Why people believe in religion.

 
 
Avatar
 
 
wahoo
Total Posts:  233
Joined  05-10-2008
 
 
 
11 July 2009 11:46
 
seeking_truth - 11 July 2009 03:05 PM
wahoo - 11 July 2009 01:36 PM

The conversation makes sense by itself without having to attach significance to a word (Greek adverb), which he points out, was almost certainly not uttered by Jesus.

The conversation makes better sense if one considers that it never took place and is merely a fabrication by some wishful thinking Greek author who wasn’t there.

Sure would be “divine” if we had an original Aramaic manuscript that contained all of Jesus’ utterings wouldn’t it?

You could make that argument without even involving the Greek text.

What Aramaic?  Palestinian Aramaic?  Later Syriac?  We don’t know a lot about the Aramaic spoken during those times.  One could argue Greek was a better vehicle with which to preserve the writings.

 
seeking_truth
 
Avatar
 
 
seeking_truth
Total Posts:  172
Joined  25-01-2008
 
 
 
11 July 2009 19:25
 
wahoo - 11 July 2009 03:46 PM

What Aramaic?  Palestinian Aramaic?  Later Syriac?  We don’t know a lot about the Aramaic spoken during those times.  One could argue Greek was a better vehicle with which to preserve the writings.

How about Galilean Aramaic?

One could argue that Hebrew (the language in which God revealed his own name) would have been a far better vehicle than Greek. This was after all, the language of God’s chosen people.

Aramaic was the most common language spoken and written at that time (most couldn’t even understand the reading of their own Scripture in its original Hebrew so translation into Aramaic was necessary).  It is suggested that Jesus however, probably knew Hebrew as a second language (after all he did debate with Pharisee’s and those discussions likely occurred in Hebrew).

One could argue why it is that we have nothing written by the Son of God himself that has survived to this day.  For surely if the Son of God put pen to paper - such written words would “endureth forever”.  And I think it’s safe to say that they would not have been in Greek.

 
 
Avatar
 
 
Traces Elk
Total Posts:  5404
Joined  27-09-2006
 
 
 
11 July 2009 19:37
 
wahoo - 11 July 2009 03:00 PM

Inspired, yes.  Inerrant, yes, but obviously allowing for language translation.  I am not a literalist….

I don’t agree that he botched it.

I see you more as an “extracts it from his asshole” type. Your argument is so bad, in fact, that all you want to do is tell us what you believe. Your argument is so bad that, if an anal wart got impregnated by a gallstone and got morning sickness and puked, that puke would be able to construct a better argument than you have done. Now, fuck yourself around the block a couple of times sideways with a flaming purple donut.

Keep in mind, Hoo-hah, that you are not exercising your freedom of religion here, but your freedom of expression, and since this is not a place of worship, that freedom protects me in telling you just how crappy your theology is in no uncertain terms.

Your devotion to that “inspired” and “inerrant” Book of yours is nothing but bibliolatry, worship of the Book itself. It is all you offer us, and it is disgusting. No one forced you to come here and testify to your devotion. You possess no capabilities that anyone else here lacks, and the evidence left here by your words is that many of your capabilities are considerably less than in those you address.

[ Edited: 11 July 2009 21:12 by Traces Elk]
 
 
 
Avatar
 
 
wahoo
Total Posts:  233
Joined  05-10-2008
 
 
 
12 July 2009 04:44
 
Traces Elk - 11 July 2009 11:37 PM
wahoo - 11 July 2009 03:00 PM

Inspired, yes.  Inerrant, yes, but obviously allowing for language translation.  I am not a literalist….

I don’t agree that he botched it.

I see you more as an “extracts it from his asshole” type. Your argument is so bad, in fact, that all you want to do is tell us what you believe. Your argument is so bad that, if an anal wart got impregnated by a gallstone and got morning sickness and puked, that puke would be able to construct a better argument than you have done. Now, fuck yourself around the block a couple of times sideways with a flaming purple donut.

Keep in mind, Hoo-hah, that you are not exercising your freedom of religion here, but your freedom of expression, and since this is not a place of worship, that freedom protects me in telling you just how crappy your theology is in no uncertain terms.

Your devotion to that “inspired” and “inerrant” Book of yours is nothing but bibliolatry, worship of the Book itself. It is all you offer us, and it is disgusting. No one forced you to come here and testify to your devotion. You possess no capabilities that anyone else here lacks, and the evidence left here by your words is that many of your capabilities are considerably less than in those you address.

I see you have once again changed my motive for being here.  I was just getting used to the Mouse Turdism!

What I “offer” is brief answers to the questions I knew I would be asked.  If someone asks “what” I believe I will tell “what” I believe.  Would you perhaps prefer preaching?

 
 
Avatar
 
 
mammooth
Total Posts:  274
Joined  03-07-2007
 
 
 
12 July 2009 07:28
 
Airy Spirit - 15 June 2009 09:22 PM

I was watching a show about Mormons,.....then religion itself has no meaning.

1. Religion is the result of the need of the Tribal animal to have a better understanding of the unknown.
Why people believe in religion?
1. Because we have being condition to believe.
2. Because people adopt other people’s beliefs to explain things that they can’t understand.
3. Because is a structural part of our society.
4. If tragedy, death and damnation is like a black hole in life, Religion is standing in front to provide explanation and hope for all the participants and observant of these events.

 
 
 
Avatar
 
 
Traces Elk
Total Posts:  5404
Joined  27-09-2006
 
 
 
12 July 2009 11:03
 
wahoo - 12 July 2009 08:44 AM

I see you have once again changed my motive for being here.  I was just getting used to the Mouse Turdism!

