BS: why do we need religion

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: Little Hawk
Date: 15 Feb 05 - 07:14 PM

It isn't necessarily so. One can posit a number of spiritual philosophies that do not include God. Taoism is one of them. Buddhism appears to me to be another.

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: GUEST,Mrr
Date: 16 Feb 05 - 01:45 PM

Actually, Little Hawk, I would beg to differ that whether I worship anything is a matter of perspective. Worship has a definite meaning, which does not apply to the way I feel about anything that I respect, believe in, or admire.
And it wasn't I who asked about the wars being raged in the name of atheism - which is not what communism is about, by the way, it's a side issue. Not everything that atheists do is done in the name of atheism. Communism may be all you say, but it is not a religion. Neither, for that matter, is atheism, although I know of (and disapprove of) a movement to have it called so, in order for atheist groups to become tax-exempt. But I did think that the question was a good one.
My question is, I guess, what is Spiritual. If it's whatever makes you happy, why use the word Spiritual? Why not happiness? It's like the word Wellness - what was wrong with the word Health?

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: GUEST,Mrr
Date: 16 Feb 05 - 01:52 PM

OK, went to the online encyclopedia:
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Worship usually refers to specific acts of religious praise, honour, or devotion, typically directed to a supernatural being such as a god or goddess. It is the informal term in English for what sociologists of religion call cultus, the body of practices and traditions that correspond to theology.
This has nothing to do with my feelings or behavior so far.
Religious worship may be performed individually, in informally organized groups, or as part of an organized service with a designated leader (as in a church, synagogue, temple, or mosque). In its older sense in the English language of worthiness or respect, worship may sometimes refer to actions directed at members of higher social classes (such as lords or monarchs) or to particularly esteemed persons (such as a lover).
Hmmm - I *have* been deeply in love - although I'm not right now. I'll have to think about whether that ever constituted worship for me.
Typical acts of worship include:
prayer; sacrifice (korban in Hebrew); rituals; meditation; holidays, festivals; pilgrimages; hymns or psalms; the construction of temples or shrines; the creation of idols of the deity.
OK, I don't pray, although I hope; I don't sacrifice TO anything, although I have certainly sacrificed FOR some things; I have habits and follow traditions, I guess you could call some of those rituals but that term means "with supernatural oversight" which we don't have in our family habits/traditions; I'm big into holidays and festivals but not to benefit anything supernatural; I believe that all the energy wasted on temples and shrines could be much better applied to, say, schools; and I don't create idols.
Hmmm. I'm gonna have to think about the rituals and being in love things, though...

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: EagleWing
Date: 16 Feb 05 - 02:22 PM

"Eagle Wing
It's hard to be silly when your faith is strong."

Oh dear. That either means my faith is weak (and it does have its moments) or that I failed to be silly.

My friends will never believe that latter suggestion since I have been very silly all my life.

Recently, on another thread, I was even officially declared to be silly!

So it must be my faith that's in doubt.

Oh well, Martin. Back to the weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth.

Frank L.

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: EagleWing
Date: 16 Feb 05 - 02:31 PM

"Not everything that atheists do is done in the name of atheism."

And not everything that is done in the name of God or Religion has much really to do with religion.

Northern Ireland, for instance, is about a United Irish Republic v. Union with the UK. It's just convenient that most of the supporters of the former are "Catholic" and most of the supporters of the latter are "Protestant".

Even the English Civil War was about monarchy v. republic.

Frank L.

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: GUEST,Mrr
Date: 16 Feb 05 - 03:37 PM

Ah, but the Catholics hate the Protestants, and the Protestants hate the Catholics, and the Hundus hate the Moslems, and everybody hates the Jews... just to bring it back to music, LOL!

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: Bill D
Date: 16 Feb 05 - 04:34 PM

Amos

"...but I have seen no evidence that so fundamental a difference in basic nature... has ever been achieved merely by adding complexity."

I have. The evidence of evolution and anthropology, plus the latest research in neurology suggests that this is precisely what is happening. Self-awareness and reflective consciousness seem to be directly related to size and complexity of brains. It is, of course, not possible under the current state of knowlege to describe exactly what might constitute 'critical mass' or what the precise mechanism might be....but that hypothesis seems, to me, easier to explore than to posit a set of concepts that cannot be explored, except linguistically.

