If there was a 'God'

[Ginger Rogers]

I am not religeous, I am more of an agnostic as its' imposible to prove if there is or is not some kind of 'God'

My own opinion is that if there were a God surely one would just know it, like we know that the sky is eternal (well, apparantly!) , grass is green, and dogs have 4 legs (in most cases)

But the question is, why is it that so many people believe in something so whimsical, on such little evidence, and that presidents, prime ministers and monachs the world over proudly bow down to their 'church'
Yet, talk of aliens, magic, or witches, and you'd be laughed at by most.

I don't understand? !

My own opinion is that the church was set up by some old government somewhere to 'control the masses' as someone I know once put it! but I guess that's conspiracy theory!

[Jocky]

Yeah, I call myself 'agnostic' too, for much the same reason. There are others here who prefer 'atheist'. I suspect that most card carrying Christians would call us all 'atheists' (among other things :D ).

My personal theory is that religion evolved as an integral part of many societies from very early in the history of humankind: it was socially functional as a mechanism for passing down important information between generations; as a way of coping with despair at the pointlessness of life; as a device for marking important moments in life; and yes, also as a vehicle for political control.

I am skeptical of whether all the people who profess to believe in it actually do - and BTW I say that as a son of the manse, brought up in the body of the Kirk of Scotland

[Mongrel]

My personal theory is that religion evolved as an integral part of many societies from very early in the history of humankind: it was socially functional as a mechanism for passing down important information between generations; as a way of coping with despair at the pointlessness of life; as a device for marking important moments in life; and yes, also as a vehicle for political control.

I'll add my theory to the mix and politely suggest you missed out enforcing common sense stuff. Best example, from my chefing days, is that of Kosher food so here's a couple of examples

Pigs are unclean - Pigs will also food competitors. When you're a nomadic desert tribe you don't want to beat your herd off of the succulent greens when you can have goats which are a far more practical animal. Second reason is that improperly kept or prepared Pork is much more likely to give you food poisoning than any commonly domesticated stock.

Draining meat of blood - the dryer a chunk of meat is the less likely bacteria will want to inhabit it, especially when you consider that blood is what every growing bacteria needs. Also from here as part of the process the meat is salted for half an hour, salt is good at killing the nasties.

[Ginger Rogers]

That is common sense stuff, but I'm not too sure what it has to do with religeon really - thats only a jewish thing anyway isn't it.

[median]

That is common sense stuff, but I'm not too sure what it has to do with religeon really - thats only a jewish thing anyway isn't it.

I think what Mongrel states is quite a plausible idea and it isn't incongruent with Jocky's proposal.
Development of well established religions such as Judaeism would have been a powerful social cohesive force. As such, elements of ritual social behaviours such as feeding would, I daresay, become integrated in the whole religious edifice.
If the concept of God was man-made then what better way to make sure such, 'survivalist' eating habits are adequately disseminated, than by insisting they were the word of God?
Remember, it is fundamental in religion to state that all things wise/good come from God.

Interestingly, when I was growing up, it was established pork wasn't eaten in the hotter months.
Various horror stories featuring tapeworm were told by my mother and we were C of E?

[Hazen]

Ed works in mysterious ways:

Oh really?

You can't take the credit for all the good stuff that happens and not take take the blame for all the bad stuff.

According to Pat Robertson, hurricane Katrina wasn't, in fact a hurricane, it was the hand of god sent to punish the wicked - evidently jewgod hates poor black people, now.

Ariel Sharon didn't have a stroke, he was struck down by the hand of god for dividing the land of Israel - pretty rich coming from a baptist fundie.

I think the quote you're mentioning is: 'religion is the opiate of the masses' for precisely the reasons you mention.

Snake oil anyone?

[Mongrel]

That is common sense stuff, but I'm not too sure what it has to do with religeon really - thats only a jewish thing anyway isn't it.

I think what Mongrel states is quite a plausible idea and it isn't incongruent with Jocky's proposal.
Development of well established religions such as Judaeism would have been a powerful social cohesive force. As such, elements of ritual social behaviours such as feeding would, I daresay, become integrated in the whole religious edifice.
If the concept of God was man-made then what better way to make sure such, 'survivalist' eating habits are adequately disseminated, than by insisting they were the word of God?
Remember, it is fundamental in religion to state that all things wise/good come from God.

Interestingly, when I was growing up, it was established pork wasn't eaten in the hotter months.
Various horror stories featuring tapeworm were told by my mother and we were C of E?

Thanks for putting that better than I could Meridan

It's not only a Jewish thing, the Muslim halal is very similar but they get more leeway in what fish they can eat and they skip the 'can't mix meat and milk' rule.

As for common sense Ginger, it is now. We have the luxury of knowing what bacteria are, how they breed and their favourite places to do it, food hygiene, excellent websites like this one and a large dollop of hindsight. There's possibly some social considerations for some of the fish restrictions, in much the same way that Baluga caviar is a status symbol today or oysters 10-15 years ago. And finally how many times do you see common sense failure in your daily life? Whilst the living enviroment would have winnowed some of them out rather quickly I doubt it would have got all of them, like Einstein said

Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.

