I'm going be starting a religion documentary soon for my senior thesis in film school.

I'd like to see any and all viewpoints for why people do or do not believe in god, or anything remotely related to religious belief. I need a handful of ideas to flesh this out a little more than what I've got planned.

I know it's inevitable that this thread will turn into someone bickering with Jon`C for 12 pages about the same thing, but I would still like to be able to pull a few ideas out of Massassi.

Do you have MSN or AIM? I'd love to talk, but I don't want to do it here.

I have an MSN account, but it doesn't work anymore.

I need to sign up for AIM... and I'll probably do it soon.

All gods, religions, and religious customs are man-made. I don't think there's anything else that really needs to be said.

NOW:

AIM: xone009
MSN: JediKirby007@hotmail.com

This is precisely the kind of feedback I want to avoid.

Does your school have a multi-cultural affairs office/building? Or religious clubs?

We have religious clubs... that's about it.

I'm assuming you're not religous, judging by your sig..

No, I'm not religious, but I'm trying to be as open minded as possible about this documentary. I'm trying to understand peoples' obsession with religion one way or the other.

Well, calling it an "obsession" won't put your project in good light.

I mean both ways, though... Religion and Atheism... Both sides are a bit obsessive.

are you trying to find out about it from an evidence stand point, or more like just like why do people believe what they believe?

this actually sounds like a really neat project, a bit daunting, but neat.

Both ways. Evidence and personal views.

What the hell is the point of saying "IMO" in front of what I said? Of course that's my opinion, what else would it ****ing be?

Yes. I know it's you're opinion. Yes. I know you're stealing that quote. Yes. I would like it if you shut up and avoid posting unless you have anything productive to say.

So this film your making is an unbiased film about religion.

Perhaps, you can start off the movie by showing the dictionary definition of "religion" in white words with a black background. Then you can show 2 two second flicks of random people practicing religion, such as a scene with Buddhist monks bowing, Muslims gathering at the Mecca, the Pope giving a speech, etc. While these scenes are being shown, you can perhaps start by saying something like "Religion has been practiced for many years with no known origin. Oldest records of religion was *insert here*." You could state what religion has caused such as the crusades, and other wars. You could also mention how there are similarities between religions such as the how Zeus looks in various statues and how God looks in Michaelangelo's painting in the Sistine Chapel.

These are all the ideas I pulled out so far. Hopefully, you find them useful.

--
Oh, and this may be a little helpful. You can show the numbers in the documentary. Everyone love statistics.

Feel free to pm me.

And since a lot of people are doing it:
AIM: oxxlinusxxo

I think it is important to examine the difference between the acts/regulations of an organized religion and a personal connection to God. A person can very easily have a close, daily, relationship to God without any sort of priest or religious leader.

Thats just my two cents, for right now. If you want to PM me, I'd be happy to talk about evangelical Christianity, and answer any questions you might have to help out your documentary.

[edit]

AIM: Axis1898
MSN: combo_limit@hotmail.com

I don't believe in Gods, religion or leprechauns. I'll explain why in point form because I'm feeling lazy. Also, for the nitpickers, I'm going to be generalising for the same reason.

-No need for Gods. Physical world can be explained without supernatural intervention.

-"Evidence" for Christian God is just as good as evidence for Islamic God, which is just as good as the evidence for Zeus. The Greeks believed in Zeus as strongly as people believe in God today, so it seems hypocritical to dismiss or promote one God over another. All hail Zeus One quote I like is: "The religion of one age is the literary entertainment of the next."

-Most religious books were written as a form of government (Thou shalt not kill is good for everyone) or control using the threat of unholy wrath or fear to enforce it. Also, they were written or inspired by people who heard the voice of God. That sort of thing will get you a padded cell and some swanky pills to take these days. So why would I believe there is anything mystical about it?

-You can only get into heaven if you accept Jesus/Mohammed/Ra! More threats, more fear. Sounds like a club you used to make in school: Boys only! No girls allowed! Now if I had to accept Raptor Jesus, then I might reconsider.