I can't quite imagine how your viewpoint deals with the various points on the continuum between one-celled organisms and fully aware humans.....Do worms participate in metaphysical consciousness? Do dogs? Chimps? (excluding, Chongo, of course)..and how about humans with severe retardation? In my approach, these are merely varying degrees of complexity and susceptible to research....and it CAN even be modified to accommodate some of your position, if evidence can be presented in a way that does not violate the scientific method.

You seem to be saying something on the order of "well, I can't see how materialism can account for everything, therefore there IS a realm beyond material stuff...some of us have seen and felt it, and we don't agree that it needs proof of the type you want."

If that's what it comes down to, it just becomes a personal attitude, much like picking a religion does...

Interesting to compare all these various ideas, though, or we'd not spend the time on it....and, it must be said that the position people take on these issues sometimes affects pragmatic decisions in life- right down to how they spend money or vote for president.

(durn...one set of thoughts leads to another, and I can't work it all into one post...*wry grin*...I need to go turn wood!)

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: Little Hawk
Date: 16 Feb 05 - 09:30 PM

Mrr - Did you ask what "spiritual" means? Well, I think it means that one believes in Spirit...that is, that there is something beyond the physical surface appearances of bodily life, and that that something gives life real meaning. Spirit can be defined as conscious awareness, self-awareness, a sense of being, a sense of identity and purpose. It is a non-physical reality that permeates all that is physical. It is also normally believed to be eternal and, whereas physicality is temporary and subject to the laws of entropy.

Spirituality is founded upon conscious intent. As you intend, so you are. That involves both thinking and feeling.

Spirituality is the source of a moral value system based upon Love and Unity, rather than upon Fear and Division.

It is not necessarily tied to any organized religion or to ideas of a "supreme being", though it can be.

The path of spirituality is the path of self-knowledge and of Love.

That's a start, anyway.

I've met atheists who were quite spiritual people.

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: Kaleea
Date: 17 Feb 05 - 01:46 AM

Ummm, so, uh, back to the Q? at hand:
   nosey, are you asking "why do we need organized religion," or "why do humans feel the need for some sort of spirituality or belief in a higher power?" There is a big difference. When you ask "we," do you mean we as in all humans, or we as individual persons on the ol' Mudcat?

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: GUEST,mrr
Date: 17 Feb 05 - 12:05 PM

Stephen Pinker has some done some great writing on the evolutionary psychology of religion, and points out that the adaptiveness of religion, if any, is different for the priesthood and the flock. Very interesting stuff. Ties right into Kaleea's point, above.

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: Blissfully Ignorant
Date: 17 Feb 05 - 02:35 PM

Fear is the most effective method of controling the masses, that's why governments can use religion-

" If you don't do this, you'll go to hell!"

Money- "If you don't do this, the economy will collapse!"

Or just plain old fear- "If you don't do this, someone will shoot you!"

Of course, they can be used together- "If you don't do this, someone will shoot you, the economy will collapse, and then you'll go to hell!!!"

It's all about cultivating paranoia...religion is just a tool that can be used to achieve this.

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: GUEST,mRR
Date: 17 Feb 05 - 03:04 PM

Very well put!

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: EagleWing
Date: 18 Feb 05 - 02:42 PM

"It's all about cultivating paranoia...religion is just a tool that can be used to achieve this."

Sounds good - until you look at it carefully.

Hitler and Stalin managed to do all that with no real reference to religion at all.

You could certainly reach the same results using science.

Frank L.

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: GUEST,~S~
Date: 18 Feb 05 - 03:16 PM

I doubt Native Americans would be amused to learn that the majority culture that stamped out their culture and spirituality sees religion so narrowly. Swap out the whole discssion for one about aspects of Native American life, and IMO the perspective on spirituality would, by necessity, have another whole dynamic. I can imagine us all tripping all over ourselves to be respectful, curious, fascinated, and, really, sort of adorably human.

