Being religious: thai vs farang

[farang000999]

Religion is not a big deal and we make fun of and ostracize all the hypocrisy in religion but at the same time we secretly sigh and say thank god that the hypocrisy actually exists. if it is just a bunch of traditions and paintings and idioms - we can live with that. the problem has always been the "True Believers" because in order to be a true believer, you need to have a mental disorder and i am not saying that sarcastically, "True Believers" are living for an existential identity they have created. I want to eat pizza because of the way it tastes and smother my face in a busty bossom because those things are actually real. The "True Believer" has no concern for reality and therefore he has no rules in his world. He has a silent voice in his head that tells him what he wants to hear and that silent voice justifies everything he does. "True Believers" exist in all religions of life- see the "Obama is an African Muslim" religion in the USA playing out now... we better all hope they are NOT "True Believers".

[Kananga]

Religion is like politics - It was invented by men and women.

So was science

Not really. Science is quantifying/observing how things really are. Yes, it takes humans (and their machines) to crunch the data. Also, science is a contunually evolving process where claims are encouraged to be duplicated and challenged. Religion is fixed and claims (virgin birth, walk on water, etc) are discouraged from being challenged. Religion is faith-based, where as science is verifyable. Religion is based on things which can't be proved or disproved, same with metaphysics, belief in aliens, crop circles, Loch Ness monster, Philippine finger surgery, clairvoyance, tarot, etc.

If anyone asks me what I believe in, I tell 'em 'science and nature.' I actually like many of the stories wrapped around religion, particularly Hinduism. But I see them all as interesting myths, not as something I need to embrace and believe in literally. I love the story of the Buddha and Milarepa and others, and I believe those men actually lived, and that's enough.

I like the stories of Jesus and Muhammed, but especially enjoy the hypocracy of their mythicized lives compared to how their followers manifers - except, of course, when it causes harm to people and the planet - which it often does.

Understand the difference now Guesthouse?

[Kananga]

Religion is like politics - It was invented by men and women.

So was science

Not really. Science is quantifying/observing how things really are. Yes, it takes humans (and their machines) to crunch the data. Also, science is a contunually evolving process where claims are encouraged to be duplicated and challenged. Religion is fixed and claims (virgin birth, walk on water, etc) are discouraged from being challenged. Religion is faith-based, where as science is verifyable. Religion is based on things which can't be proved or disproved, same with metaphysics, belief in aliens, crop circles, Loch Ness monster, Philippine finger surgery, clairvoyance, tarot, etc.

If anyone asks me what I believe in, I tell 'em 'science and nature.' I actually like many of the stories wrapped around religion, particularly Hinduism. But I see them all as interesting myths, not as something I need to embrace and believe in literally. I love the story of the Buddha and Milarepa and others, and I believe those men actually lived, and that's enough.

I like the stories of Jesus and Muhammed, but especially enjoy the hypocracy of their mythicized lives compared to how their followers manifers - except, of course, when it causes harm to people and the planet - which it often does.

You really don't understand the fundamentals of science do you.

Look into the philosophical discussions surrounding something as simple as 1+1 = 2.

The discourse is not 'well of course it does'

Maths and science are philosophies - they are pure constructs of the human mind.

And once again, the choice is not nor never has been Religion or Science - nobody lives their life, no society is based upon, one or the other not even on just Religion and Science.

Its a lot more complicated than that.

But as we observe, the term zealot, often cast at people of faith is equally applicable to some of their detractors.

Looks to me like guesthouse is religious but just falls short of wanting to admit to himself he believes in fairytales. There is no virtue in having 'faith' by the way.

[rgs2001uk]

Religion is like politics - It was invented by men and women.

