PDA

View Full Version : Do people need god?



Pages : [1] 2

Mantha
02-24-2008, 11:27 AM
If you can notice, I didn't capitalise god. I'm talking about religion in general.
This is not a religious debate. This is not a debate about proving whether God exists or not. If you think so, then get out.

This question has been in my head for a long while now. Does the man really need god? Or are the Atheists living proof that we don't need faith?

Now don't say it's because science explains everything. I don't really think religion is here to explain something. Isn't god just an idea of good, perfect and just in a disguise?

Also, this isn't about winning or losing a debate. It's comparing opinions to get to a conclusion.

Lemme see your ideas. Or contradict me, whatever.

Raffi
02-24-2008, 11:33 AM
Considering the amount of Athiests living everywhere, they seem to get along fine. So maybe man doesn't need god.

But there are some extremists who are like "OMG GOD IS SUPA KUL BELEEV IN HIM AND HE WILL GIF U HAPPINESS AND SECRET MYSPACE PAGEZ!!!!!!!!!" who seem to not get along so well as the Athiests, but still get along well.


So maybe man doesn't need god.

Dragon⁰⁷⁷
02-24-2008, 11:37 AM
You could form an argument that when early civilizations were forming and when man was young, people needed god to set them on a moral track and to answer questions that they could not answer for themselves. Today, our morals are locked and can never be changed and we can answer almost every question that needs answering. Is god still necessary to humans now? No, I would say that in the 21st century that many people have been able to take off the ancient training wheels that is religion. However, I also don't find it necessary to rid the mind of god, humans are perfectly capable without him. The differences in the lives of a believer in god and a non-believer are subtle, to say the least.

Mantha
02-24-2008, 11:57 AM
@Raffi: You can't determine/define/explain something, if you're taking extremists. Those are the extreme cases, deviations, you know what I mean? You have to take the norms.

@Dragon: Agreed. But isn't the religion the one who shaped our morals and culture?

Also, I've talked to lots of religious people, asking them the reason they believe. They say the prayers make them feel relief, better and safer. Because life isn't always easy. =/

Raffi
02-24-2008, 12:05 PM
@Raffi: You can't determine/define/explain something, if you're taking extremists. Those are the extreme cases, deviations, you know what I mean? You have to take the norms.

Meh, I'm not much of a debater, at least to those who can.

Ash
02-24-2008, 12:19 PM
A quote by Douglas Adams says it all:
"Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?"



Many people say that science sucks all the beauty and magesty out of life, that constantly trying to figure everything out makes things less grand. But isn't a sunset just as beautiful if you know what makes it so beautiful? In fact, many scientists find beauty in the apparent complexity of the universe.

Yet another quote may help here, this one by Carl Sagan:

"In some respects, science has far surpassed religion in delivering awe. How is it that hardly any major religion has looked at science and concluded, 'This is better than we thought! The Universe is much bigger than our prophets said, grander, more subtle, more elegant. God must be even greater than we dreamed'? Instead they say, 'No, no, no! My god is a little god, and I want him to stay that way.' "

No religion has ever furthered our understanding of quantum mechanics, light refraction, time dilation, or relativity. How many religions can vouch for the accuracy and reliability of science? The mere fact that you must throw out or refine (change) a theory in science while religion states that you must not change it is a sure indicator of the worth of each.




Now, another common argument is that religion gives people hope.

Many times I have seen people who call themselves atheists and their explantion is that they are angry at God for a tragedy in their life. Even worse, some people commit suicide to "get back" at God. Some people say that the reason they commit some crimes is that they "Are already going to hell".

We are nothing special. Really. There are probably other forms of life, some like us, some very different, out in the universe. Our star is very average, our planet small. See this pale blue dot? That's us. That's the Earth.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/71/PaleBlueDot.jpg

Look at a star tonight. Imagine that there are little men with infrared skin and ultraviolet eye cells looking through a oddly-shaped telescope at that little star in their night sky, our sun. Do they think that they are as unique, as special as we think we are? Do they have a God that seems to have made only them and no other life forms? Did they have a little infrared-colored man who died on a 6-shaped peice of wood to save them from eternal damnation?

How special are we? Not at all, or at least not according to science.

Does this impersonal view mean that science is wrong? Is it wrong simply because it's unpleasant? Is it unpleasant?

I say to HELL with religion. I've been happier as an atheist than I ever was as a Christian. I've felt more free than ever. We have billions, no, TRILLIONS of stars to explore during the span of our existance. Are we going to let something as trivial as a book keep us grounded, waiting for an apocalypse that may never happen? Or are we going to reach out, both physically and intellectually, touch the stars that the Chinese tried to get a closer look at by building towers?

Mantha
02-24-2008, 12:32 PM
Okay, I think you've missed the point a bit. This isn't a comparison between science and religion, which is better and which should be abandoned. There are extremes everywhere.

Well of course scientific researches help the man, we have progress, we have a better life, etc. Have you read my first post? It's from the moral point of view. Also, you're taking the Bible literally. Which isn't supposed to be done. Even I know that, despite the fact I'm not religious.

If you're an Atheist, that's great. But do you believe in beauty, perfection, good in the world? Of course you do, you just don't call it "god".

That's what the point of the thread is. I suggest re-reading.

Ash
02-24-2008, 12:49 PM
Now, I understand perfectly. I'm saying that we don't need God because it doesn't do anything for us. Here, I'll adjust it to the subject of morality.


Imagine for a moment that religion is completely the invention of man. All the morals that were put in a religious text are the product of the writers. They wanted people acting in the way that seemed just. They wouldn't have needed divine influence to come up with these morals.

You see, there's a trait that humans have, one that people have a tendancy to forget about in debates about whether we need religion or a god to give us our morals. It is defined as "Identification with and understanding of another's situation, feelings, and motives." This doesn't require supernatural influence: we have it because it helped us to learn from others mistakes as well as our own.

It is empathy, and it is the emotion, the psycological characteristic that drives civilization.

Delphinus19
02-24-2008, 01:13 PM
We do need God...

Sick of atheists.. Sick of these self-aggrandizing pricks flaunting their bogus theory.

you started the thread.

Ash
02-24-2008, 01:25 PM
Hey. You. E=mc_cubed. Instead of just asserting that atheists are wrong, how about you actually put forth an argument on the subject? If you aren't going to actually debate, LEAVE THE DEBATE SECTION. After all, that's why we're here. TO DEBATE. Not to say "NEENER NEENER NEENER, atheists are WRONG!!!!"

Imbecile.

2-D
02-24-2008, 01:38 PM
We do need God...

Sick of atheists.. Sick of these self-aggrandizing pricks flaunting their bogus theory.

We don't need god...

Sick of Christians.. Sick of all these self-aggrandizing pricks flaunting their bogus "lord".

Dudeman
02-24-2008, 02:13 PM
Humans are naturally spiritual. Does that require organized religion? Not really.

Almost since the beginning of time, humans have had their idea of a higher presence.

Nodd
02-24-2008, 02:16 PM
We do need God...

Sick of atheists.. Sick of these self-aggrandizing pricks flaunting their bogus theory.

Atheists don't have a theory, therefore atheists can not flaunt it, nor is it bogus.

Mantha
02-24-2008, 02:22 PM
Humans are naturally spiritual. Does that require organized religion? Not really.

Almost since the beginning of time, humans have had their idea of a higher presence.
This is an interesting point. Mind elaborating? (I've always wanted to say that olollo)

Also, e=mc_cubed, read the stickies for debating or something. Or simply leave.

Dudeman
02-24-2008, 02:28 PM
Well, all you have to do is look at history. Since the human mind has developed, humans have naturally been drawn to the idea of god/gods/spirits. Even if they are primitive

Delphinus19
02-24-2008, 02:39 PM
Yes, but as they got more "civilized" they moved away from that. Most of our atheistical ideas are only 500 years old, where the Bible's ideas have been around for several thousand, along with alot of 'holy' ideas.

springtime4hitler
02-24-2008, 03:13 PM
My opinion on this matter is that the answer to your question is completely subjective. If you believe in a god, then you know for a fact in YOUR mind that everyone NEEDS a god. Atheists can live without the belief in a higher spiritual being, and much of the world today does. I believe that many moral beliefs stem from religion, and (certain) religions morals do tend to encompass many of our laws. But for humanity to simply survive and co-exist, religion may not be needed today. It comes down to what you believe about how religious people interact, and how non-theistic people interact. You can say non- theists live together more peacefully, with no god to supposedly tell them crazy things to do(i.e, Jonestown). Or you could say that in an ideal situation, religious people work better together, without flaw. It's all about where your belief starts, then every thing else you see as evidence simply reinforces it from there, an atheist sees the world as it is and decides a god is not needed. A religious individual, as mentioned before, has a different starting point, and different ideas reinforcing their beliefs.


Personally, I'm for religion. I believe in religious morals and a god that are needed to help us operate as a whole, otherwise they are just changeable laws that mean nothing other than what the current society believes to be "the right thing".




In all honesty, I'm not sure if I answered anything at all in that post.

2-D
02-24-2008, 03:41 PM
Well, all you have to do is look at history. Since the human mind has developed, humans have naturally been drawn to the idea of god/gods/spirits. Even if they are primitive

So.. ? Just because a bunch of people believe in something, doesn't make it true.

Tabion
02-24-2008, 03:42 PM
hmmm...
I don't really think the human race needs a God. I can't really think of a reason why though.

Off topic:The dumbasses in my YEAR 6! (the top Y6 Class) class would be like Whuuu? whut dus tht meen? There just complete Dumbasses except a few that are (half) my friends

Mantha
02-24-2008, 03:43 PM
@2-D: Again, whether it's true or not is not the point.

I'm asking whether people need faith or not.

Big Bang
02-24-2008, 03:49 PM
Honestly, why bother debating Creation Vs evolution? It's a ****ing stalemate. Neither can be without a doubt proven, nor disproven until death. Either you die and you cease to exist, and you'll never know. Or you die, go to heaven\hell and do know.

Or..you might believe in reincarnation, which is impossible to prove although it may actually be truth.

And Ash, want to know why I hate evolution and atheism? People like you.

Always assuming you're right, close-minded pricks. Not saying all atheists are like that, but because of people like you I can hardly trust any one of them.

TL;DR: **** you. Consider other possibilities, and before you play the hypocrite card I used to believe in crap like evolution. I thought about the other, and it simply made more sense to me.

Straw man argument. Really weak.

If you cannot prove yours, why do you keep trying to disprove the other?

Kegman
02-24-2008, 04:12 PM
Yeah, gods pulled a quite alot of people out of rough spots in there lives.

Its helped people better themselves and be generous and selflessly giving to others in need.

Its brought people together in times of stress, sadness and suffering and given them the strength to work through it.




Now I bet your expecting a witty comment eradicating all sincerity of this post, but alas, I cannot bring myself to insult something that has done so much good in the world.




....





i bet god watches foot porn olol

Kagedanji
02-24-2008, 04:18 PM
In my thoughts, religion was only made to explain things that were unexplainable long ago like weather, astronomy, and birth. It also calmed people down and gave them positive thinking whenever something bad happened, like someone's death, or strange weather, etc. They would just say, "(insert religious icon here) wanted it, he made it happen, he had a good reason, there's your explanation," or, "(insert religious icon here) will make it ok, it'll happen soon, he'll take his time."

Then science came along and things were explained more logically. But people who were already long-time followers of a religion stayed because they didn't want to leave something that their ancestors have been with for so long that they thought it to be true. That's what we call faith. So, religion was pretty much the placeholder for science back then.

Now that we have science, and we know how things work, we probably don't need religion, but some people have already practically sold their souls to their religion, and they actually need it to have something in life.

Jeremy
02-24-2008, 04:31 PM
Like dragon said, I think people might have needed a god or deity earlier in history. But that could have just been a collective ideal aswell. People can be rallied up at the thought of freedom as much as they can at they thought of people are mocking their lord. The way the human mind has evolved, and our technological advancements have progressed, I don't think we need the concept of a god or deity anymore. Some people could I guess, its a hard concept to swallow that once you die there is nothing left. And if it helps people get through life and hardships then it would be fine, but it never just ends there. And its the bad things gods have caused that really make me cringe.

kido426
02-24-2008, 06:03 PM
We have needed god in the early ages for all creation.Man, this is my opinion, DO need god.No god, no order, therfor all of us would go to hell.And i your a complete reataurd who thinks " ZOMG YOU COULD ASK FER LIKE FORGINES EN STUF!" than tell me this.Ask who?

pagan
02-24-2008, 06:12 PM
what the hell are you talking about

E=mc_cubed
02-24-2008, 06:55 PM
I revoke every statement I made in this thread.. You know how I feel, but it doesn't matter.

I'm not visiting this website anymore.

Goodbye.

pagan
02-24-2008, 06:58 PM
noooooo! not e=mc cubed!!!! favorite member!!! how will i go on!!!!

alive
02-24-2008, 07:26 PM
I don't think there is any general answer for this. A lot of people needs to know if there's a higher purpose of life, religion can satisfy that need. A lot of people needs something to explain what they doesn't understand, religion can satisfy that need. I'm sure that if you strip away religion, a lot of people would feel meaningless.

However, some people doesn't need religion at all. I, for one, do not believe in any higher being or deity that can directly interact in my life. Still, I have had a successful life so far. I don't need to believe in a god to find a purpose in life, or explain to me what I don't understand. In fact, I don't need the beautiful sunset to be explained for me at all.

So I'd say it's more of a personal question than a general. I don't think anyone can say that "We all need religion!" or "No one needs religion! Get rid of that bullshit!" Let people believe whatever they wants to believe.

Every post in this thread is tl;dr. Including mine

Big Bang
02-24-2008, 09:59 PM
I revoke every statement I made in this thread.. You know how I feel, but it doesn't matter.

I'm not visiting this website anymore.

Goodbye.

Don't forget to close the door when you leave.

The things you do are directly influenced in how you feel. When you believe in god, you are confident because you believe someone up there is protecting you. This doesn't necessarily mean you're being protected.

In the end, God it's just both the answer to the questions that transcend us, and someone who can inspire us with confidence, since you know, believing that some guy in heaven is going to protect you is far more plausible than thinking that you won't get hurt because you desire so.

Schwa
02-24-2008, 11:38 PM
Man must need religion otherwise it would not be such a common invention in all great and remaining civilizations.

They must need religion because seeing as it is so illogical and there is no reason for it man must need religion. What I'm trying to say is that since there's no physical proof/evidence for religion, so for it to be such a common invention all over the world it must be needed.

Git it?

There's also a book called, I think, "The God Brain" which discusses if man has the need for god wired into their brain.

Jeremy
02-25-2008, 01:43 AM
Man must need religion otherwise it would not be such a common invention in all great and remaining civilizations.

'It exists, therefor it must be needed.' Thats a logical fallacy I'm pretty sure.


There's also a book called, I think, "The God Brain" which discusses if man has the need for god wired into their brain.

Sounds like propaganda to me.

Mantha
02-25-2008, 08:25 AM
Man must need religion otherwise it would not be such a common invention in all great and remaining civilizations.

They must need religion because seeing as it is so illogical and there is no reason for it man must need religion. What I'm trying to say is that since there's no physical proof/evidence for religion, so for it to be such a common invention all over the world it must be needed.

So you're saying that since it's so illogical and senseless, it MUST be needed?
Okay, penis shaped toilets are illogical. Does it mean they must be needed?
Don't say yes. Because I know you will. <.<
Your argument doesn't really have a support.
Git it?
Nope, sorry.
There's also a book called, I think, "The God Brain" which discusses if man has the need for god wired into their brain.
Will look for it on the Internet perhaps, there are rare books from the US or UK in my puny country.

Ash
02-25-2008, 08:58 AM
I don't think religion is commone because people are naturally spiritual, I think it's because they are curious, and want to explain nature but lack the scientific power to do so. The greeks said that eathquakes were made by Poseidon, and the Christians belive that everything was caused by their God.

Dragon⁰⁷⁷
02-25-2008, 10:10 AM
I don't think religion is commone because people are naturally spiritual, I think it's because they are curious, and want to explain nature but lack the scientific power to do so. The greeks said that eathquakes were made by Poseidon, and the Christians belive that everything was caused by their God.
What do you mean by "everything?"

Mantha
02-25-2008, 10:51 AM
I have to admit, I too am curious about this. Mind explaining, Ash?

But first I must say that there is a difference between ancient Greeks and modern believers.

Also, I think that if we research the meaning of the god to the man, maybe we can find the answer.

Gray
02-25-2008, 11:20 AM
We have needed god in the early ages for all creation.Man, this is my opinion, DO need god.No god, no order, therfor all of us would go to hell.And i your a complete reataurd who thinks " ZOMG YOU COULD ASK FER LIKE FORGINES EN STUF!" than tell me this.Ask who?

We just got pwned.

: (

Jeremy
02-25-2008, 03:18 PM
and the Christians believe that everything was caused by their God.
I don't believe thats right. The Christians I know don't believe everything is caused by god. Since 'everything' would include the bad, and god is the representation of all that is good.
Actually, I think a lot of Christians believe problems rose up after the fall at eden, when sin was first brought into the world through the first act of disobedience by Adam. Which would be their explanation of diseases, unwanted death, etc.

Ash
02-25-2008, 07:20 PM
I didn't mean it in that way, I meant that the creation of the world and it's order were caused by God.

Schwa
02-25-2008, 09:42 PM
Will look for it on the Internet perhaps, there are rare books from the US or UK in my puny country.

Yes Penis Shaped Toilets are illogical but does every single great civilization all accross the world have them? No, in fact, hopefully, none of them do.

What I'm saying is that religion is not like a flood. Lots of civilizations have floods, so they build flood protection. Because it is naturally occuring and occurs all over.

But religion has no basis whatsoever in any sort of physical common occurence, yet it is common to the whole world. So the need for God must be wired into man's brain, not put there by outside forces. Like a flood.

Does that make sense?

Ash
02-25-2008, 09:48 PM
Yes Penis Shaped Toilets are illogical but does every single great civilization all accross the world have them? No, in fact, hopefully, none of them do.

What I'm saying is that religion is not like a flood. Lots of civilizations have floods, so they build flood protection. Because it is naturally occuring and occurs all over.

But religion has no basis whatsoever in any sort of physical common occurence, yet it is common to the whole world. So the need for God must be wired into man's brain, not put there by outside forces. Like a flood.

Does that make sense?

I've already argued against that.
http://www.stickpageportal.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1178269&postcount=34

We have religion out of a desire to explain the universe. It's the same reason we have science.

Myself
02-25-2008, 09:50 PM
Isn't god just an idea of good, perfect and just in a disguise?


Good just has an extra o.

Schwa
02-25-2008, 10:19 PM
I've already argued against that.
http://www.stickpageportal.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1178269&postcount=34

We have religion out of a desire to explain the universe. It's the same reason we have science.

You're being very simple minded if you think that that is the sole reason for religion.

I'll let you figure that one out for yourself.

Ash
02-25-2008, 10:38 PM
It's the sole reason for the formation of religion. People don't think "Hmm, we need a way to get people not to murder each other, let's say that Zues doesn't like it." they say "Where does that lightning come from? Maybe a man throws it from the sky?"

Big Bang
02-25-2008, 10:41 PM
It's the sole reason for the formation of religion. People don't think "Hmm, we need a way to get people not to murder each other, let's say that Zues doesn't like it." they say "Where does that lightning come from? Maybe a man throws it from the sky?"

More like "Oh wise shaman. Why does light fall from the sky?", "Uh...ZEUS! ZEUS IS THE GOD OF LIGHTNING! FEAR ZEUS!"

It's the primitive smartass' answer to all questions.

Komaru
02-25-2008, 10:58 PM
Hmm...I think that religion was made to be an explanation for things. Like, using greek mythos as an example, the Greeks didn't know what an earthquake or thunder or fire was. They didn't understand it, and made an explanation for it. I think that this applies to modern religions, and theories, also. The question of creation- Nobody can prove that their thoery or religion is true. Nobody knows that they are right (They might believe in it very very strongly, but it still could be incorrect). So, it is something ununderstood, and people made an answer, and explanations about creation. They can't prove it, but it is still a possibility.

So, I believe that until all questions are answered, religions, gods, and God will still be needed (Or at least existant). But I do not believe that they need to be there to put forth their argument, if they are disproved (Yet dissappear, they will not).

Dragon⁰⁷⁷
02-25-2008, 11:01 PM
Yes Penis Shaped Toilets are illogical but does every single great civilization all accross the world have them? No, in fact, hopefully, none of them do.

What I'm saying is that religion is not like a flood. Lots of civilizations have floods, so they build flood protection. Because it is naturally occuring and occurs all over.

