Does Religon Show Weakness in Society

[TENYEARS]

Akihiro, you are young and have much to learn. Decisions are what we have when we do not understand. Do not decide on truth for truth needs no decsion. You have much much to learn and those lessons will not be found in books.

Note: Because something is written does not mean it is true. The definition of religon in the dictionary is incorrect. The person who wrote it did not understand.

 

[Tom McCurdy]

TENYEARS...
you assume a lot of things about people, also I can not accept an argument about how some minds are not feeble based on the planet of the apes movie, apps minds are not as capable as our owns, they are not distracted, they just aren't as cabable. It is true that no one uses their full potential of their mind, and yet it is also true that some people are infact smarter than others. My sister has down syndrome, and I love her, but I know that she is not going to grow up as smart as she would if she did not have it.

 

[Tom McCurdy]

1. For science will prove the existence of not only precogniction but god.

2. The scientists will fall back on their heals and the relgious will be angry for what science will attempt to take over.

3. There will be great turmoil for those who will deny on both sides. There will also be those in the middle are from both sides they will be in utter amazement of the whole thing.

4. In one church it was to listen to the voice what had to be angel for her voice was that way.

5. Maybe there is hope that the people can sing in a single voice for humanity itself.

6. Don't look at the relgion, look at the truth that exists within it.

7. Are you one of those who says an album is awsome when it absolutely sucks becasuse there is only one or two good songs on it.

8. If truth is your interest, then follow your instincts and you will be brought before truth.

TENYEARS RESPONSE an anaylsis

i broke down your repsone and am going to respond to specific sentences, again I will ask if you are using a language translator such as altavista babelfish for your responses...

1. For one thing, I dought that it would ever be science that proves the existence of God, for one thing I dought anyone ever will be cause I don't believe God exists. However getting around my own personal beliefs why and how would science prove the existence of God, that is something science can't do. Proving the existence of God would most likely happen from God revealing himself in some extradornay act. The role of science would be to prove that the events were indeed extraordinary and that what happen could not happen with our laws of physics. Also what happens if science proves that there is no need for God. Assuming we get to the point where we can explain everything about science. How we were created and why we are here.

2. what? Hypothetically speaking let's say you are correct in your presumption that one day God will be proven to exist and it was done with the aid of science. Why would science fall back on its heals, it just have aided in the bigest discovery ever. It would be a joyous day for science and religon both. IT would also provide answers for questions in science. I would project that both the religous and scientists which would then become one group as scientists would be religous would get allong great.

3. WHAT? Where is the turmoil is science is used to prove relgion. If it is proved then it is proved. PROVED implies that it can't be wrong, and if this is true than there will be no turmoil, just a lot of shock. There will be no denying sides because in proving God with science they would JOIN SIDES in essence there would be no sides.

4. WHAT... it does not add anything to the response

5. I can see the part about singing in a single voice, but why for humanity itself.

6. I am going to assume you are talking about organized religon and looking pass to the meaning of religon and yet you discussed the benefits of organized religon with the sermon and angel response.

7. THis was the most ackward placement for this sentence ever. It really has nothing to do with anything at all. On a positive note it gave me a good laugh.

8. You present a second option, look to my insticts for truth, but I am also supose to look beyond religon for truth... I hate to tell you but these would produce two separate truths... my insticts tell me that there is no God, and peoples belief in religon is a result of cult like brainwashing that all people are subjected to constantly by the society we live in.

 

[Tom McCurdy]

Akihiro, you are young and have much to learn. Decisions are what we have when we do not understand. Do not decide on truth for truth needs no decsion. You have much much to learn and those lessons will not be found in books.

Note: Because something is written does not mean it is true. The definition of religon in the dictionary is incorrect. The person who wrote it did not understand.

7 entries found for religion.
re·li·gion ( P ) Pronunciation Key (r-ljn)
n.

Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion



So what is the definition of religon, and how is it that you know it

 

[TENYEARS]

I know it because I experienced what it's founders did. To be or not to be and that really is the question.

 

[Moses]

An important I want to add

Wow! I did not come here since two days and i thought the thread was over,
Thanks God is it alive!

In short, I have a different definiton for religion, remeber the "Dictionary" definition you use is for English Language, which its origin form European societites [UK] with all the aspects of society and culture to be taken into consideration.

