What ACTUALLY gives you hope for humanity?
- Thread starter Not G. Ivingname
- Start date
Recommended Videos
RooftopAssassin said:
I'm just saying it because I view it as the last hope. Yes I do get most of my moral choices from The Bible.RooftopAssassin said:
Not to be rude or to offend you, nor saying it is christianity, since there manny religions, but in the past, most wars were made in the name of "god" , and some of intolerance comes from it to.Digikid said:
Hey guess what this is the Gives you hope thread not the "complain about religion" So go back to your cave and stay thereSteel Ronin said:
There is a difference between looking at a religion from the inside (having it being shoved down your throat as a child) and seeing it from the outside (being raised with no faith, and exploring with a sceptical eye).Imperator_DK said:
What you call personal faith I would hope many would recognise as simply "spirituality". I don't believe there is a god, I don't believe there is an afterlife, but I would say I'm a spiritual person.
I believe in the importance of life and I try to always better myself as a person and foster understanding between others, if I get the opportunity, I'm no crusader.
The way I see it is there are lots of religious people that are pretty normal people, I've met "normal" Christian, "normal" Muslims, and "normal" Hindus, they're not trying to convert you, it does not take over their lives, some people like to look at something, feel that it is right, and leave it at that. THESE are those people, religion has not hurt their lives, or the lives of their families. To these people religion is as normal as any other moral system.
The difference between me and them is I ask questions, I like to pull things apart and see how they work in the real world, sometimes I feel like I don't really do much else, whereas these normal religious people have jobs and communities and families to occupy themselves with. They are happy, and at the end of the day, happiness and fulfilment is all anyone wants, some are happy to be ignorant - I do not blame them, the world is a strange place indeed.
There is the other side tho, the far sides of the dividing line. There are those that feel that OUR FAITH IS THE ONE TRUE FAITH, EVERYTHING THAT IS WRITTEN IS TO BE TAKEN AS THE WORDS OF GOD. They see the world differently, they see problems, and they are holding tools in their hand to fix these problems (or so they think).
There are also the more extreme athiests, which make me think of "true neutral" zealots. They want everyone to acknowledge that their religion is useless. This isn't constructive, because you want to keep the morals, and spread the morals/ethics that are benefactory for the community.
Personally I've never really been into formal stuff, I like to talk to people on a one-to-one kind of level. So I'll respect the beliefs of others and I'll tell them why I'm not buying into them, but they're free to have them and I'd like to hear their perspective nonetheless. I hear the garden of eden story and I hear the warnings of jealousy and power. I hear the tower of babel story and I think of the pitfall of pride becoming arrogance. I don't believe that Adam and Eve where the first humans, I don't believe that god sundered the tower of Babylon, scattered us across the globe, and gave us separate languages.
Biblical tales are like telling children about Santa coming down the chimney at Christmas. You don't want to tell them how it's just a holiday where everyone gives each other presents and people make alot of money. You want something to keep the story memorable, put some mystery in.
I'd like to point out that if you still believe in Santa as an adult there's something you're missing. (For reference - when I have kids, I'll tell them about Santa, but maybe I'll make it ambiguous so that when they find out they feel like they've solved a mystery, rather than had the magic dispelled)
I hate people likeFlimsii said:
Steel Ronin, now I don't intend for this to become a flame war and I know you don't want it to be one either, but when I hear people hate on religious people because they "blindly follow a leader that probably doesn't exist." it makes me rage. Religion to me is something that you choose. It's a way of life, and it helps certain people get through their day. Also people saying religion is blind faith; Fuck... blind faith or not, it's still gonna help me get through my day knowing that even though something is unlikely, there is still a chance that everything will work out. That "leader that probably doesn't exist" doesn't exist... physically. God is a symbol of everything that is good in this world. He is the spirit of Christianity. LISTEN its NOT the ghostly kind of spirit. An example of what I'm trying to explain would be Santa Clause. Yes we all know he doesn't exist, but we call him the spirit of Christmas for a reason. We humans gave the spirit of Christmas a physical identity; he has a big white beard, big and jolly, wears a long red hat with a white fluff on top, His coat is of similar design, and he wears big black boots. With this identity, whenever people see a picture of Santa Clause they instantly think of Christmas. The only difference between Santa Clause and God is that God doesn't have an exact identity. Usually people believe he is an older looking version of Jesus, others believe he is bald, and some people believe he is black. But you know, that's the beauty of it all. We aren't suppose to know his identity. He is anonymous. Also I would like to point out that if God did exist physically, people would go fucking crazy, and all other religions would probably be wiped out because they would be pointless compared to a religion that is completely true in everyone's eyes. It wouldn't be a belief anymore, it would be fact. You wouldn't have the freedom to believe in anything else because what can beat the truth. God has to be anonymous, so that people have the freedom to believe what they want.Flimsii said:
Oh and the little part at the end. If we didn't have evil/sin, we wouldn't have the ability to make choices. All choices have both positive and negative effects. The violence you constantly hear about is the price we pay for the freedoms that we have been given. In exchange for having complete freedom, and the ability to think for ourselves; violence will always exist.