But religion has no basis whatsoever in any sort of physical common occurence, yet it is common to the whole world. So the need for God must be wired into man's brain, not put there by outside forces. Like a flood.

Does that make sense?
I see what you are thinking, but just because religion is prominent across the world does not mean in must be wired into man's brain. It doesn't work that way.

Schwa
02-25-2008, 11:12 PM
I see what you are thinking, but just because religion is prominent across the world does not mean in must be wired into man's brain. It doesn't work that way.

But there's no other external reason for it to exist commonly.

It must be something it is commonly internal to man.

Ash
02-25-2008, 11:13 PM
GODDAMMNIT SCHWA.

"It's the sole reason for the formation of religion. People don't think "Hmm, we need a way to get people not to murder each other, let's say that Zues doesn't like it." they say "Where does that lightning come from? Maybe a man throws it from the sky?""

Schwa
02-25-2008, 11:18 PM
GODDAMMNIT SCHWA.

"It's the sole reason for the formation of religion. People don't think "Hmm, we need a way to get people not to murder each other, let's say that Zues doesn't like it." they say "Where does that lightning come from? Maybe a man throws it from the sky?""

By silently ignoring you I am acknowledging that I am wrong and I misunderstood your post, kay?

Jeez;

But my points still stand.

Dragon⁰⁷⁷
02-25-2008, 11:18 PM
But there's no other external reason for it to exist commonly.

It must be something it is commonly internal to man.
Now, it doesn't. Just because it is prominent doesn't mean it is man's need.

Ash
02-25-2008, 11:19 PM
The reason that religion is found all over the world isn't becaue we need religion, it's because we all have the desire to explain the universe.

Schwa
02-25-2008, 11:21 PM
The reason that religion is found all over the world isn't becaue we need religion, it's because we all have the desire to explain the universe.

But why religion? Why choose something so similar all around the earth that is so illogical strange and unreasonable.

It doesn't make sense.

Unless its something common to man.

Ash
02-25-2008, 11:37 PM
You act as if people say "Hmm, lets explain it with religion", but that's not how it works. They create an explanation, such as an omnipotent being (Which is easy to imagine and thus very common) and that explantation is what we call religion.

They don't make religion, but what they do make is what we call religion, if that makes sense to you.

Note also that at the time of the creation of most religions, they didn't find it illogical. This was when people thought the Earth was flat and the center of the universe, despite the observations of many people.

Schwa
02-25-2008, 11:39 PM
You act as if people say "Hmm, lets explain it with religion", but that's not how it works. They create an explanation, such as an omnipotent being (Which is easy to imagine and thus very common) and that explantation is what we call religion.

They don't make religion, but what they do make is what we call religion, if that makes sense to you.

Well, why is it so easy and common to invent an omnipotent being/beings?

And your ****ing blah is flawed. Early religions were all about beings who were barely better than human, not omnipotent beings, at least in the greeks, monotheistic religions didn't occur until later.

Ash
02-25-2008, 11:58 PM
Yeah, my wording was a bit wrong. The titans were stronger than the gods in Greek mythology, for instance. But still, misnomers aside, they imagine that powerful beings are behind it because of 3 factors:

A)They observe that they can't produce the phenomena
B)They have experiece with people in everyday life
C)They are open to superstition

Dudeman
02-25-2008, 11:59 PM
You guys were confusing religion and spirituality.

Almost all early humans had some form of spirituality. They all felt that there was some kind of higher-then-human being/beings. Hopefully, we can agree on this.

Religion, however, is just an elaboration of that idea. It isn't really explaining how the world works. It's explaining the idea of spirituality and their theory of what the higher being is. The entire religion is eventually based of that primary idea. This is usually where religions finally differ from each other.


Yes, but as they got more "civilized" they moved away from that. Most of our atheistical ideas are only 500 years old, where the Bible's ideas have been around for several thousand, along with alot of 'holy' ideas.
I'd also like to bring this up. I know it was a long while ago, but some of you might still be thinking this.

Just because you/your society is going through another dependency on science, doesn't mean that you can ignore all of history. You can't suddenly claim yourself more sophisticated just because your an atheist. You're just being an elitist and making an extremely bold claim.

Komaru
02-26-2008, 07:58 AM
Spirituality is an imporant part of human lifestyle, though. Even if it isn't religiously base.

I can't talk much about this now, I gotta go to school.

Mantha
02-26-2008, 08:45 AM
Oh Schwa. I see where were you getting now. That's good, you've explained the source of religion. It doesn't mean it's a need though, as Dragon said.

Also, people still believe in god(I'm not going to put an emphasis on Christianity, I'm talking about all beliefs) though science and progress have explained pretty much everything so far. I'm not taling about the ancient beliefs and how god existed.

What about from the moral point of view? Big Bang made a good point a few pages back, did anybody see it? What about crime, justice, relationships, forgiveness? Is something bad because the god says so or does god forbid something because it actually is bad?

Maybe the earlier explanations of world were actually for real, but they are not supposed to be taken literally now. Like Christians, for instance. They believe that it was God who created the man and the woman, but not out of nothing. They all still learn the theory of evolution and acknowledge it. Heck, I bet Charles Darwin was religious.
My point is, that all of those Bible stories(since we're talking about Christians) always had a moral message.

Ash
02-26-2008, 08:46 AM
You guys were confusing religion and spirituality.

Almost all early humans had some form of spirituality. They all felt that there was some kind of higher-then-human being/beings. Hopefully, we can agree on this.

Religion, however, is just an elaboration of that idea. It isn't really explaining how the world works. It's explaining the idea of spirituality and their theory of what the higher being is. The entire religion is eventually based of that primary idea. This is usually where religions finally differ from each other.


I'd also like to bring this up. I know it was a long while ago, but some of you might still be thinking this.

Just because you/your society is going through another dependency on science, doesn't mean that you can ignore all of history. You can't suddenly claim yourself more sophisticated just because your an atheist. You're just being an elitist and making an extremely bold claim.

I'm not going to go so far as to say that we are more civil (I don't think science is a mark of civility) but we certainly have a greater understanding of the universe.



And I've yet to see anyone explain why spirituality is so gosh-darn important.



Mantha, firstly, Darwin was an out-right atheist. Rumors about a death-bed conversation are a complete fallacy: he was an atheist to the end.

Second, bible stories DON'T always have a moral message. Many of them are just saying "This is what happens when you don't believe in God."

Lastly, people still believe in God in such great numbers because they are threatened from childhood onward about not beliving. OF COURSE they believe in God. Tell a child that he'll go to hell if he doesn't believe in santa and see how much longer he'll believe.

Mantha
02-26-2008, 09:13 AM
You're just saying that because you had a terrible experience yourself. People believe in god because they might have been raised like that. Not threatened.
Ask anybody religious and tell me what he or she will say.
Do you remember this:
http://stickpageportal.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41708
Did my parents threaten me? No and that's what the whole post is explaining. I also know a whole bunch of people that believe because they want to.
You can't just generalise, though I understand why you do that.

And stop capitalising god, you're on Christianity here again, whilst we're talking about religion and faith in general.

Schwa
02-26-2008, 10:05 AM
Ash as far as I know Charles Darwin was a devout religious something or another who was critiscized/ostracized because of his work.

Bleh.

Will find proofs later.

Cai Johnson
02-26-2008, 10:30 AM
Well. Religion becomes to exists because people need explanations. In past I don't think that they knew all of this we now know thanks to the science. I am atheist and I think except that that there is still other reason. People need idol, they need something they could behave like. Religion makes a very good law. What is most important thing - most people believing in god because they parents believe. I don't want to hear now "Wut? I am believer 'cuz I want to!". It's just that religion comes "form father to son". My parents are actually catholics, but lets take my firends: almost all of them believe in god, because they parents believe. This may sound stupid, but it's not a lie in my opinion.
Thanks,
Cai Johnson

Jeremy
02-26-2008, 04:12 PM
Ash as far as I know Charles Darwin was a devout religious something or another who was critiscized/ostracized because of his work.

Bleh.

Will find proofs later.

I think I heard the same thing. I'm pretty sure he was a clergyman for most of his life, actually.

Dragon⁰⁷⁷
02-26-2008, 07:51 PM
Mantha, firstly, Darwin was an out-right atheist. Rumors about a death-bed conversation are a complete fallacy: he was an atheist to the end.
If wikipedia's to be believed, he was Anglican. Could you state your source?

Edit: Quote: “an Agnostic would be the more correct description of my state of mind.”

Not exactly and "outright atheist."

Dudeman
02-26-2008, 08:07 PM
I'm not going to go so far as to say that we are more civil (I don't think science is a mark of civility) but we certainly have a greater understanding of the universe.
I would agree.


And I've yet to see anyone explain why spirituality is so gosh-darn important.
Aha, here it is. The main difference of spirituality and religion is crucial. Religion is what a group believes in/cultural traditions tied to a belief. Your spirituality is on an individual level. It is that person's connection to a higher prescence. What I've been trying to say is that all people, now and in the past, have spirituality. They are all have/once had a connection to a higher being. This is what the basis of the thread is. Do people need religion? Probably not; however, I believe that all people have spirituality.

Second, bible stories DON'T always have a moral message. Many of them are just saying "This is what happens when you don't believe in God."

Oh come now, you're just attacking the bible. We're on a broader scale. I won't even rebuttle for fear of keeping Christianity on the stage.

Jeremy
02-26-2008, 08:53 PM
Aha, here it is. The main difference of spirituality and religion is crucial. Religion is what a group believes in/cultural traditions tied to a belief. Your spirituality is on an individual level. It is that person's connection to a higher prescence. What I've been trying to say is that all people, now and in the past, have spirituality. They are all have/once had a connection to a higher being. This is what the basis of the thread is. Do people need religion? Probably not; however, I believe that all people have spirituality.

You didn't answer his question. He asked why spirituality is important, not what the difference is between it and religion.

cyan
02-26-2008, 09:01 PM
Mantha, that thread you made was pretty thoughtful, and I pretty much agree with everything you said. Honestly what is the point of living your life in sadness? There are so many things to be HAPPY about, why dwell on things that are depressing?

Dudeman
02-26-2008, 09:06 PM
This is what the basis of the thread is.

You didn't answer his question. He asked why spirituality is important, not what the difference is between it and religion.

The importance is all about spirituality. Do people need God? Is it natural for people to try to connect to a spiritual being? This thread is all about the individual's natural or unnatural will to accept God.

Schwa
02-26-2008, 09:41 PM
but we certainly have a greater understanding of the universe.




No. **** you. You eltist shit.

Religion is an additive to theists life, not an inhibitor. Why in the name of ****ing Charles Darwin would believing in "Gawd" give you less of an understanding of the universe? Do you have any reasoning for that?

No you ****ing don't. Unless you're being stereotypical and saying "Oh, god, creationist, **** the big-bang, shit shit, **** ****, literal literal."

You do know that most of the worlds scientific advances and 'knowledgebility shit about the universe' came because people believed in god? Most of the greatest advances in technology were caused BY the church.

And since Charles Darwin was religious in some way or another and he caused arguably one of the most profound scientific insights into our universe.

Seriously.

Goddamnit.

Houston-Mane
02-26-2008, 09:42 PM
I really beleive in my heart there is a god i thank him because i've had countless times if he did'nt tell me something was gonna happenned id be dead.

i don't wanan go into this whole epidimic story but ill shorten it.

This one time i was gonna go to the pool party with my friend and something in my mind or body told me not to go and im glad i did'nt some guy was dancing with this other guy's girl and he got mad so he went to his car got the gun and started shooting up the place no one died but 12 was injured badly.

i think their should'nt be a queston that u believe god because if you have a belief on earth and you die and end up in the limbo between lines of hell and heaven then ur screwed thinking their wasn't a god.

Schwa
02-26-2008, 09:45 PM
No. **** you. You eltist shit.

Religion is an additive to theists life, not an inhibitor. Why in the name of ****ing Charles Darwin would believing in "Gawd" give you less of an understanding of the universe? Do you have any reasoning for that?

No you ****ing don't. Unless you're being stereotypical and saying "Oh, god, creationist, **** the big-bang, shit shit, **** ****, literal literal."

You do know that most of the worlds scientific advances and 'knowledgebility shit about the universe' came because people believed in god? Most of the greatest advances in technology were caused BY the church.

And since Charles Darwin was religious in some way or another and he caused arguably one of the most profound scientific insights into our universe.

Seriously.

Goddamnit.

Just quoting this so that you guys don't miss it.

Houstan-Mane, thats not whats the threads about and doesn't relate to the topic at hand, or any of the discussions we've had. So...yeah...bleh.

Dudeman
02-26-2008, 09:46 PM
No. **** you. You eltist shit.
blahblahblah
Giving you time to delete your post

He was actually talking about the people in our time period, not his religious group specifically. Unneeded attack.

Komaru
02-26-2008, 09:47 PM
I really beleive in my heart there is a god i thank him because i've had countless times if he did'nt tell me something was gonna happenned id be dead.

i don't wanan go into this whole epidimic story but ill shorten it.

This one time i was gonna go to the pool party with my friend and something in my mind or body told me not to go and im glad i did'nt some guy was dancing with this other guy's girl and he got mad so he went to his car got the gun and started shooting up the place no one died but 12 was injured badly.

i think their should'nt be a queston that u believe god because if you have a belief on earth and you die and end up in the limbo between lines of hell and heaven then ur screwed thinking their wasn't a god.

This isn't an debate about the existance of God, just a debate about the relevance of the effects of the spirituality on human lives.

Dragon⁰⁷⁷
02-26-2008, 09:48 PM
No. **** you. You eltist shit.

Religion is an additive to theists life, not an inhibitor. Why in the name of ****ing Charles Darwin would believing in "Gawd" give you less of an understanding of the universe? Do you have any reasoning for that?

No you ****ing don't. Unless you're being stereotypical and saying "Oh, god, creationist, **** the big-bang, shit shit, **** ****, literal literal."

You do know that most of the worlds scientific advances and 'knowledgebility shit about the universe' came because people believed in god? Most of the greatest advances in technology were caused BY the church.

And since Charles Darwin was religious in some way or another and he caused arguably one of the most profound scientific insights into our universe.

Seriously.

Goddamnit.
This is why you shouldn't take things out of context. You end up looking like an idiot.

Schwa
02-26-2008, 10:00 PM
He was actually talking about the people in our time period, not his religious group specifically. Unneeded attack. Not really. So you're saying that because of our increase in Atheism we understand the universe better?


Which is poppy cock and calamine lotion.


You do know that most of the worlds scientific advances and 'knowledgebility shit about the universe' came because people believed in god? Most of the greatest advances in technology were caused BY the church.

And since Charles Darwin was religious in some way or another and he caused arguably one of the most profound scientific insights into our universe.


Geebz.

Stickty
02-26-2008, 10:16 PM
god.... we totally need him u bastards (no offense)

Jeremy
02-26-2008, 11:57 PM
You do know that most of the worlds scientific advances and 'knowledgebility shit about the universe' came because people believed in god? Most of the greatest advances in technology were caused BY the church.

And since Charles Darwin was religious in some way or another and he caused arguably one of the most profound scientific insights into our universe.

I agreed up until then. Both of those claims are laughably stupid. Scientific advancements come from people with open minds, it doesn't matter what religion they come from. And to classify the scientific advancements were made by the church because some of the scientists might have believed in a god?

Please, you're being the elitist one now, and your doing it on behalf of an entire religion.

Second, Charles Darwin was only a clergyman for most of his life. When it mattered, I'm pretty sure he wasn't in fact a theist.

Dragon⁰⁷⁷
02-26-2008, 11:59 PM
Not really. So you're saying that because of our increase in Atheism we understand the universe better?
He was saying we understand because we are more advanced, as in science. Read the post he was responding to.

Schwa
02-27-2008, 12:11 AM
Just because you/your society is going through another dependency on science, doesn't mean that you can ignore all of history. You can't suddenly claim yourself more sophisticated just because your an atheist. You're just being an elitist and making an extremely bold claim.


I'm not going to go so far as to say that we are more civil (I don't think science is a mark of civility) but we certainly have a greater understanding of the universe.

Bleh ?

Easy to misinterpret?

CriticalDesign
02-27-2008, 12:22 AM
Some people just use a deity to explain the unexplainable, and to give them a sense of protection and hope. It's less harmful than drugs, imo.

Schwa
02-27-2008, 12:26 AM
Some people just use a deity to explain the unexplainable, and to give them a sense of protection and hope. It's less harmful than drugs, imo.

Thanks for knocking off my post bud.

We've already covered that.

Dudeman
02-27-2008, 01:28 AM
Bleh ?

Easy to misinterpret?
I know. Looking back on it, it's very complicated to think about. It's just a few pronouns away from changing the meaning. I was trying to stay reserved until ash came after I took a re-read through the last couple of pages.


Not really. So you're saying that because of our increase in Atheism we understand the universe better?
Also, I meant to say that our global society today knows more about the universe. I didn't mean the group of athiests currently compared to ....athiesm.

Damn, I'm confused.

Steyene
02-27-2008, 07:59 AM
Faith and spirituality are needed, for the human mind, as with a omnipotent being you can never be alone.

Who is to say that science doesn't strengthen faith? As surely seeing how infinitely complicated everything is, is surely going to show how much power God has? As I know that is how I feel on a personal level.

Also I might be reading to deeply into Ash's posts but the way he is phrasing everything is making it sound like science is the new religion. So who is to say that in the future that religion might become the new science?

Ash
02-27-2008, 08:55 AM
Science can never be called a religion because sience isn't some dogma, or a way of life: it's just the term we use to describe the process of observation>hypothesis>expirementation>theory.

Religion has a tendancy to stay the same. In fact, the Christian bible says that the word will stay the same (****ing mormons not paying attention), that it must not be changed.


Dudeman, back on the subject of spirituality, I disagree that everyone has it. I, and a few people I know, are very comfortable with the thought that we are alone, that there is no God. In fact, we like it this way, because there are no vague standards to live up to.

Rusender
02-27-2008, 11:19 AM
Religion gives a reason for people to feel guilty. I think (even if its a complete lie), that religion is a great thing. A person without anything to believe in is a very empty person.

Everyone has some sort of philosophy, and its by that idea that they live by. We need something to follow, be it a god or trying to get rid of god. What would our lives be like if we had no goal, nothing we were trying to accomplish in life?

Ssjbryando
02-27-2008, 12:14 PM
I believe in a god. Because, well I just do. I know there is something higher lol doing something. But I guess thats me. And it also gives hope to people. like when people who believe in god, are like feeling sad, or miserable. they mostly pray to god, and believe there is someone helping them.

YOU KNOW like. Your like believing in something and think you can't do it alone or something, they get in bed and pray, and It gives them hope. Cause, like when someone has cancer and its an incurable disease. people pray, and believe there is always a chance that she might survive. while others who don't believe are like ''Yeah that ****er is screwed it cannot be cured'' ok yeah >__>

Mantha
02-27-2008, 02:08 PM
Schwa, I'd like to ask you to stop insulting. This is a debate, lighten up.

I'd like to thank you people for posting your opinion here. Now if you excuse me, I'll post something smarter later. I'm alcoholised.

Steyene
02-27-2008, 04:01 PM
observation>hypothesis>expirementation>theory.

Religion:

Observation: The world around them and how complex it is.

Hypothesis: There must be a all powerful being or greater being to have made all of this in such a complex way

Experimentation: What happens to the human phycie(sp) when you add faith into their mind. Trying to replicate the world, and its conditions

Theory: There must be a greater being as everything is so minutely complex.

Also Ash, you can see a huge similarity between religion and science, the same thing happened with modern religion taking over the older ones. Science is just providing another belief structure although it isn't a belief per say.

Jeremy
02-27-2008, 05:43 PM
Religion gives a reason for people to feel guilty. I think (even if its a complete lie), that religion is a great thing. A person without anything to believe in is a very empty person.

Everyone has some sort of philosophy, and its by that idea that they live by. We need something to follow, be it a god or trying to get rid of god. What would our lives be like if we had no goal, nothing we were trying to accomplish in life?

I think your using the 'being Christian gives you a better sense of morality' theory . Thus giving people a reason to feel guilty?

And purpose exists outside of a god, not all philosophies and lifestyles start with a god or a religion, so I don't see why your using this argument.


Experimentation: What happens to the human phycie(sp) when you add faith into their mind. Trying to replicate the world, and its conditions

You're desperate. I have never heard anyone ask this question, and I don't think anyone thinks like that, or asks that question.

You cant compare faith to science, they are polar opposites. Science is what you can feel and see and prove, after dozens of experiments and tests.

Faith is the belief in something you cant see or feel.

