Quote:
Originally Posted by Cowboy89
It's kinda funny how posters who routinely crap on the religious every chance they get are in here in the UFO thread believing in aliens using the same logic theologians use to describe their faith.
|
That's a real interesting comment Cowboy. Not a religious guy anymore, nor bother to engage religious types for the most part, as I believe faith is personal and unique to the individual. So that comment is really interesting. Here is where I think the comment is off base and not reflective of the discussion or issue.
1) There are many theories behind what these phenomena are. There is no one theory that people ascribe to, nor is there any dogma associated with it.
2) The structural foundations of "religion" is missing. There is no central authority, no leader in the crusade to defeat evil, no consistent morals, beliefs, or worldviews. There is no sacred text, no place of worship, no rituals associated with any of the beliefs.
3) This is belief more than it is faith. There is evidence to support the claims, and scientific inquiry into the provide substance to the belief in the phenomena. If you were looking for something that does pull these various theories together it would be they are datacentric. The focus on the physicality of these phenomena is what drives the interest in the subject all together. If anything, when spirituality is mentioned in circles pertaining to this subject, most will roll their eyes. The new age theories, which speak to spirituality, have fringe support.
Speaking personally, I tend to look at these things as needing physical explanation, because they are physical devices. They are observed no only in the visible spectrum, but also through the infrared spectrum. They are picked up on radar and tracked as solid physical devices. They also do things beyond our understanding and capabilities. That means they are very unlikely to be from our understandable context. We must look beyond what we think we know and consider the thigs we don't know, and be willing to consider the fallibility of the things we think we know.
This is another issue where the connection to religion breaks down. Religion is usually based on the infallibility of the creator, while this subject matter is based largely on the fallibility of the owners/operators of these objects.
I think your comment is interesting, so I would like more of your thoughts here.