Why religion will never die.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
...what [do] you mean by "universe [without] a purpose"[?]

When I say a universe without a purpose I mean a universe that is not specifically created to serve some need for a higher being, or in a greater context.

I mean we can build values that can be endorsed (as you put it) by what we can see is built into the universe itself. So, you can have a religion (should you so wish) without believing that the existence is serving a purpose in any way but to sustain its internal components (of which we're tiny ones).

---

(Can I do what I did above with the quote? I mean, is it normal to do that? I felt like a genius when I did it, anyway. 😏 )

Originally posted by lucifershammer
S: [Communism] merely forbids you to practice the religions built on top of those beliefs. LH: Which sets it firmly against religion.

No. Against religious practice in an official capacity which may give it influence over the people such that the communist state may fall asunder over time. This part I don't like about communism, but is it unique? Any society has forbidden certain practices to uphold the state (even modern western societies). Communism takes it to an extreme, but so does religions like islam and christianity. There's an awful lot of rules to follow in those religions and they can easily be used to control people in a negative way. (Which is probably why ideas like those formulated by Marx has been conceived in the first place.)

Understand that I'm not speaking for communism. I'm merely pointing out that communism is actually a good idea at the core. My own dream society is such that it would consider all parties in that society. In other words, my dream society is absolutely impossible, as my next post will explain (hopefully).

Originally posted by lucifershammer
S: If communism (as practised in some dictatorships today) promotes anything, it's religions like christianity and catholicism. LH: Really? 😕

Yes, really. Let's reverse the roles for a second.

Do you believe that if I lived in a very strict, catholic society, where everyone is forced to live according to catholic laws, that I would be any less atheist? Of course not. I would still not believe in God because I find god to be a most unlikely part of the universe that I can observe. I may claim to believe (for obvious political reasons) but in my heart I would know I don't actually believe.

In fact, I think I would be encouraged to speak my mind and fight for my right to deny the christian god for as long as possible. If I can't do it in the open, I would do it in secret. Seek up like-minded and try to create a sub-culture of sorts. I wouldn't stop being what I am because the catholic church tells me it's sinful or wrong. I may feel bad about it (noone likes to have to hide their true self), but I couldn't possibly be anything but me.

I don't think it's any different with communism. If a communist state is forceful about keeping religion out of society entirely, those who believe will only fight harder to sustain their religion (in secret if they have to).

Considering that the state we originally spoke of was a strict state that didn't give the people a whole lot to live on (which is a violation to communism if you think about it - communism is about sharing the posessions equally among all the people), I can see how some weak-minded people (and aren't most people just like that?) might seek a god to give some meaning to their life beyond this despicable life they're forced to live. So, such a state would in fact encourage religions like catholism. Because the curch give the promise of a reward in the afterlife (if you live by the rules), it is tempting to believe it if your life generally sucks.

If we take Cuba as an example. It's a dictatorship where the communist party of Cuba is the only party allowed to be nominated for election (meaning that it's not a democracy at all). Not even the communist party of Cuba is allowed to nominate another candidate. 😵 So stupid. Anyway, since 1991 the catholic church (and any other religion - although the majority of the people on Cuba are now catholics) has been allowed to practice their catholic believes on Cuba, and it's now considered a secular state (rather than an atheist state as Castro first wanted it to be). It's still a communist state (although warped). So you see, despite what Marx said about religion there can still be a communist state with a secular foundation beneath it. I'd say that's necessary (for obvious reasons). Now, if Cuba can only allow for a real democracy with a stable communistic constitution it could actually be a nice country. I doubt it will happen any time soon, though.

Because every society consists of so many different people, having so many different beliefs and values in life, the ideal society - the one where everyone is treated equally and still given enough room to feel free - is impossible. Isn't it? There will always be a minority (if it's a democracy) whom live under unacceptable conditions. I'd like to see societies based on common factors. Catholic. Atheist. Anarkistic, Islamic. And so on. People within one society are allowed to move to another if they don't believe in what their country stands for. Of course, that too, is an impossibility. A country is dependant on its citizens and what if I'm the only atheistnostic around? Could I actually live by myself in my own country? Hmmm... Actually, why not? The societies would have to support each other as needed.

I still maintain that just because the Czech rebublic was a communist state for so many years (under the sovjet union), it doesn't mean that the majority of people who live their today are atheists because of it. There can be many reasons for being atheist, so yes, in a way it is surprising if the majority of the czhechs are. If anything, you'd think they'd react similar to the cubans and seek a religion to make life durable.