What I “offer” is brief answers to the questions I knew I would be asked.  If someone asks “what” I believe I will tell “what” I believe.  Would you perhaps prefer preaching?

I don’t really care that much about your motives, which I can identify, and I note that they are numerous and very conflicted. You are offering “excuses” instead of “explanations” and “answers”. You are “excusing” your prejudices. It is entertaining to watch someone who knows he’s hip deep in it exhibitionistically do the Br’er Rabbit thing with his God.

There’s a very simple problem with telling someone “honestly” what you believe, and leaving out the discussion of any doubts you have about it. If you cannot express any doubts about what you believe, then your beliefs are so shallow that you cannot be said to hold any beliefs. See that film with Meryl Streep and P S Hoffman, entitled “Doubt”.

 
 
 
Avatar
 
 
Rami
Total Posts:  1321
Joined  24-04-2006
 
 
 
12 July 2009 17:37
 
clayforHim648 - 17 June 2009 06:27 PM

If life is the centre of one’s consciousness, then one would turn away from religion.

Unless your Joel Osteen…have you read “Your Best Life Now”? 

It seems that a contemplation of death may lead someone to think about religion or spiritual things, but I don’t see how death is really at the center of all religious people’s consciousness. 

Generally speaking, I would say people “turn to religion” for an endless number of reasons.

I agree, Clay.  It does something for them.  They get something out of it.  We atheists tend to focus on the faith aspect of religion - because it is the aspect we reject and the very thing that makes us atheists.  But there is so much more to religion than faith.  And I am beginning to come to the conclusion that for a large portion of those who label themselves as belonging to a religion, faith is not really the central focus. 

I really don’t think most people are profound thinkers.  They know that religion provides something for them.  And the faith is only a part of it - most of the time.  Religion, after all, means “to bind together”.  I think we forget that.  Social cohesion.  Tribal identity.  Common customs, rituals, holidays, traditions, stories, foods…  A weekly ritual of being social with other members of the family or tribe.  Fellowship.  Forming ties with other members of the community.  Binding together - being “religious”. 

All the deep stuff, the pondering of the meaning of life, the inevitability of death, the reason for existence, etc. - I think that is peripheral for most people. 

Just last week I visited my family in Bulgaria.  When I was growing up there, they claimed to all be atheists.  Heck, everyone was an atheist.  Nobody went to church, nobody prayed, nobody owned a Bible.  Now that they are all anti-communist, they are all “religious”.  But what does that really mean?  They don’t really have faith.  They go to church whenever there is big religious holiday.  They have pretty icons in their homes - because they are pretty.  And so they identify as “Christians”.  But for them this label has little to do with faith.  It has to do with national, tribal identity and that’s about it.  We are Christians, unlike the Turks (a substantial minority in Bulgaria), who are Muslims.  We are Christians, unlike the communists, who are atheists.  In their minds to be an atheist is to be like a communist. 

So anyway, I think that for most ordinary people out there, faith, with all of the complexities of doctrine and dogma, is not central to their “religiosity.”  Religion really is about binding together more than anything.  Thoughtful people like you, Clay, are somewhat rare.  In my experience.

 
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  1044
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
12 July 2009 18:46
 
Rami - 12 July 2009 09:37 PM

Thoughtful people like you, Clay, are somewhat rare.  In my experience.

Was that supposed to be “thoughtless”?

 
 
 
Avatar
 
 
eudemonia
Total Posts:  2492
Joined  05-04-2008
 
 
 
13 July 2009 15:02
 

‘Was that supposed to be “thoughtless”?’

LOL. Thats what I was thinking. Clay thoughtful????

Surely you jest?

 
 
nachtmusick
 
Avatar
 
 
nachtmusick
Total Posts:  137
Joined  27-12-2007
 
 
 
19 July 2009 02:34
 

I think Rami meant “thoughtful” in the generally accepted sense of the term.

I sometimes wonder why Clay continues to post when he is subjected to indiscriminate ridicule on a constant basis.  I disagree with Clay, but I have never found him to be ridiculous.  Or impolite.

 
 
Avatar
 
 
eudemonia
Total Posts:  2492
Joined  05-04-2008
 
 
 
19 July 2009 12:38
 

Yeah, just joking about Clay. However he is quite ridiculous. His views anyway. Unless you think that the apocalypse is coming and Jesus will return and millions of us will be murdered and sent to everlasting fire and damnation. Thats ridiculous to me, and many others here.

 
 
goodgraydrab
 
Avatar
 
 
goodgraydrab
Total Posts:  1891
Joined  19-12-2007
 
 
 
21 July 2009 07:33
 
Rami - 12 July 2009 09:37 PM

Thoughtful people like you, Clay, are somewhat rare.  In my experience.

nachtmusick - 19 July 2009 06:34 AM

I disagree with Clay, but I have never found him to be ridiculous.

WTF!  shut eye

 
 
 
Avatar
 
 
dlsmith
Total Posts:  952
Joined  26-06-2006
 
 
 
21 July 2009 08:32
 
Rami - 12 July 2009 09:37 PM

I really don’t think most people are profound thinkers.

That’s the understatement of the year.

 
 
 
Avatar
 
 
Traces Elk
Total Posts:  5404
Joined  27-09-2006
 
 
 
21 July 2009 10:22
 
dlsmith - 21 July 2009 12:32 PM
Rami - 12 July 2009 09:37 PM

I really don’t think most people are profound thinkers.

That’s the understatement of the year.

And ignores the elephant in Rami’s room. But with a big enough vacuum cleaner, all is forgiven the elephant, eh?