Why has God allowed religion to be so tribal?

[Jason118]

There is so much solid teachings in religious dogma and so many warm and kind people who practice. Why has it all come to this, or was it ever thus?

Having a PHD in astrophysics does not make him the ultimate authority on the subject. His research begins with the premise of a god and then attempts to show how science demonstrates God. This isn't how science works. This guy is not a reliable source of useful information.

Well it makes him an intelligent person who is capable of holding religious thought

Again this is your opinion not a counter argument or anything constructive.

I'll wait now shall I to be called arrogant/ignorant delete as appropriate

Seriously I don't know how many times you can fit those words in a post

Just a small point Missy - this is not just a religion forum, it's philosophy/religion. Such arrogance in assuming ownership is the best example you could have given. Sums it up really.

religion/philosophy same point- you either want to talk about such matters or not. Ask a question, expect an answer.
This is a religious topic- Can I give an opinion without being called arrogant?

And I'm sick of hearing that word, it's pathetic

If people got to the topic without feeling a need to call people arrogant every 5 seconds it may make more a discussion.

I seem to have started something here with the "arrogant" thing. Wasn't my intent and tbh it was mostly aimed at organised religions as a whole rather than individuals.

Missy, genuine question... Why do you think some children are born to suffer?
I am guessing you see a child as innocent at birth, so how do you personally reconcile this?

When we kill each other in war etc, then man (not God) is hurting man. But an innocent baby? That is hard to swallow.

Disagree torn that religion must exist around God.

Religion is the construct in which humans explain their perceived teachings of God, form tribal ideas of wrong and right ways to express their beliefs, have dogma, rules. It's perfectly possible to believe in a conscious, creative force known as 'God' without subscribing to any particular religion. Indeed, if more people attempted a more personal relationship and understanding of what they call God and what this means for them in their lives and how to express what God means without dogma, heirarchy, power and doctrine, perhaps we'd have less fighting and tension over who is ultimately right or wrong, who's religion is 'correct'.

If people came across as less holier than thou, then the 'a' word wouldn't be used.

Halebek425
I agree, a personal god is a much better belief system, if you need one. Perhaps that's actually what we as a civilisation are tending towards, personal belief with shared moral and social values. Sounds a much better system to me, no imposed rules, no hierarchy, no indoctrination.

I tend to think so though I do appreciate others value the sense of community, tradition, history and culture that comes from belonging to an organised religion. However the flip side of that is always going to be power struggle both inside and out of the belief system, war and division.

I think it would be beneficial if we moved towards a place where the focus was more on our combined humanity and common values rather than what divides us. Of course, one need not have a belief system at all to share in that. It is difficult for anyone to have respect for others if they're always being told you're wrong I'm right, my way is the right way, if you don't do it like this it's wrong, etc etc. I struggle to believe such a powerful and enormous being like a God that has created all of existence would really care about such minuscule petty details that humans tend to focus on.

That was my point though, the moment your personal relationship with a God involves teachings and guidance it starts to become a religion, and once that guidance applies to all who follow, the religion is born.

It's human nature to form a group, and believing in a God needs another person to believe in that same God to validate that it's not a figment of your imagination. Once you have two people sharing the same God, they will start to interpret God together

Many scientists are still theists, esp in areas like physics.

If you're interested in what makes sense and what beliefs tally with reality then you're not going to give unwarranted stock to what other people believe regardless of their position in society.

I've arrived at my position of no faith because of the thought I've had based on raw facts and my own experience of the world.

Even if every scientist was a Christian it wouldn't be able to upturn the line of reasoning I've gone down, such as no evidence of Christians being in touch with a supernatural deity who answers prayer.

The fact the apostles and early Christians were executed, in the most horrendous ways, for something that they made up is improbable to me.

How do you view suicide bombers/martyrs of other faiths whose impetus is religion based?

Science tells you how things happen. Religion tells you why.

Why do some newly born, innocent children suffer pain?
Science tells us how, but I'm still waiting for the religion's answer on why...

I'm sorry but historians on the whole do believe in historical Jesus so it is entirely revelant to faith.

There's still plenty of debate. But it still doesn't demonstrate that Jesus was devine in any way just because he existed.

Jesus existence is an important part of Christian belief.

Obviously, but it's also important that he was the son of god and there's simply no evidence that this was the case.