Ash
02-27-2008, 08:00 PM
Religion:

Observation: The world around them and how complex it is.

Hypothesis: There must be a all powerful being or greater being to have made all of this in such a complex way
this is where it ends. No experiment has ever been performed to dest this hypothesis.
Experimentation: What happens to the human phycie(sp) when you add faith into their mind. Trying to replicate the world, and its conditions
Erm... Sounds more to me like something a PSYCOLOGIST would ask, not a person from 400 BCE.

Also, how does this expirement test the hypothesis? After all, that's how the scientific method works.
Theory: There must be a greater being as everything is so minutely complex.
Erm... wow.
Also Ash, you can see a huge similarity between religion and science, the same thing happened with modern religion taking over the older ones. Science is just providing another belief structure although it isn't a belief per say.

I love how you layed out your method there. It's as if I were to do this:



Observation: The sky is blue.

Hypothesis: The sky reflects the blue from the ocean.

Expirement: How does the color of the sky effect people's mood?

Theory: The sky is blue because it reflects the ocean.


What you layed out was a bothery of the scientific method. Your experiment should have tested whether complexity requires intelligence to arise, not whether religion effects the brain.




A person without anything to believe in is a very empty person.

Well, actually, I feel quite content. In fact, i'm more consistantly happy now that I don't the thought of a God to keep me worried.


Religion gives a reason for people to feel guilty. I think (even if its a complete lie), that religion is a great thing.

WHY DO ALL YOU PEOPLE KEEP FORGETTING ABOUT HUMAN EMPATHY!!!!!


Everyone has some sort of philosophy, and its by that idea that they live by. We need something to follow, be it a god or trying to get rid of god. What would our lives be like if we had no goal, nothing we were trying to accomplish in life?

I'm looking forward to a good dinner, actually.

Schwa
02-27-2008, 10:01 PM
Schwa, I'd like to ask you to stop insulting. This is a debate, lighten up.

I'd like to thank you people for posting your opinion here. Now if you excuse me, I'll post something smarter later. I'm alcoholised.

>_>

Ash I apologise for my insulatation...by taking your side.

Personally I think the world would be a better place with no religion if we all had morals reflection those taught in the bible, but without having to rely on a supernatural deity to enforce those.

Something like that.

I hate it when people bring up that religion gives you morals, sure, it might, but people do have their own morals.

But I also hate it when people insult people for having morals based on the bible.

Just throwing that out there.

Back on topic.

Think father figure-esque mode of thought.

Since I can't think of anything intelligent to add.

zerzavy
02-27-2008, 10:19 PM
It's not my choice to make people want to believe in what they want but they should be real strong about what they believe.

They have this guy who could be the devil forceing you into a different type of beleif atheanism i don't really support their cause because they have no certain clue in what to believe in if their gonna beleive there's no god then why do they still live?why not kill theirselves?.

For God believeres thats me we have our own design in what we love tho we are uncertain of what god looks like we do have people giving us alot of more info to picture but we still are unsure i'll love him to the day i die for some reason people have too many questions in god and make up stupid reasons to start some bull stuff like killing people because god sent u a message to .... just be real i don't think god would tell you to kill someone i know the devil would but anyways thats my opinion.

Ash
02-27-2008, 10:39 PM
It's not my choice to make people want to believe in what they want but they should be real strong about what they believe.

They have this guy who could be the devil forceing you into a different type of beleif atheanism i don't really support their cause because they have no certain clue in what to believe in if their gonna beleive there's no god then why do they still live?why not kill theirselves?.

For God believeres thats me we have our own design in what we love tho we are uncertain of what god looks like we do have people giving us alot of more info to picture but we still are unsure i'll love him to the day i die for some reason people have too many questions in god and make up stupid reasons to start some bull stuff like killing people because god sent u a message to .... just be real i don't think god would tell you to kill someone i know the devil would but anyways thats my opinion.
This post proves that Christians have no punctuation skills.

Dudeman
02-27-2008, 10:46 PM
This post proves that Christians have no punctuation skills.

This post proves that Athiests are generalizing jackasses.


****ing mormons not paying attention
Moar proof.



Dudeman, back on the subject of spirituality, I disagree that everyone has it. I, and a few people I know, are very comfortable with the thought that we are alone, that there is no God. In fact, we like it this way, because there are no vague standards to live up to.
Disregarding my shenanigans:

Those standards you spoke of pertain to religion. This is just about an individual belief, far from the expectations of society and culture. I don't have a problem that you believe that. I'm just taking a look at history and saying, "Wow, almost the majority of all people were religious for centuries. Is it because they followed religion, or is it because people had spirituality and religion justified it?".

Schwa
02-27-2008, 11:09 PM
This post proves that Christians have no punctuation skills.

Hey. I'm a Christian.

Steyene
02-28-2008, 06:55 AM
Also side note:

Mormons aren't Christians, it is a different belief system and faith >_>

Ash
02-28-2008, 11:28 PM
This post proves that Athiests are generalizing jackasses.
It was a joke.

Moar proof.
Another joke.


Disregarding my shenanigans:

Those standards you spoke of pertain to religion. This is just about an individual belief, far from the expectations of society and culture. I don't have a problem that you believe that. I'm just taking a look at history and saying, "Wow, almost the majority of all people were religious for centuries. Is it because they followed religion, or is it because people had spirituality and religion justified it?".

I'm sure it never had anything to do with preasure, fear, and incentive for reward. (Not generalizing, just saying that this has happened in the past with numerous religions.)

Steyene
02-29-2008, 05:12 AM
Yes but Ash, you are now saying that the world will be better without religion (pressure), because religion is the cause of lots of conflicts (fear), and that if you don't have a religion you will be a lot less worried and that you don't have to have your life governed by religion (incentive)

funnyav
02-29-2008, 05:32 AM
Assuming I understood the actual point of this thread, then all I'd need to say is:

Atheists can have lives just as good as religious people therefore people do not NEED god.
The idea of a god was an explanation for things that seem very simple to us today, and was sometimes abused by clever people to get others to do what they want.

Myself
02-29-2008, 05:38 AM
Assuming I understood the actual point of this thread, then all I'd need to say is:

Atheists can have lives just as good as religious people therefore people do not NEED god.
The idea of a god was an explanation for things that seem very simple to us today, and was sometimes abused by clever people to get others to do what they want.
A winrar is you, good sir.

funnyav
02-29-2008, 05:42 AM
Thank you. And congrats with your livers ^_^

Jeremy
02-29-2008, 06:06 AM
Yes but Ash, you are now saying that the world will be better without religion (pressure), because religion is the cause of lots of conflicts (fear), and that if you don't have a religion you will be a lot less worried and that you don't have to have your life governed by religion (incentive)

He actually never said any of that in this thread. He just said that those methods have been used in religions before.

funnyav
02-29-2008, 06:16 AM
I thought my post concluded this thread. If you wish to continue I will express my beliefs on the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

Ash
02-29-2008, 08:15 AM
Yes but Ash, you are now saying that the world will be better without religion (pressure), because religion is the cause of lots of conflicts (fear), and that if you don't have a religion you will be a lot less worried and that you don't have to have your life governed by religion (incentive)

Don't try to read too deep into my posts, I said exactly what I meant.

Many people, for instance the atheistic barbarians of some early cultures, became Christians because the Catholic church said that if they didn't, they would burn forever in the afterlife. They were scared, and so did what the Church said. They were only religious out of pressure, fear, and incentive of reward.


This sort of thing occurs more often in conversion (Atheistic cultures are few and far-between, and usually very primitive), such as the Native Americans in the mid 1600s to 1800s, and the Pagans in Europe in the 12th Century.

CriticalDesign
02-29-2008, 11:49 PM
A winrar is you, good sir.

Stating the obvious does not = win, it = ....well...stating the damn obvious.

SuckCannon
03-21-2008, 08:24 PM
>_>

Personally I think the world would be a better place with no religion if we all had morals reflection those taught in the bible, but without having to rely on a supernatural deity to enforce those.

think about it. why do you need to rely on that deity? god has never forced you to use his system of morals, so you've really been doing it yourself all along.

the bible has too much hate for me to consider it a good source of morality. the holier-than-thou attitude is permanently ingrained in christianity. why not do whatever you want, but without infringing anyone else's rights? if everyone would quit ****ing with everybody else we'd be fine. unfortunately, no one ever has as much as they want (christians included) and greed causes them to devalue the lives of their neighbors.

so i suppose it's just wishful thinking.

p.s. there is no god.

Gavel
03-21-2008, 08:52 PM
think about it. why do you need to rely on that deity? god has never forced you to use his system of morals, so you've really been doing it yourself all along.
If you really read the bible, you'd know that God gives you free-will so that he can see if you're worthy enough to enter heaven when your time comes. That argument was just pointless.

the bible has too much hate for me to consider it a good source of morality.
Now just how much of the bible did you read before producing this theory?

the holier-than-thou attitude is permanently ingrained in christianity. why not do whatever you want, but without infringing anyone else's rights?
So basically what you're saying is is that we should just lock ourselves off from society and never cross another person's path at all? Because I don't understand how people are supposed to "do whatever they want" without someone else being involved. Except for, maybe, masturbation.

if everyone would quit ****ing with everybody else we'd be fine.
Wow what a philosophy. You should probably make your own television therapy session.

unfortunately, no one ever has as much as they want (christians included) and greed causes them to devalue the lives of their neighbors.
So what you're saying is everyday, every single Christian on Earth succumbs to his or her greedy nature and fucks someone over in the process?

so i suppose it's just wishful thinking.

p.s. there is no god.
Wow, what a useful and needed statement.
Responses in bold.

SuckCannon
03-21-2008, 09:11 PM
If you really read the bible, you'd know that God gives you free-will so that he can see if you're worthy enough to enter heaven when your time comes. That argument was just pointless.
quite aware of that. you can be moral without threats of punishment. he gave us free will but still wants to scare us into loving him, so what kind of choice is that really?
(if there were actual, definitive proof of god's existence no one would deny him. as it stands, the complexity of a tree or rainbow doesn't do it for me.)


Now just how much of the bible did you read before producing this theory?
i'd say about all of it. sure, excluding the old testament removes much of the hate, but it's still present in the NT.


So basically what you're saying is is that we should just lock ourselves off from society and never cross another person's path at all? Because I don't understand how people are supposed to "do whatever they want" without someone else being involved. Except for, maybe, masturbation.
plz read. "without infringing on anyone else's rights" i didn't say exclude yourself from society, i said don't do anything that takes away another person's rights. like murdering them, get it?


Wow what a philosophy. You should probably make your own television therapy session.
i was actually thinking about doing just that and.. oh, you're being sarcastic. cuts me to the core.


So what you're saying is everyday, every single Christian on Earth succumbs to his or her greedy nature and fucks someone over in the process?
it wasn't directed at just christians, but yeah. human beings by nature love to **** each other over.
you can exaggerate my statements as much as you want, but hopefully the others on here realize that was a loaded question as i clearly did not say what you are taking out of it.


Wow, what a useful and needed statement.
same.

Responses in italic.

SuckCannon
03-21-2008, 09:52 PM
example

Mark 7:26 The woman was a Greek, a Syrophenician by nation; and she besought him that he would cast forth the devil out of her daughter.
7:27 But Jesus said unto her, Let the children first be filled: for it is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it unto the dogs.

she begs and he does help her, but why did she have to beg? because she's greek, jesus believes she is unworthy.

edit: aw buddy, come on back. i wanted to argue.

Ash
01-17-2009, 09:52 PM
I know this is a massive ****ing bump, but it was a very good, clean debate, and it left a lot of unanswered questions. Instead of making a new one that would, for the first 3 pages, be nothing but people complaining about religion-related debates, I decided to ressurect this one.

Hopefully we can get back into the debate without too much whining.


To kick it back into gear, I maintain that people may be able to bolster their morals through some form of holy text, but in practice reject anything that seems immoral to them, and only pick and choose "the good stuff".

Ssjbryando
01-17-2009, 10:00 PM
I Don't know if I posted here already, but my answer is yes.

People are weak. Well not weak, but if they believe in something ''magical', some spirit, some higher power, it gives them a lot of faith and hope.

Some people if there scared, pray to god, and then think its in his hands, thus making them feel much less scared, and more self-secured.

I am a christian, but I'm not sure if there's a god. I believe in a guiding sort of thing though, we don't have in control. But even if he doesn't exist, I'm in a way glad people THINK he does. Cause he gives people hope, to defeat things like.. Cancer for example, which have no cure. Or those kinda thinking stuff, that are hard to do by just human hand. And thinking gods power is in-human. And believing in something like that makes you mentally stronger as well.

But it also causes a lot of war :\ which a certain type of religion does a lot.. (Not naming) besides that, yea.

Haven't really read the thread so lol.. I could be just re-saying stuff.

Ash
01-17-2009, 10:14 PM
I Don't know if I posted here already, but my answer is yes.

People are weak. Well not weak, but if they believe in something ''magical', some spirit, some higher power, it gives them a lot of faith and hope.

Some people if there scared, pray to god, and then think its in his hands, thus making them feel much less scared, and more self-secured.

I am a christian, but I'm not sure if there's a god. I believe in a guiding sort of thing though, we don't have in control. But even if he doesn't exist, I'm in a way glad people THINK he does. Cause he gives people hope, to defeat things like.. Cancer for example, which have no cure. Or those kinda thinking stuff, that are hard to do by just human hand. And thinking gods power is in-human. And believing in something like that makes you mentally stronger as well.

But it also causes a lot of war :\ which a certain type of religion does a lot.. (Not naming) besides that, yea.

Haven't really read the thread so lol.. I could be just re-saying stuff.

It sounds like you are saying that it would be better for a person with an incurable disease to believe that prayer can help that for them to accept their fate, even if god were to not exist. Is that correct?

If so, then I contend that that has an adverse effect. Sure, it may comfort that one person, but for others the belief in prayer may be deadly. For example, imagine if someone has a disease with a known cure, but decides to sacrifice a goat instead of get medicine. The assumption I'll make is that they die, and while they may have died comforted by the thought of their god, they still died.

My point is not that this always happens with theists. I know that most theists don't do things like that, and that theists are usually very rational beings. However, the people to whom they give these beliefs can't always be counted on to behave just as rationally as other theists, especially if their holy book says that sacrificing a goat will cure your ailments. YOU may know that it isn't meant to be done, but others don't always have the same interpretation as you.

2-D
01-18-2009, 03:25 AM
god falls under the want catagory of want and need.

you need water, food, clothes, etc

Slayer
01-18-2009, 04:02 AM
In my opinion, God is simply a filler for the "afterlife". People want to have something to look forward to after death, and they don't want to believe that there's nothing then. That's practically the whole basis of all religions; "assurance" that there's something to do after you die. People can't deal with the idea that you stop existing, stop comprehension, stop all aspects of life when you die, although that makes perfect sense.

tl;dr: People make up gods and religions so that they have something to do after death.

herbivore
01-18-2009, 04:11 AM
You say successful aethiests exist, but all the "aethiests" I know run to god when they're in trouble. Especially those aethiests with Christian families, who celebrate Christmas, get married in churches and do everything a Christian does, all it takes is one incident for them to revert what they are actually inside. The thing is, most white people have grown up around primarily Christians - its the only thing they know, and its somewhere inside them. If you're a proper aethiest, then behave like one, because its not just belief which constitutes a religion - its the practices people follow.

Beta
01-18-2009, 04:35 AM
@herbivore
I don't resort to God for anything, because when you try to talk to God, it's like talking to yourself, except it doesn't work. I know this for fact, because my grandmother died last week.


If there is a time of no explanations, and some one says "ooh there is a man in the sky directing everything we do" people we accept it, regardless of how strange it sounds. When there are no explanations, people will accept almost anything.

And obviously it had been a long time going that no one ever disputed that, and that is why there are so many christians, because they think that if something has been believed for a long time, it must be true.

Slayer
01-18-2009, 05:08 AM
It's also sort of a first-come first-serve thing. Religion was the first "explanation" for many things, according to a lot of old civilizations. It's generally harder to get people to believe something new when there's already a widely accepted explanation. Religious people tend to be stubborn, imo.

See, science can give you tangible facts and information explaining nearly everything. That's what I believe in. I don't like blind faith. It's like pretending to sword fight, or gun fight or whatnot as a child. You just propose "Ok, so there's a guy in the sky who created everything and runs everything." and so you play by those rules.

I'm starting to ramble.

Bonk
01-18-2009, 06:32 AM
You say successful aethiests exist, but all the "aethiests" I know run to god when they're in trouble. Especially those aethiests with Christian families, who celebrate Christmas, get married in churches and do everything a Christian does, all it takes is one incident for them to revert what they are actually inside. The thing is, most white people have grown up around primarily Christians - its the only thing they know, and its somewhere inside them. If you're a proper aethiest, then behave like one, because its not just belief which constitutes a religion - its the practices people follow.

WHOA, WHOA THERE.

For a start, I do not know any atheists who run to god. Yet, this is not an arguement on either of our parts, and those who run to god are not really atheists, just doubting believers. I am annoyed that you use your personal experience as a broad generalization and also as a "factual" point in this debate.

Secondly, I hate the "athiests shouldn't celebrate christmas" arguement that you put forward. Why the hell not? Chirstmas long ago broke away from its strictly religious roots, and although it is a religious holiday it has also developed into a public holiday. It's the time when families get together, when friends give gifts and have a merry day. Arguing to deny that to atheists is selfish, considering it's not just your holiday anymore.

Thirdly, getting married in a church should not be restricted to non-atheists. It is a celebration of marriage, and just because god is not involved does not make it any less "holy".

Automaton
01-18-2009, 06:52 AM
I Don't know if I posted here already, but my answer is yes.

People are weak. Well not weak, but if they believe in something ''magical', some spirit, some higher power, it gives them a lot of faith and hope.

Some people if there scared, pray to god, and then think its in his hands, thus making them feel much less scared, and more self-secured.


It also makes them less independant, and believing in something that just isn't going to happen, thus when it doesn't happen they lose all faith and slip into depression.

Just thought I should point that out.

Automaton
01-18-2009, 06:55 AM
@herbivore
I don't resort to God for anything, because when you try to talk to God, it's like talking to yourself, except it doesn't work. I know this for fact, because my grandmother died last week.


I just thought I should point out that that sentence seems quite contradictory.

Ssjbryando
01-18-2009, 07:20 AM
It sounds like you are saying that it would be better for a person with an incurable disease to believe that prayer can help that for them to accept their fate, even if god were to not exist. Is that correct?

If so, then I contend that that has an adverse effect. Sure, it may comfort that one person, but for others the belief in prayer may be deadly. For example, imagine if someone has a disease with a known cure, but decides to sacrifice a goat instead of get medicine. The assumption I'll make is that they die, and while they may have died comforted by the thought of their god, they still died.

My point is not that this always happens with theists. I know that most theists don't do things like that, and that theists are usually very rational beings. However, the people to whom they give these beliefs can't always be counted on to behave just as rationally as other theists, especially if their holy book says that sacrificing a goat will cure your ailments. YOU may know that it isn't meant to be done, but others don't always have the same interpretation as you.

Well, one worries less about death, if they know a god exists and they go to heaven. Even though it might not be true, it gives them a great feeling of relieve, thinking everything will be ok. Even though that may be a lie, and I guess gives them the wrong idea. But if you die, and you believe that your bodies just shuts down, and you won't remember anything anyways, why not die a little more happy. Although I'm not saying that is necessary right, cause if you know there is nothing out there, and if you accept your dead, you stand much stronger.

[Second paragraphs]
Well, that of course I agree is not really right. But what I was more going for was, the people that because they believe also makes them stronger. For example, small things like idk.. a robbery or something. You stay calm, thinking that everything will probably be OK, cause its in gods hand. It gives you some more mental confident, but.. Of course IT SUCKS that they leave everything in his hand, and not take action themselves. That I do agree with, but the people who really believe know that '' (Check my last sentence in this comment)'' (Another horrible example sorry D:)

I guess I'm only thinking of the positives things, like staying calm in danger, knowing that its not your time to go yet for example, or stuff like that. :| (Sorry lmao, for the bad examples)

But we life in a more modern time now, and those people you just named probably rarely exist anymore, with the goat rituals, while they know there is a cure that can save them.

Although I agree there are people, that have to take medicines every week to stay alive, but at one point just think ''Arg.. I don't wanna live this way, I don't wanna extend my life, its time for me to go and rest in peace'' So stop taking em. (BUT I guess this ALSO counts for people who don't believe in god and just wanna rest)

@fluxinator: Yea I guess youre right, but it could also be the exact opposite. It doesn't happen, but because they believe in there goal, and that they can succeed with a higher powers help they continue to fight for it. But

I guess it just all depends on the people's will power, and how much they actually believe/bond them self to god, and leave everything to him.