But such a question would be better addressed WITH a Native friend, couldn't most of us agree? An exchange of hearts, past the boundaries that usually make a discussion like this inappropriate in a casual social setting? Would most of us, for example, walk up to a person of color and say, "Hey, I always wondered, what's up with that stuff your people put in their hair????" Well, no, but it IS the kind of question a caucasian woman might ask a close Black friend, during a sleepover. Asked differently, perhaps, as well. One hopes the interested party would pick an opportune moment, one hopes she also would know the friend well enough to know how to ask without giving offense.

What I have been reflecting on, during my vacation from BS threads, has been how these kinds of questions remind me of how a caucasian person who lacks diversity among their friends will ask very poorly-informed and awkward questions about other cultures they do not share or understand. In a close relationship with a Christian friend, for example, I doubt that genuine curiosity would be expressed in quite this fashion. Perhaps the answers and dialog people seek would be conducted more effectively and informatively within a friendship that has a good base of respect for one another as unique individuals... approaching it in this distant fashion seems somehow not quite right, even just in practical terms, for such a personal subject.

I know I do it too. I've asked some pretty bald questions of wiccan, pagan, and atheist friends. Some of them around here. But via PM, so I guess that would be why the usual reaction at my "intolerance" and "narrowness" has no publicly-viewable posting record in contrast. :~)


All I have today on this is that 2 cents' worth. And a reflection, rather than a reaction. I'd welcome others' reflections in response, but I have learned that at Mudcat, what I am more likely to get IS reaction.

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: Little Hawk
Date: 18 Feb 05 - 03:19 PM

Hitler referred to religion a great deal. He used it to rally the German people against supposed threats from non-Christian Jews and godless Communists. Every German soldier in the Wehrmacht wore a belt buckled that said "God is with us" (translated). Nazis were under the impression that they were fighting on behalf of Christian civilization. (Hitler was secretly into some very odd occult stuff, but he did not make that very apparent to the average German. He praised Jesus Christ in Mein Kampf, as having been not a peacemaker, but a "fighter"...presumably for all that was right and good in Hitler's view of things.)

Stalin used organized Christian religion as something to fight against...the "opiate of the masses". In fact, Stalin was in charge of a new organized religion...one that idolized HIM and the Communist Party. It was one of the strictest and most vicious religions of all time, and its only real god was Stalin himself...and the barrel of a gun.

Accordingly, they both used religion as a motivating factor, but in opposite manners.

Nevertheless, Blissfully Ignorant's point is spot on:

"Fear is the most effective method of controlling the masses."

Exactly right. One can choose to enlist religion in stirring up fear...or not...but the key is Fear. Make people afraid, and they will give their willing assent to all manner of destructive policies on the part of their rulers.

Fear is the key that opens Pandora's box. We need to eliminate Fear, not religion.

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: Blissfully Ignorant
Date: 19 Feb 05 - 07:34 AM

"Sounds good - until you look at it carefully.

Hitler and Stalin managed to do all that with no real reference to religion at all.

You could certainly reach the same results using science."

That's my point exactly- religion is just one way of cultivating fear in a society, so to say that we need religion to controll the masses is innaccurate.

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: Little Hawk
Date: 19 Feb 05 - 11:21 AM

You can "control the masses" with anything that plays heavily on their insecure minds. It might be religion, financial security, hatred of foreigners, material greed, political fanaticism, a sense of grievance over past wrongs and persecutions (refer to Nazi Germany and Israel and Al Queda for spectacular examples of that!), a sense of racial superiority and "manifest destiny" (Germany, Rome, Israel, the USA, Japan, etc...)...any darn thing at all!

And at the basis of it will be...Fear. Fear based on a sense of separation and disunity from one's fellow human beings. Love unites. Fear divides. Love see the similarities and forgives the differences. Fear sees only the differences and forgives nothing.

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: GUEST,Mrrzy
Date: 19 Feb 05 - 04:59 PM

Little Hawk, I would think that if we eliminate a major cause of fear, we'll have done a great deal to diminish fear. I would also also think that it would be a very bad idea to eliminate something as necessary to the indivudual's survival as Fear, even if one could overcome such a basic element of our motivational system. Literally, that is.