The definition i use is : Religion is [the ture religon] The sum of the Faith in God and the system "rules" the He puts for Humans to follow.

By that definiton, "True Religion" is not a weakness. Since its source is Perfect. The weaknesses that may occur is becuase of curroption by the society organizers from people, or if that religion is not from God, or have been changed by people. In the last cases i mentioned. Religion here is subjective to have good and bad staff, AS ANY HUMAN SYSTEM.

Since Religion have a great influence, the errors there if it happened will be severe. And the human history shows that.

Does this make sense or not? I hope so

 

[TENYEARS]

Amen and will you please marry me :!)

Lol, my wife would not be too pleased if I took a second wife. There is someone who is waiting for you though. You don't even need to look. Just do what you do, forget the search and the rest will fall into place.

 

[Tom McCurdy]

Wow! I did not come here since two days and i thought the thread was over,
Thanks God is it alive!

In short, I have a different definiton for religion, remeber the "Dictionary" definition you use is for English Language, which its origin form European societites [UK] with all the aspects of society and culture to be taken into consideration.

The definition i use is : Religion is [the ture religon] The sum of the Faith in God and the system "rules" the He puts for Humans to follow.

By that definiton, "True Religion" is not a weakness. Since its source is Perfect. The weaknesses that may occur is becuase of curroption by the society organizers from people, or if that religion is not from God, or have been changed by people. In the last cases i mentioned. Religion here is subjective to have good and bad staff, AS ANY HUMAN SYSTEM.

Since Religion have a great influence, the errors there if it happened will be severe. And the human history shows that.

Does this make sense or not? I hope so

I would argue that your defintion would make religon in its pure form helpful, but that is different from the question of it being a weakness of society. I believe that religon can be a great thing... it can be something for people who have nothing else. It has done great work with charities, and it is able to control population into acting in specific ways... like you said it is a human system. However this does not mean that it is not a weakness in society. To me the fact that people are able to be manipulated so easily by religon, and brought up with religon, shows the weakness in religon. Religon is often merely a tool used by people to gain something for themselves.

 

[Tom McCurdy]

I know it because I experienced what it's founders did. To be or not to be and that really is the question.

What do you mean you expereinced what it's founders did... you seem to be referring to some deep religous realization or revelation that happened to you, would you mind sharing your experience that brought you so close with religon? Also what do you mean by the shakespere.--To believe or not to believe?

 

[Moses]

Tom McCurdy, I do agree in all what you said, I do completely believe that "Human is weak" and thus we strengthen our selves by "tools" like science which gives us some sort of power. Religoin as well is the same issue since we "need" as a person or as a society and thus we are "weak".

However, an important thing i should mention is: A society without a religion is really weak, i mean wekaer than a society which has "true religion". Since the "nice push" the religion give to people that society will lack, add to that the mechanism of that "system". Still that society may be better than another society who suffers severly from curroption in applying the "true religion" or applying a changed version of that religion, or a human mae one.

Our societies, we humans, will be weak always, true religion make it stronger, if not, it depends onb the whole picture to judge if without religion is better or with some corrution and misusing of religion.

I will listen to the Universe master is he really send a message to me

 

[Rasine]

i think that religon adds to the culture of socity. it does not weaken it, but sometimes people account it for unexplainable events. today's science is not correct, just more correct than it was and it will continue to evolve in a way which religon is not a simple way to explain phanomina. but religon will always be there. it is not the kind of thing that will ever be concreatly proved to be correct. that is the point of reglion. it is faith and i don't think that will ever be left or ment to be left undoubed.

 

[Tom McCurdy]

i think that religon adds to the culture of socity. it does not weaken it, but sometimes people account it for unexplainable events. today's science is not correct, just more correct than it was and it will continue to evolve in a way which religon is not a simple way to explain phanomina. but religon will always be there. it is not the kind of thing that will ever be concreatly proved to be correct. that is the point of reglion. it is faith and i don't think that will ever be left or ment to be left undoubed.

Religon may add to the culture of socitey, and yet it could still show weakness. It is the fact that it is used as oposed to science to explain unexplainable events that it is weak. How did we get here? Well in the beginning God took some clay and put us in a oven on 350... cooked for 20 minutes and bing... we got here. Its the fact that we use it for this that it shows our weakness. I agree with you that science is not pefect, but science bluntly states that it isn't perfect and the important thing is that science does not try to cover up for what it doesn't know. Instead people try to solve the particular problem.