-If I had been raised in country X, I would have been taught about religion X, indicating that much of faith is indoctrinated.

-For the same reason I don't believe in leprechauns. All powerful beings watching over us? Please.

-I am however somewhat partial to Buddhism, minus the reincarnation crap, as it seems to be based on common sense and doesn't require faith (or belief in reincarnation for that matter). For this reason, I would class Buddhism as more of a philosophy than a religion, but that's open to (fruitless) debate.

Can expand points if you want.

you could perhaps, go into...

- the role religion has played in shaping history, (both positively and negatively)

-what role religious leaders play in different cultures, everything from medicine men to the pope.

-common themes among different religions: flood, resurrection story.

- what are peoples reasons for believing: purely on faith, personal experience, indoctrination ...etc.

-what do followers of one religion think about followers of others?

-what is the personal appeal to any given religion: its how i was raised, guilt, gives hope, fear, tradition, genuine belief, quest for power.... and on and on.

on the evidence side, you could go into archaeological evidence for events in religious texts, or if you find it to be the case, the lack there of. (granted as far as i have seen this pertains mostly to Christianity)

I'm afraid what your going to find in the end is that after reviewing all of the information you going to throughout this project: scientific, non-scientific, personal beliefs and experiences, studies done on parts of the brain during religious experiences, and what not, is that everything simply boils down to a matter of opinion, and what people CHOOSE to see.

however i still think this is going to be a really neat project.

I think the fact is that everyone has a need to believe in a value system that affirms the way they've chosen to live their lives. Atheists may have rejected old-school spirituality, but their system of beliefs about the world still creates a hierarchy of some things (scientific truth, material possession, etc) being better than others. They're just as vehement as religious types in defending their own beliefs (or attacking others), because ultimately they shape their lives by that set of beliefs.

Basically, everyone needs to "know" what is good and what is bad, so they can live their lives accordingly. Not that everyone believes themselves to always do good, but they need an ideal to aim at.

Of course, religion has other built in social functions (like establishing basic laws), but they're accomplished by incorporating them into the above... and at any rate, that function of religion isn't what people get so passionate about. I don't think any holy wars have ever been started over the Swiss civil code.

I mainly believe in the existence of God because the idea of a sentient being creating the universe seems more plausible to me than the idea of matter simply "being".

I acknowledge that there are similarities of stories and themes between many religions, and that some religious ceremonies have common origins. I, personally, am against a centralized religious hierarchy (such as the Vatican) dictating the beliefs of people because I believe that to allow people to have such a tight-fisted control over your belief structure can lead to abuses (not that it always will or that it necessarily does). I see church (and synonymous organization and establishments) leadership as more of a guide and something to ask questions of rather than someone who can dictate what I can and can't do, preferring to rely on my own conclusions and judgments (which, hopefully, are compatible with the beliefs of the organization to which I subscribe) to determine what I believe and how I act.

I'll also add that the idea of my death resulting in the discharge of my synapses and rotting in the ground (and, thus, nothing more) is a frightening and sobering thought, and probably contributes to my belief.

If you want i'm up for a talk :).

Aim - tinnywashington
MSN - tinnywashington@hotmail.com

(I have no interest in arguing religion ... I am not religious whatsoever and my arguing against this point is a matter of clarifying and playing devil's advocate and not because my views contradict yours)

Well actually, the Christian God is the Islamic God (they're the same entity), and according to some faiths [edit: I found it-- that would be according to the Guru Kabir (1440-1518) of the bhakti movement] all gods of all religions are a manifest part of the same one almighty universal deity. Kinda like the Brahman in Hinduism. Well actually yeah, it pretty much is the Brahman in Hinduism.

[More on Kabir:
(Bentley/Ziegler, Traditions and Encounters: A Global Perspective on the Past 423)

So? All that belief does is make a claim that the monotheists are right and the polytheists are wrong. Quit trying to make it sound like everyone worships the same god; they don't.

