What makes a religion a religion?

[Darkflight]

"Organized and strong belief in something that has no scientific basis or evidence backing it up" would be my initial attempt at a definition.

 

[El_Machinae]

Too much Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins is never good, for anyone.

Never too much Hitchens. I found that guy so, so funny.

 

[Mechanicalsalvation]

You have evidence to support this assertion though.

- you know that she lives in a different country. This has been previously verified.
- you believe, with a certain degree of certainty that if she was to leave this country, you would be informed. You have precedent for this belief, such as every time she's left the country before, you've been told.
- you further believe that if she were not alright, you would be informed. You again have valid reasons to believe this is true, based on past experience.

O.K. I have an evidence but lets say my mum has died moment ago. What is the evidence worth now? Similarly your non-evidence of Gods existence doesnt render your faith worthless.

 

[Gatsby]

"Organized and strong belief in something that has no scientific basis or evidence backing it up" would be my initial attempt at a definition.

In answer to the question of what makes religion a religion, I would take the above idea, combine it with El Machinae's thoughts back on page 1 of this thread, and add the following thoughts:

1) Religions teach what I call "Expedient Truths". These are truths which are primarily intended to bring about desired changes in people's attitudes and behaviours, and for which consistency with factual empirical reality is at best a secondary consideration. Expedient Truths don't have to actually be true, they only have to be true enough for the target/believer to accept them.

2) Religion is not a simple yes/no thing, and it would be more accurate to talk about how "religion-y" a worldview is (based on a number of different criteria).

3) A religion is that which can get tax concessions from the government for being a religion.

 

[Gatsby]

O.K. I have an evidence but lets say my mum has died moment ago. What is the evidence worth now? Similarly your non-evidence of Gods existence doesnt render your faith worthless.

Then you'd get independent verification of your mum's death sooner or later. It seems like you're implying that religious belief can only exist in the fleeting period between when we ask a question about reality and when we find an answer which dispels our ignorance regarding that question. I agree

 

[Mechanicalsalvation]

In answer to the question of what makes religion a religion, I would take the above idea, combine it with El Machinae's thoughts back on page 1 of this thread, and add the following thoughts:

1) Religions teach what I call "Expedient Truths". These are truths which are primarily intend to bring about desired changes in people's attitudes and behaviours, and for which consistency with factual empirical reality is at best a secondary consideration. Expedient Truths don't have to actually be true, they only have to be true enough for the target/believer to accept them.

I am currious if you can supply an example here. When you say truth you actualy do not mean truth but dogmatic belief right?

 

[Mechanicalsalvation]

Then you'd get independent verification of your mum's death sooner or later. It seems like you're implying that religious belief can only exist in the fleeting period between when we ask a question about reality and when we find an answer which dispels our ignorance regarding that question. In which case, I would agree with you

Who is saying you will not get independent verification sooner or later in matter of Gods existence? Is million years soon enough for you? In evolution of universe its nothing. When you face this Immortal reality in the future with your own immortal consciousness you will know. Meanwhile one can use a faith, thats all.

 

[Gatsby]

I am currious if you can supply an example here. When you say truth you actualy do not mean truth but dogmatic belief right?

Look at any page of a bible and you will find a whole bunch of examples. But here's a few to get you started:

*Original sin. Completely inconsistent with the evidence, but it establishes a rationale for why people suffer and why they should submit to religious authority throughout their lives (i.e. to reconcile with an angered God).

*Prohibitions on eating shellfish and pork. These particular foods are notorious for giving people food poisoning, and in a time before germ theory, refrigeration and scientifically verified food safety standards it made sense to simply call these foods "forbidden" and "impure" in order to minimise the risk of members of the tribe dying unnecessarily (and this in turn helped to minimise risk to the tribe's collective survival).

*The idea of a "Chosen People". This acts as a self-fulfilling prophecy, because if a people believe they are chosen by God then they are more inclined to have confidence in themselves as a people and be more resilient in the face of adversity because they think that God is on their side and/or testing the faith of his Chosen People.


There is no difference between a belief and a truth in religion, the belief is the truth. You might call it a "dogmatic belief", but those who subscribe to it might call it a sacred revelation about reality.

 

[Gatsby]

Who is saying you will not get independent verification sooner or later in matter of Gods existence? Is million years soon enough for you?

And who says that we will? So far the evidence against God's existence has been growing as science advances, and believers have had to take their God of the Gaps and either 1) shoehorn him into ever-smaller gaps in our knowledge, or 2) "vague him out" so that he can't be pinned down and tested by scientific investigation. The former strategy only buys time, and the latter strategy causes God to become increasingly irrelevant to the point where he is functionally "vagued-out" of existence anyway.

When you face this Immortal reality in the future with your own immortal consciousness you will know. Meanwhile one can use a faith, thats all.

"When you face the archangel Michael on Judgement Day with your own immortal soul you will know. Meanwhile one can use a faith, that's all"

See what I did there?

 

[Traitorfish]

Which two specifically contradict?

All three of them, as far as I can see.

