toofarnorth Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 It never ceases to amaze me how intelligent some people on this forum actually are, as they really do their best to hide this in everyday posts. I'm not a believer in anything really, but I really hate being labelled as an atheist. I'm not quite sure why, but I just doesn't sit well with me. Whenever on forms it asks for religious beliefs I always choose not to answer, rather than putting atheist. The thing that really put me off any kind of religion was the idea that a supreme being or body would want me to worship it and waste my time visiting a place especially to do this. God or whoever must be a bit insecure if he needs constant praise. I have no problem with anyone who does believe as they have every right to and I would never try to argue with them about it, but inside my belief is that they may be a little misguided. I appreciate that many religions promote good moral and ethical behaviour, but this can be encouraged without the need for the religious additions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 Modern religion (christianity/Islam/Judaism etc) is means used to exploit the weak. Essentially a profit making enterprise which prays on fear. In the case of Christianity there is the bible which is simply a book of propaganda written by monks years after the supposed events. If a bible was to be written today for a new religion you could quite easily substitute Jesus with a 9/11 bomber or such like because one persons terrorist is another persons freedom fighter and Jesus was terrorist in my opinion. I state this because i choose to believe his trial was justified over and above believing biblical propagnda written years later to fill a void caused by the collapse of the Roman empire. The Roman empire loses influence and the Roman Catholic church pops up - what a coincidence. That all said if some choose to believe and they take comfort in their beliefs who am i to critisise their ignorance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pancake Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 That all said if some choose to believe and they take comfort in their beliefs who am i to critisise their ignorance. Yet again another post from a non-religious person on this thread trying oh-so-hard to belittle those with religious views. And yet, not a single person who has said on here that they consider themselves religious has gone anyway towards insulting (or trying to) those who don't share their views. An interesting tagent to this thread, Im sure you will all agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyb1 Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 nope got 3 words in and stopped reading anyone else get any further? I looked at who wrote it and didn't bother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 Yet again another post from a non-religious person on this thread trying oh-so-hard to belittle those with religious views. And yet, not a single person who has said on here that they consider themselves religious has gone anyway towards insulting (or trying to) those who don't share their views. An interesting tagent to this thread, Im sure you will all agree. I totally agree. Maybe I dose of religion would calm their aggression somewhat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 (edited) The Bible and The Koren should both be banned from publication for inciting racial hatred, homophobia, sexism, ethnic clensing, murder, violence, infanticide etc etc under UK and international law. If it were any other book they would be already. Both books have horrendous morals and are evil. People can uses passages from both to "justify" very evil acts. Many religious people pick and choose which bits of both books they like and follow and which they don't and ignore. Totally bizarre as they are meant to be the word of God, you either believe it all and follow it to the letter or don't and dismiss it as as books created at a time when the human race knew little of how the world around them work and created religion to fill the gaps which have since been explained by evidence and rational thinking rather than blind faith. I'm tempted to take a case to the High Court myself Edited 5 November, 2009 by Matthew Le God Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint in Paradise Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 Many many years ago whilst in hospital waiting to be operated on I had to fill in a form. One question asked what religion I was and I, being bored and wanting to be different, answered none. The look of shock on the nurses face was amazing and she said she would put me down on the form as C.O.E. I objected and she didn't seem to like me very much after that and she didn't appear to be very forgiving either. Along with the saying that there are no atheists in a foxhole I think that is also difficult to find a 100% atheist amongst people facing a major operation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Will Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 My views are: why believe in God when you can believe in yourself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 Yet again another post from a non-religious person on this thread trying oh-so-hard to belittle those with religious views Prehaps it's because many feel that the belief in God by adults is as absurd as the belief, by adults of Father Christams or the Tooth Fairy? Afterall, the belief in God is an act of faith, not anything based on fact and many believe in the latter and have no time for the former. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lets B Avenue Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 What's absurd about Father Christmas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 What's absurd about Father Christmas? Fair point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norwaysaint Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 Want a bigger brush to tar people with? Don't be a tit, Pancak, if you've read the post, you know I referred to Christians that I've tried to discuss it with. It was even the other half of the sentence you highlighted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 Yet again another post from a non-religious person on this thread trying oh-so-hard to belittle those with religious views. And yet, not a single person who has said on here that they consider themselves religious has gone anyway towards insulting (or trying to) those who don't share their views. An interesting tagent to this thread, Im sure you will all agree. I'm genuinely intriged how you can believe the bible as i just don't get it. I used to believe in father christmas when i was about 4 but eventually i twigged it was dad that used to eat the mince pie and drink the sherry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
