‹ First  < 2 3 4 5 6 >  Last ›
 
   
 

What is Religion?

 
Can of Tuna
 
Avatar
 
 
Can of Tuna
Total Posts:  12
Joined  18-08-2017
 
 
 
07 September 2017 13:26
 

Jesus (Jewish heretic)
Muhammed (Christian heretic)
Shia (Muslim heresy)
Luther (Catholic Heretic)
Joseph Smith (ALL about the heresy)
Various Lutheran subgroups (Heretic heretic heretic)

Religion is heresy of the mind.

 
Shaikh Raisuddin
 
Avatar
 
 
Shaikh Raisuddin
Total Posts:  85
Joined  20-03-2015
 
 
 
11 September 2017 11:35
 

Religion is BRAIN OPERATING SYSTEM like DOS, WINDOWS, UNIX etc.

Human brain cannot work without set of beliefs.

Buddhism is atheistic yet it is religion.

No definition of dictionary appropriately define the word religion inclusive of all types of religions of past and current time.

Atheism is a STATE RELIGION in disguise whereby it gives fa more power to government than theological god viz mercy killing, abortion, gay marriage etc. Atheism is religion promoted by governments.

 
Shaikh Raisuddin
 
Avatar
 
 
Shaikh Raisuddin
Total Posts:  85
Joined  20-03-2015
 
 
 
11 September 2017 11:39
 

All atheists believe in law of land and government. They can never deny to pay tax, cannot violate traffic rules, can never think to be a traitor.

Would you call a traitor an atheist?

 
MrRon
 
Avatar
 
 
MrRon
Total Posts:  1861
Joined  14-08-2008
 
 
 
12 September 2017 02:46
 

@Shaikh

Why are you ignoring our questions? I had asked; “does everybody who speaks a language believe in a god???”  What is your answer to that? And previously I had asked if you adhere to any religion and if so, which one.

Ron

 

 
Jefe
 
Avatar
 
 
Jefe
Total Posts:  7118
Joined  15-02-2007
 
 
 
12 September 2017 07:25
 
MrRon - 12 September 2017 02:46 AM

@Shaikh

Why are you ignoring our questions? I had asked; “does everybody who speaks a language believe in a god???”  What is your answer to that? And previously I had asked if you adhere to any religion and if so, which one. 

Ron

He’s a dogma-bot

 
 
EN
 
Avatar
 
 
EN
Total Posts:  21584
Joined  11-03-2007
 
 
 
12 September 2017 08:07
 

Religion is any activity performed in response to a person’s belief in a god (supreme being).  Atheism, political philosophy, personal philosophy, science, etc. don’t count as religion.  There must be a belief in a god. Otherwise, the word loses any significance.

 
Shaikh Raisuddin
 
Avatar
 
 
Shaikh Raisuddin
Total Posts:  85
Joined  20-03-2015
 
 
 
12 September 2017 10:06
 
MrRon - 12 September 2017 02:46 AM

@Shaikh

Why are you ignoring our questions? I had asked; “does everybody who speaks a language believe in a god???”  What is your answer to that? And previously I had asked if you adhere to any religion and if so, which one.

Ron

Yes every body who uses language, consciously or unconsciously believe in God as “ultimate cause of all causes” becuase of the grammar rule of language viz. Subject + Verb (action) + Object. All languages are based on principle of causality.

 
Shaikh Raisuddin
 
Avatar
 
 
Shaikh Raisuddin
Total Posts:  85
Joined  20-03-2015
 
 
 
12 September 2017 10:09
 

Only TRAITORS and INSANE only can be atheist.

Because atheism is not exact antonym of theism.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/dictionary-misery-mankind-shaikh-raisuddin

[ Edited: 12 September 2017 10:11 by Shaikh Raisuddin]
 
EN
 
Avatar
 
 
EN
Total Posts:  21584
Joined  11-03-2007
 
 
 
12 September 2017 11:34
 
Shaikh Raisuddin - 12 September 2017 10:09 AM

Only TRAITORS and INSANE only can be atheist.

