LIME

Hey Jakob,

I’m not the right person to comment on having religious faith, as I don’t consider myself religious in the traditional sense. But I have had many discussions with those who do (Muslims, Christians and Buddhists mainly), and I do have – what can be vaguely termed – ‘spiritual beliefs’. However, I think for now I should leave the questions of living with religious faith to those who know of it directly; so I have forwarded your post onwards. Hopefully someone will find the time to comment, I’d be interested in input to this discussion too! :)

hi, real quick…im muslim. muslim faith says you dont have to be muslim to go to heaven ( i think the only faith that says that)so denomination is not the ticket to heave. to the moslem, christians, jews, zoroastrians, sabeian, and other faiths that have come and gone, prophets we know of, and know nothing about have come and gone, they are all people of the book, and follow the one true God. apparently, hindu, and buddist texts, as well as the bible speak of “he who is worthy of praise” coming as the seal of the prophets…”he who is worthy of praise” is a literal translation of the word/name “mohhamad”. not about to get into specifics coz my wife wants me to get off the computer. is there a God? of coarse there is..whatever you call him…he exists. everything that exists is here because something happened before it to make it exist..literally everything…so hence something must have started it all off. and that something by definition, has the nature of existing within it self…so everything came form one thing, hence everything is one…hence a part of god, hence the feeling of having god with you all the time. is he concious…well yes. because if everything came from god, then you can argue that you exist…”we” might be a figment of your imagination..but you definatly exist to yourself, because youthink therefore you are. so the minimum you can say is that you exist and so within the great existence of “everything” which is one..the minimum conciousnes that this “one” (god, or whatever you call it) possesses is the very conciousness within you….so God is concious. whats the point? well naturally, its for you to figure out what the point is, while all the while practicing that sacred covenant of free will. for if you had no choice between good and evil generaly described as lack of godliness)you would not be able to practice free will..you would just be good….hmmm…amyways, gotta go, have fun chewing it all up n agreeing or disagreeing, but know this. if you are not evil, then you do not lack godliness…but genarlly, you just dont beleive in the doctrine..which is ok..but dont resist spirituality..in fact prayer is the contemplation of god (as islam teaches) so hence this very discussion is a prayer..heck you should just slap a white collar on and call yourself father!!! peace

Hey Wissam, thanks for taking the time!

I understand that Muslim faith is very much based around introspective enlightenment; isn’t this one of the interpretations of the term Jihad, and the goal of Islamic Sufism (please do not be offended if I show myself to have a very dodgy grasp of theological concepts; this certainly isn’t my forte, which is exactly why I would like to learn)? To look into yourself and ask those really difficult questions? In that sense, I would be inclined to lump it to the “philosophy” category, rather than “religion”. The thing that separates me, as an atheist or apatheist or whatever I ought to be called, from a religious person is the fact that I do not expect an afterlife, nor do I base my thoughts and behaviour on the prospect of one. At least I guess that’s the difference between a religous and non-religious person? Spirituality, however, is a different story altogether and one which I don’t reject at all.

I certainly agree with the need for soul-searching, but when that need isn’t coupled with a concept of a judging, conscious god who can offer me rewards or smite me with punishment, then I guess it can’t really be called religion (at least not Western religion; the Eastern denominations are a wee bit different but are also dealing with a concept of an afterlife, and a purpose of existance in a way that an atheist doesn’t).

The thing you’re saying about causality is interesting. God must exist because everything else does, and something – a divine being – must have come before that, if I understand you correctly? I’m obviously not completely agreeing about you here, but I do see your argument. It’s just that I don’t necessarily believe that everything has a cause for existence. Look at things like quantum mechanics, for example, where you have phenomena like super-position and so on, which seems to imply that our logical, rational urge to see cause and effect, cause and effect, cause and effect behind everything sometimes isn’t enough to make valid assumptions. SOMETIMES THERE APPEARS TO BE NO CAUSE. At least none that we can see, or comprehend. I’ve heard people make this argument as an indication that god does indeed exist, but I feel that it could more aptly be used as a very strong argument for the fact that he DOESN’T. Our religious beliefs are based around our culture, and thus on our minds, when we are seeing more and more proof of the fact that our minds way of dealing with information isn’t necessarily reflecting reality at all. To realize that some things – time and space bending, the concept of loopholes, or super-position – can’t be explained by our way of thinking – A leads to B, and B leads to C and so on ad nauseam – leads me to question a lot of the straight-line thinking that prevails in (Western) religion.

I think Western religions are based around the concept of linear thinking – causality – which is now more and more shown to be just one of several alterative ways of describing the world. And so an insecurity has entered the world, where we can’t be sure of our minds’ accurate portrayal of the universe around us. Why, then, should we assume that the old scriptures are correct?

