Comment deleted by Site Moderator

And most religious folk call their's 'beliefs', tbf.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

comment by Galvs...Friend of Reason. (U10415)
posted 31 seconds ago
Fair comment, but only one side is constantly asking any questions....
The 'belief' is based on the answers given thousands of years ago.
_______________

Why bother asking questions? If you want answers then go and read the appropriate ancient dusty book. Religion has the answers to every question - apart from the ones that God doesn't feel like answering of course.

God didn't give you intelligence so that you would actually use your brain...He only gave you that so that you can read old books.

Never mind that these ancient people thought the world was flat and that the Earth was the centre of the solar system...All the answers you will ever need are in their old books.

comment by Galvs...Friend of Reason. (U10415)
posted 21 minutes ago
Fair comment, but only one side is constantly asking any questions....
The 'belief' is based on the answers given thousands of years ago.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not sure that's entirely true either, otherwise you would never see schisms developing - which obviously they do. A lot.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Galvs...Friend of Reason. (U10415)
posted 21 minutes ago
Fair comment, but only one side is constantly asking any questions....
The 'belief' is based on the answers given thousands of years ago.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not sure that's entirely true either, otherwise you would never see schisms developing - which obviously they do. A lot.
________________

So you think that religious behaviour is more down to individual beliefs and interpretations then, rather than being about solely what was written in an old book?

Interesting...I don't disagree.

comment by redmisty (U7556)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Galvs...Friend of Reason. (U10415)
posted 21 minutes ago
Fair comment, but only one side is constantly asking any questions....
The 'belief' is based on the answers given thousands of years ago.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not sure that's entirely true either, otherwise you would never see schisms developing - which obviously they do. A lot.
________________

So you think that religious behaviour is more down to individual beliefs and interpretations then, rather than being about solely what was written in an old book?

Interesting...I don't disagree.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think behaviour has everything to do with the individual and there is no such thing as "religious behaviour" at all - at least not in the way your statement implies. Some people use their beliefs as justification for doing y things, but I'm fairly sure they would have done those things with or without an old book.

I think behaviour has everything to do with the individual and there is no such thing as "religious behaviour" at all - at least not in the way your statement implies. Some people use their beliefs as justification for doing y things, but I'm fairly sure they would have done those things with or without an old book.
_______________

Agreed. Religion is used as an excuse to legitimise that behaviour.

But surely a schism is also a behavioural division? As such, I think it is fair to refer to that as religious behaviour based on interpretation - since the religious text itself remains unchanged.

Sorry, I'm not getting your use of 'behaviour' here - a schism, for me, is a divide based on belief or interpretation: a behaviour is what you might do as a result of that, and I'm not sure there is any such thing - unless you mean specific religious practices, like taking communion or some such. Confused.

I just mean that beliefs and interpretations can only be evaluated on the basis of how those beliefs and interpretations manifest themselves (since we are not all mind readers).

E.g. the only way I can assess your beliefs is in the ways in which it affects your behaviour. I.e. a schism is unlikely to lead to a religious text being re-written on the basis of a different set of beliefs. It is more likely that a difference in beliefs/interpretation will affect how people choose to lead their lives. I.e. their behaviour.

If it's stil unclear what I mean by "religious behaviour" then ask yourself this: what is the point of religion if it has nothing to do with how people behave?

E.g. the only way I can assess your beliefs is in the ways in which it affects your behaviour.
_____

Sorry - meant to say the ways in which *they* affect behaviour.

That doesn't really work though; it's not a 1 for 1 relationship between behaviours and beliefs - two people can do two very different things and claim them both based on the same tenet of their beliefs.

An example that springs to mind based on another random thread here today; two people believe strongly in animal welfare, one of them thinks avoiding eating meat or any other meat product is the way to go, the other thinks being actively involved in supporting an ethically driven animal produces market is better.

If the hypothetical 'old book' in this case said "You should do your best by other animals", both could easily argue they are doing that yet hate the actions of the other at the same time. So, yes, I guess you have to judge based on behaviour to some degree, but you are only really testing you understanding of that belief - not theirs.

I'm rambling now. I should do some work...

two people can do two very different things and claim them both based on the same tenet of their beliefs.
________________

Correct - because they both apply a different interpretation.


"So, yes, I guess you have to judge based on behaviour to some degree, but you are only really testing you understanding of that belief - not theirs."
________________

Correct - that would be my interpretation of their beliefs based on their behaviour. There is no other basis on which I can evaluate their beliefs other than by what they do and say.

Well, you can ask them. We are blessed with a rich and complex way of expressing our beliefs without doing a thing.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

comment by Galvs...Friend of Reason. (U10415)
posted 4 hours, 24 minutes ago
Well that is certainly true....it was a hive of scientific discovery and enlightenment once...Iraq for example.
It's a shame that it is no longer that way
----------------------------------------------------------------------

When a region is in turmoil, education is the last priority I suppose.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

The more educated a nation becomes, the more likely it would drift away from religious beliefs. It is often in the interest of religious fundamentalists, to keep the population uneducated.

Well, you can ask them. We are blessed with a rich and complex way of expressing our beliefs without doing a thing.
_____________

Agreed but, if you don't "do a thing", then in what way is that belief actually a religion? Surely a religious belief must impinge on behaviour somehow.

Otherwise, what is religion and what purpose does it serve? If religion is nothing more than a belief then surely everyone is religious since we all believe in something?

Again I would argue that beliefs are largely irrelevant unless they affect the way we live our lives. I.e. the way in which we behave.

Simply "asking them" is also pointless imo. Osama Bin Laden would probably have said that he was deeply religious if I asked him...I am far more interested in how such people actually behave than in what they claim to believe...

The same goes for some young earth creationists who claim to be devout Christians, though many are really just racist redneck cants!

My point is that it is the *behaviour* of people that demonstrates their true values - not what they *claim* to believe.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

"Simply "asking them" is also pointless imo. Osama Bin Laden would probably have said that he was deeply religious if I asked him...I am far more interested in how such people actually behave than in what they claim to believe..."

Well that's true of they're 'behaviour' too, a dishonest person is equally capable of sticking a fiver in the collection tray. I mean surely a priest would be a perfect person, based on their behaviour, to look after your son, for instance.

comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 11 minutes ago
"Simply "asking them" is also pointless imo. Osama Bin Laden would probably have said that he was deeply religious if I asked him...I am far more interested in how such people actually behave than in what they claim to believe..."

Well that's true of they're 'behaviour' too, a dishonest person is equally capable of sticking a fiver in the collection tray. I mean surely a priest would be a perfect person, based on their behaviour, to look after your son, for instance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Osama Bin Laden also stated that he rejected religion to carry out his attacks

Comment deleted by Site Moderator