- Although real people who believe in god, know that he gave us free will, so we shouldn't be counting on him to do miracles, or to do all the work. We have to do it ourself, so doing nothing in occasions I named above, isn't told. But Idk, I don't really know much of religion, so I could be wrong with whatever I just said.

herbivore
01-18-2009, 07:28 AM
It's also sort of a first-come first-serve thing. Religion was the first "explanation" for many things, according to a lot of old civilizations. It's generally harder to get people to believe something new when there's already a widely accepted explanation. Religious people tend to be stubborn, imo.

See, science can give you tangible facts and information explaining nearly everything. That's what I believe in. I don't like blind faith. It's like pretending to sword fight, or gun fight or whatnot as a child. You just propose "Ok, so there's a guy in the sky who created everything and runs everything." and so you play by those rules.

I'm starting to ramble.

See, thats another reason why people become aethiests - so they feel intellectual. People love to believe that science is the opposite of religion. By losing religion, they become believers in science.

Well science is definitely not removed from religion. Time for an Einstein quote!

"Well, I do not think that it is necessarily the case that science and religion are natural opposites. In fact, I think that there is a very close connection between the two. Further, I think that science without religion is lame and, conversely, that religion without science is blind. Both are important and should work hand-in-hand. It seems to me that whoever doesn't wonder about the truth in religion and in science might as well be dead."

If it wasn't for a belief in god (note, not Christ - not everyone is a Christian for those who haven't realised, nor is every religion similar to Christianity), many scientific developments may not have been made.

Your comment, "Ok, so there's a guy in the sky who created everything and runs everything", is very ignorant. Firstly, although the christians may believe it, many religions consider god to be very different. In fact, you are on the premise that religion contradicts science. It may be for Christianity, but many religions such as Buddhism and Hinduism do not.


@herbivore
I don't resort to God for anything, because when you try to talk to God, it's like talking to yourself, except it doesn't work. I know this for fact, because my grandmother died last week.


If there is a time of no explanations, and some one says "ooh there is a man in the sky directing everything we do" people we accept it, regardless of how strange it sounds. When there are no explanations, people will accept almost anything.

And obviously it had been a long time going that no one ever disputed that, and that is why there are so many christians, because they think that if something has been believed for a long time, it must be true.

Once again, you have generalised religion to Christianity - common mistake, since thats what most have you grown up around. Although Christians may believe god directs our actions, many religions do not. In fact, many religions say that it is our own actions which determine our fate - not god. Take hinduism and buddhism for example. You would have heard of 'karma' I'm sure.

Sorry to hear about your grandmother, but you did seem to contradict yourself there as Fluxinator pointed out.



WHOA, WHOA THERE.

For a start, I do not know any atheists who run to god. Yet, this is not an arguement on either of our parts, and those who run to god are not really atheists, just doubting believers. I am annoyed that you use your personal experience as a broad generalization and also as a "factual" point in this debate.

Secondly, I hate the "athiests shouldn't celebrate christmas" arguement that you put forward. Why the hell not? Chirstmas long ago broke away from its strictly religious roots, and although it is a religious holiday it has also developed into a public holiday. It's the time when families get together, when friends give gifts and have a merry day. Arguing to deny that to atheists is selfish, considering it's not just your holiday anymore.

Thirdly, getting married in a church should not be restricted to non-atheists. It is a celebration of marriage, and just because god is not involved does not make it any less "holy".


You speak from the point of view of someone who's probably grown up in a western country or one where Christianity is the dominant religion.

"Chirstmas long ago broke away from its strictly religious roots, and although it is a religious holiday it has also developed into a public holiday." How ludicrous! Then why don't you celebrate another festival? Celebrate Hanuka, Diwali or Eid instead? Just because in western countries holidays are given for Christian festivals, doesn't mean its not a religious affair.

You won't go to Afghanistan and find Muslims celebrating Christmas because its a 'non-religious' festival. Nor will you find many Aethiests in America celebrating Eid or Diwali. Why is that I wonder? Just because in places like America children are fed to believe Christmas is a non-religious event that everyone in the world celebrates, doesn't mean its true.

No way should aethiests be denied the right to celebrate Christmas. But they shouldn't conveniently forget that they are in fact celebrating (whether it be meeting with family, or otherwise) the birth of a Christian figure, Jesus.

As for getting married in Church: well, aethiests should not be restrcited at all, but why Church? If you are not truly Christian inside, why not get married at another 'holy' location. You know - other religions have holy places too. However its hard to understand for 'aethiests' who only know how Christians live - they get married in Churches, take Christian oathes and get blessed by Christian priest. Patheticly ignorant.

Why not get married in a temple? Or on the beach if you want to stick to your non-belief in god.

I can't even count how many 'aethiests' I've met who shout "Jesus Christ" or some other variations in a moment of surprise.

If an aethiest believes there is no god, yet every minute of his/her life either remembers or celebrates the presence of one (particularly Christ), then I believe there is no need for aethiesm.

Save a space in the dictionary, or maybe redefine it to "kids in western countries with Christian families who can't be bothered going to Church".

BTW, I am not a christian and am only expressing an opinion. I hope no-one gets offended.


Thanks.

Slayer
01-18-2009, 07:41 AM
I never said that science and religion are opposites. My only reason for introducing it was to point out that science can disprove, with tangible evidence, many of the ideas within religion. Religion has no evidence to their claims, only stories.


See, thats another reason why people become aethiests - so they feel intellectual.
I'm not an atheist(learn to spell, guys), I'm merely a person who likes to understand things that can be explained with experiments and physical evidence, and not made up fallacies. I'm also not saying that if you're religious you're stupid, or vice-versa. I simply choose not to buy into stories spun by frightened individuals about death. Religion was created to ensure some sort of satisfaction after life. Those who created religion couldn't deal with the concept that you die, and nothing happens afterward. Science isn't a bundle of stories made to console humans. Science is there to inform humans about how things work.

Also,

Your comment, "Ok, so there's a guy in the sky who created everything and runs everything", is very ignorant. Firstly, although the christians may believe it, many religions consider god to be very different. In fact, you are on the premise that religion contradicts science. It may be for Christianity, but many religions such as Buddhism and Hinduism do not.

The title of the thread is addressing God.

Jeremy
01-18-2009, 07:52 AM
Long Replies Umglol.

herbivore
01-18-2009, 07:53 AM
I never said that science and religion are opposites. My only reason for introducing it was to point out that science can disprove, with tangible evidence, many of the ideas within religion. Religion has no evidence to their claims, only stories.


Which religion? Again your thinking Christianity here. Scientific theories are just that - theories. Its foolish to think they've been proved. But because lots of people believe in it, its taken as true. Same for religion. Anyone who has done chem will know how cheap some of the theories taught are. XD


Religion was created to ensure some sort of satisfaction after life. Those who created religion couldn't deal with the concept that you die, and nothing happens afterward. Science isn't a bundle of stories made to console humans. Science is there to inform humans about how things work.

Haha, nice generalisation. If you knew that how many things in science are simply based on speculation, you wouldn't say that. There's a lot of evidence to point to scientific theories being true, but they've not been proved, but we do believe them. Thats why they use that word theory. Religion can inform people how things work, and not necessarily contrary to science.

From your logic, religion is more trustworthy, because its been explaining for longer than science!



Also,


The title of the thread is addressing God.

OK, maybe you didn't realise that other religions have gods. Well, now you know. Christians haven't patented god you know.

And if your not convinced, first post in the thread:


If you can notice, I didn't capitalise god. I'm talking about religion in general.

Slayer
01-18-2009, 08:24 AM
Which religion? Again your thinking Christianity here. Scientific theories are just that - theories. Its foolish to think they've been proved. But because lots of people believe in it, its taken as true. Same for religion. Anyone who has done chem will know how cheap some of the theories taught are. XD
Yeah, gravity, sunlight, biology, photosynthesis, osmosis, chemistry, nuclear fusion, chemical reactions, velocity, mass, infrared light waves, cancer-causing UV rays, reproduction, geology, etc. are all just theories. It's not like they are proven or occur everyday or anything.
Do you see how stupid that comment was now?

Haha, nice generalisation. If you knew that how many things in science are simply based on speculation, you wouldn't say that. There's a lot of evidence to point to scientific theories being true, but they've not been proved, but we do believe them. Thats why they use that word theory. Religion can inform people how things work, and not necessarily contrary to science.

From your logic, religion is more trustworthy, because its been explaining for longer than science!
Again, you seem to only be addressing the theories, and not the proven facts. Sure, there are scientific theories, but there are probably far more facts that have been proven through experimentation. See my above paragraph.

OK, maybe you didn't realise that other religions have gods. Well, now you know. Christians haven't patented god you know.

And if your not convinced, first post in the thread:
My opinion still stands, all religion is based on stories and fiction. It's something people choose to believe in. You don't believe or disbelieve facts, they are or aren't.

Ash
01-18-2009, 08:40 AM
Well, one worries less about death, if they know a god exists and they go to heaven. Even though it might not be true, it gives them a great feeling of relieve, thinking everything will be ok. Even though that may be a lie, and I guess gives them the wrong idea. But if you die, and you believe that your bodies just shuts down, and you won't remember anything anyways, why not die a little more happy. Although I'm not saying that is necessary right, cause if you know there is nothing out there, and if you accept your dead, you stand much stronger.

That may help a person who thinks they're going to heaven, but what happens if they think they're going to hell? It causes only pain and dread.



[Second paragraphs]
Well, that of course I agree is not really right. But what I was more going for was, the people that because they believe also makes them stronger. For example, small things like idk.. a robbery or something. You stay calm, thinking that everything will probably be OK, cause its in gods hand. It gives you some more mental confident, but.. Of course IT SUCKS that they leave everything in his hand, and not take action themselves. That I do agree with, but the people who really believe know that '' (Check my last sentence in this comment)'' (Another horrible example sorry D:)


Again, while it may comfort one person, further down the line it will worry someone, especially if this other someone is doing something illegal, because they might get the idea that god is OPPOSING them. And, again, they might be worried about going to hell.


@fluxinator: Yea I guess youre right, but it could also be the exact opposite. It doesn't happen, but because they believe in there goal, and that they can succeed with a higher powers help they continue to fight for it. But

I guess it just all depends on the people's will power, and how much they actually believe/bond them self to god, and leave everything to him.

But what happens when something BAD happens, and the person looses trust in their god? If they have full confidence that their God will prevent the death of their son on the front lines, but he ends up dying, they will usually in practice develop a pessimistic, hopeless attitude.



See, thats another reason why people become aethiests - so they feel intellectual. People love to believe that science is the opposite of religion. By losing religion, they become believers in science.

Stop right there. You're only a paragraph in and I know this won't end well. I don't "Believe" in science the same way one "believes" in their religion. No atheist does. The word "belief" evokes "faith", which in turn is the exact opposite of what I have. One with faith holds on to their beliefs despite contradicting evidence. If I were to see that the scientific method was an ineffective way of finding truth, I would ditch it in a second. However, there has been no such case yet.


Well science is definitely not removed from religion. Time for an Einstein quote!

"Well, I do not think that it is necessarily the case that science and religion are natural opposites. In fact, I think that there is a very close connection between the two. Further, I think that science without religion is lame and, conversely, that religion without science is blind. Both are important and should work hand-in-hand. It seems to me that whoever doesn't wonder about the truth in religion and in science might as well be dead."

Obviously you don't know Einstein.

In that quote he wasn't talking about religion in a theological since: he was himself an atheist, or at least and agnostic. He meant religion as in a hypothetical "religion of science", a dogmatic approach towards science.


If it wasn't for a belief in god (note, not Christ - not everyone is a Christian for those who haven't realised, nor is every religion similar to Christianity), many scientific developments may not have been made.

That's a very weak argument. It doesn't prove a thing about theism. You might as well have said "If it weren't for Coffee, many scientific discoveries may not have been made."

First, correlation does not imply causation. Just because theism came before any specific discovery doesn't mean that theism caused that discovery.

In fact, usually those with theistic beliefs IMPEDE the advancement of science. One need look no further than Galileo, who was put on house arrest for his scientific propositions.


Your comment, "Ok, so there's a guy in the sky who created everything and runs everything", is very ignorant. Firstly, although the christians may believe it, many religions consider god to be very different.

Errr.... Yeah. And? Whether his description was accurate is beside the point. We are discussing the effects of theism on humanity and humans.

And besides, he was just using an example, because that's how early Christians perceived the god of the Bible.


In fact, you are on the premise that religion contradicts science. It may be for Christianity, but many religions such as Buddhism and Hinduism do not.

Stop, you're making a fool of yourself. At the core of Hinduism is the belief in reincarnation. Hindu beliefs have no concept of a "new soul". If you are alive, then your soul has been borrowed by thousands of people before you, and presumably thousands after you, unless you reach enlightenment, because only then can you escape the endless cycle of reincarnation.

This presents a mathematical impossibility. Hindu beliefs maintain that every time a person is born, the soul of another person is taken (the carrier dies) and is put into the new person.
So what happens when the population rises to billions of people?

I think that someone's been printing up new souls!



Once again, you have generalised religion to Christianity - common mistake, since thats what most have you grown up around. Although Christians may believe god directs our actions, many religions do not. In fact, many religions say that it is our own actions which determine our fate - not god. Take hinduism and buddhism for example. You would have heard of 'karma' I'm sure.

Nice Straw Man (http://www.stickpageportal.com/forums/showthread.php?t=62689) argument, there!

You are arguing against a small pert of his post, but failing to grasp the meaning. He wasn't assuming that all religions operate the same way, he was just using an example to illustrate that when an explanation arises that they can understand, people accept it as truth.

You could easily replace "ooh there is a man in the sky directing everything we do" with "ooh, when we die, our consciousnesses fly into a brand new body, but our body stays here!"


You speak from the point of view of someone who's probably grown up in a western country or one where Christianity is the dominant religion.

"Chirstmas long ago broke away from its strictly religious roots, and although it is a religious holiday it has also developed into a public holiday." How ludicrous! Then why don't you celebrate another festival? Celebrate Hanuka, Diwali or Eid instead? Just because in western countries holidays are given for Christian festivals, doesn't mean its not a religious affair.

You won't go to Afghanistan and find Muslims celebrating Christmas because its a 'non-religious' festival. Nor will you find many Aethiests in America celebrating Eid or Diwali. Why is that I wonder? Just because in places like America children are fed to believe Christmas is a non-religious event that everyone in the world celebrates, doesn't mean its true.

No way should aethiests be denied the right to celebrate Christmas. But they shouldn't conveniently forget that they are in fact celebrating (whether it be meeting with family, or otherwise) the birth of a Christian figure, Jesus.

I'll merely direct you to another thread for this.
http://www.stickpageportal.com/forums/showthread.php?t=97268



As for getting married in Church: well, aethiests should not be restrcited at all, but why Church? If you are not truly Christian inside, why not get married at another 'holy' location. You know - other religions have holy places too. However its hard to understand for 'aethiests' who only know how Christians live - they get married in Churches, take Christian oathes and get blessed by Christian priest. Patheticly ignorant.

Well, firstly, most atheists (SPELL IT RIGHT, YOU IDIOT!) don't have Christian weddings. They have "Civil marriages", usually in a courthouse, and with no religious connotations.

Secondly, most of the ones who still marry in a church only do so because churches are beautiful buildings, with amazing architecture and artwork.


Why not get married in a temple? Or on the beach if you want to stick to your non-belief in god.

Many DO get married in a temple, or on beaches. They get married where they want to.


I can't even count how many 'aethiests' I've met who shout "Jesus Christ" or some other variations in a moment of surprise.

I do things like that all the time.

Does that mean anything? NO.
If I say "Holy cow" does that make me a Hindu? NO.



If an aethiest believes there is no god, yet every minute of his/her life either remembers or celebrates the presence of one (particularly Christ), then I believe there is no need for aethiesm.

Good ****ing god you're an idiot.

Whether I was once a Christian has no bearing on whether I should be an atheist. The only reason I was ever a Christian was because I was forced into it through childhood indoctrination. People around me said it was so, and I believed it.


Save a space in the dictionary, or maybe redefine it to "kids in western countries with Christian families who can't be bothered going to Church".

BTW, I am not a christian and am only expressing an opinion. I hope no-one gets offended.


Thanks.

I AM offended. You are riding under the assumption that atheism is a person who is really a theist deep down, but for some reason denies the existence of god just for shits and giggles.

Atheism, by definition, means WITHOUT ANY BELIEF IN THE EXISTANCE OF A GOD.

I think that god doesn't exist. I'm not just saying that, either, I really feel that way. It may be hard for a simpleton like you to comprehend, but some people actually might have different beliefs then you.

Ash
01-18-2009, 08:44 AM
Wait, this guy's a troll.




Haha, I've been had. If Herbivore is Tyler or Patriot, I'm gonna scream.

Bonk
01-18-2009, 08:49 AM
You speak from the point of view of someone who's probably grown up in a western country or one where Christianity is the dominant religion.

Australia?

"Chirstmas long ago broke away from its strictly religious roots, and although it is a religious holiday it has also developed into a public holiday." How ludicrous! Then why don't you celebrate another festival? Celebrate Hanuka, Diwali or Eid instead? Just because in western countries holidays are given for Christian festivals, doesn't mean its not a religious affair.

Christmas is the only one where EVERYONE gets time off. So therefore, atheists celebrate that.

You won't go to Afghanistan and find Muslims celebrating Christmas because its a 'non-religious' festival. Nor will you find many Aethiests in America celebrating Eid or Diwali. Why is that I wonder? Just because in places like America children are fed to believe Christmas is a non-religious event that everyone in the world celebrates, doesn't mean its true.

Yet, many atheists do celebrate Christmas without any religious indication. I guess its more tradition now, because way back our families WERE all religious. Yet now, as atheists, we should not be excluded from tradition.

No way should aethiests be denied the right to celebrate Christmas. But they shouldn't conveniently forget that they are in fact celebrating (whether it be meeting with family, or otherwise) the birth of a Christian figure, Jesus.

See above. We aren't celebrating the birth of Jesus; we are celebrating a season of family and joy and time-off, with no religious ties except for the convenient name of the holiday period.

As for getting married in Church: well, aethiests should not be restrcited at all, but why Church? If you are not truly Christian inside, why not get married at another 'holy' location. You know - other religions have holy places too. However its hard to understand for 'aethiests' who only know how Christians live - they get married in Churches, take Christian oathes and get blessed by Christian priest. Patheticly ignorant.

I'm arguing as an atheist in a christian society. Because not many people are atheists converts FROM any other religion. You speak as if we are picking out Christians, but that is simply because Atheists and Christians have a connection. If atheists do exist from say Islam, then replace the word "Church" with "Mosque". You're the one bringing this down to ONLY Christianity.

Why not get married in a temple? Or on the beach if you want to stick to your non-belief in god.

Once again, tradition that used to be religious. Now it is simply tradition. And also, a lot of people DO get married outside of church. You speak as if ALL atheists must do one or the other.

I can't even count how many 'aethiests' I've met who shout "Jesus Christ" or some other variations in a moment of surprise.

Maybe "****" has a religious implication in the past - my point is, it has lost meaning and is now just another swear word. Plus, "taking the lord's name in vain" would be against religion.

If an aethiest believes there is no god, yet every minute of his/her life either remembers or celebrates the presence of one (particularly Christ), then I believe there is no need for aethiesm.

Religion is so ingrained into society that it isn't our fault if our family get-togethers happen to be on a religious holiday. It's not our fault that our civilization was built on faith - would you have us not do anything that stems from religion? That would be denying many everyday things that are no LONGER religious, like calling the holiday after a religious one for convenience.

Save a space in the dictionary, or maybe redefine it to "kids in western countries with Christian families who can't be bothered going to Church".

We don't believe.

BTW, I am not a christian and am only expressing an opinion. I hope no-one gets offended.


Thanks.

You dropped "Christian" many times, and I never did. I'd like to point that out


Which religion? Again your thinking Christianity here. Scientific theories are just that - theories. Its foolish to think they've been proved. But because lots of people believe in it, its taken as true. Same for religion. Anyone who has done chem will know how cheap some of the theories taught are. XD

Science has more proof than religion. But I don't think they are opposites, even if they aren't related.

Haha, nice generalisation. If you knew that how many things in science are simply based on speculation, you wouldn't say that.

I think you underestimate science.

There's a lot of evidence to point to scientific theories being true, but they've not been proved, but we do believe them. Thats why they use that word theory. Religion can inform people how things work, and not necessarily contrary to science.

Religion attributes unexplainable things to something unexplainable. Thumbs down.