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: Little Hawk
Date: 19 Feb 05 - 05:11 PM

Ah, yes, well that shows just how tricky words are. I clearly don't mean that we should eliminate caution...or the appropriate awareness of physical or other danger. For instance, I am quite correct to fear that I might lose control of the car on an icy road...and accordingly, to drive carefully. I am correct to fear that a mother bear may decide I am a threat to her cubs...and behave accordingly. I am correct to assume that a cop on the beat may be nervous, and accordingly not to make sudden moves that he might misinterpret.

If, however, I have been brought up to fear and hate Jews or Arabs or Blacks or Communists or cops as a group just because they are "different" from me and my family...that's where the trouble begins. Such fears and hatreds are irrational. They have no place in a mature human community.

I quite agree that organized religions have often encouraged and exploited such fears. Oddly enough, most of those religions are based on teachings which point to a far wiser path, but the churches and their followers have frequently tended to lose sight of those teachings. Religion tends to become a handmaiden to political objectives.

In religions, as in other fields of human interest, one finds both ignorance and brilliance.

You see, spiritual study has gone quite far in reducing my fears. I am far less fearful in most ways now than I once was, and it's partly because of experience, but mostly because of spiritual studies that shed light on my experience. Those studies were not confined to any particular organized religion in my case, but found some useful input from the traditional teachings of a great many religions.

Subject: The Kinder and Gentler Christianity
From: Amos
Date: 19 Feb 05 - 07:36 PM

The following is by Sister Joan Cittister, OSB, and was published in the National Catholic Reporter. Like Jerry, Joe, Praise and others here, she is the kind of Christian I am delighted to associate with!

A

---

Is this kind of Christianity Christian?

By Joan Chittister, OSB

The problem with the political agenda of the Radical Right is not that they're wrong. Who isn't concerned about the so-called "moral values" on which this last presidential election is said to have hinged.

Each of those concerns surely merits attention. Abortion, for instance, is indeed a major issue. Hitler did it and called it eugenics; the Chinese did it in Tibet and called it population control. Obviously, the whole question of the morality of abortion is a serious and an imperative one, as is birth control for some denominations and alcohol for others, for instance. Just as obvious, however, is the question of whether or not the government of a pluralistic state ought to be legislating for any of those things according to the tenets of any one particular religious tradition. Those are questions of faith, not of politics. That's how we got the Taliban in the first place. Someone somewhere decided that their religion had to be everybody's religion.
The question for the state, then, is not whether or not abortion is morally wrong. That is for religions to decide. The question for the state to determine in its responsibility to assure "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" is, What is life? When we know that answer, we'll all know, each of us from a different religious perspective, the political answer to abortion.

This is not the first time in U.S. history, however, that politics began to look like religion and single-issue religion tried to drive politics.

It was religion that fostered prohibition on moral grounds and its notoriously ineffective decline into the speakeasies operated by organized crime syndicates.

It was also religion that supported slavery and segregation and the argument that God made the white man (sic) superior.

It was religion that fueled the fire or provided the basis for many a war or Crusade.

It was religion that inveighed against dissection and all the medical information that came from it.

Religion -- including Christianity--however sincere, has often been proven wrong as time went by.

It may be prudent then, while we insist that it was God's will that we invade Iraq, and that it is murder to engage in stem cell research, that we approach all our questions with political respect for different religious sensitivities everywhere.

I understand the so-called "conservative" agenda. I even share its concerns. They are real and they are important. But they are also incomplete -- which is why I doubt that, as they are being framed right now, that they are either "right" or "religious." The agenda is simply too narrow, too concentrated on issues around human sexuality alone, and too self-centered to be the agenda that drove Jesus from Galilee to Jerusalem curing lepers, feeding the hungry and raising the dead to life.

Anyone has the right, of course, to privatize religion and call that "Christianity." But no one has the right in a nation based on the separation of church and state to impose it on everyone else. After all, while some people are getting a patent on their definition of Christianity, the rest of the Christian agenda may well pass us by. If we're going to create a party platform on "Christian" values, we ought to at least ask whose Christianity we are selling -- and how.

There are many Christian churches, for instance, that oppose to abortion on demand but leave room in their moral pantheon for therapeutic abortions. Some religions, in some circumstances, would even require it.