 

[Mechanicalsalvation]

Look at any page of a bible and you will find a whole bunch of examples. But here's a few to get you started:

*Original sin. Completely inconsistent with the evidence, but it establishes a rationale for why people suffer and why they should submit to religious authority throughout their lives (i.e. to reconcile with an angered God).

Original sin story is a methaphor. It was perverted by the same way of thinking which demands finite proof for existence of the infinite.

*Prohibitions on eating shellfish and pork. These particular foods are notorious for giving people food poisoning, and in a time before germ theory, refrigeration and scientifically verified food safety standards it made sense to simply call these foods "forbidden" and "unclean" in order to minimise the risk of members of the tribe dying unnecessarily (and this in turn helped to minimise risk to the tribe's collective survival).

Sounds reasonable for the time an age, I guess...

*The idea of a "Chosen People". This acts as a self-fulfilling prophecy, because if a people believe they are chosen by God then they are more inclined to have confidence in themselves as a people and be more resilient in the face of adversity because they think that God is on their side and/or testing the faith of his Chosen People.

But what prevents this faith to be smashed to pieces by the realities of life? Moreover you have another example of practicality of faith here.

There is no difference between a belief and a truth in religion, the belief is the truth. You might call it a "dogmatic belief", but those who subscribe to it might call it a sacred revelation about reality.

Thats not my view. Belief is supporting element in human psychology which helps one to arrive at the higher spiritual truth in spite the adversity of lower forces.
Truth is reality as it functions on particular level of consciousness.
Sacred revelation could mean vision of the higher worlds inexplicable by present level of knowledge.

 

[Mechanicalsalvation]

And who says that we will? So far the evidence against God's existence has been growing as science advances, and believers have had to take their God of the Gaps and either 1) shoehorn him into ever-smaller gaps in our knowledge, or 2) "vague him out" so that he can't be pinned down and tested by scientific investigation. The former strategy only buys time, and the latter strategy causes God to become increasingly irrelevant to the point where he is functionally "vagued-out" of existence anyway.

What is the evidence against God existence? All I know, some ridiculous dogmas and views has been smashed. That doesnt mean that those who dont have faith in God do not have these. Its a nature of human mind to create them, not necessary result of religion.

 

[Gatsby]

Original sin story is a methaphor. It was perverted by the same way of thinking which demands finite proof for existence of the infinite.

And that's your belief, because a more literal interpretation would not be true enough for you, as per the Expedient Truth concept. Others however have an equally firm belief that it isn't a metaphor.

But what prevents this faith to be smashed to pieces by the realities of life? Moreover you have another example of practicality of faith here.

I just told you: The ability to rationalise the harder realities of life as being due to God testing your faith. The bible has a whole section devoted to this idea, it's called the Book of Job.

Thats not my view. Belief is supporting element in human psychology which helps one to arrive at the higher spiritual truth in spite the adversity of lower forces.
Truth is reality as it functions on particular level of consciousness.
Sacred revelation could mean vision of the higher worlds inexplicable by present level of knowledge.

Well it's the view of many people who consider themselves to be religious and spiritual. What "higher spiritual truth" does it help you arrive at exactly, and what makes you think religious beliefs are the best way to get to it anyway? Your "higher spiritual truth" is still going to have the religious beliefs as a logical foundation, and the alleged vision of higher worlds is really a mind game you play with yourself.

 

[Gatsby]

What is the evidence against God existence? All I know, some ridiculous dogmas and views has been smashed. That doesnt mean that those who dont have faith in God do not have these. Its a nature of human mind to create them, not necessary result of religion.

Well apart from the considerable logical problems with the idea(s) of God, the fact that pretty much every natural phenomena which used to be explained with "Goddidit" has been found to have natural impersonal explanations, and the fact that God is clearly a projection of human fears, fantasies, preconceptions, apophenia and personification onto the cosmos.

We're not talking about dogmas of non-believers here. It may be possible for non-religious people to come up with dogmas, but that doesn't change the fact that religions are especially good at churning them out.

 

[Mechanicalsalvation]

Well it's the view of many people who consider themselves to be religious and spiritual. What "higher spiritual truth" does it help you arrive at exactly, and what makes you think religious beliefs are the best way to get to it anyway? Your "higher spiritual truth" is still going to have the religious beliefs as a logical foundation, and the alleged vision of higher worlds is really a mind game you play with yourself.

Truth doesnt help you to arrive, belief does. Thruth is the goal. Belief isnt foundation but every thruth is self-supported on its own level. Falshood need support of some other force which is usually some perverted form of truth or force working in opposition of truth. If something is true on "higher" level it means it has more capacity and force- its more genuine and more potent.

 

[Funky]

You are using your faith day in day out. What evidence do you have Sun will rise tomorrow? Its your knowledge and experience and your trust of these which allowes you to have faith that Sun will rise tomorrow. We know there will come a day when Sun will not rise becouse it is finite justlike there was no sunrise before this Sun came to an existence. How do you know today wasnt the last time? Where is the evidence?

