Why Should I Believe? (moral, choice, myth, bible, POV)

[FatMan]

Originally Posted by penguino

Then they are not religions then are they? Religions believe in a supernatural supreme thing, which we cannot fully understand the complex makeup of. Only a religion belives in a supereme deity.

GODLY AND GODLESS RELIGIONS
Religion consists of explanations of existence based on supernatural assumptions and including statements about the nature of the supernatural and about ultimate meaning.
Ultimate meaning concerns the fundamental point and purpose of being. Does life have meaning? Why are we here? What can we hope? Why do we suffer? Does justice exist? Is death the end?
Supernatural refers to forces or entities (conscious or not) that are beyond or outside nature and which can suspend, alter, or ignore physical forces. Gods are a particular form of the supernatural consisting of conscious supernatural beings.
Notice that the definition of religion leaves room for "Godless" religions, such as the elite forms of Confucianism and Taoism wherein the supernatural is conceived of as a supernatural essence--an underlying mystical force or principle governing life, but one that is impersonal, remote, lacking consciousness, and definitely not a being. As explained in the Laotzu, the Tao is a cosmic essence, the eternal Way of the universe that produces harmony and balance. Although the Tao is said to be wise beyond human understanding and "the mother of the universe," it is also said to be "always nonexistent," yet "always existent," "unnameable" and "the name that can be named." Both "soundless and formless," it is "always without desires." Finally, the sage is advised to make no effort to understand the Tao, which is how such an understanding will be achieved. Little wonder that the Tao inspires meditation and mysticism, but not worship.

Religions based on essences are not found only in the East. Many Western intellectuals, including some theologians and even bishops, propose an image of "God" as impersonal and unconscious as the Tao. Supernatural essences may be ideal objects for meditation and mystical contemplation by intellectuals, but Godless religions fail to appeal to the general public, and therefore the popular forms of Confucianism and Taoism include a substantial pantheon of Gods. This split has existed for millennia. The Chinese philosopher Xunzi (ca. 215 B.C.E.)* taught that the truly educated know that although religious rituals can be beautiful and inspiring, they are but products of the human imagination: "They are done merely for ornament." However, "the common people regard them as involving the] supernatural."



You are correct that religions by definition have some unexplained force. That doesn't necessarily have to be a God.

[Storm]

Originally Posted by FatMan

So what? That means the statement that all religion leads to a god is false.

The statement was that all "religions lead to God," not "all religions lead to a supreme deity."

It's only false if you rewrite it to elevate your own beliefs over others', which is not only elitist, but dishonest.

[FatMan]

Originally Posted by Storm

The statement was that all "religions lead to God," not "all religions lead to a supreme deity."

It's only false if you rewrite it to elevate your own beliefs over others', which is not only elitist, but dishonest.

And since there are Godless religions, all religions do not lead to god.

I think you are looking at the statement backwards, or you are failing to understand the explanation.

[Don Penguinoini]

Then what s it?! A really powerful guy who knows what to do and is really clever? That is god. Your explanation of religion there doesent seem correct. That supernatural essence is god. Simple as that.

[fantôme profane]

Originally Posted by FatMan

So what? That means the statement that all religion leads to a god is false.

No it doesn’t. Suppose it is true that the path to “God” is compassion, love and selflessness. If this is the case then any tradition that encourages this would be a path to “God”, regardless of whether or not they believed in a Supreme Deity. If this supposition is true then even atheistic humanism would be a path to “God”.

[Don Penguinoini]

Originally Posted by FatMan

And since there are Godless religions, all religions do not lead to god.

I think you are looking at the statement backwards, or you are failing to understand the explanation.

Godless religion - Way of life, NOT religion.

[Storm]

Originally Posted by FatMan

And since there are Godless religions, all religions do not lead to god.
I think you are looking at the statement backwards, or you are failing to understand the explanation.

Deity-free is not necessarily Godless. You are failing to understand that "supreme deity" is not the only concept of God. It's either ignorance or exclusivism.

[FatMan]

Originally Posted by penguino

Godless religion - Way of life, NOT religion.

Religion, by definition is a way of life, not necessarily a path to follow a God.

Here is one definition: A religion is a set of beliefs and practices generally held by a community, involving adherence to codified beliefs and rituals and study of ancestral or cultural traditions, writings, history, and mythology, as well as personal faith and mystic experience. The term "religion" refers to both the personal practices related to communal faith and to group rituals and communication stemming from shared conviction.

Most people make the mistake of assuming that god has to be part of religion because that is traditionally what they have been taught, but religion is simply a set of beliefs. Atheism is a religion. Any set of beliefs is a religion.

I really didn't expect that this had to be pointed out. It is fairly well known and accepted.