I will probably be tracked down and hunted for this, but has anyone wondered about the future of religion?

Will all religions merge into one or will they keep clinging to ancient texts that in my humble opinion are not relevant to the modern world.

I have no problem believing in a creator or first cause , but I cannot believe the religious texts , because from my point of view they are childish in todays modern world of rationalism.

These texts were used to account for unexplained phenomena just like scientific theories are today.

Believing in a Universal God or creator is to me the ultimate step religions should take to unify people instead of deviding people further.

So will religions ever fade away or will they linger on? Will religions ever be able to unify and agree to disagree and focus on what they have in common?

Will religious leaders ever be honest enough to agree that some of their most cherished teachings do not make sence when viewed from an objective point of view?

I am of the opinion that God would be more like a scientist and less like a preacher.

Article

Discussion

[I know this is controversial , but I hope this can be the catalist for some meaningful discussions]

Some people have the opinion they are every bit as relevant in the modern world. There is a difference of opinion. It would be wrong for either group to impose their opinion on the other. As far as a natural progression of things I do not envision religion being outmoded unless of course it is forced.

Personaly iv,e always felt that religion and realisim go hand in hand
science tells us how god did it and religion tells us why god did it

I once read an interesting philosophy piece on why god created. The answer is supposedly within the creator and no one can no it except if you dial direct.

(Just a thought)

Hence prayer theres your direct connection

That's funny, I haven't heard a convincing answer for 'why?' from anyone of any religion known to humanity, but I've heard some well thoughtout ones for the 'how?' from science.

I am of the opinion that all religions will be merged into one. I don't think that the ancient texts will be completely disgarded, nor will people cling to them. Religious organizations will become more like a social club than a true religion. There will be no absolutes and religious truth will be considered subjective. In short, you will be able to believe and do anything you want to. We already see this happening in what have traditionally been called "Christian" churches. That will be the beginning of the end for this current worlds system IMO.

If for a "true religion" you mean a governmental style organization of control, then I agree.

If we see religion as a form of early mans science, meaning a tool to answer big questions then the futures religion will become more scientific.
We will most likely see universal religions as we colonize new worlds.. removing the religious focus from this world alone.

The thing about science, and the quest to answer huge questions is, as curious people know, that in answering big questions you will open up for even bigger ones as you progress. And things unanswered and not understood is what religion fuels on. So religion will "have" to move with science and modify the answers they can provide to stay the tool so answer things unknown.

The meaning of life is a strong one... combined with fear of death you will be able to gather huge amounts of followers who will rather believe in absurdity than in the puzzle biology works on. IF bioligy one day gathered all pieces I don't see it changing much... many people would not be able to handle this question answered as something that happened by chance. If would make them feel like they lived an empty and meaningless life.

Religion will potentially blossom each time something new in the realm of amazing is discovered.

Has the absolute ring of solid logic to me.

We interrupt this thread with an important announcement from the Human^© Technical Support Team.



* Strokes white cat, looks innocent *

Dr. Evil strikes again!!!!

Religion as an ongoing attempt by man to reach God will probably never end because man has enough hubris to believe he can be "good enough" to take his place with God.

Religion as the spiritual search for and establishing of a personal relationship with God will continue because it is a rational act.

Very good post....


I add that 'god' as understood by antiquity will eventually take its place with all the other mythologies and future cultures will marvel at how we could of actually believed such things......



Searching for answers is futile as it creates dead ends, questions lead to more questions....and this can easily be understood when one actually questions..... not questioning beleifs creates dogma's because one belief is not as good as the next so when we say you can beleif whatever you want in essence as a culture we encourage dogma's and instituitons such as religion that can then thrive....


the more one is encouraged to think instead of told what to think resolves this on its own....

Yes I see with a lot of people this is where God ends up. Right out on the periphery. We don't need him to explain morals/evils/natural phenomena - therefore he has slunk away to be the first cause. Although a God who set this all up then just rests on his laurels is quite an interesting scenario as well. But anyways, I agree that the explaining, interventionist God has definitely had his day.

