaps gods "become real" to the person doing the arguing, but that isn't necessarily transferable to other people. I've not experienced anything that would give me a sense of gods being real. The Great Red Spot on Jupiter, though, is real to me because I've seen it. Same for the rings of Saturn.

And (subject to the visibility of planets on a particular night) I can point up to a spot in a sky, and say "There's Jupiter, there's Saturn, Mars is over there, and that bright one near the western horizon is Venus. Can't see Mercury tonight because it's really close to the sun at the moment."

Much, much more real to me than gods.

[brewer]

[Mister Agenda]

This might be a little abstract, but I would argue all words/concepts are unsupported assertions, until they are argued for. So if you're willing to argue for the idea that there are planets, stars, moons, etc., then those things become real. Likewise, if you're willing to argue for the idea that there are gods, who created planets, stars, moons, etc., then gods become real.

This seems to be a uniquely theistic position, I've never seen an atheist paint themselves into a corner where they have to admit that if they're right, Santa Claus and leprechauns and shit made up on the spot are real.

As an aside, I'm enjoying religion at the moment, in a way (of course I already enjoy anime). I'm re-reading the Bible. It's much less traumatic this time now that I know the Hebrews didn't do nearly as much slaughtering of the innocent as they claimed to in their foundational myths. I can appreciate the aburdity this time around (like the lesser known plague of hemorrhoids against the Philistines and the five golden hemorrhoids they had to pay up to make it stop), and since I'm reading a Catholic version, there's several parts I haven't read before. Just finished Tobin, which I was previously completely unfamiliar with.