School prayer, one of the icons of the movement, sounds very good in principle. But in a nation now decisively pluralistic, whose population is now more Buddhist, more Hindu, more Muslim, more Jewish than ever before in history -- and each of them getting larger every day -- whose prayers shall it be?

From 1990-2000 devotees of Islam in the United States rose 109 percent, of Buddhism 170 percent, of Hinduism 273 percent and of Christianity 5 percent.

Do Christians of the radical right really want their grandchildren reading from the Koran or the Vedas or the Flower Sutras for morning prayer? And if not, what will those same Christians do when school boards under different ethnic influences require them? Will they declare that minority schools in ethnic areas must use the Christian scriptures to satisfy our definition of God because this nation was settled, founded, incorporated by Christians over 200 years ago?

Obviously, there is a difference between questions of personal faith and questions of public politics.

But politics do touch on the rest of the Christian value system, if not in its speeches, certainly in its budget. Here politics and morals become one, are public, are universal, are not amenable to individual choice.

This month we saw "compassionate conservatism" -- all that concern we're told this government has for moral values and life and Christian identity -- show its real face. Now that the election is over, abortion and school prayer have suddenly disappeared from this administration's agenda, but the release of the Bush White House budget makes the administration's values clear. Furthermore, because the budget impinges on every citizen in this society, the values cannot be dismissed on grounds of personal moral commitment.

National budgets are a nation's theology walking.
In an era in which we call poverty "low-income" and hunger "lack of food security," the number of poor, according to the U.S Census Bureau, is increasing and the number of hungry in the richest country in the world has been rising steadily for four years. To pay for a war we should never have fought -- at least not for the reasons they gave us -- this budget is slashing domestic programs.

The budget of this Christian presidency cuts food stamps. It reduces support for subsidized housing. It suggests pillaging social security. It reduces environmental enforcement programs and scientific research in a scientific age. It even reduces veteran's health benefits.

Clearly, the country is in danger of going the way of all oligarchies; power and wealth are sucked to the top, while those on the bottom bleed. We can call it "Christian" as it collapses.

And all the while, we watch more food lines forming, more homeless on the streets, more environmental degradation and more of the elderly living destitute lives.

More than that, according to the budget analysis done by Bread for the World, (www.bread.org) while we honor our tax breaks to the rich in this country, we are not keeping our promise to fight HIV/AIDS around the world or to support the Third World development programs that might really make us secure in the future.

From where I stand, it seems that the poor who will be most affected by these budget cuts have no political voice with which to protest them and the rich can hardly be expected to object since they are benefiting from them

That leaves only the Christians -- the pastors and the bishops and the Religious Right -- who worked so hard to put this administration into office, to require that the rest of the Christian agenda finally be faced. Otherwise, forget the prayer in schools, the definition of marriage, or the fight against abortion. We lost the Christianity of this Christian nation a long time ago.

Comments or questions about this column may be sent to: Sr. Joan Chittister, c/o NCR web coordinator. Put "Chittister" in the subject line. E-mails with attachments are automatically deleted.

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 03 Mar 05 - 10:43 AM

Just remember the greatest crimes in human history were done by atheists.

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: Amos
Date: 03 Mar 05 - 11:43 AM

Guest,

I doubt it.


A

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: Don Firth
Date: 03 Mar 05 - 12:22 PM

Amos, thanks for posting that. Right on the button!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: Blissfully Ignorant
Date: 03 Mar 05 - 01:16 PM

How come you don't hear of anything being blown up in the name of Buddhism?

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: Little Hawk
Date: 03 Mar 05 - 01:27 PM

The Nazis were not atheists. They were quite mystical on the upper levels, and generally conventionally religious on the lower levels. Every German soldier wore a belt buckle on which was emblazoned "God (is) With Us", in German words.

They committed some of the greatest crimes in history.

The Holy Roman Empire/Church of Rome committed some of the greatest crimes in history, wiping out vast numbers of people merely for having a different belief in some way.

There are numerous other examples...

On the other hand, atheists also have committed great crimes. Stalin murdered millions, so did Mao, and so did Pol Pot.

The fact is, crimes are just as easily committed by atheists as by fanatical religions.