From your logic, religion is more trustworthy, because its been explaining for longer than science! OK, maybe you didn't realise that other religions have gods. Well, now you know. Christians haven't patented god you know.

And if your not convinced, first post in the thread:

Socks
01-18-2009, 08:49 AM
I am born and raised Jewish, but for sometime I struggled with my swaying opinon with god.

I never was a true believer in what people say god did, i.e. splitting the river. but, i only wanted to believe in god because of facing a good afterlife.

being a little kid, the thoughts of death would torment me, but now that im older, i have realzed, it wasnt death that scared me, it was this "heaven" craze that did, and the fact of not existing scared the shit out of me. so, for believing in god rather than science as a kid, i got to relax and believe that i will have an aferlife.


long responses ftw.

herbivore
01-18-2009, 09:04 AM
Yeah, gravity, sunlight, biology, photosynthesis, osmosis, chemistry, nuclear fusion, chemical reactions, velocity, mass, infrared light waves, cancer-causing UV rays, reproduction, geology, etc. are all just theories. It's not like they are proven or occur everyday or anything.
Do you see how stupid that comment was now?

Again, you seem to only be addressing the theories, and not the proven facts. Sure, there are scientific theories, but there are probably far more facts that have been proven through experimentation. See my above paragraph.

My opinion still stands, all religion is based on stories and fiction. It's something people choose to believe in. You don't believe or disbelieve facts, they are or aren't.

I agree with you. You misunderstood me. I was just pointing out that science doesn't disprove religion...

Ash, lol, ok I was exaggerating but it wasnt totally trolling! Of course atheists exist. I'm not Tyler or Patriot though!

However, I do stand by the fact that many atheists are not truly atheists. I do agree that genuine atheists exist. :) I'll post a long post soon in reply to some of the things you've said.

Ash
01-18-2009, 09:05 AM
ITS SPELLED "ATHEISTS".


Seriously, man, spell it right.

herbivore
01-18-2009, 09:10 AM
ITS SPELLED "ATHEISTS".


Seriously, man, spell it right.

Never.

aethiest
aetheist
aithiyust

Ash
01-18-2009, 09:12 AM
Okay, this guy's just trolling.

Either that or he's genuinely stupid.

herbivore
01-18-2009, 10:05 AM
Stop right there. You're only a paragraph in and I know this won't end well. I don't "Believe" in science the same way one "believes" in their religion. No atheist does. The word "belief" evokes "faith", which in turn is the exact opposite of what I have. One with faith holds on to their beliefs despite contradicting evidence. If I were to see that the scientific method was an ineffective way of finding truth, I would ditch it in a second. However, there has been no such case yet.

Sorry, what I was trying to say is that 'science' almost becomes an opposite to religion for some people. Rejecting religion is as if they've "accepted" science, or become a "part" of it, despite the fact that religious people can be scientists.

Obviously you don't know Einstein.

In that quote he wasn't talking about religion in a theological since: he was himself an atheist, or at least and agnostic. He meant religion as in a hypothetical "religion of science", a dogmatic approach towards science.

Einstein himself said, "I am not an atheist". He wasn't proposing a religion of science either, as he insisted that these are seperate yet connected.

This was his explanation:
"I'm not an atheist, and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books, but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws, but only dimly understand these laws. Our limited mind grasps the mysterious force that moves the constellations."

That's a very weak argument. It doesn't prove a thing about theism. You might as well have said "If it weren't for Coffee, many scientific discoveries may not have been made."

First, correlation does not imply causation. Just because theism came before any specific discovery doesn't mean that theism caused that discovery.

This was reference to Einstein's quote about the relationship of science and religion. He said it can be religion which prompts scientific investigation.

There is no correlation between religion and discovery in the sense that religion appeared and scientific discovery was made! As I said above, I was pointing out the fact that in some occasions it has been religion itself which has prompted scientific investigation.

And how dare you doubt the powerof coffee... 8O

In fact, usually those with theistic beliefs IMPEDE the advancement of science. One need look no further than Galileo, who was put on house arrest for his scientific propositions.

I agree, some strict religions which punish those who go against them have indeed hampered scientific progress!

Stop, you're making a fool of yourself. At the core of Hinduism is the belief in reincarnation. Hindu beliefs have no concept of a "new soul". If you are alive, then your soul has been borrowed by thousands of people before you, and presumably thousands after you, unless you reach enlightenment, because only then can you escape the endless cycle of reincarnation.

This presents a mathematical impossibility. Hindu beliefs maintain that every time a person is born, the soul of another person is taken (the carrier dies) and is put into the new person.
So what happens when the population rises to billions of people?

I think that someone's been printing up new souls!

What you say is just another example of how people misunderstand the concept of reincarnation in Buddhism and Hinduism. You are not necessarily reborn as a person, and secondly this lies on the premise of history being linear. History may be cyclical, in that generations come and go. We have heard of the Ice Age, the destruction of dinosaurs and what not. Reincarnation is not a simplistic concept at all.

Well, firstly, most atheists (SPELL IT RIGHT, YOU IDIOT!) don't have Christian weddings. They have "Civil marriages", usually in a courthouse, and with no religious connotations.

Secondly, most of the ones who still marry in a church only do so because churches are beautiful buildings, with amazing architecture and artwork.

Many DO get married in a temple, or on beaches. They get married where they want to.

Of course not all atheists get married in churches! However I've talked with many people who call themselves atheists but when asked, say they will marry in a church. For many atheists, this is going against what they believe in. Some people who get married elsewhere, still have a priest present! Its like a Muslim going to the Synagogue for prayer. Slightly contradictory? I respect those atheists who choose to not opt for a Christian wedding.

I do things like that all the time.

Does that mean anything? NO.
If I say "Holy cow" does that make me a Hindu? NO.

Good ****ing god you're an idiot.

Wow, you're a bit of a moron too. Which Hindu in his/her right mind exclaims "Holy cow". If you didn't know, that's a derogatory remark.

If you shout out Jesus, get married in a building dedicated to his teachings, celebrate his birth,and whatnot, do you expect people to think you're a Sikh? No beanhead. Thats like someone exclaiming Hail Hitler when they hurt their pinky, celebrating the killing of Jews in the holocaust on 27th January, yet saying they are against Hitler's beliefs.

Whether I was once a Christian has no bearing on whether I should be an atheist. The only reason I was ever a Christian was because I was forced into it through childhood indoctrination. People around me said it was so, and I believed it.

Thats the worst part about it. Of course people have a right to their beliefs, but some people believe they are totally seperated from religion altogether while western scoiety itself is ingrained with Christian beliefs which have been 'normalised'.

I AM offended. You are riding under the assumption that atheism is a person who is really a theist deep down, but for some reason denies the existence of god just for shits and giggles.

Atheism, by definition, means WITHOUT ANY BELIEF IN THE EXISTANCE OF A GOD.

I think that god doesn't exist. I'm not just saying that, either, I really feel that way. It may be hard for a simpleton like you to comprehend, but some people actually might have different beliefs then you.

Dam thats funny shit! :Happy:


Message was too short until I typed this.

Kegman
01-18-2009, 11:20 AM
If you don't believe in god, you are going to hell.


Thats my selfish, arrogant, archaic and misjudged view anyway.

Narcotic Jew
01-18-2009, 12:20 PM
Religion must die for mankind to live.

Ash
01-18-2009, 03:09 PM
Sorry, what I was trying to say is that 'science' almost becomes an opposite to religion for some people. Rejecting religion is as if they've "accepted" science, or become a "part" of it, despite the fact that religious people can be scientists.

You are looking at it all wrong. I don't reject religion in the same way a vegetarian might reject meat and go with vegetables instead, choosing one over the other.

Humans are born atheists. We are no more theists at birth than one is a Republican or a Marxist at birth.
I picked up religion as one might pick up a piece of gum, chewed it for a while, and then spat it back out.

Being an atheist isn't something you add to my list of characteristics. It' sjsut that I don't have any religion on that list.


Einstein himself said, "I am not an atheist". He wasn't proposing a religion of science either, as he insisted that these are seperate yet connected.

This was his explanation:
"I'm not an atheist, and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books, but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws, but only dimly understand these laws. Our limited mind grasps the mysterious force that moves the constellations."

http://blogs.jta.org/telegraph/article/2008/06/18/1000044/relatively-speaking-einstein-was-an-atheist


This was reference to Einstein's quote about the relationship of science and religion. He said it can be religion which prompts scientific investigation.

There is no correlation between religion and discovery in the sense that religion appeared and scientific discovery was made! As I said above, I was pointing out the fact that in some occasions it has been religion itself which has prompted scientific investigation.

Read below:


In fact, usually those with theistic beliefs IMPEDE the advancement of science. One need look no further than Galileo, who was put on house arrest for his scientific propositions.

Sure, religion might prompt scientific discovery. The only cases of that are when people make an observation CONTRADICTING religion, and then try to explain that observation.

To say that any scientific discovery is made BECAUSE OF religion is a desperate attempt at finding something good that religion does for science. In almost all cases, the discovery is made IN SPITE OF religion, not BECAUSE OF.


What you say is just another example of how people misunderstand the concept of reincarnation in Buddhism and Hinduism. You are not necessarily reborn as a person, and secondly this lies on the premise of history being linear. History may be cyclical, in that generations come and go. We have heard of the Ice Age, the destruction of dinosaurs and what not. Reincarnation is not a simplistic concept at all.

Err... And? It still presents a mathematical impossibility, whether one is reincarnated as a person or an ant.


Of course not all atheists get married in churches! However I've talked with many people who call themselves atheists but when asked, say they will marry in a church. For many atheists, this is going against what they believe in. Some people who get married elsewhere, still have a priest present! Its like a Muslim going to the Synagogue for prayer. Slightly contradictory? I respect those atheists who choose to not opt for a Christian wedding.

How is getting married in a church a contradiction of their beliefs? Who says that they have to believe in the existence of god to have their wedding in a church? They just might want to get married in a pretty building. I don't have to believe in god to enter a church.


Wow, you're a bit of a moron too. Which Hindu in his/her right mind exclaims "Holy cow". If you didn't know, that's a derogatory remark.

EXACTLY. It's a derogatory remark for a Hindu, but to anyone else it's just a word. (Or in this case, phrase)

When I stub my toe and exclaim "Goddammit!" it's not because I literally want the Judeo-Christian god to send it to hell, it's because I grew up a Christian in America, and adopted the vernacular of those around me.

If I say "unicorn", does that mean I believe that unicorns exist? NO.


If you shout out Jesus, get married in a building dedicated to his teachings, celebrate his birth,and whatnot, do you expect people to think you're a Sikh? No beanhead. Thats like someone exclaiming Hail Hitler when they hurt their pinky, celebrating the killing of Jews in the holocaust on 27th January, yet saying they are against Hitler's beliefs.

It's not like that at ALL.

I celebrate a secular holiday based on the values of commercialized Christmas, with Santa, ornamented trees, and all that because I grew up in a Christian family. That's how it is for a LOT of atheists.

Just because I am celebrating a RELATED holiday doesn't mean that I am celebrating the birth of Jesus.

And your scenario is NOT like my own at ALL. Perhaps you should modify it to include factors like "The holiday celebrated on January 27th, henceforth Naziday, has over the past century become more and more commercialized, and in the common eye focusing more on The Great Smiley and family values than Hitler, even though it is supposed to be about Hitler" and "It is generally common practice to say "Hail Hitler" when one hurt their pinky."


Thats the worst part about it. Of course people have a right to their beliefs, but some people believe they are totally seperated from religion altogether while western scoiety itself is ingrained with Christian beliefs which have been 'normalised'.

Oh? Like what? What are these "Christian Beliefs" so ingrained in Western society?




Could you PLEASE not use a "bolded quote" style of reply? It's very frustrating to replay to.

AppleSauze
01-18-2009, 08:31 PM
I think people need God, so many good things happen when they choose Christianity. For me I find that God helps me a lot. When nothing is going right you can talk to him and pray that things will turn out good, and they always do. And if people are out there that say they are Atheist because they have a hard life and God was never there for them. That is bull shit, Atheist is totally different it is completely rejecting the WHOLE concept of God, not because that your life is hard. A true Atheist just doesn't want God in his or her life.

Steyene
01-18-2009, 09:19 PM
I don't think that it boils down to belief in a deity, but rather belief in something. Something that in your eyes is complete ( or close enough too) truth. As has been said people don't necessarily need God, but they do need a belief.

For some people this is belief in a Deity(Old, New. Good, Bad) or in something man made or found.

For example Dawkins has belief in humanity and that it can fix its self with the help of science. I am guessing that he would also believe in science, and that science can assist humanity with its problems.

Now if you look at say the Pope, you can easily replace science with God, and then get nearly the same answer and belief. Yet if you put them together in a room, neither will change their minds, regardless of information and evidence for either side.

Edit: The easiest way to find out someones beliefs is to get into a religious argument with them

herbivore
01-18-2009, 09:51 PM
You are looking at it all wrong. I don't reject religion in the same way a vegetarian might reject meat and go with vegetables instead, choosing one over the other.

lol what? Of course you do, unless your just blank and don't think about the world. You choose to believe there is no god, and reject the existence of a god... even if you are born an atheist. If you're born to believe the Earth is round, you're rejecting that its flat. Both are mutually exclusive - you can't believe there is a god and there isn't.

If you cannot understand, I'll explain again: Science and religion are not opposites, because they do not necessarily contradict each other. I disagree with the idea the several atheists have that by rejecting religion, they have "accepted" science. Science is not something you accept. A religious person can be a scientist/agree with science too. Science can be part of religion, and science can investigate religion.

In short: I'm sick of stupid white dicks who think by becoming atheists they become intelligent all of a sudden. They know nothing about science yet because they've joined another movement like emos, they feel special.

And now you'll say calling atheism a movement is stupid. Be it so, I'm talking about the kids haven't given a second thought about what they believe in. BTW, I am not talking about anyone here/all atheists - only certain people who behave like that.

Humans are born atheists. We are no more theists at birth than one is a Republican or a Marxist at birth.
I picked up religion as one might pick up a piece of gum, chewed it for a while, and then spat it back out.

Being an atheist isn't something you add to my list of characteristics. It' sjsut that I don't have any religion on that list.

I love to chew on Wrigley's atheism gum and stick it on bus seats. Gum analogies don't help here, and yeah... back to the debate.

http://blogs.jta.org/telegraph/article/2008/06/18/1000044/relatively-speaking-einstein-was-an-atheist

You've found a shallow analysis of a such a debated topic as Einstein's spirituality. Maybe you should read it yourself, because Einstein was undoubtedly an agnostic. If you care, take a book out and read up on him. But I know you wont do that, and arguing this point is futile, as thats not what this debate is about.

Read below:

Sure, religion might prompt scientific discovery. The only cases of that are when people make an observation CONTRADICTING religion, and then try to explain that observation.

To say that any scientific discovery is made BECAUSE OF religion is a desperate attempt at finding something good that religion does for science. In almost all cases, the discovery is made IN SPITE OF religion, not BECAUSE OF.

Wow Mr. Scientist. I didn't know someone can understand all the scientific advancements at such a young age! Just because what you've learned so far in year 4 science seems to have been made in spite of religion, doesn't mean it is. Wait, does gravity disprove religion? Projectile motion? Radioactive decay? Science has nothing to do with this. If radical Christians go around burning professors for lols, I can't help that, but look to some tolerant religion which hasn't spent eternity swooping the land and converting people at gunpoint.

Its something some atheists would love to believe. Why? Because of that subconscious feeling that they are now some sort of advocate for science. Well, many religious people have been famous scientists.

I hate it when religious folly such as Christians against stem cell research prevents scientific progress. True. But sometimes investingating the foundations of some religions has led to interestung science.

Err... And? It still presents a mathematical impossibility, whether one is reincarnated as a person or an ant.

You can't understand, because you choose to conveniently ignore half the paragrah. Lets leave this behind, because its no longer relevant, and just stop going around shouting "mathematical impossibility".

How is getting married in a church a contradiction of their beliefs? Who says that they have to believe in the existence of god to have their wedding in a church? They just might want to get married in a pretty building. I don't have to believe in god to enter a church.

EXACTLY. It's a derogatory remark for a Hindu, but to anyone else it's just a word. (Or in this case, phrase)

If thats the case, then to some people atheists are white shit-for-brains who've had their jobs stolen by Jews and Hindus and would rather play counter-strike than go to church on Sundays. We're trying to analyse this from a universal perspective. If you want someone to debate the topic from the point of view of a white American who has woken up to realise god's just a convenient myth, let me know, but I don't intend to.

"Nigger" may just be a word for some people, but for many its derogatory. Because you don't find it offensive, doesn't mean next time you say it to the guy down the road you wont come home with a hole punched in your face.

You shout out Jesus Christ in pain, but the Muslim you live next to won't. If everything is ultimately subconscious and doesn't mean anything, then how can someone be distinguished from another? I infer someone is a Jew if they wear a Jewish cap, yet I am meant to understand someone shouting "for Christ's sake" and all its variations is an atheist?

Its become common language where you live, but you wont find Iraqis doing the same.

When I stub my toe and exclaim "Goddammit!" it's not because I literally want the Judeo-Christian god to send it to hell, it's because I grew up a Christian in America, and adopted the vernacular of those around me.

If I say "unicorn", does that mean I believe that unicorns exist? NO.

There was a boy in a class I had back when I was in school, and he would shout out "shit", "I'm a peacock" and whatnot. Was he a peacock? NO. He had tourettes.

Unicorn has no reference to a set of beliefs, but Jesus Christ, Hail Hitler, etc does. Just as if I went around shouting "Hail Hitler" in the neighbourhood, people would think I was a neo-nazi, someone shouting out the name of the Christian figure Jesus wouldn't be labelled a Hindu.

Undoubtedly, many Christian sayings/words have become part of they way people speak English. Like saying "Bless you" after someone sneezes is different/not there in other religions and languages. They're used all the time. However, many non-Christians who speak English do not like to exclaim "Jesus!" or "Hallelujah!" when something good happens.

My point again: If you don't believe in god, yet do so many things a Christian does, then there is Christianity ingrained in your conscience. Indeed you may believe there is no god from the heart. But to many, not just simpletons as you would have believe, you would appear otherwise.

It's not like that at ALL.

I celebrate a secular holiday based on the values of commercialized Christmas, with Santa, ornamented trees, and all that because I grew up in a Christian family. That's how it is for a LOT of atheists.

Just because I am celebrating a RELATED holiday doesn't mean that I am celebrating the birth of Jesus.

Many people who do NOT believe in Jesus, do NOT celebrate Christmas. These people have other religions. Atheists do not believe in Jesus, yet a LOT celebrate Christmas? This either a shame, or not true. You speak as if you are a representative for all atheists on this planet. Many atheists intentionally do not celebrate Christmas simply because they are after all celebrating the birth of Jesus. Search the net and you'll find it on many forums, etc.

Making the exscuse of a commercialised Christmas to justify what is possibly a fear of truly rejecting Christianity, is weak. If you want gifts, go give them to your freinds. But setting up a Christmas tree, Santa and other Christmas traditions and saying you're not a Christian is pathetic.

Just remember: you are not celebrating a related holiday. Christ-mass is what you are celebrating and that is a celebration of the birth of Christ.

Sure, no-one can stop you if you must do so, but it is like a vegetarian eating meat on an annual sausage sizzle. They're not vegetarians. Its bullshit. I read a blog about this somewhere, and he said it very well:


Not only must he(atheist) stand up to the theocrats, he must also stand up to himself. He must be honest with himself. He must not make excuses to himself. During the so-called holiday season, he must be able to stand aside and look at it all objectively and say, "Why, this is silliness. Gussied up though it may be in tinsel and fantasy, it's all no more than ritual kow-towing to an imaginary being in the sky. I'm a grownup now, and I no longer need to believe in Santa Claus."
If you're not able to do this, then at least, for God's sake, stop pretending you're an atheist.
And your scenario is NOT like my own at ALL. Perhaps you should modify it to include factors like "The holiday celebrated on January 27th, henceforth Naziday, has over the past century become more and more commercialized, and in the common eye focusing more on The Great Smiley and family values than Hitler, even though it is supposed to be about Hitler" and "It is generally common practice to say "Hail Hitler" when one hurt their pinky."

It may be common practice to shout "Jesus!" in a predominantly Christian country such as America, but not everywhere. Likewise, why is "Hail Hitler" not a common saying, besides the fact its downright stupid? No-one says it because of the Nazi connotations. Its the hate for Holocaust and the Nazis. Yet Atheists shouting Jesus is alright. Of course it is, because that what they do where you live.

