4 of 4
4
A Human Moral Creed
Posted: 24 November 2012 12:30 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 46 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1777
Joined  2007-10-22

Ariel:

All humans are created by God originally to meet the needs and accomplishments of God’s Plan, which is to evolve Life into God.—Arielmessenger, recorder of God’s Cosmic Plan in the Gospel of Humanity at: http://biomystic.org/gospelofhumanity.htm

No they are not.  The proof of this is the number of gods that exist, each arising in a specific society, to meet the needs of that particular society’s needs.  i.e. The origins of Judaism was the need to organize a number of Bedouins and escaped slaves to invade Canaan, whose population were mostly followers of Baal.  Or the beginning of Xtianity as rural resistance to the Roman’s imposing Greek culture and the Roman plantation system in the area.

 Signature 

Gary the Human

All the Gods and all religions are created by humans, to meet human needs and accomplish human ends.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 November 2012 02:43 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 47 ]
Jr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  71
Joined  2012-11-13
garythehuman - 24 November 2012 12:30 PM

Ariel:

All humans are created by God originally to meet the needs and accomplishments of God’s Plan, which is to evolve Life into God.—Arielmessenger, recorder of God’s Cosmic Plan in the Gospel of Humanity at: http://biomystic.org/gospelofhumanity.htm

No they are not.  The proof of this is the number of gods that exist, each arising in a specific society, to meet the needs of that particular society’s needs.  i.e. The origins of Judaism was the need to organize a number of Bedouins and escaped slaves to invade Canaan, whose population were mostly followers of Baal.  Or the beginning of Xtianity as rural resistance to the Roman’s imposing Greek culture and the Roman plantation system in the area.

Your focus is too limited. You are not looking at the bigger picture which if you did, you would see a clear transmission of the Humanitarian Model moving through those very same ancient religions carrying and developing the Humanitarian Model despite the intentions of the particular religionists, e.g. Jews, to claim only their own religion is everything needed. This shows the Humanitarian Model is above any religion and still is quite apparently with us as in our times God has upgraded it with the Celestial Torah Christianity information as well as the Gospel of Humanity. You have to realize each stage of human social development is still a packhorse for further developments.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 November 2012 01:53 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 48 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1777
Joined  2007-10-22

I am no way denying that at least some religions profess “a clear transmission of the Humanitarian Model moving through those very same ancient religions carrying and developing the Humanitarian Model despite the intentions of the particular religionists,”

In fact my one of my points is that that was one of the main functions of the social tool humans invented that we call religion.  I’m not so much anti-religious as non-religious and believe that this social tool should be subject to the same examination as any other tool we humans have invented.  We need to acknowledge the good in it as well as the human created evil it contains. 

Personally I cannot not maintain a belief that is based upon false premises such as a big daddy in the sky that created us for his own amusement not rewards and punishments after death.

 Signature 

Gary the Human

All the Gods and all religions are created by humans, to meet human needs and accomplish human ends.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 November 2012 02:45 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 49 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3330
Joined  2011-11-04
garythehuman - 29 November 2012 01:53 PM

I am no way denying that at least some religions profess “a clear transmission of the Humanitarian Model moving through those very same ancient religions carrying and developing the Humanitarian Model despite the intentions of the particular religionists,”

In fact my one of my points is that that was one of the main functions of the social tool humans invented that we call religion.  I’m not so much anti-religious as non-religious and believe that this social tool should be subject to the same examination as any other tool we humans have invented.  We need to acknowledge the good in it as well as the human created evil it contains. 

Personally I cannot not maintain a belief that is based upon false premises such as a big daddy in the sky that created us for his own amusement not rewards and punishments after death.

I agree that we should be careful not to unnecessarily demonize religions.  (Although the idea of demons was a concept that came out of religions).

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 December 2012 10:34 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 50 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  83
Joined  2012-12-01

I find it interesting that every time “god” is listed as a creator, the question of “which one” is simply dodged, waffled, or avoided.

Since MOST of the “rules” of the more moderate religions are exactly the kind of rules that lead to survival of the tribe in pre-industrial, pre-agricultural, pre-medical, pre-technical society, it’s not surprising that they tend to converge toward a model of “Us good, tolerate Us, Them bad, (avoid, kill, shun) Them”.

