The God Questions

[LJT]

The people didn't need to be 'manipulated' by religion. The kings and dukes could rely on their complex feudal hierarchy to ensure vassals support. Your everyman in the field had little say in such matters. Religion may have given it an amount of popular support but it didn't factor much into what actually happened. A vassal had to support their liege with troops and the like no matter how fervently they believed in the faith or not.

Back then you didn't need popular support to go to war anymore than you actually need to these days considering Iraq and the like. All your really criticizing are the folk in power who will use any tool to remain in power and increase their control of whatever capital there is from religion to capitalism.

[Jive Turkey]

Having an army that believes they're acting in and for the name of god is a much more effective army than one who fights only because the King says they have to.

But are we really arguing whether the crusades were religious wars or not??

[Pearl]

Originally Posted by LJT

The people didn't need to be 'manipulated' by religion. The kings and dukes could rely on their complex feudal hierarchy to ensure vassals support. Your everyman in the field had little say in such matters. Religion may have given it an amount of popular support but it didn't factor much into what actually happened. A vassal had to support their liege with troops and the like no matter how fervently they believed in the faith or not.

Back then you didn't need popular support to go to war anymore than you actually need to these days considering Iraq and the like. All your really criticizing are the folk in power who will use any tool to remain in power and increase their control of whatever capital there is from religion to capitalism.

I agree. The average person in the medieval period weren't exactly stupid or illogical; they simply didn't have much freedom to think for themselves and had to do what their lord or king told them to do.

There's a lot of ways to manipulate the masses, and you don't need religion to do it. You can use nationalism or political pride. Just get a charismatic orator who knows how to strike fear, pride or anything else into many people, and you got yourself a problem.

[Jive Turkey]

Originally Posted by Pearl

The average person in the medieval period weren't exactly stupid or illogical

I'd have to disagree with this

And yes, you can use other methods for manipulation, but none of them are as effective as appealing to basic human fears and promises of immortality. There are things people can be convinced to do for religion that they wouldn't do for any other reasons

[LJT]

Having an army that can be stripped of all their possessions and family arrested is or killed if they don't obey is probably more effective still. While most religions deserve criticism for much of what it promotes, I feel your ire would be better directed at the power structures that exist and have existed. Religious war and such is a concept only really invented since the turn of the first Millenium. Injustice and persecution have existed for much longer.

[Jive Turkey]

I'm sure we could make a compelling argument that jihad isn't religiously motivated too

[Pearl]

I'm not saying religion doesn't play into religious wars or terrorism, but I don't think it is the one and only reason.

[Jive Turkey]

I wouldn't disagree with that

[u2popmofo]

Originally Posted by Jive Turkey

I'm sure we could make a compelling argument that jihad isn't religiously motivated too

Or that most every war in Asian history somehow wasn't "religiously motivated".

Saying the concept of religious war didn't exist until after the first millennium is like saying half of the world doesn't exist.

[LJT]

I'd make a similar argument that the Arab wars of conquest from the 7th to 10th centuries were more about an expansionist new nation, again control of land and trade routes. I will grant you it was likely Islam that fashioned this new sense of being a singular people, from desert tribes to burgeoning empire. Afterwards Jihad was a defence against incoming European powers. Modern jihad I see as more of a response to being politically sidelined and alienated in the world. With the British and then US governments propping up dictatorships that either were responsible for supporting islamic or propping up other governments that didn't treat the muslims well within their borders.

You push anyone to the side and they are likely to go to extremes. Alex Jones while clearly nuts is in my opinion an actual expression of deep unease many Americans have with Washington and the financial worlds sway, these irrational fears are a byproduct of a deeply injust system hence the religious rights paranoia. Religion doesn't cause that injustice such as the way capitalism works or why the healthcare system is the way it is, it's more an expression of that inequality that comes out in some rather unfortunate ways, but it would still come out even if religion didn't exist.