Because atheism is not exact antonym of theism.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/dictionary-misery-mankind-shaikh-raisuddin

This is complete nonsense.  All that is required for atheism is that one not believe in a god (supreme being).

 
MrRon
 
Avatar
 
 
MrRon
Total Posts:  1861
Joined  14-08-2008
 
 
 
12 September 2017 15:13
 
Shaikh Raisuddin - 12 September 2017 10:06 AM
MrRon - 12 September 2017 02:46 AM

@Shaikh

Why are you ignoring our questions? I had asked; “does everybody who speaks a language believe in a god???”  What is your answer to that? And previously I had asked if you adhere to any religion and if so, which one.

Ron

Yes every body who uses language, consciously or unconsciously believe in God as “ultimate cause of all causes” becuase of the grammar rule of language viz. Subject + Verb (action) + Object. All languages are based on principle of causality.

Could you also say that everyone who uses language believes in universe-creating Magical Pixies because of the rule of language viz. Subject + Verb (action) + Object and the principle of causality? Why would that work for God, but not for some other unfalsifiable assertion?

Anyway, which God do YOU believe in? Do you adhere to any particular religion?

Ron

 
LadyJane
 
Avatar
 
 
LadyJane
Total Posts:  3322
Joined  26-03-2013
 
 
 
12 September 2017 15:37
 
 
 
Shaikh Raisuddin
 
Avatar
 
 
Shaikh Raisuddin
Total Posts:  85
Joined  20-03-2015
 
 
 
13 September 2017 10:55
 
MrRon - 12 September 2017 03:13 PM
Shaikh Raisuddin - 12 September 2017 10:06 AM
MrRon - 12 September 2017 02:46 AM

@Shaikh

Why are you ignoring our questions? I had asked; “does everybody who speaks a language believe in a god???”  What is your answer to that? And previously I had asked if you adhere to any religion and if so, which one.

Ron

Yes every body who uses language, consciously or unconsciously believe in God as “ultimate cause of all causes” becuase of the grammar rule of language viz. Subject + Verb (action) + Object. All languages are based on principle of causality.

Could you also say that everyone who uses language believes in universe-creating Magical Pixies because of the rule of language viz. Subject + Verb (action) + Object and the principle of causality? Why would that work for God, but not for some other unfalsifiable assertion?

Anyway, which God do YOU believe in? Do you adhere to any particular religion?

Ron

There is practice/tendency to use synonymous words even in science for the character of God viz. Nature, Force fields etc because of linguistic dictate. Nobody explain where from Nature or Force fields originate but certainly we hold force fields as the ultimate causes of dynamics of world.

I, you and we all adhere to multiple religions. I have my professional religion, community religion, national religion, linguistic religion, biological religion etc.

 

 
MrRon
 
Avatar
 
 
MrRon
Total Posts:  1861
Joined  14-08-2008
 
 
 
13 September 2017 13:57
 
Shaikh Raisuddin - 13 September 2017 10:55 AM
MrRon - 12 September 2017 03:13 PM
Shaikh Raisuddin - 12 September 2017 10:06 AM
MrRon - 12 September 2017 02:46 AM

@Shaikh

Why are you ignoring our questions? I had asked; “does everybody who speaks a language believe in a god???”  What is your answer to that? And previously I had asked if you adhere to any religion and if so, which one.

Ron

Yes every body who uses language, consciously or unconsciously believe in God as “ultimate cause of all causes” becuase of the grammar rule of language viz. Subject + Verb (action) + Object. All languages are based on principle of causality.

Could you also say that everyone who uses language believes in universe-creating Magical Pixies because of the rule of language viz. Subject + Verb (action) + Object and the principle of causality? Why would that work for God, but not for some other unfalsifiable assertion?

Anyway, which God do YOU believe in? Do you adhere to any particular religion?

Ron

There is practice/tendency to use synonymous words even in science for the character of God viz. Nature, Force fields etc because of linguistic dictate. Nobody explain where from Nature or Force fields originate but certainly we hold force fields as the ultimate causes of dynamics of world.

