Religions are supposed to breed happiness. Why do they not do that?

by SpannerintheWorks 24 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Abaddon

  spanner;

  Are you saying that if an emotion is not contained within a dictionary's definition of a thing, then it is illogical for that emotion to be expected whilst experiencing it?

  You are saying religions are meant to breed happiness. I am saying that is YOUR definiton of what religions are meant to do. You're free to expect cream cheese mouse cake from religion, but that would AGAIN be YOUR definiton of what religions are meant to do, and some would argue it to be illogical, just as some would argue that expecting religion to breed happiness is illogical.

  Essentially what you are saying is like me saying;

  "Government departments are supposed to breed happiness. Why do they not do that?"

  Government departments are nothing to do with breeding happiness, according to the dictionary definition. I (in this example) might feel that that is what they are meant to do, but that is a personal opinion. If the produce happiness in me then they fufill my expectations, if they don't, they disappoint my expectations, but my expectation of government departments being happiness breeders is MINE, it is not their purpose and some people would not agree that government departments should breed happiness.

  Just 'cause you think religions should be happiness breeders doesn't mean you are right or that everyone will agree with you.

  I think perhaps looking at your question and rephrasing it to something like;

  Some people will contend that religions should breed happiness. I feel that they do not do this. Do you agree that religions should breed happiness? If yes, do you feel that they do this?

  ... may help, as your question really doesn't make sense to anyone other than someone who agrees with your expectations regarding religion.
• 

  SpannerintheWorks

  Abaddon,

  You are saying religions are meant to breed happiness.

  True. That is why I said it.

  I am saying that is YOUR definiton of what religions are meant to do.

  No, it's not. I didn't give a definition.

  Essentially what you are saying is like me saying;

  "Government departments are supposed to breed happiness. Why do they not do that?"

  Typical strawman argumentation. Well, maybe not typical, most strawman arguments are more subtle and cleverer than yours.

  I think perhaps looking at your question and rephrasing it to something like;

  Some people will contend that religions should breed happiness. I feel that they do not do this. Do you agree that religions should breed happiness? If yes, do you feel that they do this?

  So now you want me to re-phrase my question to suit YOUR opinion! You should listen to yourself more often, you may learn something! (See your comments above).

  ... may help, as your question really doesn't make sense to anyone other than someone who agrees with your expectations regarding religion.

  Which part of the question do you not understand? Is English your first language? Talking of questions, you haven't answered my question to you. (See the beginning of your last post).

  Anyway, thank you for informing me that religions do not, in fact, make people happy. That was my point!

  Spanner
• 

  Dansk

  Rocketman:

  I often wondered why I wasn't happy as a jw, but instead felt the reverse. My wife wondered the same thing. I kept thinking "this is supposed to be the true religion; things aren't supposed to be this way" that is, the constant feelings of unworthiness, sadness, fatigue, and frustration.

  You must have read my book (in a manner of speaking!). I felt EXACTLY the same! My wife said that she always knew I was never completely happy as a JW.

  Today, in all honesty, I (we) feel so much more content. Leaving the Witnesses was the best thing I've done for a long time. I'm really enjoying life now.

  Dansk
• 

  bebu

  Sorry Spanner, I still think your premise is flawed as far as "religion" being supposed to breed happiness. (It makes an interesting thread title, though.)

  I think you might have a point with the JWs--not with the Catholics, as in your first post. When the WT advertises dubs as the "happiest people in the world", then it is, in my opinion, making a claim--a claim that falls flat. I haven't met a Catholic who advertised Catholicism as making them happy, but then again, I'm on the left coast. Maybe they should just say, they are happy to be Catholics/Baptists/JWs, rather than their religion "breeds" happiness (in general).

  I don't know if Islam claims to make people happy. Muslims do enjoy many aspects of their faith, of course, but I think it makes people anxious, actually, since everyone is still quietly wondering if they will balance over 50 good on the Scales of God at judgement. (Lowest passing score to reach Paradise is 51%.) I've read comments by former Muslims, and according to them, this anxiety motivates the constant religious works--even martyrdom. They have strong faith in God (Allah), but there is no way to be assured this side of heaven that they will not be saved.

  (BTW, two odd similarities b/w Islam and JW: 'Paradise' without God's presence, and God is constantly billed as "compassionate" but really comes across as desperately wanting to completely annihilate at everyone...)

  The Sokka Gakkai branch of Buddhism is an interesting one. I've had friends in college and Japan who say that it makes them extremely happy and relieved, since they don't have to follow any "rules" at all; just chant for peace, and whatever else they personally want. When they get it, they are very happy. If they don't get what they want, they still have comfort from chanting. This branch of Buddhism is an unusual one, I should add.

  More traditional Buddhism seems to be a religion of resignation. So does Hinduism, in my view. There's not much to hope for, and once you figure that out and come to terms with understanding this, well, you have a measure of peace and happiness (of a sort). This is just my observation and interpretation from personal conversations. But I don't think that Buddhism or HInduism aggressively promotes themselves as ways to happiness, except when you see serene statues of the Buddha and Bodhisatvas, or see the Dalai Lama smiling calmly. There is an inference to serenity.

  Pagan religions are not usually complicated--they are, at heart, frameworks of keeping out of the wrath of gods or demons or gaining wealth or health; not breeding happiness. Our Chinese international student was terrified of cemeteries and was extremely superstitious when she first arrived--though she called herself a Christian. At this point, she has a fuller idea of faith, and I think she is relieved to not live in constant fear of demons now (like dubs do). I'd say that's a nice perk of her faith. She seems a lot happier to me now, to be honest with you, but I don't think pursuing happiness was her original motivation for becoming a Christian. I think she was looking for something that could REALLY be more powerful than the demonic forces she'd experienced earlier in her life, with an aunt who was a medium...

  I think that people are attracted to religions that offer them hope, or something positive. And hope gives a person relief from fear. Comfort is a nicer state than anxiety.

  blahblahblah. Sorry.

  bebu
• 

  Abaddon

  You are saying religions are meant to breed happiness.

  True. That is why I said it.

  I am saying that is YOUR definiton of what religions are meant to do.

  No, it's not. I didn't give a definition.

  Spanner, you are saying that religions are meant to bred happiness. By doing so you are defining religions in that respect. You then say you don't give a definiton. This is clearly contradictory, so save you attitude darling.

  You might, if you were bothered, look at the use of the word 'like' when I gave a similie of what your statement was like to highlight the illogicity of your statement. This is not s straw man arguement. Please familiarise yourself with what a strawman argumnt is before you start throwing accusations around, phrases like 'straw man' are not magic get out of bad arguement free cards.

  I rephrase your question because your question needs rephrasing to be answerable without taking on a raft of incorrect tacit assumptions built into the question. Pay attention to the fact that I am not the only person who thinks your question is flawed, but obviously it is my fault, I grovel before your lucidity.