5 ms·

implying that religions are themselves I take issue with even that much of the concept. Religions are not entities, only the people that make them up are. An

implying that religions are themselves I take issue with even that much of the concept. Religions are not entities, only the people that make them up are. And it seems the unfortunately vast majority of the time, those people are hateful, ignorant, or just plain dulled.

baguasquirrel 16y ago
"I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." -Gandhi
javert 16y ago
Religions are not entities, only the people that make them up are. I could have phrased what I said better, but I stand by the essential meaning of what I said, and I disagree with you. A "religion" as a particular body of ideas, is distinct from the adherents to that religion. Which is why it's perfectly reasonable to say something like, "Most Christians don't actually live up to the teachings of Christianity." For example, nobody can reasonably deny that Christianity involves (1) belief in Christ; (2) a large helping of faith instead of reason; (3) a significant element of self-sacrifice. Or for Islam: (1) belief in the teachings of Muhammad, and in Allah; (2) a large helping of faith instead of reason; (3) a significant element of self-sacrifice (this time posited as "submission"). Buddhism, arguably, might only be (2), depending on your interpretation; I think Buddhism is probably "less well-defined," so to speak, but maybe I just no less about it. Still, there are clearly certain concepts that define and/or are implied by any particular religion.
- cookiecaper 16y ago
  These religions are often much more different than their common manifestations, but their peddlers simplify and adulterate the teachings to make them more palatable. It involves serious work to become either a real Christian or a real Muslim, and people prefer "drive-through religion", as it were. I suggest you explore religion, especially religion that exists outside of the spotlight, more deeply to gain an appropriate understanding of how these things work. For instance, religion does not emphasize faith over reason, but faith in tandem with reason; faith on a basic level is merely sufficient trust to give something an earnest try (or, in more religious terms, "things hoped for but not seen", which is to say, a belief in potential), which is a principle necessary in the acquisition of all meaningful knowledge.
  - javert 16y ago
    faith in tandem with reason That's a contradiction. faith.. is necessary in the acquisition of all meaningful knowledge. I strongly disagree. Believe me, I've looked into it.
    - cookiecaper 16y ago
      It's not a contradiction, you don't understand. Faith is the serious belief that something can happen or is real. When a scientist embarks upon a hypothesis, he does so because he has faith that something valuable may come from experimenting on that hypothesis, which is a hope for value not yet seen. Faith is not just a belief or hope, but it is a set of works accomplished in the attitude of that hope, so the scientist, by faith, continues his experiments on a hypothesis. The same process occurs in the spiritual and religious realm with regard to faith. Religious people hear that certain information and/or manifestations are available to them, and they have faith sufficient to follow the path outlined. As they do so, they find their initial faith validated, and then they continue to have faith on the next point outlined in the scriptures, and find that faith validated, and so on. Faith is not knowledge; faith is a stopgap on the way to knowledge, and it's a principle necessary for healthy or reasonable conduct in all forms, which is part of why religion requires such an emphasis of faith. If a man obtains all knowledge, there is no more need for faith, because he knows everything of himself and has no need to believe something without a formal proof, as he has already received a formal proof of every true thing, which can only happen as that man has sufficient faith in true things to experiment and learn of their truth with help from God. He has no faith because he no more has a mere hope in things not seen; he now sees all things.
      - javert 16y ago
        Faith consists of believing something without reference to reality, i.e., divorced of reason. A scientist engaging in an experiment is attempting to gain knowledge, and he may expect the experiment to go a certain way, based on what he knows. Someone engaging in faith says, "I believe this, just because I want to." There is no reference to knowledge, reason, or reality. It's putting an "I wish" over "It is." To engage in faith is to surrender your mind. To surrender your mind is the most basic kind of evil there is; it's anti-human life. If you are actually interested in thinking about this further, you'll probably find my cousin response (i.e. responding to another child of this comment's grandparent) highly relevant.
kalasa 16y ago
I would suggest that if it seems like three-quarters of humanity is hateful, ignorant, or dulled you might want to consider the possibility of selection bias in your data.

