The Lemon Fool

Turkish rescuers shouted "Allahu Akbar" when a child was found alive from the ruins. Their joy is wholly understandable, I'm not questioning that.

It's that their chant seems to give their god the credit for a life saved. It seems a strange contrast when around them is death and destruction and that is somehow nothing to do with their god. Of course they'd be right, it's down to the tectonic plates and suspect building quality as we all know.

Likewise the saving of a child is down to the diligence and bravery of the rescuers and a big slice of luck.

It's just one of the many examples of theists explaining the good in the world being down to a god, and the bad stuff is swept under the carpet.

Yes. This occurs to me too. Surely, if you believe in god, then the earthquake/hurricanes/plagues are all down to god too. The scriptures are all perfectly clear that such disasters are sent by god. The death of your family and neighbours, annd the destruction of your home, are down to god. How come god always gets the praise for the good stuff and never the blame for the bad? Why aren’t they shouting “curse you god” for sending the earthquake in the first place?

Not just Muslims is it? Disaster survivors in Africa and the Americans all say “Thank God I’m saved” too.

Leothebear wrote:Turkish rescuers shouted "Allahu Akbar" when a child was found alive from the ruins. Their joy is wholly understandable, I'm not questioning that.

It's that their chant seems to give their god the credit for a life saved. It seems a strange contrast when around them is death and destruction and that is somehow nothing to do with their god. Of course they'd be right, it's down to the tectonic plates and suspect building quality as we all know.

Likewise the saving of a child is down to the diligence and bravery of the rescuers and a big slice of luck.

It's just one of the many examples of theists explaining the good in the world being down to a god, and the bad stuff is swept under the carpet.

Agreed. It's just the same in other religions - Christianity for example - and there are several well known jokes on this theme. (e.g the guy drowning).
The other strange thing is to claim it is God's will, a will which seems completely wayward - but then he works in mysterious ways

Arb.

Thank God this thread seems to be going rationally and reasonably

I think there's a big distinction between language that refers to "a god" which is often used figuratively and Faith.

I've heard Stephen Fry use it and also his RTE interview talking about "God" from the perspective of a world that includes brain cancer in children.

Anywhere you have an significant indoctrinated population you will have crossover and influence in the language; I'm not sure you can read too much from the words observed. It may or may not be sincere and literal

Leothebear wrote:Turkish rescuers shouted "Allahu Akbar" when a child was found alive from the ruins. Their joy is wholly understandable, I'm not questioning that.

It's that their chant seems to give their god the credit for a life saved. It seems a strange contrast when around them is death and destruction and that is somehow nothing to do with their god. Of course they'd be right, it's down to the tectonic plates and suspect building quality as we all know.

Likewise the saving of a child is down to the diligence and bravery of the rescuers and a big slice of luck.

It's just one of the many examples of theists explaining the good in the world being down to a god, and the bad stuff is swept under the carpet.

Faith by definition is not rational. It is the belief in things unseen (lacking evidence). When you take the initial decision to deny rational thought and replace it with Faith then acceptance of anything becomes possible, no matter how contradictory. Exhibit 1: celibate priests, thousands of abused kids and complicit, secretive, enabling organisation.

Actually it's slightly more subtle than that, most religious people employ logic but their Faith starts with some flawed premise (e.g. "the bible is the Word of God"), from which myriad other fallacies are derived using superficially sound deductive reasoning.

GS

Leothebear wrote:It's just one of the many examples of theists explaining the good in the world being down to a god, and the bad stuff is swept under the carpet.

If I were in a falling lift I would probably utter up a quick prayer, even though He made the lift fall.

Turkey apparently has a very high level of religious observance, much as we did say 200 years ago. Perhaps they will eventually follow the same secular path.

V8

88V8 wrote:Turkey apparently has a very high level of religious observance, much as we did say 200 years ago. Perhaps they will eventually follow the same secular path.

I think they tried that under Ataturk - or at least, they separated the clergy from the state, so as to create a secular state. But Prime Minister Erdogan has been doing everything he can think of to take the country back toward a full-on Islamist theocracy. The only thing likely to halt all that will be if he loses this year's election. Which, fortunately, he might.

BJ

(I'm an ex Christian but to give a brief explanation of theist view for debate). They would say, the natural disaster is a test of faith, so that although God/Allah could intervene and prevent the action he doesn't as part of his greater plan. So the believer supposed to just roll with what life throws at them.