70's Mike Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 read the title saw who wrote it, thought he was having another go at MLT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 I can't see much difference between believing in God and believing in Father Christmas, Tooth Fairies or Dwarves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludwig Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 I can't see much difference between believing in God and believing in Father Christmas, Tooth Fairies or Dwarves. Or believing in the 'laws' of Mathematics, believing that what you experience is truly real, or well... believing in 'anything' for that matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 I wish that some people could debate sensibly without insulting the beliefs of others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 Why are we here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ponty Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 I can't see much difference between believing in God and believing in Father Christmas, Tooth Fairies or Dwarves. Verne Troyer may disagree there. Dwarfs/Dwarves are not mythical beings, you know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eurosaint Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 An interesting debate, and one that has been ongoing for centuries and, no doubt, will continue to be debated for many more centuries to come. Just so everybody is clear on my stance before I continue, I am not a believer in god, and I would probably classify myself as an atheist if I absolutely must pigeon-hole my beliefs. I have had many a debate myself on this subject on other forums, and it always strikes me that the people who vehemently defend christianity, or religion of any kind, tend to be extremely irrational and blinkered when it comes to their own beliefs. There is a guy who I have debated with on another forum who talks in all kinds of riddles about the subject, and when you challenge him on any of the many contradictions in the bible, he always replies with 'God moves in mysterious ways' as if that is all OK and explains everything. His one argument that really got me though was his insistence that to be a christian, you must first accept that we are all sinners in the eyes of god. This statement, to me anyway, throws up all sorts of questions and complications. Firstly, if you believe that God created us all, why then did he create us as sinners? Secondly, why would anybody swear their allegiance to a religion that seeks to impose a sense of inferiority on every one of its members? It is my belief that religion, theistic religion at least, first came about as a way of explaining anything that mankind could not understand, before the advent of scientific method. It was then perpetuated as a way of exercising control over the populace by those with a vested interested in maintaining power over their people. I will never condemn anybody for following God, the bible, or anything associated with the church in that way (although I have met some religious people who talk absolute drivel in my lifetime) because if people find that religion helps them to make sense of the world and they can become happier and healthier from it then that can only be a good thing. But I do take exception to be told by religious types that I must accept Jesus in order to give my life meaning and morality. I am quite capable of following my own moral compass without the need to absorb texts from a 2000-year-old work of fiction. I am a very rational person, and as such I am incapable of allowing myself to be guided unquestionably by religion. An excellent post all round, but the highlighted sentence for me is the most relevant ! How many wars have been (and are being!) fought 'in the name of God' ? Africa is plagued with AIDS, yet the Catholic church still preaches that the use of condoms is a sin ! These are only 2 examples and there are many, many others ! Sometimes I despair, I really do ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 I totally agree. Maybe I dose of religion would calm their aggression somewhat. One could argue that religion has caused many more of the worlds problems than it has solved and that aggression, violence and war go hand in hand with religion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Will Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 Christianity: One woman's lie about having an affair that got seriously out of hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 Verne Troyer may disagree there. Dwarfs/Dwarves are not mythical beings, you know. I was talking about the ones in Lord of the Rings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ponty Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 To sum up: I've never heard of an atheist zealot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludwig Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 Something I've discovered fairly recently, having taken an interest in the philosophy underpinning the foundations of Mathematics, and general reading regarding inducting any sort of thought; is that belief in anything takes a massive amount of faith. I find it entirely hypocritical for a person to believe they are erring on the side of 'science', when the scientific method as a means of absolute proof is entirely useless. Every finding using scientific methods (experimentation and observation), every empirical observation in fact, can be reasonably doubted. It can be argued that masses of empirical data make it far less probable that scientific experiments produce false results, but regardless; it is not absolute. The problem lies with induction, how can we know that that which we have previously experienced will continue to hold true in the future? Perhaps we have a model in which we can be 'sure' that the sun will rise every morning. Do we, however, understand the fundamental nature of 'natural laws'? We think we do, but