The difference between philosophy and religion

philosophy has to wth existence which is there in our lives.things like water,food,air,wind,kwonledge,belief,love,hate,life,evaporation etc.

The only argument that you have is based on an assumption that there is a god. What else makes this Omni-BEING of yours necessary, besides the fact that we would be lost without it? This is symbolic, that your god is acting like a parent, or as "the father." You are describing something with human characteristics, which is not human.

So, you also believe in what you call the "law of circumstantialism," in that god is there to guide us through Real-time situations of the outside world as it happens to us. This sounds like a form of fate, and it looks to me you are apart of one of the dozens of christian communities, whichever it may be, therefore you believe in a good or loving god. Let me ask then, would it be better to create something to love you, or for that which you created, to love you by its own choice?

What can this god of yours really do? Can it create a rock heavy enough that it can't lift it? Or is this god partially evil for allowing it to be an option at all in world? If your position holds that god is all-knowing, all-powerful, and benevolent, why isnt evil stopped? Either this god knows about it (being omniscient, or all-knowing), and benevolent, but NOT omnipotent or all-powerful, because evil still exists. You can use any sequence you like of the three attributes of your omni-being, but you can't have them all to make it work. God has limitations too...

Philosophy is not something that just takes words out of a book like the bible or any religious book, and accepts it as the ultimate truth. Do you really think all the answers of the universe can fit inside a book?

Why does religion centralize everything on the human being? We aren't the center of the universe. We are only apart of something. And in my opinion it's bigger than god.

Spot on! god treats humans (made in his image, they say) the same as all life forms on this planet. He kills them off in mass when he has the human imagination to do so - like the world flood.

The bible was written at a time when women were considered second class humans. Only man has the ability and ignorance to think we are superior.

As a matter of fact, most religions that were created by man had the same error in judgement about women. Many still do.

It doesn't seem too easy to contrast religion and philosophy. Much easier to contrast religion with science. Philosophy seems to fit better between the two. Some religions, like the more mystical non-dualistic forms of Hinduism (.e.g. Vedanta), Buddhism (e.g., Zen), Islam (e.g., Sufism) and, to a lesser extent, Judaism (e.g., Kabala) are in large part close to many expressions of philosophy (and humanistic psychologies). At least they are not starkly opposed to Science, nor is Science so opposed to them. But the opposition between Science and the "fairy tale" dualistic fundamentalist forms of Christianity and Islam is stark. This is not denied by the fact that a very small percentage of science practicioners are fundamentalist religionists. Compartmentalism!

I've always thought of philosophy discovering the truth of life, whereas religion concealing it.

I tend to think of philosophy as an on-going effort to create understanding/meaning regarding existential realties and religion as an on-going effort to put a comforting gloss on reality.

There was a time when all people generally were funneled through some type or religion or other. There is the temple, now go worship God, type of deal.

Well when neighboring tribes hit on the ideal that destroying your rivals temple "built by God's will" was a good way to get back at a despised neighbor well it became the "in thing" to destroy each others places of worship. This clearly did a head trip on tribes.

The tribal leaders (usually priests in a theocracy) who had seemingly used the temples to enslave the people for many years lost a grip on their own societies when this would occur.

With no working temple there was no way to do sacrifices and the collective act of doing the law was replaced with various interpretations of the law and/or the "philosophizing" about the law instead. People would sit and halfheartedly wish they were doing the law rather than actually doing them.

So the ritual of doing the ritual became the ritual of talking about doing the ritual.

This talking about doing the ritual then became the "tradition" and replaced the actual devout religious tradition of actually fulfilling the laws in many cultures.

During Jesus' time he is said to have had something to say about this.

The priests of the temple were trying to catch him breaking the law and they said Jesus, "Broke the traditions of the elders because he did not wash his hands before he ate." He answered them and said, "You brake the commandments of God by your traditions."

In other words, their traditions of talking about the law rather than doing the law. It is debatable whether or not Jesus actually believed in the "commandments of God" himself (as had been delivered by the prophets), but it was a way for him to finagle out of the priests picky-oon demands.

So in my opinion, philosophy came out of that same tradition of the elders of "talking about and debating the law" rather than doing it. This tradition came out of the fact that a temple may have been destroyed or defiled and doing the law became impossible under those conditions. So you have teachers become the ruling sect of society rather than the priests...

So (again in my opinion), human wisdom (philosophy) was born and became pitted against God's wisdom (theosophy) in this manner.

This is how priests became rabbis.

Anyone serious about both philosophy and religion--and their overlaps--should read Aldous Huxley's The Perennial Philosophy.

Hi Rex, Unfortunately, those of religion have committed more crimes against humanity over human history than we can count! Religion is created to control the masses of people and their money, because it works.

You are becoming an increasing expert in self ironic statements...

I wish I understood that, sounds deep.

Religion as evil as it is must contain SOME truth or people would not plunge so willingly into it headlong. All religions and cults contain some truth, no religion is perfectly evil or perfectly good. People use a grain of truth to entice others to relinquish their rights, standards and liberties as human beings.

We hear it all the time; religion is needed to teach us morals. Why then is it that no matter what religion is practiced in any country, crimes remain relatively high.

Humans are animals with animal instincts; stealing and killing are natural for humans. Ever wonder why wars are so popular?

In earlier times the motives for war revolved more around the pride of rulers and their territorial values, today it has more to do with raw economics and the values of nationalism. Instincts have little to do with it.

I call it the "instinct for war." It doesn't matter what the reasons for it are.

I am not saying we need religion to teach us to be good. Blaming the devil or needing god's purification is not always a bad thing. It is one way to help unload a heavy burden and free oneself from possible shame and terrible embarrassment and trauma. Whether if you agree or disagree with that approach it is still a method that has worked for some if not many people.

When people carry around their faults and do not find a way to cleanse their souls they become bitter and often their lives end in tribulations. A "higher power" whether if you call that a scapegoat, conscience or whatever is a refuge from these types of troubles. Even psychology recommends not leaving ones problems on a "back burner". Talking about them and getting them "out in the open" is not always helpful and often makes them seem even more present and is sometimes even a form of hopelessly reliving them.

To be "forgiven" by the will and powers that be is maybe "a fairly tale" but one that has proven to bring about a desired change. To each their own and it is not always right to questions one's methods in this type of situation as long as they do not go to extremes with the "god thing". God(s) is okay in my book. If people find refuge and resolution in God and blaming the devil... AMEN

If there were an instinct for war, we would not have so many passivists in our species--you do know, of course, that instincts are pan-species phenomena?

Passivists are always at the mercy of those who would declare war for one reason or another that seems trite after the war has ended.