And the REAL truth is, atheism IS a religion, but it's not a religion that theorizes or includes the existence of "God", that's all. It has its own chosen idols to bow down to, among which are: materialism, survivalism, profit, the ego, a political theory, a political party, and/or a charismatic authoritarian leader.

Nothing is more dangerous than a fanatic...whether or not he is an atheist OR a member of some traditional religion like Christianity, Judaism, or Islam.

We need compassion, wisdom, and Love. Those can be found and developed either within organized religion or outside of it.

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: GUEST,Mrr
Date: 03 Mar 05 - 01:41 PM

Dear GUEST,Guest of Date: 03 Mar 05 - 10:43 AM who wrote "Just remember the greatest crimes in human history were done by atheists."

Nonsense. Read history.
Also, atheism is NOT a religion; if it were, we'd be tax-exempt.

Someone once said that all that is needed for evil is for good men to do nothing. Someone also said that for good men to do evil requires religion.

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: Blissfully Ignorant
Date: 03 Mar 05 - 01:46 PM

Nah, i think all that's needed for evil is people.

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: John Hardly
Date: 03 Mar 05 - 03:52 PM

Well, according to Blaise Pascal, the reason we need religion is...

"There is a God shaped vacuum in the heart of every man which cannot be filled by any created thing, but only by God"

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: Bill D
Date: 03 Mar 05 - 04:16 PM

very poetic. "Vacuums in the heart" may exist about a lot of things.........Pascal also suggested that one should believe in God because 'it's the safest bet'....a real deep thinker, that Pascal.

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: Little Hawk
Date: 03 Mar 05 - 04:59 PM

You got it, Blissfully Ignorant. :-) People are the problem, not religion. Fearful people. Yet some of the finest people I have ever known have been numbered in the ranks of both the religious and those who are termed "atheists"...

I was amused by the comment that "atheism is NOT a religion; if it were, we'd be tax-exempt."

Ha! Funny! Well, the reason we have taxes, I'd say, is that MONEY is a religion. Right now, the worship and pursuit of money is the most powerful organized religion on the face of the Earth, basically dominating and running virtually every society in existence. That's why it says on American money: "In God We Trust"

The money IS the God being referred to in that case. :-) A few people are willing to lie, cheat, and kill for the God of heaven...millions are willing to do it for money! Just ask Al Capone about that. Ask any thief or mugger or arms manufacturer.

Money is a made-up thing. People created it. It's a totally artificial idea. To kill people over a completely artificial, made-up thing sounds like a very primitive religion to me...and primitive religions are usually quick to sanction violence.

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: Amos
Date: 03 Mar 05 - 05:08 PM

LH:

You-all better slow down waving your arms when you type or you gonna end up up a tree and no way to get down, dude!!

Every assertion is not religious and every philosophy is not a religion. Atheism is a single tenet that states God (as envisioned by CHristians, or Hindus, or Janists or any religion that has one or more) does not exist.

This COULD be a religious statement but it isn't necessarily so,.

1. a subjective relationship to certain metaphysical, extramundane factors. A kind of experience accorded the highest value, regardless of its contents. The essence is the person's relationship to God or salvation. Jung called them psychotherapeutic systems and believed they contained, offered a gradiant for, and transformed instinctual (hence asceticism), nonpersonal energies, giving people a cultural counterpole to blind instinct, help through difficult transitional stages, and a sense of meaning. They also help separate the growing person from his parents. For Jung, the unconscious had a religious function, and religion rests on an instinctive basis. Different from creeds, which are codified and dogmatized versions of a religious experience. Creeds usually say they have THE truth and are a collective belief. For Jung, no contradiction existed between faith and knowledge because science has nothing to say about metaphysical events, and beliefs are psychological facts that need no proof.
www.tearsofllorona.com/jungdefs.html

2. (generic definition of): A means of getting in touch with and of attaining at-onement with "ultimate reality." In slightly different words, a religion is a system of symbols (e.g., words and gestures, stories and practices, objects and places) that functions religiously, namely, an ongoing system of symbols that participants use to draw near to, and come into right or appropriate relationship with, what they deem to be ultimate reality.
www.aar-site.org/syllabus/syllabi/c/cannon/r201glos.htm

