Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Jinxy]

Wonderful post, Ecurb...

[Jjpregler]

For my own purposes, I separate God from religion -

If, when I die, I discover nothingness - that there is no God - well, then the joke's on me. But my continued faith makes me a happier person and a more loving part of the community. Without going to church or practising any kind of religion.

If you die and it was all nothingness, then wasn't it religion all along and the seperation of relgion and god was in error?

[Jinxy]

No - my faith in a God that didn't exist...

As for my separation of God and Religion - well - that's just my way of focussing on the big picture, the important picture (God) and leaving behind all the man made crap that corrupts the big picture.

[Rederic]

I don't mean to be argumentative, Rederic, but what world are you living in? We can argue the 'shoulds' and 'shouldn'ts' all we want, but living in today's society means that children will hear about or be exposed to the notion of 'God' whether or not their parents are doing the teaching.

It's one thing when a child hears about God & religion from its parents, but it's quite a different scenario actually teaching it in a state school. Children look upon teachers as figures of authority & if they are taught by teachers that God & religion are fact, then this is indoctrination.

[Jinxy]

I believe I've already posted my position on the 'ills' of religion with respect to schools and government. Actually, the 'ills' of religion altogether. But what, I guess, you're suggesting is the abolishment of separate (or religious) schools - and that's an entirely different conversation...

[Rederic]

If children aren't taught about black holes in the first place then they don't believe in black holes. Does that mean we're "indoctrinating" them by teaching them about black holes. Obviously, nobody should teach children to believe things that are untrue. That's why some people here think they shouldn't be taught to believe the Christian religion. That's fair enough. The question is: who gets to determine what is true and what is untrue? Xris? Some science faculty? It's ridiculous.

Public schools (State schools for you, Xris) should teach the accepted scientific canon (even though there are disputes about what this comprises). But parents have a responsibility to teach their children what THEY believe is true. Forbidding Christian parents from teaching their religion to their children is tyranny. IN addition, it demands that parents lie to their children. If a child asks his mother about God, is she (a devout Christian) required to lie, and say, "No, Tommy, there is no God and Jesus did not die for your sins." Requiring parents to lie to their children is surely worse than allowing them to talk about religion. It has a dramatic impact on the trusting relationship between parent and child. Yet that is what some posters here seem to want to do.

Which constitutes "abuse"? Parents telling their children what they believe to be true (even if they are incorrect, as we all are about many things)? Or Xris outlawing such speech and throwing parents in jail for telling their children what they believe to be true? I can see that some people here think the world would be a better place if there was no religion. But how can they be so dogmatic and tyrannical as to want to outlaw the free and honest expression of dearly held ideas within a family home? Are Xris and his supporters going to start burning all Religious texts? Yes! Book-burning is the logical next step on their tyrannical agenda.

You're talking about two different things. God, faith & religion are beliefs. They can't be proven & have zero evidence. Black Holes, on the other hand, have plenty of evidence. Observation & prediction are the keys. Scientists look to an area in space where they suspect a Black Hole to be, they then look for particular behaviours of close space matter & can measure the rate of attraction towards Black Holes.

Parents could always tell their children their own beliefs but add that it can't be proven & that other people have different beliefs. That's the way to be truthful.

But how can they be so dogmatic and tyrannical as to want to outlaw the free and honest expression of dearly held ideas within a family home? Are Xris and his supporters going to start burning all Religious texts? Yes! Book-burning is the logical next step on their tyrannical agenda

Being a tad dramatic here aren't you? Xris didn't suggest any of this. When it comes to book burning, religious types have cornered the market I'm afraid.

[Bermudj]

...They can't be proven & have zero evidence. Black Holes, on the other hand, have plenty of evidence. Observation & prediction are the keys. ...

You do have evidence of a spiritual life.

[Rederic]

Rederic wrote:...They can't be proven & have zero evidence. Black Holes, on the other hand, have plenty of evidence. Observation & prediction are the keys. ...

You do have evidence of a spiritual life.

No, I don't, how could I when it doesn't exist?

[Bermudj]

Rederic wrote:...They can't be proven & have zero evidence. Black Holes, on the other hand, have plenty of evidence. Observation & prediction are the keys. ...

You do have evidence of a spiritual life.

No, I don't, how could I when it doesn't exist?

You do not consider NDE and the like as evidence?

[Jjpregler]

No, I don't, how could I when it doesn't exist?

You do not consider NDE and the like as evidence?

No, NDEs have a valid scientific explanation as well, whichis more likely to be truth other than spiritual life.

[Rederic]

Rederic wrote:

Rederic wrote:...They can't be proven & have zero evidence. Black Holes, on the other hand, have plenty of evidence. Observation & prediction are the keys. ...

You do have evidence of a spiritual life.

No, I don't, how could I when it doesn't exist?

You do not consider NDE and the like as evidence?

Seven years ago whilst in a cardiac ward recovering from open heart surgery, I had a cardiac arrest. My heart stopped for 90 seconds & I only survived because of the expertise of the hospital staff. There was no out of body experience, no white light to go towards, & no dead relatives to meet me, in fact there was nothing except sweet oblivion.

[Xris]

Southampton university's three year experiment on NDEs is near complete. It will be interesting to read their findings. I am not against any spiritual search but I am this insidious desire to convert young minds before they have the ability to reason. The difference between teaching science and religion, one has a dogmatic attention while the other,we hope, has an open mind and can reconsider the evidence.

[Bermudj]

Southampton university's three year experiment on NDEs is near complete. It will be interesting to read their findings. I am not against any spiritual search but I am this insidious desire to convert young minds before they have the ability to reason. The difference between teaching science and religion, one has a dogmatic attention while the other,we hope, has an open mind and can reconsider the evidence.

Yes it will be interesting to read their results. If you have a link to these I will appreciate it. Thanks.

[Rederic]

Southampton university's three year experiment on NDEs is near complete.

My experience happened at Southampton General. In the last seven years I've attended many follow up clinics. I'm well known for talking to anyone near enough to hear me, & I've yet to meet anyone who had an NDE. Not very scientific I will admit.

[Xris]

I don't think they have released any results yet. NDEs are controversial and I will find their results very interesting. Many hundreds have reported NDEs but the jury is still out on their validity or reasoning. A very difficult subject to experiment scientifically. The one that stood out for me was the women who blind from birth actually had a NDE with her sight restored during the experience. I have not been able to confirm this experience from any valid source.