One benefit for them is their faith gives some comfort in being to cope with death and destruction. Here (without comforting myths) we just shrug shoulders, they're gone and that's it. It does make it more difficult to cope with loss of loved ones.

Faith in God is probably best described by the following :

“To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary. To one without faith, no explanation is possible.”

Saint Thomas Aquinas

Adamski wrote:(I'm an ex Christian but to give a brief explanation of theist view for debate). They would say, the natural disaster is a test of faith, so that although God/Allah could intervene and prevent the action he doesn't as part of his greater plan. So the believer supposed to just roll with what life throws at them.

One benefit for them is their faith gives some comfort in being to cope with death and destruction. Here (without comforting myths) we just shrug shoulders, they're gone and that's it. It does make it more difficult to cope with loss of loved ones.

Why does God need to test someone's faith surely he already knows as he is omniscient ?
Similarly if he can't devise and execute a plan which doesn't result in innocent deaths from natural disasters then that means he isn't omnipotent.

Corinthians 9:15
Thanks be to God for his ineffable gift.

"Why does God need to test someone's faith surely he already knows as he is omniscient ?"

OK I'll bite because it is for our benefit, not for God's, the idea that it'd build faith/belief.

"Similarly if he can't devise and execute a plan which doesn't result in innocent deaths from natural disasters then that means he isn't omnipotent."

OK, that's tricky.. I'll go with the innocent departed get into heaven, so they get to live in eternal bliss.

I bet you were a pain at Sunday school with these questions I look back and spent far too much of my life worrying about such things!!

88V8 wrote:Turkey apparently has a very high level of religious observance, much as we did say 200 years ago. Perhaps they will eventually follow the same secular path.

V8

Secular societies have a very high level of moral observance, which stems directly from religion. If there is no God then why do we have this? Of course morality is good for society as a whole but that's not the same as attributing to it the absolute foundation that we are all indoctrinated with.

Bottom line indoctrination is powerful and it's worth exploring the basis for our own (usually) very strongly held beliefs and why we have them. It does help understand why so many people are theists in countries that, for example, have a call to prayer 5 times a day.

BoE

Bubblesofearth wrote:

88V8 wrote:Turkey apparently has a very high level of religious observance, much as we did say 200 years ago. Perhaps they will eventually follow the same secular path.

V8

Secular societies have a very high level of moral observance, which stems directly from religion. If there is no God then why do we have this? Of course morality is good for society as a whole but that's not the same as attributing to it the absolute foundation that we are all indoctrinated with.

Bottom line indoctrination is powerful and it's worth exploring the basis for our own (usually) very strongly held beliefs and why we have them. It does help understand why so many people are theists in countries that, for example, have a call to prayer 5 times a day.

BoE

As society developed those in power whether chieftains/kings or high priests had a vested interest in keeping good order since maintenance of that order kept them in power. Religion was the marketing tool for maintaining that good order backed up by threats of punishment in this or the next life if you disobeyed the rules of the god(s). Religions and the moral codes they promoted were the creation of human societies.

ursaminortaur wrote:


As society developed those in power whether chieftains/kings or high priests had a vested interest in keeping good order since maintenance of that order kept them in power. Religion was the marketing tool for maintaining that good order backed up by threats of punishment in this or the next life if you disobeyed the rules of the god(s). Religions and the moral codes they promoted were the creation of human societies.

Yes but that rational argument doesn't take away the deep feeling I have that it is morally wrong, for example, to kill. When I try to get my head around why so many intelligent people believe in God I look to my own morals to help me empathise with religious beliefs. Arguing that these morals are a societal construct doesn't materially change this feeling any more than I suspect rational argument shakes many individuals faith in God.

In a strange sort of way it is a bit hypocritical of people who have a strong moral compass to criticise theists for their beliefs. We are all (or at least most of us) partly a product of our indoctrination.

BoE

Bubblesofearth wrote:

ursaminortaur wrote:


As society developed those in power whether chieftains/kings or high priests had a vested interest in keeping good order since maintenance of that order kept them in power. Religion was the marketing tool for maintaining that good order backed up by threats of punishment in this or the next life if you disobeyed the rules of the god(s). Religions and the moral codes they promoted were the creation of human societies.