So was science

Not really. Science is quantifying/observing how things really are. Yes, it takes humans (and their machines) to crunch the data. Also, science is a contunually evolving process where claims are encouraged to be duplicated and challenged. Religion is fixed and claims (virgin birth, walk on water, etc) are discouraged from being challenged. Religion is faith-based, where as science is verifyable. Religion is based on things which can't be proved or disproved, same with metaphysics, belief in aliens, crop circles, Loch Ness monster, Philippine finger surgery, clairvoyance, tarot, etc.

If anyone asks me what I believe in, I tell 'em 'science and nature.' I actually like many of the stories wrapped around religion, particularly Hinduism. But I see them all as interesting myths, not as something I need to embrace and believe in literally. I love the story of the Buddha and Milarepa and others, and I believe those men actually lived, and that's enough.

I like the stories of Jesus and Muhammed, but especially enjoy the hypocracy of their mythicized lives compared to how their followers manifers - except, of course, when it causes harm to people and the planet - which it often does.

Understand the difference now Guesthouse?

The last time I was operated on I was more concerned with the doctors experience,knowledge and understanding of medical science and the procedure he was about to undertake, his religion or lack of played no part in my choice of having him operate on me.

[Kananga]

So was science

Not really. Science is quantifying/observing how things really are. Yes, it takes humans (and their machines) to crunch the data. Also, science is a contunually evolving process where claims are encouraged to be duplicated and challenged. Religion is fixed and claims (virgin birth, walk on water, etc) are discouraged from being challenged. Religion is faith-based, where as science is verifyable. Religion is based on things which can't be proved or disproved, same with metaphysics, belief in aliens, crop circles, Loch Ness monster, Philippine finger surgery, clairvoyance, tarot, etc.

If anyone asks me what I believe in, I tell 'em 'science and nature.' I actually like many of the stories wrapped around religion, particularly Hinduism. But I see them all as interesting myths, not as something I need to embrace and believe in literally. I love the story of the Buddha and Milarepa and others, and I believe those men actually lived, and that's enough.

I like the stories of Jesus and Muhammed, but especially enjoy the hypocracy of their mythicized lives compared to how their followers manifers - except, of course, when it causes harm to people and the planet - which it often does.

Understand the difference now Guesthouse?

The last time I was operated on I was more concerned with the doctors experience,knowledge and understanding of medical science and the procedure he was about to undertake, his religion or lack of played no part in my choice of having him operate on me.

Funny how apart from the wacked out sects like the Christian Scientists, religious people all seem to suddenly put their 'faith' in science and medicine when they are seriously ill instead of using their 'faith' and prayer to heal themselves or not doing anything at all because its all part of 'God's plan'. LOL.

[GuestHouse]

Looks to me like guesthouse is religious but just falls short of wanting to admit to himself he believes in fairytales. There is no virtue in having 'faith' by the way.

Not at all GH knows exactly where he stands on this issue - and if you read my responses you'll find I'm pretty liberal (in the true sense of the word) in my views.

Its a position from which I find it very easy to knock holes in shallow arguments on both sides of the debate - particularly the zealotry we see from some of the anti faith camp and the ridiculous argument that 'science' is some infallible truth.

Science, like faith, is a construct - and as we see it has its self righteous zealots.

Clearly though, many expats in Thailand have a problem with religion - but you'd have to have a frank and honest examination of why before you could draw any real conclusions from that.

[anon210]

I wonder if any of those present here have really learned to distinguish between ritualism and being religious. Thailand being the very codified society we know (even though everyone thinks nothing of breaking all codes on a daily basis), there is a huge emphasis on ritualism (saluting the idols, "spirit" houses, whatever), but a total void when it comes to real religious belief.

People bowing to statues or bringing in monks to bless whatever they have does not mean anything. Most of these actions are commended by the hope of a tangible reward in this existence (namely those "merits" - I like to compare them to "points" accumulated, where intent does not count), and hence are more akin to superstition than true religious belief. Considering the real superficial approach of most people to Buddhism, it looks as though ritualism is the only important thing here, with little to no understanding of the tenets of this philosophy (obviously, most people pass over the fact that Buddhism is a philosophy and not a religion).