then, geocentricity was a prominent idea in the not so distant future (if we consider the age of the universe). It follows that our thought is based on inducting all sorts of empirical observations we make, but we cannot necessarily ever be certain of them. In fact, I've found that many a person would cite 'Mathematics' as an infallable set of truths. Lies. Complete and utter lies. You need faith to believe in the word of Mathematics, in the same way you do with belief in God. You need faith to believe in that which you empirically observe. Mathematics, is not logically sound, there is no way to prove the fundamental axioms of Mathematics are true, other than to accept that they are 'self-evident', in the same way that it is 'self-evident' that the TV opposite me is currently on. I cannot be certain it is, my senses can deceive me, I perceive feeling in dreams which apparently is not there. Can the world not be a long dream, constantly fooling me? (I think, therefore there is thought) There is faith required to believe in science, to believe in Mathematics, we must trust our empirical observations blindly, because the only way in which we can validate anything else is using our empirical observations, and using them to validate themselves is circular and not logically sound. You have faith, not in God, but in your senses. Your senses can deceive you, you may believe they do not, they may not, but that does not mean they cannot. Attacking a religious believer for 'blindly' believing in God, when infallable science is around, is hypocritical. Perhaps, we can do as Hume says, and tend towards that which is more probable. Perhaps it is more probable that our collective empirical experiences are not wrong, that science is true, that mathematics is probably true and that God is merely a 'gap-filler'. However, if someone disagreed with you, that a table is not a certain shape, that they see it differently, they do not interpret their sensory perceptions in the same way as you. Does this mean they are wrong? Are you wrong? It is merely a matter of interpretation. A person may have an equal faith in God that you have in science. Both are similarly doubtable, to argue otherwise is ridiculous, though a strong case could be made that to disbelieve science would irrational, as evidence errs in its favour. Science though, merely explains 'how', never 'why'. Why did the big bang happen? (There must surely be an answer to this, not that this necessitates the existence of a God, but faith in such a thing would not be totally unreasonable) What is the difference between someone telling you God exists and someone (using science) hypothesising the shape of the universe based on certain types of evidence? Neither can be empirically observed by you. How can you give credence to one, yet not the other. This is totally hypocritical. Everything can be reasonably doubted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ponty Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 I'd already done the summing-up, Orn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludwig Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 I dislike the way in which I was able to knock that out in 15 minutes, yet have been writing an essay on Shakespeare for 2 hours that is only slightly longer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludwig Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 To sum up: I've never heard of an atheist zealot. Dawkins. Militant atheism is just as bad as religion. God =/= religion. Do not mistake them for one another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Will Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 Where's my joke gone?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ponty Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 Where's my joke gone?! Perhaps it was in bad taste, considering the posters who would contribute to a thread on the discussion of God/Religion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ponty Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 Dawkins. Militant atheism is just as bad as religion. God =/= religion. Do not mistake them for one another. Has Dawkins ever killed in the name of Atheism? Many religions have done this at one time or another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Will Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 Perhaps it was in bad taste, considering the posters who would contribute to a thread on the discussion of God/Religion? Aww it was only a joke and I'm sure even the religious folk would have had a chuckle. Just trying to lighten the mood Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludwig Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 Has Dawkins ever killed in the name of Atheism? Many religions have done this at one time or another. Yes he has, I have a video. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ponty Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 Yes he has' date=' I have a video.[/quote'] Cool. Share? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludwig Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 You'll sell it and you need the money soon, so I'd rather keep it myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott_saints Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 I believe in Father Christmas. It's more believable than this religion cr@p. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheaf Saint Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 Also, and I must acknowledge the musings of the late, great Bill Hicks at this point, why is there no mention of dinosaurs in the bible? If God created the heavens and the earth in six days and on the seventh created man, why is it that the fossil record has proved that there were giant lizards living on this planet millions of years before mankind was even a glint in God's eye? Many extreme religious types argue that the bible is the absolute word of God yet, as demonstrated by my example above, a lot of it has been disproven as our understanding of nature and of the universe in general has improved. People used to believe that earthquakes and volcanoes and other natural disasters were 'the wrath of God' because there was no other explanation available at the time. Now we know differently of course, yet some people still insist that the bible is the absolute word of God when clearly it isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 One could argue that religion has caused many more of the worlds problems than it has solved and that aggression, violence and war go hand in hand with religion. Nope. It is the misinterpretation of Christianity which causes violence and war. I cant speak about other religions because I dont know enough about them all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 An excellent post all round, but the highlighted sentence for me is the most relevant ! How many wars have been (and are being!) fought 'in the name of God' ? Africa is plagued with AIDS, yet the Catholic church still preaches that the use of condoms is a sin ! These are only 2 examples and there are many, many others ! Sometimes I despair, I really do ! I'm not a catholic but I don't argue that all chritianity is wrong because of catholocism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 Has Dawkins ever killed in the name of Atheism? Many religions have done this at one time or another. Religion gives people an excuse to start wars. If it didn't exist it would be something else. As I said, with regards to christianity it is the misuse of the religion is the problem. That isn't the religion's fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 Also, and I must acknowledge the musings of the late, great Bill Hicks at this point, why is there no mention of dinosaurs in the bible? If God created the heavens and the earth in six days and on the seventh created man, why is it that the fossil record has proved that there were giant lizards living on this planet millions of years before mankind was even a glint in God's eye? Many extreme religious types argue that the bible is the absolute word of God yet, as demonstrated by my example above, a lot of it has been disproven as our understanding of nature and of the universe in general has improved. People used to believe that earthquakes and volcanoes and other natural disasters were 'the wrath of God' because there was no other explanation available at the time. Now we know differently of course, yet some people still insist that the bible is the absolute word of God when clearly it isn't. Some people use the bible as a guide for how to live their lives and some believe every word within it. With regards to your six days, many believe that to not be a literal six days, rather it was easier to use "days" so that it was easier to understand. It could have been millions of years since God is outside of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 (edited) Some people use the bible as a guide for how to live their lives and some believe every word within it. With regards to your six days, many believe that to not be a literal six days, rather it was easier to use "days" so that it was easier to understand. It could have been millions of years since God is outside of time. Picking and choosing which bits you believe and which bits you don't from the Bible is strange as it is meant to be the word of God and taken literally. It has terrible morals it it as well as good ones. The Bible is a vile book and as I said earlier incites racial hatred, infanticide, ethnic cleansing, sexism, homophobia, violence etc etc. Should be banned from publication under UK and International laws. Edited 5 November, 2009 by Matthew Le God Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 (edited) Nope. It is the misinterpretation of Christianity which causes violence and war. I cant speak about other religions because I dont know enough about them all. Christianity is a religion. Religion is the reason given for war. QED religion is responsible for war. * I've always found it strange how religion is used as a reason to kill people despite God being a peaceful, mercifull God. Edited 5 November, 2009 by View From The Top Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 Picking and choosing which bits you believe and which bits you don't from the Bible is strange as it is meant to be the word of God and taken literally. It has terrible morals it it as well as good ones. The Bible is a vile book and as I said earlier incites racial hatred, infanticide, ethnic cleansing, sexism, homophobia, violence etc etc. Should be banned from publication under UK and International laws. Huh? Who said? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludwig Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 Religion is not the only reason given for war and thus religion is not wholly responsible for war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 Christianity is a religion. Religion is the reason given for war. QED religion is responsible for war. * I've always found it strange how religion is used as a reason to kill people despite God being a peaceful, mercifull God. So I presume you encouraged horror films to be banned in the wake of the Jamie Bulger case? After all, that was the reason given for the atrocities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 Religion is not the only reason given for war and thus religion is not wholly responsible for war. And just because someone gives a reason for something does not mean that that thing is to blame. I could shoot someone and say it was because of my sister. Is she to blame? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 Huh? Who said? And who said it shouldn't? Do you agree with me that some of the morality in the Bible is vile and evil? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 (edited) And just because someone gives a reason for something does not mean that that thing is to blame. I could shoot someone and say it was because of my sister. Is she to blame? Are you saying the Crusades were not based on religion? I could give you a huge list of wars that are undeniably intertwined with religion as a major cause. Edited 5 November, 2009 by Matthew Le God Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 5 November, 2009 Share Posted 5 November, 2009 And who said it shouldn't? Do you agree with me that some of the morality in the Bible is vile and evil? The bible like every belief is open to interpretation. People may choose to take it literally if they like. Others (like myself) may read it and form a different opinion. You may read it and find vile and evil parts and that is your right. My personal interpretation is different and that is basically would religion should be about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now