 

[Tom McCurdy]

Tom McCurdy, I do agree in all what you said, I do completely believe that "Human is weak" and thus we strengthen our selves by "tools" like science which gives us some sort of power. Religoin as well is the same issue since we "need" as a person or as a society and thus we are "weak".

However, an important thing i should mention is: A society without a religion is really weak, i mean wekaer than a society which has "true religion". Since the "nice push" the religion give to people that society will lack, add to that the mechanism of that "system". Still that society may be better than another society who suffers severly from curroption in applying the "true religion" or applying a changed version of that religion, or a human mae one.

Our societies, we humans, will be weak always, true religion make it stronger, if not, it depends onb the whole picture to judge if without religion is better or with some corrution and misusing of religion.

I will listen to the Universe master is he really send a message to me

What do you mean by true religon... Religon no matter which one can't be completely true, every religon has been screwed with ennough for that. True Religon is at best a Utopian ideal, in which case if there was a god then having the correct faith would be helpful, but any deviation from that would show weakness. However in the event, which i believe that no religion is correct because there is no God then any religon of any sort shows weakness. It shows how primitive our minds are as humans, that we could be fooled into something that completely contridicts experimental observation.

 

[Moses]

Well, What i meant is simply IF there is a true religion then...[as what i showed in the post]

Saying a small thingy about what you wrote: Well, I DO believe in God, and i hate the fanatic way of believe or the blind faith. And now i am following a religion which i a, certain by using my mind and mere logic that it is from God. I could be wrong even i believe that i am correct in this matter. Still i am opening my mind, not lack of faith, but for the logical process to be fullfilled in finding the truth.

Build on that : Yes! From my frame of refernce, i think that the Ture Religion that i am following is a strong factor in the society of humans, the weak creatures who need their God and a religion from him. Still , I am really angry why some people even misusing the true religion from God for their benefits. And i found it natural that there is no "perfectness" in performing the "theory" or religion [Faith , and laws]. Do we perfectly use our scientific theory for the gaols we want [regardless if it is bad or goo] the answer is: human is not perfect, thus the performing is not perfect, still some perforamnce is good, other good with bad "different ratios", and a third which it is bad...etc

P.S: Please don't hesitate in asking me to divide my point or make them more clearer, I know i am having problem in communicating for some personal reasons. If i am saying too many things and making the "spagetti" please tell me to organize them

 

[Tom McCurdy]

orgaize them :) actually I am curious to ask you if you believe that you are following a relgion that is 100% true, that infact everything in you faith is correct and how sure you are about it. I also am interested in what you did to question you faith when you did.

Also it seems that you would agree in saying that religon does show weakness in society if it is not true. The problem presented is how do you justify that your religon is correct and others faith is incorrect when you have nothing but your own instict to base it on. A major problem I have with religon is that it is based on things besides pure faith. Religon is orgainzsed now and I believe all forms of organized religon are tainted to a degree.

 

[tiger_striped_cat]

I value my collection of quarks-- I don't know why I am here, but I enjoy being here ...

Religion is often created to account for the unexplained-- we explain the unexplained there is no need for religion.

You guys are proving my point. Your value is entirely subjective. You say you "value" you're quarks, leptons, and messenger particles? That has absolutely no binding on anyone but yourself. Why should I value what you value? Are you saying that everyone should see this same value as you. I'm glad you found meaning in a life that is devoid of one. But don't expect me to believe in some value just because some amalgamation of fundamental particles in the form of an evolved subhuman's determined psychology and body chemicals told him to tell me that.

So in the same vein, the same way you find value in some way, people find value through religion. I think you would be as hard pressed to defend this value, as the person on here that believes in the progress of humanity, as the person who believes in God when I as the simple question, "Why should I believe in this value of yours?"

 

[Tom McCurdy]

Your argument could be used against you in the same way... why should people believe what your beliefs are... we are both trying to state our cases... what we believe in and why we believe it.

 

[Tom McCurdy]

It is hard to convince someone who is religous that what they are doing is a sign of weakness in society... if they thought this then they would not be participating in religon. However it seems clear to me that religon is a tool wielded by society throughout history to conrol people. To make them behave, and to motivate them to do things they otherwise wouldn't such as die in a war that was for personal greed rather than anything else. Religon is also just a way of trying to come up with excuses of stuff that has not yet been explained by science.

