What should replace religion?

Religion will adapt as science continues to make discoveries, and will likely begin to have a more "open source" and less dogmatic base, with much more focus on raw philosophical and metaphysical concepts to pick up where scientism leaves off. I imagine religions and spiritual paths akin to, say, Wicca, Gnosticism, Thelema, the New Age movement, Paganism, etc., will begin to thrive as people seek less rigid systems of spiritual practice.

Although it should be remembered that this isn't the first time that religion began to lose it's place in society. I can't give a history lesson off the top of my head, but I think some good examples would be the Age of Enlightenment and the Romantic era.

kanoguti said:

It was "divinely inspired" by the Holy Spirit, according to the Catholic Church that is. So it (allegedly) can't be wrong.

Click to expand...

Allegedly being the key word here.

gimmepie said:

God didn't write the bible... even the bible admits this. I don't know about you but I don't believe every random group of people who claim to speak to God.

Click to expand...

You're right man wrote it, under the divine inspiration and guidance of the Holy Spirit. If you want to be a biased atheist God hating liberal mod on an agenda be my guest, but don't involve me. I don't mind you asking real genuine questions out of curiosity but don't ever address me if you're going to mock my God because I'm no longer going to reply, I don't cast my pearls before swine.

Kristaok said:

You're right man wrote it, under the divine inspiration and guidance of the Holy Spirit. If you want to be a biased atheist God hating liberal mod on an agenda be my guest, but don't involve me. I don't mind you asking real genuine questions out of curiosity but don't ever address me if you're going to mock my God because I'm no longer going to reply, I don't cast my pearls before swine.

Click to expand...

I believe the intention was genuine skepticism of the authors and not mockery of God. The problem isn't so much the validity of direct divine influence, but rather the validity of the natural human claiming they are under the influence of the Holy Spirit; anyone could say that regardless of whether or not it's true. The faith then shifts away from any sort of divine body and on to humans, who are faulty even by biblical standards.

If one were to have a personal encounter with the Holy Spirit, they could certainly base some legitimate faith off of that, but to rely on indirect communication with said Holy Spirit would result in an unstable basis for any sort of belief. There is no way to verify the Bible's accuracy, particularly when it is taken 100% literally, so perhaps it should be interpreted differently.

Forgive me if I'm projecting a bit here.

Elthemor said:

I believe the intention was genuine skepticism of the authors and not mockery of God. The problem isn't so much the validity of direct divine influence, but rather the validity of the natural human claiming they are under the influence of the Holy Spirit; anyone could say that regardless of whether or not it's true. The faith then shifts away from any sort of divine body and on to humans, who are faulty even by biblical standards.

If one were to have a personal encounter with the Holy Spirit, they could certainly base some legitimate faith off of that, but to rely on indirect communication with said Holy Spirit would result in an unstable basis for any sort of belief. There is no way to verify the Bible's accuracy, particularly when it is taken 100% literally, so perhaps it should be interpreted differently.

Forgive me if I'm projecting a bit here.

Click to expand...

I don't owe anyone any further explanations for why I'm a Christian. I've seen WAY too much to KNOW without a shadow of a doubt my God is VERY real.

Kristaok said:

You're right man wrote it, under the divine inspiration and guidance of the Holy Spirit. If you want to be a biased atheist God hating liberal mod on an agenda be my guest, but don't involve me. I don't mind you asking real genuine questions out of curiosity but don't ever address me if you're going to mock my God because I'm no longer going to reply, I don't cast my pearls before swine.

Click to expand...

Okay firstly, I'm not even an atheist. I thought I made it fairly clear earlier but I'm agnostic. Secondly, I'm not biased I am making legitimate points that you are quite literally refusing to consider - that would be bias. I definitely haven't mocked your God or any other.

I'm just saying, I find it a lot more believable that some guys made up some stories to push their morality than that God spoke to them and told them all these things. People do the former every day, I've never met nor even heard of a person who has actually spoken to God. Certainly none that could prove it.

