The bible was made   300 yrs after He died plenty of time for chines whispers I think .......It is a pollie book mad to keep order in large groups.. That is all it is about .........The real thing is billion's & billion's of years of evolution............Look and you will see what I mean............

There's more to it than that. You can't understand the New Testament without understanding the particular sect of Jews who rebelled and split off from the dominant Jewish thought at the time. Moreover, it can't be understood without taking into account the rebellion against Roman military virtues. Additionally, it also can't be understood without understanding Platonism.

John Smith wrote on Sep 30^th, 2012 at 7:12pm:


The "morals" in the bible are debatable. I wouldn't teach any kid morals from that violent and disgusting book. Theres giving daughters to strangers @the door and god killing everyone on earth just to mention a lil bit.

SOB

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Oct 1^st, 2012 at 10:44am:


Yeah right. So basically you need some kind of degree to understand it so you should "take it on faith". Poppycock.

SOB

muso wrote on Oct 7^th, 2012 at 7:13pm:


Intelligence? Negative maybe . . . .

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 8^th, 2012 at 6:34am:


Well, relligiosity is clearly reflected in brain development, and it's very similar  to other kinds of intelligence, such as cognitive ability, social intelligence and even motor ability/ athletic ability/dexterity. IN a sense, all three involve the develpment of neural pathways or nerve cell communications.  In a physiological sense, religious development is similar to other cognitive development in that it too involves the development of neural pathways. (Centred on the parietal lobe according to recent research.)

My only point is that anything where you use the brain, such as religion, music, mathematics, reading literature, interesting experiences etc will have the effect of stimulating new neural pathways within the brain. Purely in cognitive terms, religion is one of many forms of intelligence. (That's not the same as saying lack of religion= lack of intelligence. )

I'm making a point about the nature of intelligence in cognitive terms.  Anything that exercises and stimulates the brain can improve intelligence in one sense of the word, and I think that intelligence has  two components, namely intrinsic or natural intelligence plus what I'd term enhanced intelligence which we gain by exercising the brain.

Does the application of  knowledge and ability (both) qualify as facets of intelligence? - or is it related more to reasoning ability? I'd say that they are complimentary.

If that reasoning or knowledge were to be applied to (say) 18th century medicinal theory and practice, most of which has been shown to be severely flawed according to today's knowledge, I'd argue that it's still intelligence.

In the same way, regardless of your attitudes to religion, it still qualifies as a kind of intelligence (in a cognitive sense).

How do you define religion? How do you define intelligence? - or even, How do theists (or anybody else) define god? These questions are all subject to interpretation.

dickens-cyder wrote on Sep 30^th, 2012 at 7:10pm:



without understanding the religion that shaped a particular society - in our case, christianity and its tributaries like judaism or greek philosophy - it is not possible to have a real understanding of the society itself, only a superficial one, like a tourist.
i don't mean you have to have faith and believe in god and jesus but hat understanding christianity is central to understanding secular western societies and cultures.

same with india and hinduism, islam and arab and other muslim societies, shintoism and japan, aboriginal religions and societies and so on.

Bertram wrote on Oct 8^th, 2012 at 9:14pm:


interesting comment.
from you pov, would you see it (your statement) more as an anthropological or sociological perspective?