 

[TENYEARS]

You guys are proving my point. Your value is entirely subjective. You say you "value" you're quarks, leptons, and messenger particles? That has absolutely no binding on anyone but yourself. Why should I value what you value? Are you saying that everyone should see this same value as you. I'm glad you found meaning in a life that is devoid of one. But don't expect me to believe in some value just because some amalgamation of fundamental particles in the form of an evolved subhuman's determined psychology and body chemicals told him to tell me that.

So in the same vein, the same way you find value in some way, people find value through religion. I think you would be as hard pressed to defend this value, as the person on here that believes in the progress of humanity, as the person who believes in God when I as the simple question, "Why should I believe in this value of yours?"

Let us go with striped tiger cat, are these particles and energy emissions a direct witnessing? No it is a machine which works with a machine which works with parts which works with formulas which works with parts which works with formulas. Any and all of this process although repetative was not designed by you and there for one uses them with FAITH. lol lol lol lol

Science is as bad as relgion because all scientist have faith. That faith is in others who created processes came up with ideas and measurements which may or may not be accurate but are accepted as so. Lol lol lol lol

If a scientist, religious or both are to transcend belief transcend faith they must indeed desire to understand. That understanding cannot be found in a book or in the words of another. The understanding will be an experience and the experiencer will know the difference. Will you? This experience is that which moves creation itself. Until then you really know NOTHING.

 

[Tom McCurdy]

Let us go with striped tiger cat, are these particles and energy emissions a direct witnessing? No it is a machine which works with a machine which works with parts which works with formulas which works with parts which works with formulas. Any and all of this process although repetative was not designed by you and there for one uses them with FAITH. lol lol lol lol

Science is as bad as relgion because all scientist have faith. That faith is in others who created processes came up with ideas and measurements which may or may not be accurate but are accepted as so. Lol lol lol lol

If a scientist, religious or both are to transcend belief transcend faith they must indeed desire to understand. That understanding cannot be found in a book or in the words of another. The understanding will be an experience and the experiencer will know the difference. Will you? This experience is that which moves creation itself. Until then you really know NOTHING.

You can't compare the faith in religon with the faith in scientests... for one thing people don't just trust scientests. Discoveries are generally slow to be accepted until repeatly proved... Unlike going on some word of someone who has said they have talked to god. MANY people all over the world currently claim to have a connection with God, many people believe they are God or Jesus, however our society pays no attention to them. To me its just as likely one of them is correct as it was 2000 years ago. People just didn't have the background back then to sucessfully question what was told to them.

 

[TENYEARS]

Tom, you are obviously not only just a kid but one that wants to hear himself speak. This will be my last post on this foolish conversation. LoL

Did you make the instrument? Did you create the formulas that make it work? All of them? To you know their degree of error? Do you know exactlly the materials they are made of? Their composition exactally. Thier composition with realtion to their exact physical area of use and the surrounding area and it's complete composition? No.. That is faith. You have faith that the instruments of science and technology will provide you truth and what it really provides is an approximation of an approximation of a reflected or non observalbe reality which is based on the approximation of an after affect. All based on faith of all the makers. A thousand times LoL.

This thread has now been completed. Truth is not faith, it is completeness beyond what you presently understand. Stop now. Kind of reminds me of Zantras old line from the comerical "Hit it with a hammer." Lol

 

[Moses]

TENYEARS.
First: Simply, you are not the one who decide if the thread is finished or no. If the mentor find it unapporaite to continue, he will lock it, do not worry and chill out. lol

Second: That what you are talking about is called: Trust, you trust who made the instruemnt that bla bla bla about the instrument he claimed otbe it is true. Your 'faith' in that guy/girl who created taht instrument depends on many factors -which it is not our topic here-.

Yeah, for me, the religion that i believe that it is from God has been reached to me through a person. I DID accept that relgion after i checked that person credibility, and concluded that "That person cannot be a lier against God". Further, he has been supported by "God signatures" aka miracles to support his claim that the Universe Lord sent him to humans.

Simply, on this i build my "Faith". I do not care if it is scientific way or no, but it is logical. The proper faith is strong, as well as any correct answer as stong by its correct method