The Concept Of Being "God Fearing"

[buttslinger]

I trust my doctor no further than he is able to explain his treatment and procedures. I trust the pharmaceuticals I buy only insofar as I trust the FDA to test them (which is getting more difficult for them to do in the present political climate). I have no faith

What's next, Doubting Thomas, you'll say that 50 million Bieber fans are delusional???!!!!??? What about tacos, no love for tacos??? Are you going to say the perfect taco does not exist because you've never tasted it?
Where is the Humanity??
There's a difference from being skeptical and being pigheaded. And there's a difference from having faith and being an airhead.
There's a big difference from what the Buddha says from what the Church Lady says.
The Father in Heaven is the new improved self, more centered, more forward.
When you sell out stadiums Trish, I might listen to you. But til then, I've got Bieber Fever, baby.


PS....I think Jesus stresses Faith more than Buddhism, say, because faith was all poor Jew peasants in Biblical times could afford, and Faith is one way to get to God. He was actually talking to Jews, and he believed Jews were the chosen people.
His Flock.
I can dig that the Church of Transsexuality and the Church of Latter Day saints aren't always on the same page.

[fred41]

Haven't been to a doctor much lately, but when I did go, I've rarely seen receptionists like that. Maybe on T.V. ...The last time I went to a Dentist, her receptionist was a guy who never came on time. He's gone now.
So...

[trish]

It's not pigheaded to want to understand a medical procedure before consenting to undergo it, nor is it pigheaded to insist on a surgeon with a good track record. Does the Platonic Taco even exist? Pride didn’t cause St. Thomas to doubt the resurrection of Jesus, lack of evidence did. He needed to see and touch the wounds. Had he not seen them (as the story goes) he probably wouldn’t be a saint. Frankly, I doubt the whole story. The dead dude with the wounds never rose, never walked; Thomas never saw the walking zombie and his doubt never relented. That's why I like kinda like him (Thomas that is). He's really sorta cute, don't you think?

[fred41]

looks a bit twinkish to me.

[trish]

looks a bit twinkish to me.

Yeah. He's cute, but I can't imagine having brutish anal sex with him all night long. He'd probably end up crying.

[fred41]

Yeah. He's cute, but I can't imagine having brutish anal sex with him all night long. He'd probably end up crying.

..and , of course....he'd doubt himself.

[broncofan]

because faith was all poor Jew peasants in Biblical times could afford, and Faith is one way to get to God. He was actually talking to Jews, and he believed Jews were the chosen people.
His Flock.
.

But he had a very low approval rating with his intended audience. Mind you, we wouldn't hurt a hair on his head despite what his followers would have you believe. But let's just say we didn't think he was much more credible than the local taco vendor (his name was also Jesus but he pronounced it differently) and without being disrespectful we may have had doubts about his mother's chastity. It wasn't exactly an easy topic to bring up with young Jesus.

[buttslinger]

But he had a very low approval rating with his intended audience.

I feel his pain. I can't even get you heathens to be Bieber Believers. Looks like Sodom and Gommorah were not good choices to start my Ministry.
Well, as long as I'm here I might as well check out a couple of clubs. I can get back on the road to Damascus tomorrow.

[hippifried]

I trust my doctor no further than he is able to explain his treatment and procedures. I trust the pharmaceuticals I buy only insofar as I trust the FDA to test them (which is getting more difficult for them to do in the present political climate). I have no faith

Oh ye of little faith... You're going to piss off the Goblin. You could pick up a couple extra millennia in Purge a Tory for that kind of hubris alone. I fear for too much of your spirits being consumed, my love. Your sole could be filleted. Cum thee to the nearest Jizzuit monastery, & prostate yourself before the holee seed!
Bless you & remember that the number to "Dial-a-Prayer" is E cum speary 2 2 oh.

[Stavros]

Now that members of HA have had their fun with cartoons and put-downs it may be time to ask what is at the core of the problem many have with God and to pose the contrast between the God of Religion and the God of Science.