baguasquirrel 16y ago

"I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." -Gandhi

javert 16y ago

Religions are not entities, only the people that make them up are. I could have phrased what I said better, but I stand by the essential meaning of what I said, and I disagree with you. A "religion" as a particular body of ideas, is distinct from the adherents to that religion. Which is why it's perfectly reasonable to say something like, "Most Christians don't actually live up to the teachings of Christianity." For example, nobody can reasonably deny that Christianity involves (1) belief in Christ; (2) a large helping of faith instead of reason; (3) a significant element of self-sacrifice. Or for Islam: (1) belief in the teachings of Muhammad, and in Allah; (2) a large helping of faith instead of reason; (3) a significant element of self-sacrifice (this time posited as "submission"). Buddhism, arguably, might only be (2), depending on your interpretation; I think Buddhism is probably "less well-defined," so to speak, but maybe I just no less about it. Still, there are clearly certain concepts that define and/or are implied by any particular religion.

cookiecaper 16y ago
These religions are often much more different than their common manifestations, but their peddlers simplify and adulterate the teachings to make them more palatable. It involves serious work to become either a real Christian or a real Muslim, and people prefer "drive-through religion", as it were. I suggest you explore religion, especially religion that exists outside of the spotlight, more deeply to gain an appropriate understanding of how these things work. For instance, religion does not emphasize faith over reason, but faith in tandem with reason; faith on a basic level is merely sufficient trust to give something an earnest try (or, in more religious terms, "things hoped for but not seen", which is to say, a belief in potential), which is a principle necessary in the acquisition of all meaningful knowledge.
- javert 16y ago
  faith in tandem with reason That's a contradiction. faith.. is necessary in the acquisition of all meaningful knowledge. I strongly disagree. Believe me, I've looked into it.
  - cookiecaper 16y ago
    It's not a contradiction, you don't understand. Faith is the serious belief that something can happen or is real. When a scientist embarks upon a hypothesis, he does so because he has faith that something valuable may come from experimenting on that hypothesis, which is a hope for value not yet seen. Faith is not just a belief or hope, but it is a set of works accomplished in the attitude of that hope, so the scientist, by faith, continues his experiments on a hypothesis. The same process occurs in the spiritual and religious realm with regard to faith. Religious people hear that certain information and/or manifestations are available to them, and they have faith sufficient to follow the path outlined. As they do so, they find their initial faith validated, and then they continue to have faith on the next point outlined in the scriptures, and find that faith validated, and so on. Faith is not knowledge; faith is a stopgap on the way to knowledge, and it's a principle necessary for healthy or reasonable conduct in all forms, which is part of why religion requires such an emphasis of faith. If a man obtains all knowledge, there is no more need for faith, because he knows everything of himself and has no need to believe something without a formal proof, as he has already received a formal proof of every true thing, which can only happen as that man has sufficient faith in true things to experiment and learn of their truth with help from God. He has no faith because he no more has a mere hope in things not seen; he now sees all things.
    - javert 16y ago
      Faith consists of believing something without reference to reality, i.e., divorced of reason. A scientist engaging in an experiment is attempting to gain knowledge, and he may expect the experiment to go a certain way, based on what he knows. Someone engaging in faith says, "I believe this, just because I want to." There is no reference to knowledge, reason, or reality. It's putting an "I wish" over "It is." To engage in faith is to surrender your mind. To surrender your mind is the most basic kind of evil there is; it's anti-human life. If you are actually interested in thinking about this further, you'll probably find my cousin response (i.e. responding to another child of this comment's grandparent) highly relevant.

kalasa 16y ago

I would suggest that if it seems like three-quarters of humanity is hateful, ignorant, or dulled you might want to consider the possibility of selection bias in your data.