The concept of God as ever-present, always here in the form of “energy”, “spirituality” or whatever we want to call it, is to me a little bit of a cop-out. It provides a mental pacifier that comforts us without really obligating us to do good, a way of feeling spiritual and guided but without having to observe moral imperatives. Of the two (“traditional” Western religion, and pantheism if I may call it such), I much prefer the ones who believe whole-heartedly and live their lives accordingly, to the ones who live their lives just like me but argue that they’re still believers in a higher power. To me, that seems like an attempt to both have and eat the proverbial cake. Of course, that doesn’t apply to people who DO believe in an omni-present God as a part of the dogma of their denomination, just to the ones who are trying to dodge the question by not really subscribing to anything other than “some benign power somewhere” that doesn’t require them to make a stand for anything.

If God is there, but I don’t have to believe in him to go to heaven, then why are bothering ourselves with building chuches, mosques and synagogues? Or even worse – if God is there, but doesn’t punish me for being bad or rewards me for being good, then…what use is he? Can’t we just forget about him in that case?

I hope I haven’t offended anybody, that is certainly not my intention, but I do find these questions interesting and so I will probably come off as a bit of a prick occasionally, as I speculate away. Hope that’s ok.

Hi Jakob (and all)

I’ll start with a petty point, because you are even contemplating the questions you are asking, you would be ‘classified’ as agnostic rather than atheist. Not that it has any consequence on this discussion…

To fill all of you that don’t know my background:
I was born into a family with a religious (Christian) mother and an agnostic father, who became a believer in the Christian faith when I was about 5 or so. He swiftly started preaching and becoming very involved in the Church, which (in time and dedication – returning to complete his secondary schooling and then to obtain his Theology degree) became his current occupation.
Until I became an obnoxious teenager (which I’m not so sure I’ve out-grown just yet) and stopped being active in the Church (to a larger degree), I was a doubtless believer in the Christian RELIGION.

When I got older, I started asking questions. Being defiant, as most teenagers are, I set my target as trying to break every paradigm.
I can’t remember what set me out on that path, but it did bring me to question the very core of my identity – which was based around religion.
As when you and I catch the slightest whiff of a good argument, we play devils advocate; so did I have these internal arguments about these topics and beliefs.

My current stance on religion is that I do not practice it, predominantly because I do not feel comfortable in the environment – I feel much more comfortable being around people like you that are able to think for themselves and explore possibilities – even the possibility that something they’ve always believed to be true is, in fact, not!
I find it very sad that the believers in religion that I have come in contact with, to the greater part anyway, are not able explore – not prepared to ask these questions.
Why? I believe because these topics are core to ones identity, and to question the core – to question the things your parents and heroes taught you – is dangerous. Dangerous because it’s destabilizing (personally – which makes one feel weaker) and makes those who’s beliefs you’re questioning to become defensive (as you are potentially putting them in that same ‘destabilized’ zone): which makes it much easier to just refrain from asking such questions. Of the other, and of ourselves…

But I digress…
I just wanted to give some sort of insight to my background, and hence my angle to this conversation.

Question 1
I believe a lot of agnostics I’ve met are far better people than a lot of Christians I’ve met. It’s your deeds that set you apart – not your religion!

As for an afterlife… I have no idea what comes after this life. I don’t particularly care. I think what is important is that people do the absolute best they are capable of right now! Not try to buy ‘heaven credits’…
According to the scriptures, it is for God to judge, no one else – on this basis, does it not make sense to do what the individual believes is in God’s will, rather than to conform to the dogma?

For me, religion is *a* means of practicing spirituality.
As in science, we need to put labels on things to understand them, to conceptualize them and discuss them.
We need to call water “water” and air “air” – we need these because we are a highly communicative species.
In the same way we need words such as “God” to discuss and conceptualize spirituality.

What is sad is that the religious institution (Christianity), due to greedy individuals within the system (I believe), is now ‘ostracized’ but much of western culture. So, because of the perversion of the Church over the last two millennia, western culture has turned its back on the religion (with good cause), but I think they’re also losing their ability to experience something amazing. They, proverbially, threw the baby out with the bath-water.

To come back to your question, Heaven… I think heaven and hell are not afterlife places or realms. I believe we are already in heaven or hell!
How that alters when our body can no longer survive – that I don’t know, and don’t pretend to. But I think this should be seen from a “time-space continuum” perspective (after all linear time is relative concept) – just for the sake of argument if nothing else.
After all, we can only know what we are by knowing what we aren’t – so let’s ask these questions of ourselves.
Basically, I believe that the name you choose to call “God” is of no consequence. I don’t think the framework that holds the piece of art makes it a masterpiece or abomination.