Also, it's not certain that the majority of people in the Czech rebublic are atheists. What we know (according to the 2001 census by CIA) is this:

Roman Catholic 26.8%, Protestant 2.1%, other 3.3%, unspecified 8.8%, unaffiliated 59%

Those figures says that the catholic church and the protestant church are considered separately and the rest is either another religion, unspecified or unaffiliated. Which really doesn't say a whole lot in terms of atheists. If I'm unspecified or unaffiliated I may be an atheist, but a buddhist or christian as well.

Source: http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ez.html

---

Oh, this is a messy post. I apologize for that... 😳

Although I do stand corrected that communism in itself is not inherently against religion. Obviously it is, so LH was right about that one. I kinda changed the discussion to be about whether or not that would promote or discourage atheism.

I'm so dirty. 🙁

Originally posted by stocken
I still maintain that just because the Czech rebublic was a communist state for so many years (under the sovjet union), it doesn't mean that the majority of people who live their today are atheists because of it.

Quite so...I think the majority of Poles are still Catholic. And there are still more church-goers in the Czech Republich than in the UK, which has never been communist. Czechs have always been free thinkers (have you heard of Jan Hus?) while Czech nationalism was instrumental in ending the Austro-Hungarian empire. Of course, Czech communism was the most progressive, until the Bear sat on them in Spring. So, three cheers for the Czechs!

Originally posted by KnightWulfe
Religion will never die because human understanding of the things around us will never be exact of complete. Human have the isatiable need to explain that which they do not understand or that which has no known answer. most often, these answers involve something plausable, but entirely based in faith.

"...most often, these answers involve something plausable, but entirely based in faith..."

This is a contradiction. Faith is not PLAUSIBLE. Rather it is blind subservience. Science is plausible, as it relies upon evidence and experimentation.
Religion is the opposite of this. It involves either ignoring plausible evidence (such as fossils) or twisting the religion to fit the facts (such as God putting fossils there and making them appear older to us to test our faith).
Religion is spoon fed and questioning it is barred (with the death penalty for Islam). This lack of transparency belies its Implausibility.

More than likely, all you religious folk simply won't understand this post because you have never been taught to think for yourselves. Your religious teachers fear that were you able to critically analyse things, then you would discover the implausibility of religion.

Thus I will speak to you in language you will grasp so as to not alienate you entirely: "Baaaa Baaaa Baaaa".

Originally posted by Halitose
To be, or not to be: that is the question.

And that question dear Stock is for you to answer: do you think a child left to himself would develop vice or virtue?

I honestly don't know. What do you think? And why? Or don't you know either?

I think LJ was on to something when he wrote: it takes a herd to instill the kind of herd mentality you have in mind.

Originally posted by stocken
I honestly don't know. What do you think? And why? Or don't you know either?

Why do so many people raised with "good family values" turn out to be complete SOB's in any case?

Originally posted by KnightWulfe
Religion will never die because human understanding of the things around us will never be exact of complete. Human have the isatiable need to explain that which they do not understand or that which has no known answer. most often, these answers involve something plausable, but entirely based in faith.

Actually, I think it is more basic than that. Religion will never die whilst Human Creativity exists. You can relax one day and lie in the sun. Enjoying the moment you can feel that the universe means you no harm. It is no great leap of creative energy in that moment to conclude that "God is Love", or that we are "One with everything".
With human interaction over thousands of years further creative impulses are applied, and we arrive at the point to which religion has deveoped today. In a sense it is possible to conclude that theologians are artists and art critics!
Science has its role to play also. If nowhere else, God exists in the mind of his believers. This leads to observable phenomena that may indicate a deep socialogical purpose behind the religious impulse, and lead to further insights into the working of the human mind.

Originally posted by Mister Meaner
In a sense it is possible to conclude that theologians are artists and art critics!

Or that metaphysics is a branch of fantasy literature.

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
Virtue

Good. That's a start. Do you concede that there are evil (non-virtuous) people around? If so, to what would you assign this anomaly?

Originally posted by LemonJello
[b]do you think a child left to himself would develop vice or virtue?

Neither. It takes a herd to instill the kind of herd mentality you have in mind.[/b]

Perhaps I should better define "left to himself" as given no moral direction. I know this would be a difficult situation to gauge since a child will emulate those around it that it respects.

Originally posted by stocken
When I say a universe without a purpose I mean a universe that is not specifically created to serve some need for a higher being, or in a greater context.

I mean we can build values that can be endorsed (as you put it) by what we can see is built into the universe itself. So, you can have a religion (should you so wish) without believing that the existenc ...[text shortened]... th the quote? I mean, is it normal to do that? I felt like a genius when I did it, anyway. 😏 )

Does that mean God is without purpose?

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
Does that mean God is without purpose?

No. It means that the universe it supposedly created may be without purpose. Who knows what other "projects" it's got going, or what purpose it may have in the larger scheme of things?