Open-mindedness is going to help your cause a lot more than closing yourself off to any other perspective, that's why people like the current pope a hell of a lot more than the last one.

I'm not open minded at all, the Bible is my one and only guide sorry.
I talk to God all the time, but I don't really care who believes that or who doesn't.

^ And this here is why many people choose not to believe in God, and ways that make us as Christians look bad.

As a brother in Jesus Christ, I feel committed to spread the gospel, but not in a way that spews hatred or in a closed-minded manner, either.

?Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you." - Matthew 7:1-2

Tsutarja said:

^ And this here is why many people choose not to believe in God, and ways that make us as Christians look bad.

As a brother in Jesus Christ, I feel committed to spread the gospel, but not in a way that spews hatred or in a closed-minded manner, either.

?Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you." - Matthew 7:1-2

Click to expand...

Not to be a super-dick but believing in God is inherently close-minded. You and Kristaok, intellectually, are essentially on the same level.

kanoguti said:

Not to be a super-dick but believing in God is inherently close-minded. You and Kristaok, intellectually, are essentially on the same level.

Click to expand...

idk, I'd think that one being open-minded about it and one being closed-minded about it would put them on a different level at least

Tsutarja said:

^ And this here is why many people choose not to believe in God, and ways that make us as Christians look bad.

As a brother in Jesus Christ, I feel committed to spread the gospel, but not in a way that spews hatred or in a closed-minded manner, either.

?Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you." - Matthew 7:1-2

Click to expand...

The bible also says you'll know them by their fruit too.

kanoguti said:

Not to be a super-dick but believing in God is inherently close-minded. You and Kristaok, intellectually, are essentially on the same level.

Click to expand...

I really could careless what you think...

BadSheep said:

Eventually as science replaces religion as an explanation for "why," and religion grows increasingly irrelevant, a void will be left. Science may be able to explain the "why," but it does not provide for a moral code.

Do we need to develop a new moral code? What would this moral code be? I would rather not get bogged down in objective vs. subjective morality, so this final question will allow us to circumvent that for this discussion: What morals should society agree to (doesnt matter if morality is subjective or not)? How will these morals be enforced (if at all)?

Click to expand...

I think that elements of our culture have already filled that gap for non-religious people. As I reflect on my childhood and observe my younger siblings, I can say that cartoons and movies provided moral examples from which we learned.

There are both the simple good character versus evil character stories - which are useful for establishing a baseline of right and wrong ways of being and acting - and there are characters that have elements of both good and evil, which prompt us investigate our own morals, to question what is morally justifiable and what is not.

Morality seems to be a fundamental dimension of the human being. If that is indeed the case, it is inevitable that we would naturally replace that cultural molding process, even without having made a plan to do so. A societal example, I think, is the playing of sports and FPS video games, which fills the societal gap that was left when our species stopped hunting.

Elthemor said:

I imagine religions and spiritual paths akin to, say, Wicca, Gnosticism, Thelema, the New Age movement, Paganism, etc., will begin to thrive as people seek less rigid systems of spiritual practice.

Click to expand...

I've been thinking along similar lines. Seems to me that our ancestors, who spent all of their time undistracted from nature, may very well have been tuned in to reality in a way that we today are not. We have the same capacities, yes, but we aren't drawing from the deeply-dug well of the old traditions. The ancient injunctions have survived though, and I would not be surprised to see more and more people begin to tread that territory.

The idea that religion and science cannot coexist is disproven by the many, many examples of religious societies that also made great scientific strides. To name a few: Ptolemaic Egypt discovering that the world was round, The Holy Roman Empire of Rudolf II sponsoring scientists such as Copernicus, Kepler, and Tycho de Brahe, the Romans making great strides in infrastructure, the Arab Caliphates advancing mathematics, and Song China almost industrializing before the Mongols came. All of these show that science and religion can absolutely coexist, one for objective truths and one for spiritualism.