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/ritualism

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/religious

[GuestHouse]

Funny how apart from the wacked out sects like the Christian Scientists, religious people all seem to suddenly put their 'faith' in science and medicine when they are seriously ill instead of using their 'faith' and prayer to heal themselves or not doing anything at all because its all part of 'God's plan'. LOL.

Again a shallow and facile argument.

Why on earth would being a person of faith preclude seeking qualified medical professionals or tried and tested drug technology?

The two are not mutually exclusive - but it might give you comfort in your own position if you invent such argument.

You are exposing your own misunderstanding of the issues on which you are expressing strongly held opinions criticising others

And or exposing the limits of your own intellect.

Neither of which helps your argument.

Edited October 9, 2013 by GuestHouse

[Morakot]

Science, like faith, is a construct - and as we see it has its self righteous zealots.

Amen to that!

[bocceball1]

When the missionaries came to Africa they had the Bible and we had the land. They said "let us Pray". We closed our eyes. When we opened them we had the Bible and they had the land.

Desmond Tutu

Edited October 9, 2013 by bocceball1

[Morakot]

There is no virtue in having 'faith' by the way.

That itself is a belief, a held faith system.

[bocceball1]

“No sight so sad as that of a naughty child," he began, "especially a naughty little girl. Do you know where the wicked go after death?"

"They go to hell," was my ready and orthodox answer.

"And what is hell? Can you tell me that?"

"A pit full of fire."

"And should you like to fall into that pit, and to be burning there for ever?"

"No, sir."

"What must you do to avoid it?"

I deliberated a moment: my answer, when it did come was objectionable: "I must keep in good health and not die.”
― Charlotte Brontë, Jane Eyre

[DMC1]

Looks to me like guesthouse is religious but just falls short of wanting to admit to himself he believes in fairytales. There is no virtue in having 'faith' by the way.

Not at all GH knows exactly where he stands on this issue - and if you read my responses you'll find I'm pretty liberal (in the true sense of the word) in my views.

Its a position from which I find it very easy to knock holes in shallow arguments on both sides of the debate - particularly the zealotry we see from some of the anti faith camp and the ridiculous argument that 'science' is some infallible truth.

Science, like faith, is a construct - and as we see it has its self righteous zealots.

Clearly though, many expats in Thailand have a problem with religion - but you'd have to have a frank and honest examination of why before you could draw any real conclusions from that.

GH you are not knocking holes in anything. All you seem to be doing is saying that whatever proof is before our eyes is not necessarily the answer. It is impossible to argue constructively with people like yourself.

[GuestHouse]

What proof is that.

As I have said, and nobody is able to refute.

Science, like religion, is a construct, a pure product of the human mind.

I further state that nobody lives their life based purely on science or purely on religion - its a lot more complex than that.

I don't see any evangelical people of faith in this debate, but there are clearly some evangelical atheist (if you'll excuse the twist in the term where it fits so well).

[bocceball1]

I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.

Mahatma Gandhi

[DMC1]

What proof is that.

As I have said, and nobody is able to refute.

Science, like religion, is a construct, a pure product of the human mind.

I further state that nobody lives their life based purely on science or purely on religion - its a lot more complex than that.

I don't see any evangelical people of faith in this debate, but there are clearly some evangelical atheist (if you'll excuse the twist in the term where it fits so well).

Awe common GH. What side of the fence are you on? Are you Agnostic?

[bocceball1]

“I am an agnostic; I do not pretend to know what many ignorant men are sure of.”
― Clarence Darrow

[Kananga]

Looks to me like guesthouse is religious but just falls short of wanting to admit to himself he believes in fairytales. There is no virtue in having 'faith' by the way.

Not at all GH knows exactly where he stands on this issue - and if you read my responses you'll find I'm pretty liberal (in the true sense of the word) in my views.

