Unanswered questions......

[ph7654]

Hi all,

I am looking for some answers / debate to some questions I have, apologies if they have been done many times before, but my reason for posting here is that generally people feel uncomfortable talking about religion in general and i always tread on egg shells not wanting to offend anyone. Here they are: I will put my background at the bottom if that helps debate:

My view currently: Religion does so many good things in the world but interpreted wrongly or used for personal gain/greed causes so many issues in it's name.

1) How can so many people be wrong?
There are many religions in the world with billions of people living their life according to that religion. However, surely only 1 religion is fundamentally correct OR none of them are? I suppose this is proof vs. faith.....

2) Your environment determines your religion?
I was born in UK, by parents who taught me to read the Lord's prayer as a child. If i was born in India by Indian parents i would likely be a Hindu would i not? and therefore as an adult (high chances are) i would devoutly be a Hindu as the "correct" religion. I would have thought (?) there must be very few people (as a %) in the world that have actually studied all religions and then said "yes, this one sounds like the most likely to be true"? Therefore, by logic, it strikes me that there are millions of people who are led into religion rather than choose?

3) Does religion have a long term goal?
With the environment being a huge topic over recent years, it seems inevitable that humans will consume most natural resources. The rate at which this occurs is obviously to do with a) the size of human population and b) rate at which we consume them (cultural). Does religion mention or tackle our long term survival? To use a topical example. Catholicism, doesn't promote contraceptive and encourages large families. Doesn't that contradict a) the size of the human population and in effect reduce our time on this planet?

Really interested and happy for this questions to be pulled apart and happy to supply any more detail.....

Many thanks.

Background: 33 years old, born and live in the UK. Brought up reading the Lord's Prayer but never really went to Church. I don't now practise any religion but have certain values close to my heart that are "treat people how you want to be treated".

[Khalifa]

hello
i read your message and i found your reasoning quite relevant
im a muslim and i agree with the fact that religion is not only faith but also proof
and that is the caracteristic of islam
i invite to do some research about it ,you will certainly find more than you expect
if u need to discuss issues i will be more than happy to help .

here is my email: ennaciri-reda@hotmail.com

[LiamOS]

So many people can easily be wrong if they don't have any good reason for believing what they do in the first place.

[Zzyzx]

.
Hi Ph,

Welcome to the forum. You open with interesting questions.

My view currently: Religion does so many good things in the world but interpreted wrongly or used for personal gain/greed causes so many issues in it's name.

Many popular religions (past and present) PROMOTE exclusivity, divisiveness, suspicion, hostility, conflict and even warfare between competing religious groups.

How can so many people be wrong?

Easily.

Billions of people over thousands of years probably believed that the Earth was the center of the universe and that the sun, moon, stars and planets revolved around the earth. They were dead wrong – but they “believed� or “knew� the false information.

There are many religions in the world with billions of people living their life according to that religion. However, surely only 1 religion is fundamentally correct OR none of them are? I suppose this is proof vs. faith.....

The options seem to be:

1. All religions are correct
2. No religions are correct
3. All religions are partially correct
4. Some religions are partially correct
5. We cannot know which religions, if any, are correct given the information available.

I choose the latter.

Your environment determines your religion?

“Determines� is too strong a word, in my opinion. “Influences� might be better. Knowledge of the distribution of the world’s religion confirms that most people who live in areas dominated by a particular religion ascribe to (or identify themselves as) membership in that religion. Social and familial pressure is a strong influence (though not determinate) of behavior.

Sure, a tenth of a percent of Christians (or whatever the number) can convert to Islam. But, the vast majority stay within the predominant religions of their culture, family, friends, etc.

Does religion have a long term goal?

Most religions, in my observation, have a “long-term goal� of “salvation� or rewards in a proposed “afterlife� for individuals who worship the right “god� (among thousands available for worship) in the right way (according to clerics).

With the environment being a huge topic over recent years, it seems inevitable that humans will consume most natural resources. The rate at which this occurs is obviously to do with a) the size of human population and b) rate at which we consume them (cultural). Does religion mention or tackle our long term survival?

Many organized, commercial religions (i.e., most popular religions) PROMOTE overpopulation in a quest for membership (or “market share�). If their congregants out-reproduce the competition (or if they recruit enough outsiders), they “win� (become dominant, influential and possibly or probably wealthy).

To use a topical example. Catholicism, doesn't promote contraceptive and encourages large families. Doesn't that contradict a) the size of the human population and in effect reduce our time on this planet?

Encouraging reproduction is diametrically opposed to concern for the environment and fails to recognize the concept of “environment carrying capacity� (the maximum number of a given species that can survive in a given environment).