Yes but that rational argument doesn't take away the deep feeling I have that it is morally wrong, for example, to kill. When I try to get my head around why so many intelligent people believe in God I look to my own morals to help me empathise with religious beliefs. Arguing that these morals are a societal construct doesn't materially change this feeling any more than I suspect rational argument shakes many individuals faith in God.

In a strange sort of way it is a bit hypocritical of people who have a strong moral compass to criticise theists for their beliefs. We are all (or at least most of us) partly a product of our indoctrination.

BoE

Even something as basic as "Don't Kill" which obviously is good for the good order of society has always been hedged with exceptions which have varied throughout history and cultures. As well as the fairly constant exceptions of soldiers killing in war or the state killing when someone transgresses its rules you have lots of other exceptions which most people today would disagree with but were accepted historically or in particular cultures.

Romans killing people in the Arena ( which didn't stop until centuries after Rome had become Christian). Roman emperors scheming and killing each other to become emperor which again didn't stop when the empire became Christian and which also occurred much later with Christian Kings ( who regarded themselves as having being appointed by God and their rise to the throne however bloody as an indication of God's support). The killing of innocent women as witches which was seen as following the orders of God - Exodus 22:18 Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live. Modern suicide bombers who believe they will receive rewards in heaven for their actions in killing others etc etc.

https://www.historyrevealed.com/eras/ancient-rome/timeline-the-rise-and-fall-of-the-roman-games/

16
AD 681
After centuries of waning popularity, and with the decline of the Roman Empire, gladiatorial combat is officially banned as a sport.

ursaminortaur wrote:Even something as basic as "Don't Kill" which obviously is good for the good order of society has always been hedged with exceptions which have varied throughout history and cultures. As well as the fairly constant exceptions of soldiers killing in war or the state killing when someone transgresses its rules you have lots of other exceptions which most people today would disagree with but were accepted historically or in particular cultures.

Romans killing people in the Arena ( which didn't stop until centuries after Rome had become Christian). Roman emperors scheming and killing each other to become emperor which again didn't stop when the empire became Christian and which also occurred much later with Christian Kings ( who regarded themselves as having being appointed by God and their rise to the throne however bloody as an indication of God's support). The killing of innocent women as witches which was seen as following the orders of God - Exodus 22:18 Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live. Modern suicide bombers who believe they will receive rewards in heaven for their actions in killing others etc etc.

https://www.historyrevealed.com/eras/ancient-rome/timeline-the-rise-and-fall-of-the-roman-games/

16
AD 681
After centuries of waning popularity, and with the decline of the Roman Empire, gladiatorial combat is officially banned as a sport.

The influence of authority has also been shown to also overcome moral objections to harming others. The Milgram experiment of the 1960's showed that people were prepared to mete out severe punishment, even leading to death, in obedience to authority and despite their moral code. The results surprised both investigators and psychology students polled before the experiment;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment

The Milgram experiment(s) on obedience to authority figures were a series of social psychology experiments conducted by Yale University psychologist Stanley Milgram. They measured the willingness of study participants, 40 men in the age range of 20 to 50 from a diverse range of occupations with varying levels of education, to obey an authority figure who instructed them to perform acts conflicting with their personal conscience. Participants were led to believe that they were assisting an unrelated experiment, in which they had to administer electric shocks to a "learner". These fake electric shocks gradually increased to levels that would have been fatal had they been real.[2]
The experiment found, unexpectedly, that a very high proportion of subjects would fully obey the instructions, with every participant going up to 300 volts, and 65% going up to the full 450 volts.

Not sure what it says about the robustness of our morals if they can all but evaporate given an excuse!

BoE

I'm nominally Christian, non practicing but willing to consider all possibilities but Pascal's wager doesn't seem so daft to me.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_wager

WickedLester wrote:I'm nominally Christian, non practicing but willing to consider all possibilities but Pascal's wager doesn't seem so daft to me.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_wager

Yes but which god? There are thousands of religions and most think their god is the only real one and all the others are heretical and to be stamped out.
The chances are overwhelmingly that your belief is in the wrong deity. Probably worse than being a misguided agnostic?

I'm with Richard Dawkins on this

Ricky Gervais said 'There are over 3000 gods. You follow one of them. I follow one less.