Is Religion Just Making Stuff Up?

[Jeremiahcp]

One of my most central criticisms of Religion is that people simply don't have the knowledge it must suppose to support it claims. In other-words it seems like a bunch of people just making stuff up. So is religion just making stuff up?

*** Feel free to make arguments for subjective centered knowledge, but know that I reject all claims of "spiritual enlightenment" or the like. I find people who assume they have some type special transcend insight egotistical and smug.

 

[LuisDantas]

It is a bit myopic to center on whether there is support for the claims. Religion is more like a language than a thesis.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

One of my most central criticisms of Religion is that people simply don't have the knowledge it must suppose to support it claims. In other-words it seems like a bunch of people just making stuff up. So is religion just making stuff up?

*** Feel free to make arguments for subjective centered knowledge, but know that I reject all claims of "spiritual enlightenment" or the like. I find people who assume they have some type special transcend insight egotistical and smug.

No. It isnt made up. Another way to understand "spirituality" without using the lingo is study psychology and culture. The feelings of spiritual enlightenment, if you want to dumb it down, is like having a high or in life long infactuation with life and gratitude thereof. Its shaped by culture, defined by practice and/or someone elses enlightenment, and pretty much a load of things.

Religions based on traditions arent made up. Religions that are usually idividualized practice by what (or some people who) draws us are. But I wouldnt phrase it that way, personally.

Its not hard to feel spirituality. Its do you think you have to attribute youe feelings to a specific religion for it to be real?

 

[HonestJoe]

I’d say religion is the very opposite of making things up since it tends to rely on followers accepting pre-defined beliefs and world views on faith. Those fundamental beliefs generally aren’t allowed to be changed, certainly not at the whim of random individuals.

How those initial beliefs first came about, typically hundreds or thousands of years ago could be a different matter but I suspect that more often than not the originators truly believed they had some kind of revelation rather than knowingly making stuff up for some reason.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

It is a bit myopic to center on whether there is support for the claims. Religion is more like a language than a thesis.

It is a bit myopic to suggest it more akin to a language. w00t we accomplished nothing!

 

[Twilight Hue]

One of my most central criticisms of Religion is that people simply don't have the knowledge it must suppose to support it claims. In other-words it seems like a bunch of people just making stuff up. So is religion just making stuff up?

*** Feel free to make arguments for subjective centered knowledge, but know that I reject all claims of "spiritual enlightenment" or the like. I find people who assume they have some type special transcend insight egotistical and smug.

Depends on how a religion goes about it.

If you read a religious themed book and people believe what the book says without any tangability behind it, then it's obvious it's made up and people go about pretending something is there when it's clearly not the case.


On the other hand, if a religion reflects what's actually going on, without embellishment and fabrication involved in regards to actual surroundings and the environment, it's less likely to be made up provided things are not played out to be more than it really is.

 

[Quintessence]

It's only "just making stuff up" if one is foolish enough to dismiss all storytelling as "just making stuff up." Implying storytelling is somehow a purely whimsical and purposeless activity is quite frankly beyond foolish.

 

[SabahTheLoner]

One of my most central criticisms of Religion is that people simply don't have the knowledge it must suppose to support it claims. In other-words it seems like a bunch of people just making stuff up. So is religion just making stuff up?

*** Feel free to make arguments for subjective centered knowledge, but know that I reject all claims of "spiritual enlightenment" or the like. I find people who assume they have some type special transcend insight egotistical and smug.

Some religions were built on observations. The explanations could be fabricated, but people believe them bacause they explain what is or was hard to explain otherwise.

 

[icehorse]

In these RF debates it seems to me that apologists often water down or bend their definition of religion to make it easier to defend. IMO, the very premise of most religion is to pretend to know what you don't know, e.g. that there is a god, that you know the nature of god, and you know what happens after death.

 

[Quintessence]

Some religions were built on observations.

I would argue they all are built on observations. Narratives don't emerge out of a vacuum. They're based on something - at a minimum, they are all based on the experience of being human and relating to the world around us. The narratives help inform us about what it means to be human and what our relationships are with things around us. Taking the stories literally often isn't the point.

 

[LuisDantas]

It is a bit myopic to suggest it more akin to a language. w00t we accomplished nothing!

Why do you think so?

 

[LuisDantas]

In these RF debates it seems to me that apologists often water down or bend their definition of religion to make it easier to defend. IMO, the very premise of most religion is to pretend to know what you don't know, e.g. that there is a god, that you know the nature of god, and you know what happens after death.

Not under my watch, no it isn't...

I don't think either of those three items is of religious significance. Sure, there are those who disagree. I find that odd.

 

[icehorse]

Not under my watch, no it isn't...

One example of this watering down and bending, IMO, is to conflate religion with spirituality. This is similar to claims that religion has something useful to add to the conversation concerning morality. Both of these ideas, spirituality and morality, can be pursued (and far more productively I might add), without any need of religion.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

It's only "just making stuff up" if one is foolish enough to dismiss all storytelling as "just making stuff up." Implying storytelling is somehow a purely whimsical and purposeless activity is quite frankly beyond foolish.

Or perhaps, just maybe, there is a small chance, that I don't see the two as equivalent.

 

[SabahTheLoner]

I would argue they all are built on observations. Narratives don't emerge out of a vacuum. They're based on something - at a minimum, they are all based on the experience of being human and relating to the world around us. The narratives help inform us about what it means to be human and what our relationships are with things around us. Taking the stories literally often isn't the point.

That is a good point. I do feel as if one too many people take the tales of their scriptures far too literally, however if there wasn't an observation of some sort, the tale would never have been told, even if the entire thing was a fabrication based off a more realistic experience. My mind shifted to more of a blunt explanation of the workings of the world and universe when I typed "observations", so perhaps I was using the term too broadly and not talking religious stories into account.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

Read the forums, I see it all over the place. People making claims about what gods there are, how they think, what they want, making claims about the afterlife, going on about what heaven is, what hell is, making claims about creation, "God's" purpose for life, and just a wide variety of various stuff. A good chunk of religion is just people making stuff up. You can pretend that is not part of it all you want, but the proof is in these forums.

 

[icehorse]

Not under my watch, no it isn't...

I don't think either of those three items is of religious significance. Sure, there are those who disagree. I find that odd.

If claims about god and the afterlife aren't central, what ideas are?

 

[LuisDantas]

One example of this watering down and bending, IMO, is to conflate religion with spirituality.

So there is an actual difference? What would it be?

This is similar to claims that religion has something useful to add to the conversation concerning morality.

It is supposed to. It is, after all, one of its main subject matters. Whether it succeeds is a more difficult question and should probably be answered in more localized scopes.

Both of these ideas, spirituality and morality, can be pursued (and far more productively I might add), without any need of religion.

They can, but that does not really tell us anything about religion other than the lack of such a monopoly , now does it?

 

[LuisDantas]

If claims about god and the afterlife aren't central, what ideas are?

Morality (mainly moral values); purpose and goals; personal responsibility and duty towards external environments (most often focusing on the family and nearby society).

 

[Quintessence]

One example of this watering down and bending, IMO, is to conflate religion with spirituality.

Interesting you bring that up, because divorcing the meanings of these two is a relatively recent phenomena in Western culture. I don't agree with the reasoning behind that divorce, in no small part because the reasoning applies very poorly to religions outside of Western (aka, Abrahamic monotheist) ones. I just plain don't use the term "spirituality." It's all religion to me, and that's how it was traditionally understood anyway. It's not "watering down" or "bending," and I see little benefit to describing disagreements about word usage in such judgmental terms.