Question 2
Does God care? Well, that’s a question only you can answer.
That’s a personal belief – that’s were faith comes in.

I can tell you that I still have a belief in “God”. I believe in the teachings of Christ (What I believe him to have been is not a topic
I will go into right now.) And I have had spiritual experiences that I cannot articulate.
Do I believe there is a greater awareness that has consciousness and emotion – yes!

The real question here is regarding the placebo effect (affect? Sorry – I can never get that right!).
Is this something that you are interacting with, something external? Or is this a creation of your imagination?

Point 1 – I think a large amount of beliefs we have are not accurate. Once we believed the world was flat.
We still believe moronic ‘facts’ such as that, but we are (obviously) unaware of the truth.
The fact is we choose what we believe in. And it’s those that have been prepared to break this convention that have changed history as we know it.

Sometimes I think we should stop being so goddamn serious! We get suckered into this adult world.
Do you remember when you were a kid how real it felt when you were playing imaginary games?
Pretending to be something? (Maybe just me?)
Ok – you might say it’s a good thing – that we have responsibilities and so forth…
I think it’s important to retain certain innate abilities (that dwindle due to it not being beneficial in our society), one of which I believe is to interact which ‘the spirit’, ‘God’, ‘Allah’, whatever… That doesn’t detract from development in other ways.

My belief makes it real! I believes it’s as good a thing to believe in as any – to believe in something great (the principles – not the practices & perversions that have occurred). Which brings me to…

Point 2 – How one sees ‘God’ will be reflected in the way one sees everything.
My observations have led me to believe that the if one sees ‘God’ as caring, nurturing, forgiving; one reflects those traits.
One the believes ‘God’ is a hard, judging, disciplining master sitting on high, one reflects this (For instance, the majority of South
African white people believe(d) in this sort of God, and this was definitely reflected in their actions. I have a suspicion that ‘God’ would have been depicted in a similar light in Germany in the 1930′s!?)
One the believes ‘God’ existence is of no consequence often believe their existence is of no consequence.

And I think this is core to our identity, as it’s the only real concept that is not static and ‘conquerable’.

So we come back to the false dichotomy – did we create God or did God create us? We are but one and the same!

Does God care? Because I believe he does, I see evidence of it everywhere.
What I call the ‘red toyota complex’ (or syndrome, or something…). As soon as you buy a red toyota, you see one ever corner you turn.
Does that mean it’s real or I’m creating it? I believe it’s real. But I have no way of substantiating that.
As I said at the start – it’s only something you can feel for yourself. Only you will know if it’s real or not.

The obvious obstacle is that if you do not allow yourself to be open to such an experience, then you will never be able to have such an experience.

When I was young, and a firm believer, I had a wart on my leg. I prayed several times a day, reciting “by His stripes it shall be healed”
(referring to the stripes on his back from the pre-crucification lashing). That wart healed and disappeared.
What happened there? Did God heal me? Did I create chemicals in my body that resulted in it healing? Coincidence?

Does it make a difference? I think it does actually, but not for the sake of this conversation. Your question was: Is God relevant?
Is true faith in a greater consciousness beneficial? A resounding yes!

To answer your later questions:
Why then should we consider the old scriptures to be correct?
Personally, I don’t think we should. I think we should try understand them in CONTEXT!
Remember, these were written in a native language that is no longer in use (and I won’t digress into a discussion about how language is shaped around culture and concepts within that culture), not to mention the potential perversion of these scriptures by the ‘Holy Church’. We also need to consider other elements, such as – did some of these stories start as folk-tales. I think we are meant to take the essence from stories such as these.

I also think it’s important to recognize some of the scriptures were intended to be metaphorical, to allow a simple man to understand concepts. I don’t think we should take them literally (and deny the existence of dinosaurs!)

Re: mental pacifier
That set off a thought. One of the things that turned me away from the religious institution is that it’s fear based – or it was for me anyway. My motivation for being good was in order not to land up in hell! What I found was that I was in hell! I felt so guilty when I did something. I later learned that I feel good when I do ‘good’ things – when I’m altruistic. I believe that faith is only beneficial if it comes from a place of love.

As I said earlier – it’s not a matter of buying “heaven credits”.
It needs to be real and alive for you right now. It needs to be interwoven with your every thought and action.

To finish off, I must say I admire your willingness to consider concepts that may seem bizarre to you!

Oh, one last thing. read “Chapter 2: Science and religion: the great divorce” from this link:
http://www.whatthebleep.com/reality/bleepbook.shtml