I, you and we all adhere to multiple religions. I have my professional religion, community religion, national religion, linguistic religion, biological religion etc.

Shaikh, I didn’t order a word salad. You did not answer any of my questions. Go ahead and try again:

Can people believe in universe-creating Magical Pixies using your logic?
Which God do YOU believe in?
Do you adhere to any particular religion? (which one?)

It’s not necessary to talk about linguistics. Just answer the questions, please.

Thanks.
Ron
PS - No, I do not adhere to any religion.

 
Kalessin
 
Avatar
 
 
Kalessin
Total Posts:  128
Joined  02-07-2017
 
 
 
13 September 2017 16:39
 
Shaikh Raisuddin - 12 September 2017 10:06 AM

I, you and we all adhere to multiple religions. I have my professional religion, community religion, national religion, linguistic religion, biological religion etc.

This could be a form of Kalam or, less convincingly, obscurantist pantheism.  “Atoms are religion, atheists are religious, science is a synonym for religion, government is religion dictionary is religion, I have multiple religions, causality means that something created everything so unless you deny causality you cannot deny God”.  Or worse, that belief is the same as faith and therefore all beliefs are faith and therefore that religion must exist because of the necessity of faith and probably that as a result God necessarily exists because of religion.
On this basis the argument is made that everything is God, and even things that declare themselves unconnected are self-denying expressions of God, since only God can be everything and everything must be God.  Language itself presupposes causality and causality presupposes God under Kalam.  Or arguments of this sort and their variants.
However, there are a number of valid and appropriate counter-arguments:
question First, that the “language” presupposition is not universal.  SVO or SOV do not account for 100% of language and equally do not account for pre-linguistic development. causality cannot be taken as a given simply by having one branch - even the dominant one - of language and reasoning that is neither eternal or necessary.  People who do not use SVO or SOV are not essentially bound to a caused causality paradigm in their experience of the world.
question Second, causality in itself is not a given, no matter how difficult it is to think outside it -  on a philosophical level causality itself is a second order inference rather than a fundamental; and on the empirical level there is quantum science about the stochastic nature of the universe which means that it operates on statistical laws rather than determinist - even if you doubt this, it is not a disproved theory and therefore as valid as other not-disproved theories.  A simpler way to explore this is in Russell’s Barber Paradox, which can be seen as a reflection on the impossibility of transcendence within logic.
question Thirdly, God is not an inevitability even if you accept all the structural premises.  Many brilliant Islamic philosophers had to rebuild theology from the ‘necessary existent’ of Avicenna (including Avicenna), in a similar way to Descartes repopulation of the moral universe out of the cogito in order to justify God, but all assumptions of Divinity are arbitrary and not required once you have both necessity and existence. 
question Again, causal logic allows simple challenges of the transcendent claim of the Kalam (that something created with such complexity cannot be self-created), either by simple inability to falsify (we would have to have experience of the multiverse) or by using any variations of the counter watchmaker argument.
question The faith/belief/god/concept strategy is the least philosophically sound.  A question would be “What leads you to not believe anything? Is it the same as what leads you to believe something?”  If the answer is no, the faith is differentiated from belief; if the answer is yes, then faith is indiscriminate and not contingent on God.

I would love to engage in simple debate using normative definitions on these issues but I am somewhat pessimistic smile
Kalessin

 
EN
 
Avatar
 
 
EN
Total Posts:  21584
Joined  11-03-2007
 
 
 
13 September 2017 16:57
 
Shaikh Raisuddin - 13 September 2017 10:55 AM

I, you and we all adhere to multiple religions. I have my professional religion, community religion, national religion, linguistic religion, biological religion etc.

No, this is not true, and you are wrong. You have made “religion” simply a word for “culture” or “situation” or “environment.”  You have some agenda behind this, but nobody is buying it, and you need to stop this ridiculous line of argument.

 
‹ First  < 2 3 4 5 6 >  Last ›