I don't think anything will ever replace religion, not exactly. Just like anything else in this world, it evolves over time. But have our morals really evolved over time, or are they just like echoes of our basic instincts?

If it's not just about survival, it's about living life more comfortably, and that takes resources. There only seems to be so many resources in certain areas, so it's either trade peacefully, or steal from other's. When two group's survival instincts collide, who has the moral high ground in taking those resources?

Religion seems to teach these basic principles about survival through peace, but science helps provide the tools to make it happen. They seem to go hand in hand just fine, it just takes time for them both, and humanity, to evolve into a more peaceful state. :D

Coming from someone that believes in energy and the universe, (I also believe in a higher entity, AND I believe that Jesus was a real man but I don't believe in the bible or follow any "Christian" religion), so as much as I hate the idea of religion (for many reasons) it's something that will never be replaced. You can't force an ideology onto someone else and religion has been a practice for many for quite some time now, why replace it now? Also science will never be able to prove such a thing, at least not in our lifetime if ever. Just like science will never prove what consciousness is and what causes placebo effect. There's many things that don't make sense in this world, but it's just the way it is. As I said I hate religion, I hate how it separates man, causes conflicts, and even causes war, but you can't just obliterate religion, you can't take something away from cultures and tribes, and you can't replace religion just like you can't use science or the bible for evidence of an entity because both don't have "concrete evidence" on the topic. Whether one believes in "God" or not is an belief, you can't just change that and be like, "Hey, religion no longer exists, we replaced it with this *inserts bullshit* that won't work anyways and piss an enormous amount of the population off, but why? I mean yeah, religion is a problem and in this current age we have it twisted, but it shall remain. We have enough problems already. Only way to fix the issues (including religion and many others) is to unite as one and accept anothers opinion; but we all can agree that will NEVER happen, humanity is too adamant and narcissistic . Not that it matters at this point anyways because we're just going to keep igniting the flame until it's war over anything and everything. Seriously, what's going on is idiocy. LOL

But really, if humanity can just start respecting one others beliefs and opinions it would make everything so much easier. Doesn't require removing religion, (religion is also cultural) and people need to accept that the BIBLE (which for me is "BASIC. INSTRUCTIONS. BEFORE. LEAVING. EARTH, and WRITTEN BY MAN) and SCIENCE CANNOT and WILL NOT prove the existence of an higher entity. There is nothing that can change that so people need to just let go. Shit don't make sense, yeah that's obvious but I feel we are here to hit our higher intellect within ourselves, and that requires the "opening of the mind". Once you open your mind and accept that things are the way they are and everybody is wired differently with mutual likes and beliefs, then you can explore so much more knowledge and grow wiser as a person or as a whole race. If everyone discusses topics in an open mind, you may learn something you didn't know from someone that has the opposite belief as you. It's what I call being in tune with the universe, it also makes the most sense to me.

I also don't condone to attacking others beliefs, and I avoid those that do that like the plague, they're like walking toxic to me. I get it, "I'll burn in hell for eternity" thought right? I mean, so I guess these people that grew up in different cultures are going to hell too right? Seems a little too sinister for something a loving "God" would do. So I believe if you accept religion for as it is and accept that people are they way they are and just be a good person, then if this magical man in the sky does happen to actually exist then when we reach the pearly gates we would be saved. Seriously, the dude would have to be twisted to descend someone with a good heart and that was a good person to hell because he didn't worship him. But basically what I'm saying is, since I do believe in a God (I mean, everything we see came from something) that would mean that IF a magical man in the sky exists and is God then, that is the God I believe in.
But in all honestly, this topic kind of makes me crack up a little.

I am a militant atheist and a member of the satanic temple.

I believe the world would be better off without gods and religions, especially if they had never existed. The world would be a much better place without it. People would hate each other for legitimate reasons, like for being assholes.

gimmepie said:

Let's just pick three examples shall we?

1. There is literally not enough water on the Earth to totally flood the entire planet, even if all the ice on the planet was melted.