So if Naziday had become commercialised, you would celebrate it? Then you have no self respect. Just because something is commercialised, I wouldn't celebrate it, because I don't believe in the concept our theoretical Naziday is founded on - the killing of Jews. I don't why its different for Christmas? It is founded on the birth of the Christian figure, Jesus.

Oh? Like what? What are these "Christian Beliefs" so ingrained in Western society?

I've just been through them and there's many more. But it doesn't help the debate. Step into another country which isn't predominantly Christian and you would notice. But who can bothered with the airfare for a forum debate. lol.



Could you PLEASE not use a "bolded quote" style of reply? It's very frustrating to replay to.

Woops. Next time. :)

Dam this consumes so much time. I don't think I'll view this thread again or I won't be able to leave it!

Bonk
01-18-2009, 09:53 PM
I think people need God, so many good things happen when they choose Christianity. For me I find that God helps me a lot. When nothing is going right you can talk to him and pray that things will turn out good, and they always do. And if people are out there that say they are Atheist because they have a hard life and God was never there for them. That is bull shit, Atheist is totally different it is completely rejecting the WHOLE concept of God, not because that your life is hard. A true Atheist just doesn't want God in his or her life.

Have you ever thought that perhaps ALL atheists aren't just people who "God was never there for"? No, we don't reject God because we "have had a hard life", we just don't believe in him.
____________________________
Herbivore said:
[B]My point again: If you don't believe in god, yet do so many things a Christian does, then there is Christianity ingrained in your conscience. Indeed you may believe there is no god from the heart. But to many, not just simpletons as you would have believe, you would appear otherwise.

I disagree. Several Christian sayings and habits have so far ingrained into our culture, and not individuals. If someone shouted "Jesus!" when something bad happened, I would not label them as religious. It has just become another swear of sorts.


Many people who do NOT believe in Jesus, do NOT celebrate Christmas. These people have other religions. Atheists do not believe in Jesus, yet a LOT celebrate Christmas? This either a shame, or not true. You speak as if you are a representative for all atheists on this planet. Many atheists intentionally do not celebrate Christmas simply because they are after all celebrating the birth of Jesus. Search the net and you'll find it on many forums, etc.

I think this is silly, because taking part in a general holiday season full of jollyness can be done without religious implications. You seem to think in a black-and-white manner, and also don't see that an Atheist's Christmas is not the same as a Christian's Christmas. Taking part in festivities should not be inclusive, and it has different meaning for different people.

Making the exscuse of a commercialised Christmas to justify what is possibly a fear of truly rejecting Christianity, is weak. If you want gifts, go give them to your freinds. But setting up a Christmas tree, Santa and other Christmas traditions and saying you're not a Christian is pathetic.

Why? The tree and stuff are symbolic not of religion for me, but of the secular season.

Just remember: you are not celebrating a related holiday. Christ-mass is what you are celebrating and that is a celebration of the birth of Christ.

No, this is what you do not understand. The season is named "Christmas" from tradition, but as atheists we do not celebrate religious things. Don't tell me what I'm celebrating buddy.

Sure, no-one can stop you if you must do so, but it is like a vegetarian eating meat on an annual sausage sizzle. They're not vegetarians. Its bullshit. I read a blog about this somewhere, and he said it very well:

Not only must he(atheist) stand up to the theocrats, he must also stand up to himself. He must be honest with himself. He must not make excuses to himself. During the so-called holiday season, he must be able to stand aside and look at it all objectively and say, "Why, this is silliness. Gussied up though it may be in tinsel and fantasy, it's all no more than ritual kow-towing to an imaginary being in the sky. I'm a grownup now, and I no longer need to believe in Santa Claus."
If you're not able to do this, then at least, for God's sake, stop pretending you're an atheist.

I think you fail to realize the point. The ONLY thing connecting an Atheist's holiday with the religious one is the name and traditions. We ARE NOT celebrating the birth of Jesus. We also KNOW that we aren't celebrating it, we DO stand aside and say that quote above.

Beta
01-18-2009, 10:11 PM
umg long replies, where is the tl;dr?

MoD
01-19-2009, 01:28 AM
We do not need gods. Do animals have gods? Not in my understanding of them. They don't pray to gods, they don't worship gods, and they don't construct shrines or temples for them. We created God/Gods because when we first came into being ( Homo Sapiens ), we had no answers, no understanding of the vast abyss of the sky, we did not know why rain fell from the sky, why the seasons changed. Only that they did. So we created the Pagan gods, which ruled over all the aspects of the world, in an attempt to explain everything; '' Its just a higher power, let it be ''. Over time, and many different gods, this devolved into the basic Catholic and Jewish faith. While in the Middle East it devolved into the god that they worship, and the various prophets. A few thousand years later, Christianity was established, or it may not even be a few thousand years, I'm not quite sure. But to answer your question bluntly, we do not need gods. We now possess the knowledge of what space is, what makes the rain fall, why the seasons change, what that big ball of light in the sky is, why birds migrate and lots of other things. Our gods are useless to us now, we know the answer to almost everything. The only reason they are left is because the idea of a higher power protecting us is appealing, as is the idea of a heaven for the good, and the idea of hell for the bad. It helps us sleep at night, and it makes the children happy. Still, I'm turning agnostic on my deathbed, just in case.

Bonk
01-19-2009, 01:58 AM
If God was sensible he would respect atheists more than last minute converts. At least they aren't afraid to say they don't believe.

MoD
01-19-2009, 02:02 AM
Yeah but maybe I'll get bonus points for trying.

Steyene
01-19-2009, 04:53 AM
At herbivore. Did you just compare believing that the world is flat or that the world is round to believing in God or not.

You sir are an idiot.

Kegman
01-19-2009, 08:07 AM
Making the exscuse of a commercialised Christmas to justify what is possibly a fear of truly rejecting Christianity, is weak. If you want gifts, go give them to your freinds. But setting up a Christmas tree, Santa and other Christmas traditions and saying you're not a Christian is pathetic.

The christmas tree stemed from pagan traditions, next

modern santa is possibly the greatest example of commercialisation, next



Many people who don't believe in god 'do' christmas because its just the done thing for the huge majority of white familys (speaking from a british viewpoint), plus, peoples familys might celebrate so we have no choice but to have a tree in our house or whatever.


And pathetic? Well if you live your life thinking people are going to burn in hell for being naughty, come on, surely thats a liiiittle more pathetic?


The rest of your points were rubbish, try harder

Slayer
01-19-2009, 10:09 AM
Still, I'm turning agnostic on my deathbed, just in case.

Haha.

I don't feel like making invisible text tags.

MoD
01-19-2009, 10:23 AM
Herbivore, I celebrate Christmas because its basically no longer a church holiday, but a country-wide and statewide holiday. Christmas is now a commercial haven and people celebrate it because it is, in effect, a second birthday.

Ash
01-19-2009, 10:23 AM
Herbivore, you have FAILED in every one of your arguments. You are too much of an idiot to understand even the simplest of logical connections, and have stepped around every argument you couldn't directly combat.

Leave the debate section. You are embarrassing yourself. I'm not even going to justify your pitiful arguments with responses, because they will only lead to more attempts at stepping around my points.

It is interesting to think that you may honestly believe that you are making any sense. What I've seen is that you know your way around the English language well enough to structure a coherent sentence, and yet are unable to express or understand meaning within writing. This became evident when you attempted to argue that I am indeed a believer in god just because I behaved like a Christian, failing to take into account simple variables like tradition, habit, and secrecy.

You are an imbecile, and you don't even realize it. This is the first time I've ever made a personal attack instead of debating the topic at hand in a long history of debating. I'm just dumbfounded that you would be so oblivious to simple observations that even the lowest of intellects can make.


I have come to this conclusion.

Either this is a troll, and should be reported as such, or this is just a really deluded individual.

Frankly, I suspect a troll, and so I am reporting him.

MoD
01-19-2009, 10:24 AM
Hell, I'd report him even if he isn't a troll.

Ash
01-19-2009, 10:32 AM
Well, I did.

Hopefully we'll be able to get some competent/non-troll debaters in here.

MoD
01-19-2009, 10:42 AM
I would step up, but it sounds like a job, and I don't like working for stuff I don't get paid for.


Unless its being a pornstar, then hell ... It'd totally be worth it.

alive
01-19-2009, 11:25 AM
I don't think people need a god. What we need, however, is answers. If there is something we don't understand, we usually want to figure it out, it's the way most of us work. To me, religion is basically either one or both of two things: One of them is an easy answer. We don't get something, so we simply say it is beyond our comprehension, and leave it at that. As we figure more and more shit out, the need for 'the easy answer' diminishes. We no longer have to say something is beyond our comprehension, and therefore divine, because it is no longer beyond our comprehension. The other thing religion is is a way to cope with death. I would assume that most people get scared when they realize they might be nothing next week, and therefore resort to faith in something beyond our world. To me, the first one is the bad one. If we simply accept that we cannot understand something, and therefore stop trying, we will never progress. We don't need that type of thinking, in fact we should refrain from it. (A third thing it could be is a way to control people, but that is irrelevant in this context.)

As people, as a race, we do not need religion. We are perfectly capable of helping old women across the street without an overhanging threat of damnation. If we are taught to do good, we will generally do good. And even if we're not, we'd still generally be nice, because we have this awesome thing called empathy.

For some individuals, however, belief is absolutely a necessity. It doesn't matter that it's a necessity they wouldn't have if religion never existed in the first place, simply because it did exist in the first place, and thus they need it. They need to believe that there is something great and benevolent, and that everything will work out in the end. As individuals, we need whatever, be it chocolate, religion, music or basketball. As a race, we need shelter, food, water, sex, etc.

Ash
01-19-2009, 02:31 PM
I don't think people need a god. What we need, however, is answers.

And I agree. We are a naturally curious species.


If there is something we don't understand, we usually want to figure it out, it's the way most of us work. To me, religion is basically either one or both of two things: One of them is an easy answer.

I don't understand this. People have this idea that religion, the idea of a god, is an easy answer.

This can't be further from the truth. Any critical thought applied to the ideas of a god immediately creates even MORE questions, ones about which hundreds of books have been written, and yet if a child asks his pastor "Who made God" the pastor's response, be it "He always was" or be it "He made himself", more questions arise about not only the integrity of the applied logic, but also to the idea of God itself.

If the idea of God was an easy one, I think we would have made at least a LITTLE progress with it.



We don't get something, so we simply say it is beyond our comprehension, and leave it at that. As we figure more and more shit out, the need for 'the easy answer' diminishes. We no longer have to say something is beyond our comprehension, and therefore divine, because it is no longer beyond our comprehension.

The other thing religion is is a way to cope with death. I would assume that most people get scared when they realize they might be nothing next week, and therefore resort to faith in something beyond our world. To me, the first one is the bad one. If we simply accept that we cannot understand something, and therefore stop trying, we will never progress. We don't need that type of thinking, in fact we should refrain from it. (A third thing it could be is a way to control people, but that is irrelevant in this context.)

As people, as a race, we do not need religion. We are perfectly capable of helping old women across the street without an overhanging threat of damnation. If we are taught to do good, we will generally do good. And even if we're not, we'd still generally be nice, because we have this awesome thing called empathy.

For some individuals, however, belief is absolutely a necessity. It doesn't matter that it's a necessity they wouldn't have if religion never existed in the first place, simply because it did exist in the first place, and thus they need it. They need to believe that there is something great and benevolent, and that everything will work out in the end. As individuals, we need whatever, be it chocolate, religion, music or basketball. As a race, we need shelter, food, water, sex, etc.

I will agree that religion might help a few people. However, I feel that it does far more harm in general than good.



I'll use Christianity as my example, since I know it best.

I think everyone will agree that the Old Testament is filled with inaccuracies.
"But wait, we don't believe in a LITERAL interpretation of Genesis, it's more of a poem about Creation."

Okay, you may think that, and I won't deny that you do. But not everyone has the same view. Some people think that it SHOULD be taken literally, and why shouldn't they? After all, it tells them it's the inspired word of God. Just as well, imagine a priest explaining to his congregation that Genesis is just a "poem about creation."

One might "know" that it's not meant to be taken literally, but someone else will also "know" that it IS meant to be taken literally.

This is all relevant to the discussion because people are supposed to get their morals from the Bible, but by what criteria does one pick and choose those morals?


BTW, this isn't directed at you, Alive, these are just questions that your post gave rise to.

GameGeek21
01-19-2009, 03:52 PM
We need Jesus he is are savior whether you like it or not. How the hell else did the universe become what it is now? Stick with God and he will stick with you.

Ash you seem pretty wise are you old or somthin?

Gray
01-19-2009, 04:00 PM
We need Jesus he is are savior whether you like it or not. How the hell else did the universe become what it is now? Stick with God and he will stick with you.

Ash you seem pretty wise are you old or somthin?

I completely agree man.

Jeremy
01-19-2009, 04:17 PM
I vomited in rage just now.

Automaton
01-19-2009, 04:39 PM
I don't think we need a God, in answer to the title. However, As a previous Christian, now Agnostic I can share what I know. I know that when I was strictly Chrsitian, I believed every little scrap of what I was told. Then I read the bible.

Steyene
01-19-2009, 04:40 PM
Yep. Is it me or the newbies actually venturing into the Debate section now?

There is one thing that I really don't like about the atheist idea that humanity is good enough, when you only need to look at Gaza.

Automaton
01-19-2009, 04:45 PM
You only need to look at the earth. Then again, if God does exist, why doesn't he step in?

Jeremy
01-19-2009, 04:49 PM
Yep. Is it me or the newbies actually venturing into the Debate section now?

There is one thing that I really don't like about the atheist idea that humanity is good enough, when you only need to look at Gaza.

That's unfair, you cant just take the worst view of us and say that is the best representation.

LakE
01-19-2009, 04:53 PM
You only need to look at the earth. Then again, if God does exist, why doesn't he step in?
If you have an experiment and it's going to plan, say, you want to create some form of life and see how long it lasts so you know where you've gone wrong to then make the next batch better.. Would you step in?

I, personally, don't believe in him. But the whole "IF HE IS REAL, WHERE IS HE NOW?" shit annoys me.

EDIT: Okay, I've only read some of the first post and the title, I figured this thread would have many good points then there would be idiotic points like something I'm going to say now. Hopefully not.
This may have already been stated.
Anyway, I don't believe in god, I never have. Not that I can remember anyway. My parents don't, they're fully open to religioins but they don't have one of their own. They've coped.
However, if I was brought up to be a strong believer I would probably find it hard to accept him not being real (Not saying he isn't). Some people stop addictions due to God, what they see him as. Some people believe they were cured by a miracle of god. Many could not live without this faith, without meaning. Without reason.
They've been lead into that life and they've told theirself "Without this man/woman there is no reason."

People need god, yes. Not ALL people, but people naturally need something to believe in and need a reason. Many have this reason.
We all have a reason and that reason is our god.

Automaton
01-19-2009, 06:24 PM
Well, if God doesn't step in because he wants to see how stuff pans out, then why worship something like that?

LakE
01-19-2009, 06:28 PM
I didn't say that's what he was doing, I was using it as an example. I thought you of all people would have figured that much.

Dudeman
01-19-2009, 06:43 PM
You only need to look at the earth. Then again, if God does exist, why doesn't he step in?This might be a deist's point of few, but try to stick with me.


God is just like a masterful clock maker. With his skills, he builds an amazingly complicated clock that functions perfectly. Although it is convoluted with many gears and moving parts, it never snags or has a glitch.

Now, the clock of course is the universe. The universe has order, it has rules, and it has tendencies. The things inside the universe follow rules of physics. Matter can not exit or enter the system. It is (as far as this analogy goes) a contained and systematic clock.

Now, inevitably the time will eventually be 11:11 with 11 milliseconds. At that time, some one will die in the universe. Now, if you were the clock maker, you could possibly prevent that. However, the only thing you could do is stop the clock to adjust it (ending the universe) or to make an adjustment in real time (divine intervention). Both have repercussions. If you adjust something that has order and is completely contained, you change the entire system. Changing the entire system could be disastrous for everyone. So if you truly loved your creations, you wouldn't dare interfere with them.

tl:dr too bad read it.

MoD
01-19-2009, 07:43 PM
This might be a deist's point of few, but try to stick with me.


God is just like a masterful clock maker. With his skills, he builds an amazingly complicated clock that functions perfectly. Although it is convoluted with many gears and moving parts, it never snags or has a glitch.

Now, the clock of course is the universe. The universe has order, it has rules, and it has tendencies. The things inside the universe follow rules of physics. Matter can not exit or enter the system. It is (as far as this analogy goes) a contained and systematic clock.

Now, inevitably the time will eventually be 11:11 with 11 milliseconds. At that time, some one will die in the universe. Now, if you were the clock maker, you could possibly prevent that. However, the only thing you could do is stop the clock to adjust it (ending the universe) or to make an adjustment in real time (divine intervention). Both have repercussions. If you adjust something that has order and is completely contained, you change the entire system. Changing the entire system could be disastrous for everyone. So if you truly loved your creations, you wouldn't dare interfere with them.

tl:dr too bad read it.
Or the clockmaker could not just be a faggot considering he made the world and all the laws in the universe he can bend and weave his way around them, therefore rendering the repercussions non-existent and another weeping family somewhere else.

Dudeman
01-19-2009, 07:49 PM
Or the clockmaker could not just be a faggot considering he made the world and all the laws in the universe he can bend and weave his way around them, therefore rendering the repercussions non-existent and another weeping family somewhere else.Think of it in terms of the gears of a clock. As soon as you change the pacing of one gear (even one time), you alter all of the gears indirectly.

MoD
01-19-2009, 07:57 PM
Yes, but a god is omnipotent, or else he is not a god. As well as being omnipotent, he can change anything. With this is mind, he can force all the gears back into the original position.

LakE
01-19-2009, 08:04 PM
Changing it all over again ****ing things up more.

If you re-wire something, then wire it back the same way it was wired before, it will never work EXACTLY the same way.

MoD
01-19-2009, 08:12 PM
Yes, but if you are truly a god, you just change the thing without the side effects.


Unless you're saying god boxed himself in his own laws?

Bonk
01-19-2009, 08:12 PM
People are trying to defend God on why he wouldn't intervene, but seriously you're just making up reasons.

While some of them make sense, it is a fruitless argument on both sides.

LakE
01-19-2009, 08:47 PM
Yes, but if you are truly a god, you just change the thing without the side effects.


Unless you're saying god boxed himself in his own laws?
So, you're saying; "If god is real, he should have infinite power. Otherwise, he is not a god."?
Very similar to saying; "If a dog is real, it should have 4 legs, bark and have a waggling tail", in a sense.
You could cut the dogs limbs off, nail it's tail down and cut off it's tongue. It'll still be a dog. If you understand what I mean, kudos to you.
Also, you said he can force things back to place. But, we're a human race, we understand too well and think too freely. Imagine somebody coming to you as god and helping you out of a situation. You would react the same way any of us would; You would want to tell more people, ruining this creation that god may have wanted. Changing one thing could change many if you see it from the same sense I'm seeing it.

Bonk:
Can you give me an example of what points were given on why god would intervene, that were stated as to why he would not? Maybe I missed some, not reading all the pages. I'm just curious.

MoD
01-19-2009, 08:49 PM
No, because a god is defined as being Omnipotent and all powerful, with the ability to change anything, do anything. If he boxed himself in with laws and physics and the whole 9 iron suite, then he is not a god, just a shell of a god, but no longer a god and not worthy to be called one.

LakE
01-19-2009, 08:53 PM
I'm not going by the fairytale god. I'm going by a god. A god could be anything far superior.

MoD
01-19-2009, 08:55 PM
I was going by the human definition of a god.



**** YES I FOUND A BOX OF JAFFA CAKES IN MY COAT POCKET YESH


I'm off to watch Spaced, see yah'

SpaceBar
01-19-2009, 08:58 PM
God is needed, because the world is a very scary place. Look at all those pedophiles out there. Once my nano tech armor arrives and I finish my costume, I shall become the new god of this world and deliver JUSTICE.
So people need a god. I don't care if they don't want one. It's not their choice.

All Hail Spacebar.

MoD
01-19-2009, 09:35 PM
God is needed, because the world is a very scary place. Look at all those pedophiles out there. Once my nano tech armor arrives and I finish my costume, I shall become the new god of this world and deliver JUSTICE.
So people need a god. I don't care if they don't want one. It's not their choice.

All Hail Spacebar.
All Hail the mighty Troll of the west.

Dudeman
01-19-2009, 09:37 PM
No, because a god is defined as being Omnipotent and all powerful, with the ability to change anything, do anything. If he boxed himself in with laws and physics and the whole 9 iron suite, then he is not a god, just a shell of a god, but no longer a god and not worthy to be called one.God created a universe with order. The sun feeds the plants, the plants feed the animals, the animals feed the humans, etc. God gave humans free choice.