[Jocky]

Mongrel / median: yes, good practice relating to food was one of the things I had in mind when I described religion as "a mechanism for passing down important information between generations". Techniques for tracking the passing of the seasons, and thereby organising harvesting of crops, preparation for hard winter months etc. is another such example. Prescientific societies would have needed some way of making such information authoritative and binding in order to maximise the chances of survival.

I deduce from your avatar that you're a big fan of religion, Hazen :)

According to Pat Robertson, hurricane Katrina wasn't, in fact a hurricane, it was the hand of god sent to punish the wicked - evidently jewgod hates poor black people, now.

Odd though it seems, I think that in the context of a prescientific society the ravings of creatures like Robertson might have been functional as well. Finding a way of making sense of unpredictable catastrophes would have been indispensible in the wake of such an event, to stop despair and fragmentation from causing the society to crumble. Uniting people against a (real or imagined) common enemy, or interpreting the catastrophe as an admonition to behave more functionally, would be the best thing the leadership could do to help the society as a whole rise to the challenges of reconstruction.

I agree of course that it is deeply offensive for preachers to make religious capital out of such disasters in this day and age, though. IMHO, part of what we can achieve by organising as skeptics is to reduce the influence wielded by such dangerous rubbish. What was right three thousand years ago, or even one thousand years ago, is not necessarily still right today - and that is a point that fundamentalist religion misses completely.

[Hazen]

I deduce from your avatar that you're a big fan of religion, Hazen

I have the utmost respect for those who think themselves morally superior precisely because they believe in I-used -to-be-a-racist-sexist-homophobic-genocidal-pyscho-but-I-changed-my-mind-and-now-I'm-the-god-of-love-except-you'd-still-better-
worship-me-or-I'll-fry-your-ass god.

[Jocky]

It almost sounds like you would prefer the good old traditional I'm-an-unrepentant-racist-sexist-homophobic-genocidal-pyscho-now-bow-down-to-me-you-plebs-or-I'll-fry-your-asses god ...

You can't take the credit for all the good stuff that happens and not take take the blame for all the bad stuff

Absolutely, religion has been an ostensible 'cause' of any amount of bad stuff which has happened in human history. But how much of that do you think might have happened anyway, even if god had never been invented? IMO, quite a few (not all) conflicts which have been expressed in religious terms are actually primarily political or economic in origin: religion has merely been a medium for expressing and rationalising the hostility.

[Ginger Rogers]

Buddhism does interest me though. But I wouldn't really call it a 'religeon' as such..

[Jocky]

Buddhism is a religion, in the broadest sense of the word (even though it does not preach the existence of god):

A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/religion

It does come across as a more personal, practical phenomenon than (say) the lofty and distant self-proclaimed authority inherent in Roman Catholicism, but like other religions it does require faith in a fundamental belief which has no verifiable basis in fact: in this case not the existence of a supreme being, but the reality of reincarnation.

I do not mean to deny the personal benefit which some people derive from Buddhism, btw. Like some other religious practices, there are certain functional aspects (eg meditation as a way of reducing stress) hidden amid the associated woo.

[Ginger Rogers]

Buddhism is a religion, in the broadest sense of the word (even though it does not preach the existence of god):

A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/religion

It does come across as a more personal, practical phenomenon than (say) the lofty and distant self-proclaimed authority inherent in Roman Catholicism, but like other religions it does require faith in a fundamental belief which has no verifiable basis in fact: in this case not the existence of a supreme being, but the reality of reincarnation.

I do not mean to deny the personal benefit which some people derive from Buddhism, btw. Like some other religious practices, there are certain functional aspects (eg meditation as a way of reducing stress) hidden amid the associated woo.

hmmm from the book I read on the subject, not reincarnation in the way that you might think.
it's more about the fact that we're all of the same atoms and particles so in effect we are a reincarnation of material before us... ?
It was called Buddhism: Plain and simple by Steve Hagen. I found it to be very very interesting, though hands up I didn't fully understand the full concept of what he was trying to say.

But I promise, even for the most 'skeptical' or non believer, it's really worth a read.....

[Jocky]

we're all of the same atoms and particles so in effect we are a reincarnation of material before us

Well, I suppose that's true; but if you boil reincarnation down to that prosaic level , I can't see a lot of spiritual value in it.

As I understand Buddhism (admittedly as a lay observer :) ), it entails a belief in the notion that your 'karma' follows you from one incarnation to the next. That belief does not appear to be compatible with a truism about the conservation of matter.

[Ginger Rogers]

I think there is buddhism, and then there is the souped up glorfied version..

again that book mentions nothing about 'good karma' It simply re-iterates that all we have to do is 'see' (ie things as they really are) to be enlightened.