I think what people object to is not so much the idea that God, or A God, or Gods created the heavens and the earth, but the way in which religion has claimed the authority of God to create or impose moral judgements about and upon human behaviour, and in particular, the idea that there is some form of eternal damnation for those who do wrong, and eternal bliss for those that do right, and moreover, that a system of reward and punishment here on Earth can be justified even when that results in acts of cruelty to the person.

A God of science is not hard to understand, because Science cannot yet explain the existence of the Universe before the Big Bang, yet it could be rational to claim it is the work of 'God' without yet being able to define what God is, to use God as a functional term. It also removes the moral core in religion by ascribing to the God of Science observable phenomena and agreeing that just as life on Earth involves us, and the rivers and the seas, hurricanes and tornadoes, volcanic eruptions and beautiful flowers, meadows and snow-capped mountains, so in the Universe solar flares, gas clouds and ice storms on Venus may be considered a form of 'Life'.

Humans can thus be understood in terms of evolutionary theory where God may be the God of Creation, but not religion.

It is clear that with a few exceptions, all human societies at some point in their existence appear to have a concept of supernatural forces that they cannot explain, but which they believe exert a controlling influence over their environment, and it also appears to be the case that probably some time after the onset of the Neolithic Revolution human societies developed a 'moral cosmology' to explain who we are, how we got here, and what the best way to live might be. From this we derive the concepts and rules of reward and punishment that sustain life as individuals and as part of a social structure -from the obvious such as not putting your hands in the fire for too long, or immersing yourself in the river for too long; to knowing how to cook animal flesh so that it does not poison the system, to not having sexual intercourse with close relatives for fear of killing the family off over the generations.

Out of basic human survival (as Hippifried has suggested in another thread) rules based on 'common sense' and a form of 'science' before science, we can see how the natural and the supernatural combine. The fear of God thus becomes a critical form of social control, for if people believe that there is a Supreme Being, that this Being not only sees us always and everywhere, but judges us, then indeed, God is to be feared if the result of bad behaviour is eternal fire. And those who claim to be in communication with God or to be his 'servants' on Earth can (and have) exert[ed] real power over others.

It thus enables the Rationalist to adopt almost all of the rules and norms of behaviour bequeathed by Religion, while removing a religious God from the argument -thus, we believe murder is wrong, robbery is wrong, lying is wrong (most of the time), that infidelity is wrong (most of the time) and so on. Basic rules and norms with a few tweaks here and there. And even where there does not appear to be a Supreme Being -absent in Jain religion and Buddhism- both are closely related to Hinduism. Some Pygmy tribes in Central Africa appear to have no system of belief, or live through rituals, but this appears to be quite unusual for humans.

One remaining and intriguing difference remains: ritual. Why have humans developed rituals as a form of expression, of faith, of apology, of remorse, of celebration and so on? Why do religions in some cases expect their faithful to kneel in prayer, or to cover, or uncover their heads? Or to 'put off their shoes' when walking on 'hallowed ground'? What does it mean to be 'anointed' and how can water or oil be 'holy'? We have seen over the millenia how a crucial ritual like Sacrifice, has gone through phases -human, animal, human, animal -but do we know why Sacrifice is even so important? Rene Girard has argued it was an essential means whereby societies could resolve inner conflicts through ritual because in most cases shedding blood terrifies and is taboo but in a controlled setting it can channel and release pent up negative energies and allow societies to express rage without causing further violence than has already taken place.

Yet outside religion, secular societies maintain rituals. A man or a woman sings a song or makes a speech, and the collective response is to clap. Crowds sing an Anthem at the start of a football game -why?

The God of Science is functional, it has no moral compass. The God of Religion is commanding, and vengeful. If you believe, then one assumes the believer lives in fear of the Wrath of God. The non-believer need not fear, yet may feel guilty when violating basic rules and norms, being unfaithful to one's partner; drowning the cat to put it out of its aged misery. Finally, and worst of all, is the campaign to force one stream of thought and behaviour upon another, and that I think is where many people take their leave of religion altogether. Because even though we are all made of the same stuff, and often adhere to the same or a similar set of rituals, we can choose to be different.