For instance, yeast introduced into an environment of grape juice and sugar will multiply geometrically until their waste products (alcohol) make the environment toxic to them – then they will die off very rapidly. I test and confirm this regularly in the process of making wine.

I don't now practise any religion but have certain values close to my heart that are "treat people how you want to be treated".

Wouldn’t it be more reasonable to treat people as they wish to be treated (within limits)? If you are a masochist, for instance, not everyone would wish to be treated the way that you might.

[McCulloch]

Welcome

1) How can so many people be wrong?
There are many religions in the world with billions of people living their life according to that religion. However, surely only 1 religion is fundamentally correct OR none of them are? I suppose this is proof vs. faith.....

People have a greater probability of being wrong when they do not insist on objective evidence to support their ideas. At least a billion people (more than were alive on the planet one hundred years ago) are wrong about religion.

2) Your environment determines your religion?
I was born in UK, by parents who taught me to read the Lord's prayer as a child. If i was born in India by Indian parents i would likely be a Hindu would i not? and therefore as an adult (high chances are) i would devoutly be a Hindu as the "correct" religion. I would have thought (?) there must be very few people (as a %) in the world that have actually studied all religions and then said "yes, this one sounds like the most likely to be true"? Therefore, by logic, it strikes me that there are millions of people who are led into religion rather than choose?

A small percentage do convert. However, it does seem that if there is a true religion, your best chance to become a part of it, is to be born of believing parents. Choose your parents well.

3) Does religion have a long term goal?

No, it has evolved.

With the environment being a huge topic over recent years, it seems inevitable that humans will consume most natural resources. The rate at which this occurs is obviously to do with a) the size of human population and b) rate at which we consume them (cultural). Does religion mention or tackle our long term survival?

Some do, most don't.

To use a topical example. Catholicism, doesn't promote contraceptive and encourages large families. Doesn't that contradict a) the size of the human population and in effect reduce our time on this planet?

To say nothing of the regrettable Quiverfull movement. These people are really scary.

I don't now practise any religion but have certain values close to my heart that are "treat people how you want to be treated".

You might find the values of secular humanism of interest.

[ph7654]

So many people can easily be wrong if they don't have any good reason for believing what they do in the first place.

I do agree to a certain extent. The problem being; your definition of a "good" reason is likely to be based on proven fact/science? Whereas, someone else who is a strong believer in their religion may use faith as a "good" reason.

I do not know for a fact that the planet Mars exists. Sure i could look in a telescope (a large one) and see for myself and draw my own conclusions. But ultimately i am content that there enough scientists out there competing with each other that if it didn't exist it would be headline news. But this isn't on my priorities to find out, so I "choose" to believe it to be true.

[ph7654]

.
Many popular religions (past and present) PROMOTE exclusivity, divisiveness, suspicion, hostility, conflict and even warfare between competing religious groups.

I agree with this (although not sure on how many is "many") and this scares me to be honest. I do not like the idea of "if you don't behave in a certain way you will either damned or in heaven (or equivalent)".

Just doesn't make sense. If there is a God (s) (of whichever religion) and is of vastly superior intelligence and reason, do people really think that the God would damn people for not supporting that particular religion? Quite frankly, i would not want to be in an afterlife with such a dictatorial regime.

If i led my life without religion but was respectful and tolerent to my fellow man/woman and then when i passed away i wasn't allowed into whichever afterlife because i had not followed the correct religion i would feel a touch agrieved.

[ph7654]

Wouldn’t it be more reasonable to treat people as they wish to be treated (within limits)? If you are a masochist, for instance, not everyone would wish to be treated the way that you might.

okay literally yes, but conversely, on meeting a stranger i have no idea how they wish to be treated.

So the generalised saying i used, would be changed to treat people with respect, without judgement.

Easier said than done, but you can but try.

[ph7654]

[quote="McCulloch"]Welcome

Cheers! and sorry forgot to say thanks to the other who said hello! thx.

[ph7654]

Encouraging reproduction is diametrically opposed to concern for the environment and fails to recognize the concept of “environment carrying capacity� (the maximum number of a given species that can survive in a given environment).

For instance, yeast introduced into an environment of grape juice and sugar will multiply geometrically until their waste products (alcohol) make the environment toxic to them – then they will die off very rapidly. I test and confirm this regularly in the process of making wine.

I do like this example and as depressing as this may sound; are what human beings doing to this planet any different?

I don't believe people like to think about it because it isn't very uplifting, but couldn't it be the case that human beings aren't quite as special as we think we are and we are all suffering from our own arrogance?