I recently read a quote by Einstein that I thought was interesting. He said, "Generations to come will scarce believe that one such as Ghandi ever in flesh and blood walked the earth." Ghandi died in 1948. I haven't heard anyone deny Ghandi's existence yet, but I have heard people deny Jesus' existence and that of the holocaust.

It was thought for a long time Troy was just a myth but the actual Troy has since been found.

What if both science and religion as well as the environments which they are used to descibe are just products of our minds? How can we prove what our senses tells us is real?

We ARE all a figment of your imagination BNW, so why are you trying to convince yourself?

that is an excelllent inquiry Brave....we can't rely on our sense as truth purveyors, exclusively....yet many do...

Because although I may believe this intellectually it doesnt mean it is a subconscious belief which relfects more strongly the truth I behold of it. A little how we could move mountains if we removed the doubt in our hearts (or if you want it put in freud jargon , remove the doubt from our unconscious mind).

I agree, God would be more like a scientist rather than a preacher. He was always that way, I believe.
God is more technological I think; and I think that since we could not comprehend His technology we believed
it to be a miracle in the past, and therefore built religion around something that used to be simple.

As mentioned above the problem is with absolutes within religions. Once the absolute boundry breaks there could be unity and peace (This stands not only for religions , but for world conflict)

In the Hitchhikers guide to the galaxy- the movie. They have a phrase that loosely goes : the chance of finding out what is really going on is so small that it is better to just forget about finding the truth and rather enjoy the ride.

Well I don't subscribe to that , but it is incredibly difficult to find the truth. It would be great if religions could merge and become more subjective. Some of what religions tell us about social condutct is good , but a lot is outdated.

The best phrase I have seen is from Wicca (I think) "Harm no one do as you please"

We could all learn from the Wiccan Rede. I have to disagree though that absolutes must be broken down. There is no absolute within the Bible that I deny. Even with my fundamentalist approach to the Word it does not stop me from taking a different approach to my fellow man especially knowing the Word tells us not to judge, not to call another a fool, not to try and excessively convert others, not to blaspheme other gods and goddesses, and not to try and destroy another persons belief.

Actually and perhaps not unexpectedly i beg to disagree. All science and all human knowledge is based on two things. The first of these is observation (which encompasses basicallly and primarilly all the human senses, with modern augmentation through machines and technology.

The second is the use of the human mind to analyse in many complex, and interesting, ways; eg comparisons, contrasts, synthesise extraolation etc what we perceive and then make logical deductions from these observations

In itself the nature and function of logic brings in a third discipline which encompasses philosophy religion and similar functions of human sentience. Thus, while mathematics can show that 2 plus 2 = 4, all human logic is inherently flawed, or enhanced, depending on how you see it, by individual and social belief systems. Human logic is not value free/neutral. It cannot be because of the nature of human intelligence, but neiher should it be.

So first observation; then analysis using the third function a multidisciplinary and unique human intelligence/perspective, which has blossomed in many forms, from ethics to philosophy to spiritual beliefs.

And so truth primarily is exactly what we physically sense. This is so obvious that it has become a rallying point for those who like to present alternative viewpoints such as brave.
But then we tend to; alter, manipulate, deny, rationalise, extrapolate, etc what we sense, and it is actually here, where we can begin to move away from the truth. The truth is what is. Anything else may be either more or less, but it is not the truth.
Of course we do the best we can, but the human mind is not quite up to perfect simulation and acceptance, or even recording, of what it sees, and so we each tend to create our own reality from what we sense.

Perhaps whoever said "i think therefor i exist "got it badly wrong. Thinking proves nothing, really. This saying detracts from what should be a much more powerful observation. which would go something like this

"The things i see and sense prove my existence, for if they were not there, then i would be unaware of my own existence".

Very simply, we mistake the nature of thought, and overemphasise its importance, (Understandable given its unique importance in human existence ,but still an error of judgement)

It is the reality of existence which creates the data stream ,which both allows for the development of sentience, and of self awareness

The truth, and reality, of existence is that; take human perception out of the equation, and all the rest remains, but take all the rest away, and human perception cannot develop or even exist .The baby in the womb, and the effects of complete sense deprivation, are two basic indicators of this.