Although he is omnipotent, he doesn't undo his own work. Although he HAS the power to intervene, that doesn't mean he should. Part of having power isn't just using your power, but having the wisdom to know when to use it.

MoD
01-19-2009, 09:39 PM
So he doesn't intervene with our lives, and yet we worship him, blindly in some cases, while we are obviously beneath his gaze?


WASTE OF LIFE MUCH

LakE
01-19-2009, 09:42 PM
That was the point of the thread from the start, basically. "Do we need god? He doesn't do anything."

But he does. The idea of him gives people the power to restart a life they gave up on a long time ago. The idea of him and what he has made us believe happens when we're wrong gives us a reason to do right.
The very idea of him created order.
We, as a race, need god. As I've said before, your reason is your god. Not the god in general, the one most of us think of. But a god to say the least. Be it a thought or a person, it's a reason and it's giving life. It must have some god-like powers rendering it a god.

Myself
01-19-2009, 09:43 PM
God is needed, because the world is a very scary place. Look at all those pedophiles out there. Once my nano tech armor arrives and I finish my costume, I shall become the new god of this world and deliver JUSTICE.
So people need a god. I don't care if they don't want one. It's not their choice.

All Hail Spacebar.

Wait, what?

MoD
01-19-2009, 09:54 PM
That was the point of the thread from the start, basically. "Do we need god? He doesn't do anything."

But he does. The idea of him gives people the power to restart a life they gave up on a long time ago. The idea of him and what he has made us believe happens when we're wrong gives us a reason to do right.
The very idea of him created order.
We, as a race, need god. As I've said before, your reason is your god. Not the god in general, the one most of us think of. But a god to say the least. Be it a thought or a person, it's a reason and it's giving life. It must have some god-like powers rendering it a god.
Oh cool.



Buffy the Vampire Slayer is my god, by the way.

alive
01-20-2009, 12:31 AM
And I agree. We are a naturally curious species.

I don't understand this. People have this idea that religion, the idea of a god, is an easy answer.

This can't be further from the truth. Any critical thought applied to the ideas of a god immediately creates even MORE questions, ones about which hundreds of books have been written, and yet if a child asks his pastor "Who made God" the pastor's response, be it "He always was" or be it "He made himself", more questions arise about not only the integrity of the applied logic, but also to the idea of God itself.


If the idea of God was an easy one, I think we would have made at least a LITTLE progress with it.

Then I will understand what I meant. Imagine that you are very far north, and see northern polar lights, something we didn't fully figure out until 2008. Obviously, many people through time have wondered what this light is. To me, it seems like a much 'easier' answer to say that the lights are dancing ancestors, without any form of backing knowledge or investigation, than it is to actually figure out what the lights are, developing theories, sending up satellites etc.
In that way, religion is easy, the easy way out. Instead of working hard to figure out what you don't understand, you can come up with an explanation that suits you, or, in some religions, simply say that it is divine and beyond your comprehension, and thus stop pursuing knowledge in the matter.



I will agree that religion might help a few people. However, I feel that it does far more harm in general than good.



I'll use Christianity as my example, since I know it best.

I think everyone will agree that the Old Testament is filled with inaccuracies.
"But wait, we don't believe in a LITERAL interpretation of Genesis, it's more of a poem about Creation."

Okay, you may think that, and I won't deny that you do. But not everyone has the same view. Some people think that it SHOULD be taken literally, and why shouldn't they? After all, it tells them it's the inspired word of God. Just as well, imagine a priest explaining to his congregation that Genesis is just a "poem about creation."

One might "know" that it's not meant to be taken literally, but someone else will also "know" that it IS meant to be taken literally.

This is all relevant to the discussion because people are supposed to get their morals from the Bible, but by what criteria does one pick and choose those morals?


BTW, this isn't directed at you, Alive, these are just questions that your post gave rise to.

Well, here I generally agree with you, I don't think organized religion does the world much good. Individual spirituality, however, can be good in many ways. Here comes a cute little story: I once asked why grandmother whether she believed in God or not. She said she didn't belong to any organized religion, but that when she dies, it would never suck not to see her grand children again, and therefore chose to believe in something. In this sense, her personal "religion" isn't harmful in at all. Quite on the contrary, it comforts her.

As 2-D said earlier, religion is not a need, it's a want. This should be obvious, and can be based on empirical knowledge, because we can all see that people can survive, whether they are religious or not. That is why we need to define what type of need we are talking about. Religion does not fall into the category of what we need to survive, but it can absolutely fall into the category of what many people need to enjoy life.

Mantha
01-20-2009, 03:43 AM
Mmhm, I agree with the post above. Generally.

Though pay attention to this.

There is no "tl;dr"-s in the debate section. Sometimes arguments have to be elaborated and have to have some examples. Whoever doesn't want to read all that is a lazy faggot and should get out of the Debate section immediately. Not saying all the posts should be long, just don't complain if there are long posts.

Kegman
01-20-2009, 07:36 AM
but it can absolutely fall into the category of what many people need to enjoy life.

or, if your a muslim woman, be persecuted and looked down upon as a lesser creature.


its all good

Ash
01-20-2009, 08:05 AM
God created a universe with order. The sun feeds the plants, the plants feed the animals, the animals feed the humans, etc. God gave humans free choice.

Although he is omnipotent, he doesn't undo his own work. Although he HAS the power to intervene, that doesn't mean he should. Part of having power isn't just using your power, but having the wisdom to know when to use it.

I don't understand the deistic point of view. If god is there just as a creator and doesn't intervene later, then why is he even a requirement? Just because science hasn't explained the universe all the way yet? And isn't a deistic view contradictive to the Bible?

sss
01-20-2009, 09:00 AM
Yes we do,we need to have someone that listens ,we need to have someone that will help us when we have no hope,we need someone that is more powerful than us. And we need someone to blame for something that is unblamable.

alive
01-20-2009, 09:15 AM
or, if your a muslim woman, be persecuted and looked down upon as a lesser creature.


its all good

That's right. I did say that there is only one side to it all.

Kegman
01-20-2009, 10:24 AM
That's right. I did say that there is only one side to it all.


yeah, but best not mention the bad sides, noone wants to hear about them.

alive
01-20-2009, 11:48 AM
yeah, but best not mention the bad sides, noone wants to hear about them.

The bad sides were completely irrelevant to the argument. It doesn't matter if many people are treated poorly because of religion, someone else can still need religion to enjoy life regardless. To say that religion can be good for some people does not equal saying that it cannot be bad for some people. The statements aren't mutually exclusive. I, for example, love playing the drums, and need to play at least half an hour to an hour a day to feel good. I don't care whether the next guy likes playing drums or not, I still enjoy it.

MoD
01-20-2009, 12:42 PM
Really? I never imagined you as a drums kind of guy, Alive.

Kegman
01-20-2009, 01:17 PM
The bad sides were completely irrelevant to the argument. It doesn't matter if many people are treated poorly because of religion, someone else can still need religion to enjoy life regardless. To say that religion can be good for some people does not equal saying that it cannot be bad for some people. The statements aren't mutually exclusive. I, for example, love playing the drums, and need to play at least half an hour to an hour a day to feel good. I don't care whether the next guy likes playing drums or not, I still enjoy it.


Maybe that guy likes the drums, he just can't play them because of a belief system imposed on him from an early age says he can't.

I'm not saying you don't appreciate the privillages you have, im saying the topic title can never be answered because of so many conflicting personal experiences with god / gods of all different faiths.


so i dont know where this is going apart from 'does god exist', which is another dead end.

Ash
01-20-2009, 01:40 PM
Yes we do,we need to have someone that listens ,we need to have someone that will help us when we have no hope,we need someone that is more powerful than us. And we need someone to blame for something that is unblamable.

I meant that it's not a requirement as in "It isn't needed for the universe to exist".

And your post was filled with inaccuracies. I'll fix it for you.



Yes we do,we need to have someone that we can talk to, even if we don't get an answer, we need to have someone that we think will help us when we have no hope, we need someone that we believe is more powerful than us. And we need someone to blame for something that is unblamable.

The thing is, we DON'T need all that. Atheists are living proof that you don't need a god to be a functioning human being. Some people may want that, but that doesn't mean they NEED it.


@Kegman: Whether people need god is a black and white issue: Either we need belief in a god to function or we don't need it. That means that we CAN, through debate, conclude whether or not belief in a god is a requirement for a functioning society.

Kegman
01-20-2009, 01:52 PM
@Kegman: Whether people need god is a black and white issue: Either we need belief in a god to function or we don't need it. That means that we CAN, through debate, conclude whether or not belief in a god is a requirement for a functioning society.


But its an impossibilty because hardly anyone in society will be willing to give up their belief in a god even if it means the world will be a million times better faith


Hypothetically speaking, i can already conlude YES, the belief in god is a hinderance to a funtioning society, as we can have morality without dropping to our knees, closing our eyes and begging forgiveness from some kind of all powerful creator.


As for losing comfort by knowing when we dies THATS IT, so what.

If you are scared of death, thats a curse of human intelligence, not a reason to seek some kind of escape.


but again, noone will give up their wants and comforts, because very simply, they dont have to.

Ash
01-20-2009, 02:09 PM
I understand what you mean about people's unwillingness, but that doesn't mean it's a lost cause. Many people, when they understand the implications of the evidence, will deconvert. It sometimes takes minutes, sometimes days, and sometimes years, but some people can be deconverted.

The problem is, many don't even think of disbelief as an option. Many don't even understand what an "atheist" is, let alone consider if their god exists or not. Still others don't really think he does, but are afraid of the social ramifications that disbelief entails, especially in the United States, and so hide it, sometimes even from themselves.

What we need to do is let people know that it's OKAY to be an atheist, it's okay to be an agnostic. Let them know that there are more than they think, and that it's not an "empty existence" as many assume. There are teachers, mothers, businessmen, slackers, entrepreneurs, and politicians who are atheists and agnostics, and they lead happy, fulfilling lives.

We also need to remove the social stigma of disbelief. Atheists and agnostics aren't heathens, we aren't bad people, we have morals, and we value human life just as much as any other.

I hate living in a world where it would be impossible for me to become president just because I am an atheist. This needs to change, and I think everyone will agree with this, and the change has to start with helping people to understand that you don't need a god to have morals, that atheism isn't a dogma or a set of belief, merely the lack of one.

Kegman
01-20-2009, 02:15 PM
I understand what you mean about people's unwillingness, but that doesn't mean it's a lost cause. Many people, when they understand the implications of the evidence, will deconvert. It sometimes takes minutes, sometimes days, and sometimes years, but some people can be deconverted.

The problem is, many don't even think of disbelief as an option. Many don't even understand what an "atheist" is, let alone consider if their god exists or not. Still others don't really think he does, but are afraid of the social ramifications that disbelief entails, especially in the United States, and so hide it, sometimes even from themselves.

What we need to do is let people know that it's OKAY to be an atheist, it's okay to be an agnostic. Let them know that there are more than they think, and that it's not an "empty existence" as many assume. There are teachers, mothers, businessmen, slackers, entrepreneurs, and politicians who are atheists and agnostics, and they lead happy, fulfilling lives.

We also need to remove the social stigma of disbelief. Atheists and agnostics aren't heathens, we aren't bad people, we have morals, and we value human life just as much as any other.

I hate living in a world where it would be impossible for me to become president just because I am an atheist. This needs to change, and I think everyone will agree with this, and the change has to start with helping people to understand that you don't need a god to have morals, that atheism isn't a dogma or a set of belief, merely the lack of one.

I cannot predict the future (yet), but i honestly believe islam will never deconvert. Some would, but i wager the majority, even when presented with the most indisputible evidence of evolution / big bang theory / multiverse whatever, they will see it as a test of faith.

'Its a sad hole we have dug ourselves into, and although we can see the light, our weak fragile bodies wont allow us to climb back out.

- Kegman trying to be obama'

Ash
01-20-2009, 02:23 PM
In the case of Islam, squashing their "Islam is peace" bullshit would help greatly. The people saying that just ignore the bad parts in the Qur'an and Haddith and pretend that it's all happy philosophy. Neither are happy books, and even a quick thumb-through will reveal that simple fact. "Islam" means peace, yes. But the "peace" described is the "peace" you get when you wipe everything else out.



I think that the Haddith and the Qur'an should be in schools as literature, because they are very important in world history. They are not good sources of morality by any means, though, and should be presented in the same way Homer's Iliad is: as literature.

Kegman
01-20-2009, 02:40 PM
In the case of Islam, squashing their "Islam is peace" bullshit would help greatly. The people saying that just ignore the bad parts in the Qur'an and Haddith and pretend that it's all happy philosophy. Neither are happy books, and even a quick thumb-through will reveal that simple fact. "Islam" means peace, yes. But the "peace" described is the "peace" you get when you wipe everything else out.



I think that the Haddith and the Qur'an should be in schools as literature, because they are very important in world history. They are not good sources of morality by any means, though, and should be presented in the same way Homer's Iliad is: as literature.



It all starts with the children. If child indoctrination into any kind of religion is made illegal, i believe it could change the whole problem around.

All children should have to right to believe whatever they want at whatever age, and by parents FORCING their beliefs (yes, its forcing) upon their children, its a unbelievably huge denial of basic human rights.


You could say by making religious indoctrination on children illegal is also an abuse of human rights, yes, but only of the selfish (or inherently stupid) parents.

The children would benefit because they could make their own informed decisions about the world and how it works and why its all here etc


But again, that will not happen because 'Get em while their young!' seems to be a necessity for most easily disputed ideas.


If i ever have a kid, i would never say 'THERE IS NO GOD DONT BELIEVE IN ANY OF IT!', because that would be exactly the same. I would let them make their own decision, whether i respect its integrity or not.

But no being gay. Ok future son?

Mantiscore
01-20-2009, 02:54 PM
Oh, another thread about me, real mature guyz.

Ash
01-20-2009, 03:12 PM
It all starts with the children. If child indoctrination into any kind of religion is made illegal, i believe it could change the whole problem around.

All children should have to right to believe whatever they want at whatever age, and by parents FORCING their beliefs (yes, its forcing) upon their children, its a unbelievably huge denial of basic human rights.

I can't agree more that that would fix the problem, but I don't think that it would be a very effective method.

A) It would just piss theists off.
B) It would never be passed, because people will cite freedom of religion.


You could say by making religious indoctrination on children illegal is also an abuse of human rights, yes, but only of the selfish (or inherently stupid) parents.

The children would benefit because they could make their own informed decisions about the world and how it works and why its all here etc


But again, that will not happen because 'Get em while their young!' seems to be a necessity for most easily disputed ideas.


If i ever have a kid, i would never say 'THERE IS NO GOD DONT BELIEVE IN ANY OF IT!', because that would be exactly the same. I would let them make their own decision, whether i respect its integrity or not.

But no being gay. Ok future son?

I agree. I'm going to take a hands-off approach when it comes to religion. Just let them decide on their own.

However, I like to think that I'd be open to my own son becoming a Christian, but I don't know if I'd be very accepting. On the other hand, though, since I talk about science all the time, and since I'd be able to answer lots and lots of questions a child will ask with ease, I don't think it's likely that any of my kids would become a theist.

Kegman
01-20-2009, 03:29 PM
Im not gonna lie and say even if parents didn't force their religions on their kids they wouldn't be influenced.


If my future not gay son asks me what i believe, i will tell him, but i will tell him to seek other peoples views and other ways of life untill he finds the one he will truly be happy living in.


That is a freedom not given to most children, which is an outrageous shame.



As for changing your mind once your a free thinking intelligent adult, im sad to say its often too late. Most people just arnt willing to look at all the interpretations of the universe, whether factual or spiritual, because they already think they have the ultimate truth in their own faith.

Ash
01-20-2009, 03:33 PM
That is so true.

That's why I'm trying to get more atheists to stop hiding in their closets. They don't have to just jump right out, but need to at least inch their way out for air. Even I have begun my movement out of the closet to my family. (All my friends know I'm an atheist. I tend to keep it outside of household discussions.)

The goal of eliminating religious oppression is impossible unless the world stops misusing our names, and stops making assumptions about us.

bigboss
01-23-2009, 05:31 PM
I think we need god if he exist. btw if you are living by the Bible live will be easier.

Ash
01-23-2009, 05:38 PM
I disagree. Living by the bible, as you say it, includes doctrines such as stoning to death those who work on the sabbath, mutilating the genitals of young boys, fear of hell, confusing, nonsensical statements and stories, and the knowledge hat people less fortunate than you would burn in hell, ignorant of their own folly until it was too late.

The Bible is not a good book. If you were to go through the old testament and highlight all the bad parts, you'd have almost the entire thing highlighted. I bet that if you were to highlight the good bits (Good morals, not arbitrary morals like keeping the sabbath holy), you'd have a pamphlet rather than a book.

Slayer
01-23-2009, 05:39 PM
I like debating for a bit, but then I get lazy and don't feel like reading entire responses. Maybe this topic just doesn't interest me much.

Ash
01-23-2009, 05:50 PM
Maybe. I reread this thread before bumping it, actually. That's mainly because I love to debate about religion. I love the passion.

Jeremy
01-23-2009, 06:23 PM
It all starts with the children. If child indoctrination into any kind of religion is made illegal, i believe it could change the whole problem around.

All children should have to right to believe whatever they want at whatever age, and by parents FORCING their beliefs (yes, its forcing) upon their children, its a unbelievably huge denial of basic human rights.


You could say by making religious indoctrination on children illegal is also an abuse of human rights, yes, but only of the selfish (or inherently stupid) parents.

The children would benefit because they could make their own informed decisions about the world and how it works and why its all here etc


But again, that will not happen because 'Get em while their young!' seems to be a necessity for most easily disputed ideas.


If i ever have a kid, i would never say 'THERE IS NO GOD DONT BELIEVE IN ANY OF IT!', because that would be exactly the same. I would let them make their own decision, whether i respect its integrity or not.

But no being gay. Ok future son?

So you want to make raising children illegal? Huh, that's weird. Tons of parents consider the bible to be an instruction manual for children, you are denying them the right they completely have. If the child wants to make their own decisions when they are 18 then they can, if they don't, then they wouldn't have made it anyways. Shielding children from things to benefit your beliefs is a bastard move sure, but its the parents right completely to do it.

And ash, I don't believe for a fucking second that you would be accepting of your child's Christianity, that is complete bullshit. You are one of the most intolerant people towards Christianity that I know of.

Ash
01-23-2009, 06:37 PM
You don't know me at all, Jeremy, so I don't think you are fit to make that accusation. Just because I don't like Christianity doesn't mean I'm intolerant. Who I am in the debate section doesn't reflect me in real life.

And if you would have taken a second to actually read my post, you'd have seen this:
"However, I like to think that I'd be open to my own son becoming a Christian, but I don't know if I'd be very accepting."

I'm not certain that I'd accept it. I don't make the claim that I know I would be.

EDIT: Oh, and did you see my response to kegman's proposition that childhood indoctrination be made illegal? Did my response seem like intolerance to you?

Jeremy
01-23-2009, 06:48 PM
I based my accusation off from the posts you make on this forum, that's what I use to judge who you are, in fact its the only way I would know who you are, and I reckon it is enough, especially with how vocal you are towards Christianity. And I did see that, and It doesn't change anything. I don't think There is anyway with how much you attack Christianity on this forum, that you would be okay or open to that(Judging from what I know about you from your posts).

The response seemed spiteful. "Damn those Christians for using their rights to indoctrinate their children!" Can you guess why it comes off spiteful? Because that's what I know you to be towards Christianity.

And you should know better than most that the new testament forgives the old, Jesus died to forgive all the sins, so there is no need to stone people, etc.

Ash
01-23-2009, 11:13 PM
I won't deny that I think the world would be better off without religion. It's not as if I HATE it, though. To say I hate it makes it sound as if I would advocate violence against it. The only system that I advocate violence against is radical Islam, but only because they use violence so readily.
And to say that I am intolerant means, by definition, that I don't tolerate it, which is very much not the case. If someone brings up that they are a Christian, I don't attack them try to deconvert them, or insult them. The only times I ever speak against religion are when it's relevant to the discussion.

If I were INTOLERANT, then my stance, and the way I behaved on the forum, would be very different.

You are correct in saying that I don't like childhood indoctrination, and I make no bones about hiding that. But my reason is because it strips children of their own rights, their right to choose their own religion. To a child, talking about hell fire and gnashing of teeth is very real, not metaphorical or anything, so if you bring up a child telling them that if they doubt that what they are told is the truth they will be subjected to eternal anguish and torture, I don't think it's just a matter of the rights of the parents, but also of the rights of the children.