Its a position from which I find it very easy to knock holes in shallow arguments on both sides of the debate - particularly the zealotry we see from some of the anti faith camp and the ridiculous argument that 'science' is some infallible truth.

Science, like faith, is a construct - and as we see it has its self righteous zealots.

Clearly though, many expats in Thailand have a problem with religion - but you'd have to have a frank and honest examination of why before you could draw any real conclusions from that.

You find it easy to knock holes in both sides of the debate? How do you knock a hole in the side of a debate that says there is no more evidence to suggest that God exists than Santa Claus or the tooth fairy exists. Or a multi couloured unicorn called Sebastian, who flies round the world healing people with his magic horn. A side of the debate that says religions contradict each other and with the advances of science become more and more disproven. For example unlike what the bible says, the planet is not 6000 years old. Science can prove that. Advances have been made since the goat herders who made up the bible got their estimate wrong by four and a half billion years. Pretty sure science can prove that you can't build an ark out of wood and collect all the animals from all over the planet and let them live harmoniously with each other and then get dropped off at exactly the points on the planet they came from. While the rains mercilessly drowned all the women and children on the planet, because god was not happy with what they done after he gave them free will in the first place. I mean the whole thing is so ridiculously stupid it honestly defies belief that grown adults like yourself can believe anything these charlatans come out with. I reckon it was childhood indoctrination with you. I'm right aren't I? You're a life long believer in these mythical stories.

[Kananga]

What proof is that.

As I have said, and nobody is able to refute.

Science, like religion, is a construct, a pure product of the human mind.

I further state that nobody lives their life based purely on science or purely on religion - its a lot more complex than that.

I don't see any evangelical people of faith in this debate, but there are clearly some evangelical atheist (if you'll excuse the twist in the term where it fits so well).

Awe common GH. What side of the fence are you on? Are you Agnostic?

Nah, he believes in skydaddies but deep down I'm pretty sure he knows he backed the wrong horse. But finds it easier to say that the physical world with the evidence to support it is no more real than the religious fantasies that so many sheep have been indoctrinated by.

There has never been any shred of proof to suggest that any organised religion is based on fact. That is in stark contrast to science and evidence based understanding and belief.

[GuestHouse]

Nice rant Kanaga... and all over something you don't believe in.

Since you brought it up - can you please show me exactly where in the bible it states the earth is 6000 years old?

I'll not ask you to provide references to Santa Claus, Tooth Faries or multicoloured unicorns as I understand you sometimes throw mindless garbage into your arguments to pad them out a bit.

So, over to you Kananga - Bible quotation giving the age of the earth as 6000 years .... tick tock tick tock.... I'm waiting for evidence from Mr Rational.

[Forethat]

This discussion is now about the existence of God? And then the tooth ferry and Santa...

lol, seriously, even a below average iQ child begins to raise questions like "if the tooth ferry is small enough to fly through the key hole, how can she carry the tooth...?" at the age of six. It's usually about at that age Santa's existence begins to come under serious threat.

And now someone says "God exists!"...?

You're joking, right?

[GuestHouse]

Have you ever seen a number?

I mean you've perhaps seen "1" or "๑" or maybe even "一" but they are just marks on paper or symbols on a screen.

Have you ever seen a number?

[snake24]

This discussion is now about the existence of God? And then the tooth ferry and Santa...

lol, seriously, even a below average iQ child begins to raise questions like "if the tooth ferry is small enough to fly through the key hole, how can she carry the tooth...?" at the age of six. It's usually about at that age Santa's existence begins to come under serious threat.

And now someone says "God exists!"...?

You're joking, right?

You aren't serious right? Seriously try to put yourself into the position of a 6 yr old child that dares question her religious christian parents on the existence of God. Replicate this with a muslim child, thai child etc.

A thai child would probably get a hiding if he/she didn't want to worship buddha or whatever gods they have but they are lucky cos a muslim one would probably end up dead.