2. The Earth has been around longer than the bible says.

3. The fossil record/simple physics completely disprove the biblical creation story.

I don't really care if you believe in god or not, but applying common sense never hurt anyone.

Click to expand...

1. God created the universe. He could easily make more water or manipulate the water that is already on it.

2. The Bible doesn't give the Earth's specific birthday.

3. The remains of Adam and Eve haven't been found so they wouldn't be part of the fossil record. Since they've probably become dust by now due to countless years of decay I doubt they ever will be.

Physics is an ever-changing study subject to the opinions and theories of any physicist, both professional and technical. To say physics completely disapproves the Biblical creation story is to say that all physicists concur with the disapproval. Therefore, your statement is false.

Kai Ai said:

1. God created the universe. He could easily make more water or manipulate the water that is already on it.

Click to expand...

Fair enough. Assuming there is a god that created the universe, that works.

2. The Bible doesn't give the Earth's specific birthday.

Click to expand...

No but you can extrapolate its apparent age from the information inside. According to the bible, the Earth is about 6000 years old. According to facts, it's a about 4.5 billion years old.

https://answersingenesis.org/age-of-the-earth/how-old-is-the-earth/

3. The remains of Adam and Eve haven't been found so they wouldn't be part of the fossil record. Since they've probably become dust by now due to countless years of decay I doubt they ever will be.

Click to expand...

Adam and Eve were supposedly fully developed human beings, we've discovered ancestors we have evolved from that were not fully hominid. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australopithecus

Physics is an ever-changing study subject to the opinions and theories of any physicist, both professional and technical. To say physics completely disapproves the Biblical creation story is to say that all physicists concur with the disapproval. Therefore, your statement is false.

Click to expand...

Physics is ever changing sure, but that doesn't change the fact that according to our current understanding, the creation story has been disproved. I'll happily change my tune if something saying otherwise comes up.

gimmepie said:

No but you can extrapolate its apparent age from the information inside. According to the bible, the Earth is about 6000 years old. According to facts, it's a about 4.5 billion years old.

https://answersingenesis.org/age-of-the-earth/how-old-is-the-earth/

Click to expand...

You might want to pick a more reliable source when critiquing the Bible such as the Bible itself. The website provided didn't do enough research. For starters it treats time like we do today. If a day to the Lord is like a thousand years than a year could be like 365,250 years. Multiply that by the 930 years Adam lived and you'll have about 339,682,500 years from his life alone. That's far more than 6,000 years.

gimmepie said:

Adam and Eve were supposedly fully developed human beings, we've discovered ancestors we have evolved from that were not fully hominid. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australopithecus

Click to expand...

They were but humans still evolved over time. Look at all the people on our planet. You'll find humans with a variety of traits that help them adapt to the various environments they are in.

Australopithecus is closely related to humans in some ways but the similarities end there and the former is now extinct. So far there is no direct link between australopithecus afarensis and homo sapiens.

gimmepie said:

Physics is ever changing sure, but that doesn't change the fact that according to our current understanding, the creation story has been disproved. I'll happily change my tune if something saying otherwise comes up.

Click to expand...

Here you go! It's a digital copy of the Book of Genesis. This particular website provides readers with access to most if not all versions of the Bible so feel free to compare them.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+1&version=NIV

If you need more proof I'd advise asking God for it with a sincere prayer. Your other option is going on an archeological expedition or inventing a time machine.

Kai Ai said:

If you need more proof I'd advise asking God for it with a sincere prayer. Your other option is going on an archeological expedition or inventing a time machine.

Click to expand...

He's not responding. Do you think I offended him?

I'm not saying that there's no God, I don't know and I don't think anyone ever will. I don't think we need to replace religion either. We do however need to stop ignoring facts and update our beliefs. For example, the number you gave still isn't long enough. The bible also describes the entire universe being created in seven days (focusing on the Earth since we didn't know there was a rest of the universe when it was written... weird how God didn't mention that to prophets)... and yet the universe is a solid 10 or so billion years older than the Earth.