Finally, I understand the Christian doctrine, but not all Christians do. In fact, the United States' vocal Christian population is generally made up of people who think the old testament still applies, and the bible itself is extremely unclear.




If my son were to tell me that he was a Christian, I do not know exactly what my reaction would be, and NEITHER DO YOU. However, I would NEVER shun him, I would NEVER act badly towards him. I may not like his decision, I may even get angry, but I am a rational person, and I never let negative emotions direct my actions.

BlisS
01-23-2009, 11:46 PM
This is what i heard from a very close friend of mine whos yes hes atheist but his theory could make since but maybe not... it has open my eyes to believe in god and to not put my hopes up....

He says this God... is just a hope for people... God is everything and every person...

Scientist ( thats what he says) say god was created to help man with the most difficult question... Why am i here... what am i suppose to do ... who put me here.. etc etc but He was created not only to help man with questions... but when a person talks about god... you can see a better confidence in the person... in the early ages people would rage war on them selves as tribute to there god... these men did not fear death because they knew if they could put aside the fear and knowing they gave there lives to them... in return they will be in a wonderful place called "heaven" but those who did not tribute,pray,etc.. went to "hell" a place we were all told was the worse punishment we could go thru for doing bad....

But dieing is easy and living is hard...
hell must not be a bad place if they let every1 in
and heaven only lets in well the bible says only a whew hundred people in...
so in order to get into heaven we have to... spray blood on his name...noo... pray everyday of our lives hopeing some good will happen in the end... noo....
How bout we live our lives... as "God" intended us to do and let w.e happens... happens.... i believe in god yes... but i do not belive in people who seek god only to improve there selfish lives... God does not snap and roll when we say he shoul... God can be real.. he can not.... but both ways vise versa hes is both good.. and bad..

God is everything and in everyone... he is hope...he is a symbol.. he is... a force that scientist may think have the answer... but still has more in store

so to the man who made this thread...

Millions of people can tell you if god is real or not... you can spend your whole life reserch and going back to see if hes there....

He is already here... hes just waiting for you to notice it..

once again i am no saying i am right i am not downing on any1s religions i am just another bystander who is curious on what happens in the afterlife.

STUFF
01-23-2009, 11:52 PM
Damn, this thread is huge.

It's just asking a simple question...

Do people need god?

People who are insecure, lost, confused, scared, and depressed might need a "god" or some other spiritual lord to pray to, to try to convince themselves that sooner or later in their life, their problems will be solved and that everything will be alright. People need a "god" to tell their problems to and to have hope that their problems will be fixed.

People who are well off in life and tend to be care free all the time shouldn't need a god, as it would only limit them and their potential.

Slayer
01-23-2009, 11:56 PM
I agree completely with Stuff.

I'm shamed to admit that, although I believe there is no god, when times are shitty, I try to hope that some higher power will help out.

Myself
01-24-2009, 12:04 AM
This is what i heard from a very close friend of mine whos yes hes atheist but his theory could make since but maybe not... it has open my eyes to believe in god and to not put my hopes up....

...

What?

He says this God... is just a hope for people... God is everything and every person...

You've lost me.

Scientist ( thats what he says) say god was created to help man with the most difficult question... Why am i here... what am i suppose to do ... who put me here.. etc etc

I think I understand. And if you are saying what I hope you are saying, I agree.

but He was created not only to help man with questions... but when a person talks about god... you can see a better confidence in the person...

???

in the early ages people would rage war on them selves as tribute to there god...

People still do.

these men did not fear death because they knew if they could put aside the fear and knowing they gave there lives to them... in return they will be in a wonderful place called "heaven"

Once again, still applies. ALLAH AKBAR

but those who did not tribute,pray,etc..
went to "hell" a place we were all told was the worse punishment we could go thru for doing bad....

Not relevant. Shit, this whole thing is irrelevant. Why am I bothering to comment?

But dieing is easy and living is hard...

Uhm. I think this is a typo.

hell must not be a bad place if they let every1 in

What?

and heaven only lets in well the bible says only a whew hundred people in...
so in order to get into heaven we have to... spray blood on his name...noo... pray everyday of our lives hopeing some good will happen in the end... noo....
How bout we live our lives... as "God" intended us to do and let w.e happens... happens.... i believe in god yes... but i do not belive in people who seek god only to improve there selfish lives... God does not snap and roll when we say he shoul... God can be real.. he can not.... but both ways vise versa hes is both good.. and bad..

cbf2decipher

God is everything and in everyone...

I AM GOD
HEAR ME, AND OBEY

he is hope...he is a symbol.. he is... a force that scientist may think have the answer... but still has more in store

scientist also think has grammar

so to the man who made this thread...

Yay. Finally, to the point.

Millions of people can tell you if god is real or not... you can spend your whole life reserch and going back to see if hes there....

What is this reserch you speak off? And where can I acquire it?

He is already here... hes just waiting for you to notice it..

He could just give a sign yo.

once again i am no saying i am right i am not downing on any1s religions i am just another bystander who is curious on what happens in the afterlife.

Actually you didn't really say anything.

At least not in English.



so i heard you... like dots... and bad grammars...

Where the **** is Pacman when you need him.

Also, Ash, you need to come out of the closet about your atheism to your parents.

Slayer
01-24-2009, 12:08 AM
(< ................
To The Rescue!

Myself
01-24-2009, 12:20 AM
_____
l O O l
l /\/\ l
l____l

WATCH OOT 4 TEH GHOSTh

Garuda
01-24-2009, 12:23 AM
Ive developed this theory that, back during the beginning of civilization, a person or a group of people realised that the moral of men alone would not be enough to keep the human race alive for very long. So they invented religion in order to create new and better motives or morals. If there was no religion, imagine how many less sacrifices for the human race there would be. We would have probably died out centuries ago. There would have been no Crusades, and many major wars may not have existed either.

Slayer
01-24-2009, 12:24 AM
Yes, let's praise religion. Let's thank religion for all the fighting and wars it's caused. You know, we could've been so much more peaceful a society, but nah, let's believe in fairy tales.

THANKS, BRO

Garuda
01-24-2009, 12:33 AM
I didnt mean that we should thank religion for our being here. Wars may have been a necessary part of the Human race, and if certain conflicts did not happen then maybe the world would have more problems then if it did have war.

Scarecrow
01-24-2009, 12:34 AM
_.
_.
_.
_.
_.
_.
_.
_.
_.
_.
_.
_.
_.
(V)

Slayer
01-24-2009, 12:35 AM
In an ancient society, what problem can be bigger than war?

Also, Scarecrow's pacman is far superior than mine.

Garuda
01-24-2009, 12:46 AM
Sorry if Im confusing you or something.

Here is what I mean:


Germany -> Hitler takes over -> Germany becomes Nazi Germany -> Nazi Germany takes over most of the world, no one intervenes. -> Nazi Germany man handles the entire planet, obvious problems arise. The rest of the world sits there with little motive to do something. Now if religion had existed, people, or groups of people, would have different morals/motives and would have decided to intervene Nazi Germany's rise to power, causing the world wars.

Slayer
01-24-2009, 12:55 AM
Little motive to do something? I actually laughed at that.

Someone is exterminating the population and enslaving people. From what I've gathered from your post, you think nobody cares enough to intervene. Religion isn't the only reason to go to war. People will still fight back against any ludicrous leaderships.

Myself
01-24-2009, 02:24 AM
Like when everybody was in an uproar when the old forums were deleted.

Slayer
01-24-2009, 03:22 AM
Yes indeed, sir.

Steyene
01-24-2009, 06:02 AM
Yes, let's praise religion. Let's thank religion for all the fighting and wars it's caused. You know, we could've been so much more peaceful a society, but nah, let's believe in fairy tales.

THANKS, BRO

While you are at it, thank religion for funding the exploration of the early world. Thank religion for our current morals.

As for religion starting wars.

Religion doesn't start wars, people do.

Slayer
01-24-2009, 06:11 AM
"Religion doesn't start wars, people do."

And they do so because of religion. That is the most common cause of great wars in the past. People disagreeing with other people's beliefs, and throwing tantrums in the form of "DESTROY THEM".

Kegman
01-24-2009, 07:12 AM
Shielding children from things to benefit your beliefs is a bastard move sure, but its the parents right completely to do it.




And what i'm saying is, thats a bad thing.



I'm not on the fence about this, i truly believe labelling a child with a ****ing religion as soon as they pop out the womb is utter madness.

Ash
01-24-2009, 07:29 AM
Thank religion for our current morals.


Ha ha no. Whatever you might think, religion is NOT the source of morals. I've been showing that through this entire thread: not only do we not need it for morality, but it is not a good source of morality. Even the message of the new testament advocates apathy, which is a different form of immorality.

Jeremy
01-24-2009, 10:08 AM
And what i'm saying is, thats a bad thing.



I'm not on the fence about this, i truly believe labelling a child with a ****ing religion as soon as they pop out the womb is utter madness.

Then shoving them into evolutionary science is madness also, its the exact same thing. Its just one belief over the other, how do you think the believers feel when they send their children to school knowing that the school they are sending them to is trying to underhand everything they want their child to be and know.

Kegman
01-24-2009, 12:14 PM
Then shoving them into evolutionary science is madness also, its the exact same thing. Its just one belief over the other, how do you think the believers feel when they send their children to school knowing that the school they are sending them to is trying to underhand everything they want their child to be and know.


did i not just say perfection would be for children to experience and learn about all the ways of thinking in the world and then develop their own?


Of course everyone wants their child to be a good well rounded kid with a decent moral code, again, what im saying is automatically calling your kid muslim / christian etc as soon as they are born is in my opinion, demented.

Jeremy
01-24-2009, 12:17 PM
Buts its their right to do as a parent... Its not abusing the kid whether you believe that or not, and he could just as well snap out of it when they are older if they want to.

Slayer
01-24-2009, 12:24 PM
I just want to add a simple comment. People don't need God, what has he done for us?

Well, based on what we know for facts, or lack thereof, he's done nothing.

At least, I don't need God.

Jeremy
01-24-2009, 12:50 PM
I just want to add a simple comment. People don't need God, what has he done for us?

Well, based on what we know for facts, or lack thereof, he's done nothing.

At least, I don't need God.

Well a lot of religions believe he created us, and created all life on earth for us, some believe he sent his only son to die a brutal death so that we could achieve entrance into ultimate paradise. Religion has nothing to do with facts and you know that, you cant disprove religion or god by using facts and science.

And like people have stated a trillion times, maybe god created the process of evolution. So we are products of his creation. You don't know for a fact one doesn't exist, in fact there could be some explanation someone has thought of that would prove he did create us. But until every single possibility has been analyzed, there is no way for a fact you could say god doesn't exist or prove he has done nothing for us.

Kegman
01-24-2009, 01:06 PM
Its not abusing the kid whether you believe that or not.


Oh, its not, thanks for clearing that one up.



Some skills you got there

Slayer
01-24-2009, 01:13 PM
Well a lot of religions believe he created us, and created all life on earth for us, some believe he sent his only son to die a brutal death so that we could achieve entrance into ultimate paradise. Religion has nothing to do with facts and you know that, you cant disprove religion or god by using facts and science.

And like people have stated a trillion times, maybe god created the process of evolution. So we are products of his creation. You don't know for a fact one doesn't exist, in fact there could be some explanation someone has thought of that would prove he did create us. But until every single possibility has been analyzed, there is no way for a fact you could say god doesn't exist or prove he has done nothing for us.

My post was basically showing that there is no proof that god helped us in any way. I'm not going to invest myself in something that has no fail safe.

Ash
01-24-2009, 01:35 PM
Then shoving them into evolutionary science is madness also, its the exact same thing. Its just one belief over the other, how do you think the believers feel when they send their children to school knowing that the school they are sending them to is trying to underhand everything they want their child to be and know.

Excuse me, but it's very different. First, evolution is not a belief, it's a 19th century theory that, as time wears on, is constantly affirmed by other branches of science, such as molecular biology, genetics, and observable phenomenon. Not only that, but it has been observed hundreds of times in single-celled organisms and in some species of animal, such as birds that were introduced to Hawaii over a hundred years ago that have now adapted so far as to be almost unrecognizable. Evolution is not a belief any more than gravity is a belief.

Also, no public school requires anything more than students be aware of the theory and what it postulates. I have never seen a high school level biology book that had more than a chapter on the subject, and even then they're extremely careful to avoid the subject of human evolution, except in pointing out the Scopes Monkey Trial.

Finally, government paid schools don't threaten students who don't accept evolution with hell. Tests only ever have one or two questions regarding the details of it, such as who it was that proposed the theory. Religious faith, however, DOES threaten disbelievers with hell, and that is child abuse. As I have said before, for a child, visions of fire, screaming women and men, and gnashing teeth are very real. A person who goes through school is given a choice and encouraged to formulate their own hypotheses. Children brought up in religion are given a choice, as well, but it's hardly what you can call a choice.

"Choose for yourself, but don't choose wrongly, because you'll be doomed to hell forever if you are wrong."



Only a very few people, about 5%, ever break free of that, and many are still scarred for life because of that fear. In fact, there are therapists who deal with that exact kind of fear, the fear that since you made the wrong choice, you'll be doomed to hell.

nuclearbreastimplant
01-24-2009, 01:59 PM
who the hell took that picture
im pretty sure we havnt been to far out of our solar system

Automaton
01-24-2009, 02:05 PM
Excuse me, but it's very different. First, evolution is not a belief, it's a 19th century theory that, as time wears on, is constantly affirmed by other branches of science, such as molecular biology, genetics, and observable phenomenon. Not only that, but it has been observed hundreds of times in single-celled organisms and in some species of animal, such as birds that were introduced to Hawaii over a hundred years ago that have now adapted so far as to be almost unrecognizable. Evolution is not a belief any more than gravity is a belief.

Also, no public school requires anything more than students be aware of the theory and what it postulates. I have never seen a high school level biology book that had more than a chapter on the subject, and even then they're extremely careful to avoid the subject of human evolution, except in pointing out the Scopes Monkey Trial.

Finally, government paid schools don't threaten students who don't accept evolution with hell. Tests only ever have one or two questions regarding the details of it, such as who it was that proposed the theory. Religious faith, however, DOES threaten disbelievers with hell, and that is child abuse. As I have said before, for a child, visions of fire, screaming women and men, and gnashing teeth are very real. A person who goes through school is given a choice and encouraged to formulate their own hypotheses. Children brought up in religion are given a choice, as well, but it's hardly what you can call a choice.

"Choose for yourself, but don't choose wrongly, because you'll be doomed to hell forever if you are wrong."



Only a very few people, about 5%, ever break free of that, and many are still scarred for life because of that fear. In fact, there are therapists who deal with that exact kind of fear, the fear that since you made the wrong choice, you'll be doomed to hell.

Well there you're wrong. My teacher mentioned how "we have progressed as we evolved", and I said "what if we didn't evolve?". She then replied "we did evolve, there are no ifs about it. We were once apes and neanderthons (sp?)". So some schools do say evolution is fact.

Jeremy
01-24-2009, 02:33 PM
Contrary to what you might think, not every parent who ever taught their children about Christianity said "YOU ARE GOING TO BURN INT ETERNAL HELLFIRE JIMMY IF YOU DON'T DO EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE TOLD." And no it isn't abuse, any more than telling a kid a scary story is. According to you, every camp counselor that tells a ghost story should be charged with child abuse, because the kid gets scared.

It isn't as bad as you are portraying it is, you are using probably your life as an example just like I used to use mine when it was completely different than I made it out to be, because I was pissed off.

Where are you getting that percentage from? I would love a link.

Kegman
01-24-2009, 02:51 PM
Contrary to what you might think, not every parent who ever taught their children about Christianity said "YOU ARE GOING TO BURN INT ETERNAL HELLFIRE JIMMY IF YOU DON'T DO EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE TOLD." And no it isn't abuse, any more than telling a kid a scary story is. According to you, every camp counselor that tells a ghost story should be charged with child abuse, because the kid gets scared.

It isn't as bad as you are portraying it is, you are using probably your life as an example just like I used to use mine when it was completely different than I made it out to be, because I was pissed off.

Where are you getting that percentage from? I would love a link.



You really dont get it

Its not about scaring children or frightnening them into believing something, its about labelling a child with a religion when they could never comprehend what any of it means.


So even if someone invents a religion where there is no damnation or scary bits, just the good stuff, i would still totally oppose telling a child he is in that religion because it is absurd to slap a great big thing like that on someone who just learnt to potty train.


As for my life ( i can't speak for ash if thats who you mean ) i got the upbringing i describe. My family never even hinted at religion, to be honest, most of them don't have time to indulge in such frivolities

Jeremy
01-24-2009, 03:13 PM
I was referring to ash in all of that post, but I don't see why that is so bad of a thing. If you don't believe in that religion than why does it bother you so much to be labeled it? It really not that big of a deal...

Dragon⁰⁷⁷
01-24-2009, 03:25 PM
Only a very few people, about 5%, ever break free of that, and many are still scarred for life because of that fear. In fact, there are therapists who deal with that exact kind of fear, the fear that since you made the wrong choice, you'll be doomed to hell.
I'd love to see the source for that statistic.

Ash
01-24-2009, 03:31 PM
Contrary to what you might think, not every parent who ever taught their children about Christianity said "YOU ARE GOING TO BURN INT ETERNAL HELLFIRE JIMMY IF YOU DON'T DO EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE TOLD." And no it isn't abuse, any more than telling a kid a scary story is. According to you, every camp counselor that tells a ghost story should be charged with child abuse, because the kid gets scared.

Err... if you say "The bible is true, God exists" then the child knows soon afterwards that, as the bible says, they will go to hell for not believing. That is Christian Doctrine. And it's quite different from telling ghost stories, because when you tell a ghost story, the child might be scared for a day or two, and will decide for themselves that it isn't true, but in the case of whether god exists, you are saying that it is true, and it's very obviously not to scare them, and they will accept it as being true for the rest of their lives, unless they are one of the few that later becomes an atheist. Noone continues to believe ghost stories their whole life, and no ghost story is reinforced by threats of hell, church, and millions of other believers.


It isn't as bad as you are portraying it is, you are using probably your life as an example just like I used to use mine when it was completely different than I made it out to be, because I was pissed off.

Actually, my experience was rather tame when compared to the horrors others, especially kids of fundamentalists. I was frightened by what the Bible said, and I was scared like all hell when I played DOOM 3 and watched Constantine, but my parents weren't that bad about it.


Where are you getting that percentage from? I would love a link.

It was an estimate based on this poll (http://www.pollingreport.com/religion.htm) which shows that roughly 6-7% of people in the united states are atheists. The percentage of people who were once Christian or Islamic would be smaller.

Dragon⁰⁷⁷
01-24-2009, 03:39 PM
It was an estimate based on this poll (http://www.pollingreport.com/religion.htm) which shows that roughly 6-7% of people in the united states are atheists. The percentage of people who were once Christian or Islamic would be smaller.
...But not all of those people were subject to "YOU ARE GOING TO HELL IF YOU DO SOMETHING WRONG BLAH!!!!"

I mean, check this out: 68% (http://religions.pewforum.org/pdf/comparison-Interpretation+of+Religious+Teachings.pdf) of the country thinks that their is more than one way to interpret their religion, and 70% (http://religions.pewforum.org/pdf/comparison-Views+of+One%27s+Religion+as+the+One+True+Faith.pd f) think multiple religions will lead to eternal life. To me, that expresses a culture of tolerance, not one of threats.

Automaton
01-24-2009, 04:07 PM
I mean all the Christians I know don't actually believe in hell. My mom is a Jehovah's witness (well sometimes she goes to their meetings - and I've been to 3 of them), and they believe we all get a second chance when we are resurrected upon the earth or somewhere, and that will be heaven. People who still do bad will cease to exist. So you see, most religions don't scare children into doing good. However, I do agree children should not be taught a religion until they can decide for themself, simply because religion is not fact. That's like teaching your children about the boogey monster, but to more of an extent because children will mostly know that monsters aren't real, whereas with religion, they will blindly believe it.

Also, I'm an atheist for those that are wondering, but I was a Christian until not too long a go. But when I was Christian, I didn't think about religion too much, and didn't care. My mom told me about God etc every now and then, but didn't force me to believe it (she assumed I did - and I did), and I decided to go to a couple of Jehovas witnesses meetings with her.

Oh and Jehovas witnesses aren't nearly as bad as people think. I hate it when people make comments about them, because generally they're nice people that are Christians, and maybe have a few different views. They're not all like "the end is nigh!" like most people think they are.

cander
01-24-2009, 06:51 PM
If people "feel" better thinking their is a god that rules over everything and that everything that happends around us, sure go ahead.