[Forethat]

This discussion is now about the existence of God? And then the tooth ferry and Santa...

lol, seriously, even a below average iQ child begins to raise questions like "if the tooth ferry is small enough to fly through the key hole, how can she carry the tooth...?" at the age of six. It's usually about at that age Santa's existence begins to come under serious threat.

And now someone says "God exists!"...?

You're joking, right?

You aren't serious right? Seriously try to put yourself into the position of a 6 yr old child that dares question her religious christian parents on the existence of God. Replicate this with a muslim child, thai child etc.

A thai child would probably get a hiding if he/she didn't want to worship buddha or whatever gods they have but they are lucky cos a muslim one would probably end up dead.

Well....I grew up with reasonable, logical and educated parents...I forgot that's a privilege...

Sorry. My Bad...

[Kananga]

Nice rant Kanaga... and all over something you don't believe in.

Since you brought it up - can you please show me exactly where in the bible it states the earth is 6000 years old?

I'll not ask you to provide references to Santa Claus, Tooth Faries or multicoloured unicorns as I understand you sometimes throw mindless garbage into your arguments to pad them out a bit.

So, over to you Kananga - Bible quotation giving the age of the earth as 6000 years .... tick tock tick tock.... I'm waiting for evidence from Mr Rational.

You add up the ages of the patriarchs from Adam to Noah and when they had their kids, and you get a date of approximately 6,000 years since Creation.

Adam/Creation to Noah/Flood - 1660 years

Noah to Abraham - 440 years

Abraham to Moses - 400 years

Moses to Jesus - 2500 years

Jesus to present - 2000 years

The story of Santa Claus isn't any less mindless garbage than judaism or christianity. Its a fairy tale told to impressionable minds in order that they conform to a set of social rules with the promise of reward for adhering to those rules and the fear of no reward if they don't confirm. Just like religion. Not going to heaven or not being reincarnated as something nice is just the same fear people are taught as not getting what you want on the 25th december.

Edited October 10, 2013 by Kananga

[Kananga]

Have you ever seen a number?

I mean you've perhaps seen "1" or "๑" or maybe even "一" but they are just marks on paper or symbols on a screen.

Have you ever seen a number?

Ok, you really seem to need this question answered? I'm pretty sure that by the age of 7 or 8 the majority of us were taught that the term 'number' represents an arithmetic value and not a physical object you can see. Similar to saying have you seen an inch. You've seen the word inch written and you have seen two points on a ruler but have you actually seen an inch, or have you seen time? You have seen a clock face move but have you actually seen time? No, but we know that with the laws of the universe we live in that as a dimension, time definitely exists.

Let me give you a very basic example in case you are still confused on why you can't physically see a 'value' such as a number. If your wife told you she had three eyes instead of two you would call her a stupid cretin because you know without a shadow of a doubt that the NUMBER of eyes she has is in fact two. There would be absolutely no doubt in your mind that the NUMBER of eyes she has is two because you can see them and therefore are conscious of the existence of her eyes and the NUMBER of eyes she has based on counting their numerical value.

[GuestHouse]

Have you ever seen a number?

I mean you've perhaps seen "1" or "๑" or maybe even "一" but they are just marks on paper or symbols on a screen.

Have you ever seen a number?

Ok, you really seem to need this question answered? I'm pretty sure that by the age of 7 or 8 the majority of us were taught that the term 'number' represents an arithmetic value and not a physical object you can see.

Actually no.

You learned to accept a construct - you learned a belief. You know you can't see numbers but you believe they exists.

Now go spend some time reading up on reality and perception.

Its not as clear cut as 'something you can see exists'.

[GuestHouse]

Nice rant Kanaga... and all over something you don't believe in.

Since you brought it up - can you please show me exactly where in the bible it states the earth is 6000 years old?