You seem to say any written evidence is likely to be wrong- therefore no one can realistically believe any historical account of anything.

No, I'm not saying that. I'm saying that written accounts alone are not sufficient evidence to believe something is true. Purely because people can write anything they like.

There is less evidence to support Alexander the Great than there is Jesus.

I'm not arguing the existence of Alexander the Great so I have no idea what this has to do with the discussion.

The rest of what I've gone through just saying "bad argument, ignorant, arrogant" is not a counter argument.

Pointing out logical fallacies in an argument is precisely what a counter argument is. You have bad reasons for believing things.

I expect it's because you know very little on the topic to say anything productive.

Ok, we'll see how that pans out.

As a non believer do you just seek out religious opinion to be rude to people.

I try to help people to understand why their beliefs are illogical. It's a service I provide free of charge. You're welcome.

Roberts Boyle was a Christian who dedicated his life to god and understanding gods laws as part of that work- his work in chemistry was part of his belief. Faith inspired early scientists. There are very many theists in science still.

So?? That doesn't demonstrate that god is real.

People like you make conversations about religion tiresome. You seem to just demonstrate hostility for no reason. If you don't like talking about religion please feel free to move to another section of the forum not about religion

I love talking about religion. That's why I'm here. I'm not hostile. You just appear to take offence when someone points out the fallacies in your arguments and challenges your belief.

Why do some newly born, innocent children suffer pain?
Science tells us how, but I'm still waiting for the religion's answer on why... So far the only thing I've come up with is that it teaches those around. Don't shoot the messenger, just an suggestion/idea.

Science tells you how things happen. Religion tells you why.

Religion doesn't tell you anything about why stuff happens. In all likelihood, there isn't even a 'why' to answer. But all religions do is say, "god did it", which isn't helpful at all.

So far the only thing I've come up with is that it teaches those around. Don't shoot the messenger, just an suggestion/idea.

You say 'don't shoot the messenger' so you feel you're passing this on from whom? From god?

For what it's worth I managed to learn a lot about maths/cooking/love/diy/literature etc without any babies needing to die.

As a human if I want to impart some wisdom on to my children I would talk to them. It would never occur to me to orchestrate someone's death to help them learn.

What about the free will of that baby? They didn't get a say in if god used them suffering/dying to teach a lesson to other people.

And in light of this 'suffering as a lesson' shouldn't he red cross stop saving lives? Seeing as in doing so they may well be stopping people learning things?

In the ages(not as long ago as people would like to believe) of the vengeful angry God saying "God did it" made some sense. Innocents dying/suffering was linked(strenuously) to some sin someone else did, a perceived slight to the church, going against the rules,breaking out etc.
It helped to control the masses through fear.
It helped to control the masses through the inevitability of it all. Take it up with God, not the individual/ruler that caused it.
It helped control the masses through the promise of a better outcome once you die. "Go through all this shit now,shut up and put up and you will go to heaven."

You say 'don't shoot the messenger' so you feel you're passing this on from whom? From god? No, just a turn of phrase.

For what it's worth I managed to learn a lot about maths/cooking/love/diy/literature etc without any babies needing to die. Not the practicalities of life. The bigger lessons in life, like coming through to the other side of grief and loss.

As a human if I want to impart some wisdom on to my children I would talk to them. Some lessons have to be experienced.

My belief is that we come here many times, over and over again, in many different lives. To experience ALL of what life has to offer.

‘God’s Will’ is God taking the blame upon Himself rather than blaming the person for what happens. would any of you like a morality based belief system that blames the innocents as the authors of their own misfortune? That babies are sick or starving because they or their parents did some wrong in some past life that made them come back abject and cleaving to the ground? Vast swathes of the worlds population believe in karma and reincarnation and with that comes ‘it’s their own fault’.
ask India's Dalits/Untouchables why they convert to Islam and Christianity in large numbers away from Hinduism.

My belief is that we come here many times, over and over again, in many different lives. To experience ALL of what life has to offer.

How do you come to this conclusion?

‘God’s Will’ is God taking the blame upon Himself rather than blaming the person for what happens. would any of you like a morality based belief system that blames the innocents as the authors of their own misfortune?

Yet Christianity advocates a moral system where everyone is born in sin and commanded to follow Christ in order to be saved from an eternal hell for something they never did.

And why should God take the blame for everything when surely certain actions should be blamed squarely on the individual?