this is just my 2 cents on the matter. I hope I didn't come off as a douche bag to you. I'm not a very religious person, but I still believe in God. I'm fine with people who don't believe in God, but I do care when people don't understand why others believe. It's simple, all you need to do is believe. It's your choice if you want to believe or not. Nobody will hold your decision against you, at least the ones who have a brain and understand others. I'm happy with whatever you choose. Whatever gets you through the day
and I apologize if I came off rude.
A: No it doesn't make as much sense. However, believing in god DOES make as much sense as belief in Santa Clause, The Tooth Fairy, and the Easter Bunny. There is exactly as much supportive evidence of their existence as there is to support Gods, which is zero.ReaperzXIII said:
B: "The Big Bang" is not the creation of life, its the theory of the creation of the universe, and saying before that there was absolutely nothing shows your lack of understanding of the theory, as does saying it directly created life, which it did not. The Big Bang theory is based on current collected evidence of how the universe functions.
C: Belief in God is a showing of Faith. Faith is believing in something without anything to support it, you have faith first and attempt to find evidence to support it second. Science works in exactly the opposite method, you find evidence first, then work up a theory to support the evidence you have. That is the core foundation of the Scientific Method, and why our understanding changes as we find more evidence.
Fictitious Example:
I tell you that without a doubt, I have Faith that the sky is actually Red and not Blue. I say "The Sky is Red, 100% certain of it", I then search for ways to prove to you its Red. That is how Faith and belief in God functions in modern society.
The other end of the spectrum, we see the sky and say "Hmmm". We then examine the sky, collect data, and come back with the conclusion "The sky is blue". This is how science works.
In both examples, the sky IS in fact Blue. For arguments sake, lets say our atmosphere was affected by some outside element and the color we see the sky as became Green. The first person still believes it is Red, while the second person acknowledges the change and adjusts his records as needed.
This is why I put no value on Faith.
If it makes you feel better to believe in God, by all means, you are welcome to do so in our free world, but I never will and I find attempts to put Faith and Science on an equal footing (when they are exact opposites) insulting.
I'm a romantic, everything gives me hope for humanity. Screw your emo internet talk of "lack of faith."
I'm quite happy to believe that a majority, perhaps even a vast one (certainly in the advanced parts of the world) of those who label themselves with "religion (x,y,z)" are moderates, but I hold that they are so in spite of their dogmatic absolutist religion rather than because of it (or more precisely, they ignore many aspects of what is by definition an inseparable "divine" system of dogmas), and since no "religion" is not defined by democratic means, what those who label themselves followers actually do matters nothing; It draws authority from a supposed god, and thus only the dogmas expressed in the scriptures holy to that god matters when defining - and relentlessly criticizing - religion.Cypher10110 said:
I thus care little what those who (mis)label themselves as "religious" (but are really only following a personal belief/faith/spirituality) does, for that matters nothing in determining what a "religion" is (though it of course matters everything in determining who "the religious" are), and I target the ideologies, not their human (mal)practitioners. The formal approach is ingrained in "religion" as far as I'm concerned, so that's what I'm going to judge and criticize it relentlessly on; a criticism which extend to any human who follow the dogmatic aspects, but obviously not those who don't (and thus aren't "religious" in that aspect...)
And who cares whether religion has hurt its own voluntary practitioners? I care that it hurts innocent minorities (Gay people, Polytheists, Wiccans, Atheists...). While those of faith may not themselves know the harms of religion, at what cost does their consolation come?