Well... I'm not trying to make it sound like everyone worships the same god. So I don't know what you're talking about. haha.

What I'm doing is saying that some people believe(d) that there's only one almighty entity (and by the way, the reason the bhakti movement stressed such a thing was because they wanted to harmonize/unify Islam and Hinduism for political and social purposes. This in itself implies that they recognized (obviously) the fact that people believed in different deities--otherwise they wouldn't have made an effort to change that fact).

The fact that someone states something doesn't mean that they have a thesis and are trying to drive a point behind it. History textbooks and such list various facts and viewpoints to show all possible interpretations abound. This is what I'm doing.

I don't think that all people worship one god. I don't think that gods exist at all. I do think that some people think that this is the case and I'm putting that information out there because somebody made a post that indicated to me that the poster did not know this information.

Fixed.

You're not going to go far mocking those who you ask advice from.

I already knew that That was part of my point, but I guess didn't make it clear enough.

It seems to me that there are very few people who are understanding of the side they aren't 'for'. Many athiests claim this and that about religious folk and vise-versa. I'm one of the few in the middle that try to see both sides of the issue.

You're going to need to be *VERY* open minded if you're going to talk about religion at all. You're going to have to talk about the good things people have done, and not just things like the inquisition.

This is why I don't need to believe in God.

Really? The beauty of that proof is why I almost do.

You might want to look at why atheism has gotten louder and more obsessive in its arguments lately. The two groups are obsessed for rather different reasons: For the religious they believe their religion holds the answers to Life, the Universe and Everything. So of course there are going to be many that are obsessive about it; it means everything and the stakes are ludicrously high from their point of view.
Atheism is more like a point of view about a subject than an actual belief set or anything. It's simply the belief that there is no god(s). The reason it's become more aggressive lately is due to what many atheists see as the undue influence of religion in public affairs etc what with Islamic fundamentalist extremists in the Middle East and apparently more frequent attempts to push religion into politics and law by Christian groups in the US. Many of the louder atheists today were quieter in past years when religion could be viewed as a benign and private affair.

eh... not necessarily, if Christians are right, then they are all going to heaven. if they are wrong, they spent their life following what they believed to be right and are now none the wiser. either way, its kind of win - win. (this is of course a slightly idealistic view, in that I'm assuming that Christians are actually FOLLOWING their own teachings and not just holding to the title.)

i guess there are some followers of Christianity as well as many other religions that are obsessive about stuff, for the most part i would consider those to be a minority.

there are certain issues which people of all faiths (or no faith) can be "obsessed " or fanatical about. simply because its easy lets take abortion for example. a lot of Christians could be considered "fanatical" about their views on abortion, however i think this has more to do with their personal view on life and when it begins than just because its "the Christian thing to do" the same could also be said about the other side of the fence. they don't hold opinions because they are "pro-choice", they are "pro-choice" because of the opinions they hold.

that being said however, every once in a while you will encounter fanatical religious people who hold beliefs ONLY because "its the Christian thing to do" and not because of personal conviction. and i must admit, those people frighten me.

I like the group that allows people to do whatever they want, and just live life as good as possible. Just in case you are judged towards the end, you know?

Do you not think that Christians might want to see their friends, family and anyone in heaven rather than hell? They seem like rather high stakes.

yeah, from a Christians point of view the stakes would be high for "non-believers" but not so much for themselves. although anyone who really understands the religion would know you cant force someone into believing it, but i suppose that wont stop the "zealots" from trying.

maybe I'm giving Christians in general too much credit.

Blaise Pascal's wager aye? Only really works if you've never heard of it. Otherwise god (being omniscient) would know you only "believe" in him out of greed.

to a certain extent. if someone is a true believer, then it doesn't really apply, however if someone is simply betting the odds then yeah, exactly...

...i think i need to go to sleep...