Is Having a Religion a Sin To Rationalists??

[Uberpod]

Short answer: Yes.

Of course rationalists would not word the belief in this fashion as they reject the notion of sin. Having a religion at this point in history is at best a major mistake, insult, or/and faux pas. Logic and empiricism bear fruit, faith only caters to the lower reptilian regions of our brains and adds nothing. I will say more, but I would rather listen for now.


re·li·gion /rəˈlijən/ noun

the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Not everyone is cut out to be a rationalist. I don't begrudge fantasy-prone people their magical spells, chants, and talismans.

 

[Goblin]

no.
it is rational to have a religion. humans desire and effectively have an emotional need for inclusiveness, ritual routine, and a belief in something bigger than them selves

 

[Desert Snake]

define 'religion'.

 

[Vinayaka]

What about religions that have no notion of sin? Is there room for us at the inn?

 

[Goblin]

after looking it up;
A religion is an organized collection of beliefs, cultural systems, and world views that relate humanity to an order of existence. Many religions have narratives, symbols, and sacred histories that are intended to explain the meaning of life and/or to explain the origin of life or the Universe.

 

[Goblin]

everyone except a no ***** sorcerer would have some sort of idea of "sin"

they are the no-no's we are taught from birth, even rationalists would equate things like stealing & murder as a "sin" although they wouldnt call it sin.

it takes alot of mental reprogramming to be really sinless

 

[Quintessence]

I suppose it's a sin if said "rationalist" has a poor understanding of religion and what it means to be rational...

 

[Monk Of Reason]

Short answer: Yes.

Of course rationalists would not word the belief in this fashion as they reject the notion of sin. Having a religion at this point in history is at best a major mistake, insult, or/and faux pas. Logic and empiricism bear fruit, faith only caters to the lower reptilian regions of our brains and adds nothing. I will say more, but I would rather listen for now.

You call them rationalists. Would someone who is not a rationalist be irrational by definition?

 

[Uberpod]

This is my definition of religion:

re·li·gion /rəˈlijən/ noun

the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.

 

[Uberpod]

no.
it is rational to have a religion. humans desire and effectively have an emotional need for inclusiveness, ritual routine, and a belief in something bigger than them selves

I believe this things are fine absent a supernatural component.

 

[Uberpod]

You call them rationalists. Would someone who is not a rationalist be irrational by definition?

I think so, Just as those people absent a god belief are atheists.

 

[George-ananda]

Short answer: Yes.

Of course rationalists would not word the belief in this fashion as they reject the notion of sin. Having a religion at this point in history is at best a major mistake, insult, or/and faux pas. Logic and empiricism bear fruit, faith only caters to the lower reptilian regions of our brains and adds nothing. I will say more, but I would rather listen for now.


re·li·gion /rəˈlijən/ noun

the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.

What would a rationalist think of someone who has religious beliefs based on personal experiences? You might say a rationalist would think the person is delusional. But how could a rationalist KNOW that?

It would be rational to me for the experiencer to follow his experience. It would not be rational to think these things are impossible because some rationalists say they're impossible.

Hence, I'm a rationalist and am fine with religion.

 

[LuisDantas]

Short answer: Yes.

Of course rationalists would not word the belief in this fashion as they reject the notion of sin. Having a religion at this point in history is at best a major mistake, insult, or/and faux pas. Logic and empiricism bear fruit, faith only caters to the lower reptilian regions of our brains and adds nothing. I will say more, but I would rather listen for now.


re·li·gion /rəˈlijən/ noun

the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.

By such a narrow definition, I'm not sure anyone should have a religion. Which I guess is your point?

 

[Riverwolf]

Define "rationalist."

 

[Uberpod]

What would a rationalist think of someone who has religious beliefs based on personal experiences? You might say a rationalist would think the person is delusional. But how could a rationalist KNOW that?

Personal experiences are not rational or truthful if they can be better explained by altered states of consciousness or biased perceptional illusions etc.

It would be rational to me for the experiencer to follow his experience. It would not be rational to think these things are impossible because some rationalists say they're impossible.

Hence, I'm a rationalist and am fine with religion.

It most certainly depends on what kinds of personal experience are being considered as evidence.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

What would a rationalist think of someone who has religious beliefs based on personal experiences? You might say a rationalist would think the person is delusional. But how could a rationalist KNOW that?

It would be rational to me for the experiencer to follow his experience. It would not be rational to think these things are impossible because some rationalists say they're impossible.

Hence, I'm a rationalist and am fine with religion.

Exactly. Materialists need to stop co-opting words to make themselves sound intelligent and scientific.

 

[Uberpod]

By such a narrow definition, I'm not sure anyone should have a religion. Which I guess is your point?

The Oxford English Dictionary uses this definition as its main entry. I think it is the most reasonable level of specificity. Other definitions take on a tinge of metaphor, as in any passionate beliefs. And. that is not to what I refer. I advocate passionate beliefs that are based on evidence and logic.

 

[Uberpod]

Define "rationalist."

One who holds that the belief or theory that opinions and actions should be based on reason and knowledge rather than on religious belief or emotional response.

 

[George-ananda]

Personal experiences are not rational or truthful if they can be better explained by altered states of consciousness or biased perceptional illusions etc.

What if the person feels certain of the experience and feels the materialists are just trying to 'explain away' something the materialists don't really understand.

It is still rational to believe, from experience, that there are real things a materialist does not understand.