3. Generally a belief in a deity and practice of worship, action, and/or thought related to that deity. Loosely, any specific system of code of ethics, values, and belief.
www.carm.org/atheism/terms.htm


A

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: Little Hawk
Date: 03 Mar 05 - 05:12 PM

If you think the arm-waving is bad, Amos, you oughta see how I keep darting my tongue in and out...and that facial twitch! Oy! I oughta see if I can get a job as a Reality TV show host, and make big bucks. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: John Hardly
Date: 03 Mar 05 - 05:13 PM

Oh, man! You don't like Pascal?! Dang, another scientific theory shot through the heart. Who you gonna believe in matters of religion, if not a scientist?

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: Little Hawk
Date: 03 Mar 05 - 05:16 PM

Well said! Hear! Hear!

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: Bill D
Date: 03 Mar 05 - 05:31 PM

to "Colonel Bogey March"

"Physics is what we learned in class.
Einstein said 'En-er-gy- is mass.
Newton is high-fa-lutin'-
And Pacsal's a rascal...so's Boyle"

"Trolley, he made the Trolley car,
Leyden, he made the Leyden jar-
Curie rides in a surrey-
And Diesel's a weasel...so's Boyle"

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: Mrrzy
Date: 03 Mar 05 - 07:45 PM

"Money is a made-up thing. People created it. It's a totally artificial idea. To kill people over a completely artificial, made-up thing sounds like a very primitive religion to me...and primitive religions are usually quick to sanction violence. "
Actually, sounds like ANY religion to me, so we're almost in complete agreement!

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: Amos
Date: 29 Aug 05 - 07:24 PM

RELIGION

Religion is a defense against having a religious experience.

             Joseph Campbell quoting Carl Jung
                        The Power of Myth

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: John Hardly
Date: 29 Aug 05 - 07:36 PM

Hey, I just read that on a different thread.

Kinda begs the question...

Why not cut out the middle man? Why give Campbell $.02 for something that isn't his?

Who do you like better -- Carl Jung or Neil Young?

...and if Neil is Young, did that make him too old to ride with Jesse James and the Youngers?

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: bobad
Date: 29 Aug 05 - 07:39 PM

To provide a rationale to kill people?

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 29 Aug 05 - 07:49 PM

So Amos... wots with ressurecting dead anti-religion threads? I was enjoying the lack of anti-religion, anti-religious right (not being one, myself) and anti-Republican (not one of them, either) threads   :-)

Jerry

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: Bill D
Date: 29 Aug 05 - 08:01 PM

ummmm...cute...but not very profound

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: CarolC
Date: 29 Aug 05 - 08:03 PM

LH waving his arms...

;-)

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: Bill D
Date: 29 Aug 05 - 08:18 PM

oh, my! Gesticulating in public!

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: GUEST,ABE
Date: 29 Aug 05 - 08:24 PM

Good Grief! Reviving a thread almost 6 months dead?

Amos, someone needs to get a life and it appears you are it!
I am new here but have seen enough - I will also seek a life elsewhere.

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: Bill D
Date: 29 Aug 05 - 08:38 PM

threads are never truly 'dead' around here..*grin*...they merely hibernate, then rise like Zombies to walk again!

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: *daylia*
Date: 29 Aug 05 - 08:45 PM

Well, acts of God do benefit insurance companies.

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: Amos
Date: 29 Aug 05 - 11:02 PM

Sorry, Jerry. I forgot I had posted it to the first thread.

I think it has a certain telling depth to it, and is often true, but not in all cases.

Abe, I am sure I don't know what you are on about, mate, but if you hang around I would be willing to hear about it.


A

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: Wolfgang
Date: 30 Aug 05 - 09:52 AM

This demonstrates the wisdom of closing BS threads after a certain time:

Imagine Amos would have been able to resurrect all threads into which the little quote seems to fit...

Now where did I read recently that skeptical quote about...I could insert it in all threads about...

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: Wolfgang
Date: 30 Aug 05 - 09:57 AM

BTW,

the correct opening words for repeated information are:

you may have missed this (copyright: Shambles)

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: why do we need religion
From: Paco Rabanne
Date: 30 Aug 05 - 10:58 AM

100.