I'll not ask you to provide references to Santa Claus, Tooth Faries or multicoloured unicorns as I understand you sometimes throw mindless garbage into your arguments to pad them out a bit.

So, over to you Kananga - Bible quotation giving the age of the earth as 6000 years .... tick tock tick tock.... I'm waiting for evidence from Mr Rational.

You add up the ages of the patriarchs from Adam to Noah and when they had their kids, and you get a date of approximately 6,000 years since Creation.

Adam/Creation to Noah/Flood - 1660 years

Noah to Abraham - 440 years

Abraham to Moses - 400 years

Moses to Jesus - 2500 years

Jesus to present - 2000 years

The story of Santa Claus isn't any less mindless garbage than judaism or christianity. Its a fairy tale told to impressionable minds in order that they conform to a set of social rules with the promise of reward for adhering to those rules and the fear of no reward if they don't confirm. Just like religion. Not going to heaven or not being reincarnated as something nice is just the same fear people are taught as not getting what you want on the 25th december.

I see so the evidence you give us, is you added up the some assumed dates, only one of which you can be sure of and from that you conclude the bible states the age of the earth is 6000 years a number which does not add up to the same number given by geologists so the bible has given the wrong number of years.

Well, it is would have given the wrong number of years - except it did not give any number of years - you made a calculation based on unfounded assumptions - one of which is a continuing date line the other is there's no missing periods.

I had hoped for something better, but I knew it was a vain hope.

Of course there are people who believe in Biblical inerrancy, they are those very people detractors of faith point to and say 'look at what nutters religion makes of people' - the comment scathing as it is perhaps holds some truth. They are almost certainly natters, but you'd have to make a careful study of each individual before pronouncing it was religion that made them that way.

Which then raises the question, what about people who hold anti religious views, who rant and rave about something they don't believe in and resort to Biblical Inerrancy to prove their points of view?

Edited October 10, 2013 by GuestHouse

[toybits]

I like the reply of the Dalai Lama when he was jokingly asked the question of what he thought was the best religion. His reply was something like this: "The best religion is THAT religion that makes you a BETTER person." SWEET!

[Kananga]

Nice rant Kanaga... and all over something you don't believe in.

Since you brought it up - can you please show me exactly where in the bible it states the earth is 6000 years old?

I'll not ask you to provide references to Santa Claus, Tooth Faries or multicoloured unicorns as I understand you sometimes throw mindless garbage into your arguments to pad them out a bit.

So, over to you Kananga - Bible quotation giving the age of the earth as 6000 years .... tick tock tick tock.... I'm waiting for evidence from Mr Rational.

You add up the ages of the patriarchs from Adam to Noah and when they had their kids, and you get a date of approximately 6,000 years since Creation.

Adam/Creation to Noah/Flood - 1660 years

Noah to Abraham - 440 years

Abraham to Moses - 400 years

Moses to Jesus - 2500 years

Jesus to present - 2000 years

The story of Santa Claus isn't any less mindless garbage than judaism or christianity. Its a fairy tale told to impressionable minds in order that they conform to a set of social rules with the promise of reward for adhering to those rules and the fear of no reward if they don't confirm. Just like religion. Not going to heaven or not being reincarnated as something nice is just the same fear people are taught as not getting what you want on the 25th december.

I see so the evidence you give us, is you added up the some assumed dates, only one of which you can be sure of and from that you conclude the bible states the age of the earth is 6000 years a number which does not add up to the same number given by geologists so the bible has given the wrong number of years.

Well, it is would have given the wrong number of years - except it did not give any number of years - you made a calculation based on unfounded assumptions - one of which is a continuing date line the other is there's no missing periods.

I had hoped for something better, but I knew it was a vain hope.

You hoped for something better but it was a vain hope? Dear oh dear, you need to cut back on the drama classes.

What is evident however is that the information in the bible is still incorrect and has been disproven by science. I'm sure when you turned to religion you hoped for something better, but we both know that it was a vain hope. LOL.