[LJT]

I'd make a similar argument that the Arab wars of conquest from the 7th to 10th centuries were more about an expansionist new nation, again control of land and trade routes. I will grant you it was likely Islam that fashioned this new sense of being a singular people, from desert tribes to burgeoning empire. Afterwards Jihad was a defence against incoming European powers. Modern jihad I see as more of a response to being politically sidelined and alienated in the world. With the British and then US governments propping up dictatorships that either were responsible for supporting islamic or propping up other governments that didn't treat the muslims well within their borders.

You push anyone to the side and they are likely to go to extremes. Alex Jones while clearly nuts is in my opinion an actual expression of deep unease many Americans have with Washington and the financial worlds sway, these irrational fears are a byproduct of a deeply injust system hence the religious rights paranoia. Religion doesn't cause that injustice such as the way capitalism works or why the healthcare system is the way it is, it's more an expression of that inequality that comes out in some rather unfortunate ways, but it would still come out even if religion didn't exist.

[LJT]

Originally Posted by u2popmofo

Or that most every war in Asian history somehow wasn't "religiously motivated".

Saying the concept of religious war didn't exist until after the first millennium is like saying half of the world doesn't exist.

What widespread religious war existed before the crusades or the arab conquests? A few of the popes and other scholars of the time had to extensively write about and formalise the idea of religious conquest before it became a widely accepted notion, the concept didn't really exist formally before this, such as Pope Urban II, Gregory VII. As such it was an innovation within religious thought at the time. It may seem odd to think of it that way but the idea had to be invented first. I'm unaware of any major religious war beforehand. Not saying people never used their beliefs prior to justify their actions in part but religion prior to this rarely influenced empires or nations to attack another.

I think here we are arguing about degrees of influence. While I disagree with much about religion I just don't feel it is as comprehensibly pernicious as some do. The much baser urges of greed and power are primarily at work in whatever war, religion is just used in attempt to make them look good while they go about their business.

[FlyontheHorizon]

I would define God as that unknown force responsible for the universe, sort of the end-all-be-all of everything. It would be hard for me to think that there is no prime source of reasoning that governs universal laws and makes them logic. God, whatever His/Its nature, is that which is beyond human understanding as the highest source of that reason. To me, it relates to Descartes's "I think, therefore I am." All humans are given some small basic measure of reason, and it would be very hard to me to imagine that such reason came about out of no reason, or that order (as we perceive it) came out of disorder...

The problem inherent in religion, I think, is that religious people assume that they know what God is. And paradoxically, thus they think they are God because, if they can understand the highest source of reasoning in the universe and prescribe it to laws they themselves create, then they place themselves on the same level of reasoning, if not higher, than the ultimate force behind the universe, and they banish God to a lower status than themselves, making Him/It not God anymore.

Not to derail from the existing topic, but I'm curious as to why the atheists here think the way they do. Is it because religion is bad, therefore God does not exist? The number one reason for not believing in God seems to be about religious people, not God per se. It's fine if you simply can't believe that something as God exists, but is your beef really with religion?

[Jive Turkey]

Originally Posted by FlyontheHorizon

The number one reason for not believing in God seems to be about religious people, not God per se.

I don't know a single atheist that doesn't believe in god because they think religion is bad. That's a very simplistic view.
I don't believe in a god because there has never been any proof that one exists and the universe doesn't need one to exist. It can exist the way it is with or without a god, so why inject one into the mix with no evidence whatsoever? Why does there need to be a prime source? Why does there need to be a meaning for it all? The only reason to believe there needs to be a meaning is as a security blanket. Otherwise we're just relatively insignificant clumps of matter in a seeming infinitely massive universe (insignificant in respect to the universe doesn't mean you can't find significance relative to life on Earth). But why can't we be insignificant clumps of matter?
The laws of the universe could be completely arbitrary, for all we know; just the result of tiny fluctuations in energy, a fraction of a second after the big bang. There needn't be some grand creator to dial them in. Why imply the universe is fine tuned for us, not the other way around?