My evidence that the sun will rise tomorrow is that it has risen every morning of my life and every morning before that in all of recorded history.
If that's not enough, physicists have calculated that our sun will continue to burn for another 5 billion years. After this timespan it will not simply be gone and "not rise", it will turn into a red giant, engulfing mercury and venus and possibly earth as well. But before it reaches us, all water will have evaporated due to the tremendous heat, and all life on earth will be destroyed.

What is the evidence against God existence?

Let's look at some specific claims which are central to Christianity (and most other religions).

God created the earth and the universe. Cosmology can track the universe back to 10-35 seconds after the big bang. Everything after that, such as the expansion of the universe, the development of particles, and the formation of stars and planets is well understood.

God created humans. Since Darwin, this claim has been refuted by the process of evolution. While we are not quite certain exactly how the first life began, there are many good explanations and it is only a matter of time till we will have discovered the answer.

God gave us morality. We know that evolution is responsible for many aspects of our morality. We can observe notions of fairness and altruism in monkeys and to an extent even in cats, dogs, and birds. Other aspects of morality have grown through what many call cultural evolution, when we started figuring out how we best can live together and flourish. The bible, on the other hand, advocates slavery, killing your neighbour for working on the sabath, and stoning your bride to death on her father's doorstep if you discover she isn't a virgin, just to name a few pearls of moral wisdom provided by Christianity which we happily have long overcome.

I could go on but I think you get the jist. Of course it is not possible to disprove the existence of a god to 100 percent, just as it is not possible to disprove that we were created five seconds ago along with all our memories of the past. But the evidence against the existence of a god is huge and is constantly growing.

 

[Mechanicalsalvation]

And that's your belief, because a more literal interpretation would not be true enough for you, as per the Expedient Truth concept. Others however have an equally firm belief that it isn't a metaphor.

And this is your own belief, I believe....
I have my own explanation of the methaphor. But how on earth could you else explain evolution in human psychology by the language of man of 3.000 B.C.?

 

[Dralix]

What evidence do you have Sun will rise tomorrow?

My evidence is the fact that is has risen every day I've been alive, and there are no indications that tomorrow will be any different. Nothing to suggest that the sun will die out tomorrow, or the earth will stop orbiting or spinning. So really, there's no reason to believe it will not rise.

If you want to say that I have faith that the sun will rise, then fine, but like Funky said, you're playing a semantic game. It's not religious faith. It's a belief based on the available evidence.

 

[timtofly]

Would you say that you pick and choose the evidence that goes with your belief system?

 

[Mechanicalsalvation]

My evidence that the sun will rise tomorrow is that it has risen every morning of my life and every morning before that in all of recorded history.
If that's not enough, physicists have calculated that our sun will continue to burn for another 5 billion years. After this timespan it will not simply be gone and "not rise", it will turn into a red giant, engulfing mercury and venus and possibly earth as well. But before it reaches us, all water will have evaporated due to the tremendous heat, and all life on earth will be destroyed.

I suppose I have got mixed up evidence, proof and certainty...

Let's look at some specific claims which are central to Christianity (and most other religions).

God created the earth and the universe. Cosmology can track the universe back to 10-35 seconds after the big bang. Everything after that, such as the expansion of the universe, the development of particles, and the formation of stars and planets is well understood.

God created the world through agents. This doesnt disaproof anything. The proof here would be if you could show me that the universe came out of nothing.

God created humans. Since Darwin, this claim has been refuted by the process of evolution. While we are not quite certain exactly how the first life began, there are many good explanations and it is only a matter of time till we will have discovered the answer.

Evolution isnt inconsistent with God since again Nature is just a Gods agent.

God gave us morality. We know that evolution is responsible for many aspects of our morality. We can observe notions of fairness and altruism in monkeys and to an extent even in cats, dogs, and birds. Other aspects of morality have grown through what many call cultural evolution, when we started figuring out how we best can live together and flourish. The bible, on the other hand, advocates slavery, killing your neighbour for working on the sabath, and stoning your bride to death on her father's doorstep if you discover she isn't a virgin, just to name a few pearls of moral wisdom provided by Christianity which we happily have long overcome.

The cultural evolution and humanism are the ideals of crucified Christ. Evolution is more then just biological process. Its manifestation of involved spirit. Animals are part of that too. But how come that mind was developed only in one line of evolution(human)? Monkeys has been around longer then humans but they didnt develope the same capacity? Any explanation?
I can see how we are trying to flourish. There is lot of corruption, greed and killing. Its the highest ideals of religions which has the capacity to keep this place in shape. Nothing better was invented yet.
You quote an Old Testament as Christianity? It was Christ who inspired us to overcome the ancient barbaric religions.

I could go on but I think you get the jist. Of course it is not possible to disprove the existence of a god to 100 percent, just as it is not possible to disprove that we were created five seconds ago along with all our memories of the past. But the evidence against the existence of a god is huge and is constantly growing.

Well thank you. But I think just the opposite. More we are able to plunge into the discovery of our own consciousness more of God appears.