We probably aren't to far away from each other in actual opinions, but our different definitions and thus methods of approach will lead to radically different styles of dealing with "religion".
Actually there is evidence to support God but some people choose to deny the evidence and some people choose to accept it. Some people choose to accept the complexity of life (cells, DNA etc....) as evidence of an intelligent designer that some people call God.Zenn3k said:
The creation of the universe will eventually lead to the creation of life and science has shown that if some of the factors were even just the slight bit off, the universe we know today would not exist. That means that the big bang was just a coincidence and since life exists and the big bang is the creation of the universe which life inhabits it also means that the eventual creation of life is just a coincidence.
I find faith to be filling in the gaps that there is no evidence, if there was absolutely no evidence to believe in something I wouldn't believe it, religious ideas also change when new evidence comes around, intelligent design only came in when new evidence was found. Despite some fundamentalists refusing to adapt their ideas and belief, some people can and as a result beliefs change.
However in your example the sky being blue is currently an absolute, The Big Bang Theory, is just a theory it is not an absolute and without creating your own universe or going back to the beginning you have no way to prove it an abosolute. Therefore it still incorporates a faith, because people choose to believe that is the way it works.
Your arguement is based off the generalization that people who believe cannot change their views or beliefs when something is proven. Science and religion do not have to be seperate in the sense that someone cannot believe in science and still believe in God. I do both and so do a lot of people, all I ask is that some people stop being so condescending about it.
I was walking home from work in the rain one day. No umbrella, no hoodie, just me and the rain.
A van pulled over to the shoulder where I was walking. A woman rolled down the window and asked where I was heading. I told her, and she asked if I wanted a ride. Evidently, she was a nurse at the hospital near my house and was heading in that direction.
I thanked her for the offer, but I politely declined. I guess I must have looked depressed because she asked if I was having a bad day. I told her I was, and she said she hopes I get better. Before I walked away, I told her I was feeling better already.
Honestly, I think it's just a matter of time before we destroy ourselves. It isn't as though things are getting any better. As Karl Marx said, "History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce." So I don't have much hope, but when I meet people like that woman, I at least know we're not all bad.
A van pulled over to the shoulder where I was walking. A woman rolled down the window and asked where I was heading. I told her, and she asked if I wanted a ride. Evidently, she was a nurse at the hospital near my house and was heading in that direction.
I thanked her for the offer, but I politely declined. I guess I must have looked depressed because she asked if I was having a bad day. I told her I was, and she said she hopes I get better. Before I walked away, I told her I was feeling better already.
Honestly, I think it's just a matter of time before we destroy ourselves. It isn't as though things are getting any better. As Karl Marx said, "History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce." So I don't have much hope, but when I meet people like that woman, I at least know we're not all bad.
Nothing at all, except that if someone like me exists, then there have to be others similar to me. My problem is I'm not what you'd deem an "average" teenager, and it's damn annoying. I don't care about being stereotyped or whatever, but it pisses me off that everyone I ever seem to care about goes out getting bladdered every weekend and they're not even legally allowed to drink.
Edit: As the We Are Scientists song says "The problem here, is I just won't grow up". I refuse to accept that this is normal behaviour for people my age, and it drives me insane. Just thinking about it has thrown me in to depression before now.
I am my own hope, and I find that a very sad prospect indeed.
Edit: As the We Are Scientists song says "The problem here, is I just won't grow up". I refuse to accept that this is normal behaviour for people my age, and it drives me insane. Just thinking about it has thrown me in to depression before now.
I am my own hope, and I find that a very sad prospect indeed.
Several things, like:
- The fact that the environmentalist writer Derrick Jensen defined hope as "a longing for a future condition over which you have no agency."
- My personal unwillingness, and the unwillingness of those I love, to give up said agency, probably the only worthwhile advantage to being human in the first place.
- And the fact that this allowed me to give up on "hope" as a whole, freeing up tons of time to actually work to make the world a better place, even if only in infinitesimally small increments.
- The fact that the environmentalist writer Derrick Jensen defined hope as "a longing for a future condition over which you have no agency."
- My personal unwillingness, and the unwillingness of those I love, to give up said agency, probably the only worthwhile advantage to being human in the first place.
- And the fact that this allowed me to give up on "hope" as a whole, freeing up tons of time to actually work to make the world a better place, even if only in infinitesimally small increments.