[FlyontheHorizon]

Originally Posted by Jive Turkey

I don't know a single atheist that doesn't believe in god because they think religion is bad. That's a very simplistic view.

Okay, thanks for this, JT. I just seem to notice that when atheists speak of atheism, the first reason for this belief/lack of belief they seem to cite is religion, as having such a negative impact on human history (as the posts above). We can all agree on that, though we might interpret that differently (as in, "My major religion has never done any such things, so you should not be accusing us" and then pointing the finger to someone else).

I'm not here to convince you otherwise whether God exists or not; that's none of my business. But that's just how I define God, and in that context, it's very hard for me personally to think that such a thing couldn't exist, though you might find it easier to imagine than I. I agree that with you on insignificance/significance. In terms of insignificance, we are both comparing ourselves to something more significant than we are. But if nothing is more significant than us, then yes, like religious people, we must think we are God. At least, by my definition of God. That is the part I'm uncomfortable with, the ignorance in assuming that humanity is the most powerful force in the universe. That's a problem I have mostly with religious people, not with atheists. So if you don't believe there is a God, defining God as any one of a number of different ways, but still believe that we are "insignificant clumps of matter," then I'm cool with that. I agree in that we are "insignificant clumps of matter" compared to something else, whatever that something else is. I just like to tack on a label to that "something else" and call it God. Because I really don't know. It might be simplifying things out of convenience, but I just don't think any of us is capable of saying with certainty.

[Jive Turkey]

Originally Posted by FlyontheHorizon

Okay, thanks for this, JT. I just seem to notice that when atheists speak of atheism, the first reason for this belief/lack of belief they seem to cite is religion, as having such a negative impact on human history (as the posts above).

I think maybe you'll just find that to have this view, you pretty much have to be atheist or agnostic... And the ones that don't share that view I guess don't really have a whole lot to talk about on the subject hahaha so you don't really hear from them (just a guess).
Sounds like you probably swing further toward the agnostic side of things than the religious?

[Jive Turkey]

Originally Posted by FlyontheHorizon

I'm not here to convince you otherwise whether God exists or not; that's none of my business.

Doesn't mean you can't lay out your beliefs though. Makes this place more interesting

[Pearl]

Originally Posted by FlyontheHorizon

I would define God as that unknown force responsible for the universe, sort of the end-all-be-all of everything. It would be hard for me to think that there is no prime source of reasoning that governs universal laws and makes them logic. God, whatever His/Its nature, is that which is beyond human understanding as the highest source of that reason. To me, it relates to Descartes's "I think, therefore I am." All humans are given some small basic measure of reason, and it would be very hard to me to imagine that such reason came about out of no reason, or that order (as we perceive it) came out of disorder...

I see God almost the same way. I don't buy into the whole Old Man in the Sky thing.

[FlyontheHorizon]

Originally Posted by Jive Turkey

Sounds like you probably swing further toward the agnostic side of things than the religious?

Well, would my views fall under "spiritual but not religious"? Maybe I'm confused as to what people here are saying "spiritual" means, but I guess that's me, despite someone here (I think) saying that there's no such thing.

I'll just go further and say that I would really like to think that "God" is benevolent and cares about us. That might be a lot more of a stretch than first saying whether or not God exists at all, but I really wish so. It's the only thing that keeps me going every day. That might be crazy, but so be it. So in that sense, am I "spiritual" if I believe that?

[LemonMelon]

Originally Posted by Jive Turkey

There is nothing in atheism akin to brainwashing. If anything, it's brain unwashing. It promotes skepticism, free thinking, and logic.

While this sounds nice, retaining a belief in a deity is not compatible with atheism. As long as there is some criteria involved in being an atheist, there is such a thing as a wrong answer; one cannot be a "free-thinking atheist" and come to the conclusion that a God exists. Therefore, it is pushing a specific belief system while excluding others. An "atheism convention," then, celebrates this belief system while condescending those that are incompatible with it. How is there not, to some degree, groupthink involved here?