mrbaggins
04-17-2002, 08:19 AM
As an introduction to the thread, I'll provide you with a 'readers digest' introduction to myself.
I'm a 28 year old guy, living in New York (for the last 6 years) originally from the UK. I'm a caucasian, and an IT professional. My belief structure borders somewhere between agnostic and atheist. Although I am fond of using religious blasphemy :)
My premise is that religion and its belief is an entirely evolved trait. My belief is that large scale belief of this nature will ultimately change into something else.
Humanity didn't start with intrinsic religion, although as people became aware, they became aware of the smallness of the self and the onmipresent nature of the Sun. This evolved into a religious worship of the sun, and eventually civilizations 'founded' religions based on other aspects of nature. Around 5 thousand years ago (as far as I'm aware from empirical evidence) God's were given personality, just like the self.
What happened to Sun worship? It had evolved out of understanding. There were more Suns, just like that one pin ing the sky at night. The need of different religions were based in:
a) a permenent leader figure - all human leaders perish. There was no continuity of rule.
However, ultimately, secularity created a blood line ruling system, and those rulers where pseudo divine.
b) a lack of better scientific understanding - The sun ultimately became an object that a God propelled across the sky, rather than being its own presence.
As our scientific understanding of everything expands, religions move the goalposts back to encompass more and more omnipotent and less and less present direct-presence of God(s).
Religions are ultimately disproved by better explanations. That is humanities experience.
Now you might say that currently we're enlightened, and have got it right with "our" current belief structure. We've only been believing the current 'in vogue' religions for a couple of thousand years. I expect that in another millenium or 3, that understanding will have evolved to either preclude religion as we currently understand it, or create a new, contemporary religion, encompassing a new understanding and new reality, not broken by previous discoveries.
Its true that the current religions have 'withstood' scientific discovery up and to a certain point- religions are certainly generic and mysterious, but they've certainly been weakened by it. There are numerous examples of religions moving the goalposts of their religions back; that the Earth is round (and not at the center of the universe) and not flat. Christianity then decided that the Sun was at the center of the universe. That was then subsequently disproved.
Religions also are fond of self referential proof rather than empirical proof: a holy book (transferred to the future originally by very falible means) is said to PROVE the nature of "God". Its a very weak proof in terms of human understanding, only popular because we a) need to believe something b) don't know better, yet.
People WILL not believe that their religion is flawed BECAUSE as humans they NEED to believe. Self-referential maintenance of religious belief. One individual will not change, just as a genetic evolution, but a share consciousness ultimately will.
Its clear to me that the early divine understanding, currently in vogue should have had a more profoundly correct understanding of the world given to its chosen authors: Giving one example. an exact date of creation was given, thay is widely discounted.
What did religion do? Say 'we didn't really mean that, so lets just say that God created everything before then, at a point where current science said it did, and as far as we're aware thats the only way that something could come from nothing.' Now contemporary science has found empirical evidence of a way something could come from nothing; Quantum dynamics.
Now this doesn't ABSOLUTELY mean that all of the religions have it wrong.. one (!!) may have nailed it. Somehow though, I think we're going to evolve our understanding of 'religion' further. Or then again, maybe a Pagan religion had it right (!!).
Western society clearly seems to be evolving away from deep religious belief, and I believe its an early beginning to a more widespread change.
Perhaps at one point, we'll understand so much and be so enlightened that we will have one big Utopian society and we will perform some sort of self or societial worship.
Now how ridiculous is it to kill in the name of the-currently-in-vogue god?
I'm a 28 year old guy, living in New York (for the last 6 years) originally from the UK. I'm a caucasian, and an IT professional. My belief structure borders somewhere between agnostic and atheist. Although I am fond of using religious blasphemy :)
My premise is that religion and its belief is an entirely evolved trait. My belief is that large scale belief of this nature will ultimately change into something else.
Humanity didn't start with intrinsic religion, although as people became aware, they became aware of the smallness of the self and the onmipresent nature of the Sun. This evolved into a religious worship of the sun, and eventually civilizations 'founded' religions based on other aspects of nature. Around 5 thousand years ago (as far as I'm aware from empirical evidence) God's were given personality, just like the self.
What happened to Sun worship? It had evolved out of understanding. There were more Suns, just like that one pin ing the sky at night. The need of different religions were based in:
a) a permenent leader figure - all human leaders perish. There was no continuity of rule.
However, ultimately, secularity created a blood line ruling system, and those rulers where pseudo divine.
b) a lack of better scientific understanding - The sun ultimately became an object that a God propelled across the sky, rather than being its own presence.
As our scientific understanding of everything expands, religions move the goalposts back to encompass more and more omnipotent and less and less present direct-presence of God(s).
Religions are ultimately disproved by better explanations. That is humanities experience.
Now you might say that currently we're enlightened, and have got it right with "our" current belief structure. We've only been believing the current 'in vogue' religions for a couple of thousand years. I expect that in another millenium or 3, that understanding will have evolved to either preclude religion as we currently understand it, or create a new, contemporary religion, encompassing a new understanding and new reality, not broken by previous discoveries.
Its true that the current religions have 'withstood' scientific discovery up and to a certain point- religions are certainly generic and mysterious, but they've certainly been weakened by it. There are numerous examples of religions moving the goalposts of their religions back; that the Earth is round (and not at the center of the universe) and not flat. Christianity then decided that the Sun was at the center of the universe. That was then subsequently disproved.
Religions also are fond of self referential proof rather than empirical proof: a holy book (transferred to the future originally by very falible means) is said to PROVE the nature of "God". Its a very weak proof in terms of human understanding, only popular because we a) need to believe something b) don't know better, yet.
People WILL not believe that their religion is flawed BECAUSE as humans they NEED to believe. Self-referential maintenance of religious belief. One individual will not change, just as a genetic evolution, but a share consciousness ultimately will.
Its clear to me that the early divine understanding, currently in vogue should have had a more profoundly correct understanding of the world given to its chosen authors: Giving one example. an exact date of creation was given, thay is widely discounted.
What did religion do? Say 'we didn't really mean that, so lets just say that God created everything before then, at a point where current science said it did, and as far as we're aware thats the only way that something could come from nothing.' Now contemporary science has found empirical evidence of a way something could come from nothing; Quantum dynamics.
Now this doesn't ABSOLUTELY mean that all of the religions have it wrong.. one (!!) may have nailed it. Somehow though, I think we're going to evolve our understanding of 'religion' further. Or then again, maybe a Pagan religion had it right (!!).
Western society clearly seems to be evolving away from deep religious belief, and I believe its an early beginning to a more widespread change.
Perhaps at one point, we'll understand so much and be so enlightened that we will have one big Utopian society and we will perform some sort of self or societial worship.
Now how ridiculous is it to kill in the name of the-currently-in-vogue god?