Things like “thou shalt not kill” help society survive, and following such rules is in the individual’s own self interest.
Ditto, “thou shalt not steal”, etc.

The problem comes when religious rules for non-medical (in particular) or non-scientific society are not abandoned.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 December 2012 01:44 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 51 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3330
Joined  2011-11-04
jj - 01 December 2012 10:34 AM

...Since MOST of the “rules” of the more moderate religions are exactly the kind of rules that lead to survival of the tribe in pre-industrial, pre-agricultural, pre-medical, pre-technical society, it’s not surprising that they tend to converge toward a model of “Us good, tolerate Us, Them bad, (avoid, kill, shun) Them”...

 

This idea of our tribal nature, is something that, I think Haidt tries to go into in depth, in “The Righteous Mind”.  Thinking about it leads me to the query:  Which came first? Our tribal natures? Or religions?  My suspicion is that religions (to a great extent) arose and arise out of the same inherent characteristics that we have that are tribal.

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 December 2012 04:04 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 52 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  83
Joined  2012-12-01
TimB - 01 December 2012 01:44 PM

This idea of our tribal nature, is something that, I think Haidt tries to go into in depth, in “The Righteous Mind”.  Thinking about it leads me to the query:  Which came first? Our tribal natures? Or religions?  My suspicion is that religions (to a great extent) arose and arise out of the same inherent characteristics that we have that are tribal.

Unfortunately, I don’t know of that particular ?book?paper?, so I’m a bit at a loss.  I suspect that you’re not far off with your suspicion, religion creates a way to get tribe members to conform that doesn’t require abstract understanding and instinctive cooperation.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 December 2012 06:17 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 53 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3330
Joined  2011-11-04

The book is relatively new. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/the-righteous-mind-by-jonathan-haidt.html?pagewanted=all

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 December 2012 11:04 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 54 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1777
Joined  2007-10-22
TimB - 01 December 2012 01:44 PM
jj - 01 December 2012 10:34 AM

...Since MOST of the “rules” of the more moderate religions are exactly the kind of rules that lead to survival of the tribe in pre-industrial, pre-agricultural, pre-medical, pre-technical society, it’s not surprising that they tend to converge toward a model of “Us good, tolerate Us, Them bad, (avoid, kill, shun) Them”...

 

This idea of our tribal nature, is something that, I think Haidt tries to go into in depth, in “The Righteous Mind”.  Thinking about it leads me to the query:  Which came first? Our tribal natures? Or religions?  My suspicion is that religions (to a great extent) arose and arise out of the same inherent characteristics that we have that are tribal.

Please keep in mind that there is quite a difference in so-called tribal or primitive religions and the political bureaucratic religions that arose with the agricultural revolution.

 Signature 

Gary the Human

All the Gods and all religions are created by humans, to meet human needs and accomplish human ends.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 December 2012 11:57 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 55 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3330
Joined  2011-11-04
garythehuman - 04 December 2012 11:04 AM
TimB - 01 December 2012 01:44 PM
jj - 01 December 2012 10:34 AM

...Since MOST of the “rules” of the more moderate religions are exactly the kind of rules that lead to survival of the tribe in pre-industrial, pre-agricultural, pre-medical, pre-technical society, it’s not surprising that they tend to converge toward a model of “Us good, tolerate Us, Them bad, (avoid, kill, shun) Them”...

 

This idea of our tribal nature, is something that, I think Haidt tries to go into in depth, in “The Righteous Mind”.  Thinking about it leads me to the query:  Which came first? Our tribal natures? Or religions?  My suspicion is that religions (to a great extent) arose and arise out of the same inherent characteristics that we have that are tribal.

Please keep in mind that there is quite a difference in so-called tribal or primitive religions and the political bureaucratic religions that arose with the agricultural revolution.

Well sure, though what I am suggesting is that our tribal instincts may have, to a great extent, been the foundation for the development of political bureaucratic religions, as the societies became more complex. But you are right that the agricultural revolution played a part, in that it enabled greater populations of people to live together.  This greater population required greater social control in order to function successfully.

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
   
4 of 4
4