Religion vs. Atheism Thread

[RussUK]

Just stumbled on this thread and thought "ah, the age old religion debate". Let me start by saying im an atheist. I believe in science, the big bang etc. and like to see proof. My wife is from a Irish Catholic family and while her generation do not practice her grandmother and great aunts do.

While i dont believe in the whole God thing myself i do believe that Jesus may have existed, and that his "miracles" such as healing the sick may have been more mundane by todays definition, he may have been the first practitioner of "modern" medicine. His turning water into wine and multiplying bread and fish may have been illusions (youtube Dynamo fishes in bucket and walking on water")

I must make it clear though that i do not begrudge anyones faith and i sometimes wish i could feel comfort like they do, however i dont like certain religions whos followers try to force it on you.

Historically religion has caused much trouble and while many think islam is the cause of a lot of it this is not the case.Christianity has caused more conflicts than any other religion starting with the "holy" crusades sanctioned and ordered by the Pope then in power. It was the Christians who termed the phrase "holy war" in the 3rd crusade (1189-1192) in arabic this is Jihad. If we all respected and accepted religions, whether we believe them or not the world would be a better place, its just a shame this will never happen.

Just my 2 pence (1.3cents) worth. I'll get off my soapbox now

[Shorty]

"My bed contains about 10 million dust mites. The Earth contains about 7 billion people. To my dust mites, I am an omnipotent, omnipresent being. I go away, sometimes for generations, then return. I created their home. I sustain them. I smash them. I drown some of them in the washing machine. I don't care what they think. I don't get angry if some of them don't like the way my skin flakes taste. The God of Christianity supposedly knows what all 7 billion of his dust mites are thinking, and he gets very angry if any of them don't love and respect him."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5dSyT50Cs8

He is also so merciful that he takes a rest from giving a child polio or a mother of 7 cancer so that he can line up a few putts for Christian golfers. He's just  AWESOME!

He'll sink a few ferries and crash a few planes but be the reason why one person wasn't burnt alive in a fire while 36 were.

[Righty to Lefty]

He is also so merciful that he takes a rest from giving a child polio or a mother of 7 cancer so that he can line up a few putts for Christian golfers. He's just  AWESOME!

He'll sink a few ferries and crash a few planes but be the reason why one person wasn't burnt alive in a fire while 36 were.

All you can do is find humor in it really!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3oH0ReL3Cew

[boogielicious]

First let me say that it is a challenge to moderate threads like this. Posters tend to have longer posts and we mods really have to skim all the words to make sure posters are behaving. So far you all have impressed me with being in control.

That being said, one thing I notice about religious and political discussions in general is a lack of tolerance for the the opposing point of view. Tolerance is the key word because in most religious belief and belief in democracy, we are supposed to be tolerant and even accepting of diverse points of view. In religion and politics, that has never been the case since the dawn of time. We spend hours and days arguing points that will never change the other's mind. We kill and go to war over political and religious differences. It is all very sad.

Apart from disease and natural disasters, the number one killer of man is man. 10,000 years of religions haven't stopped this and neither has any political system ever created and practiced. It kind of makes you think that as a species, this must be part of our genome, part of our nature. Not every person has these traits, but enough do. Until we figure out why we want to kill other humans, this debate will rage on.

Carry on.

[RussUK]

First let me say that it is a challenge to moderate threads like this. Posters tend to have longer posts and we mods really have to skim all the words to make sure posters are behaving. So far you all have impressed me with being in control.

That being said, one thing I notice about religious and political discussions in general is a lack of tolerance for the the opposing point of view. Tolerance is the key word because in most religious belief and belief in democracy, we are supposed to be tolerant and even accepting of diverse points of view. In religion and politics, that has never been the case since the dawn of time. We spend hours and days arguing points that will never change the other's mind. We kill and go to war over political and religious differences. It is all very sad.

Apart from disease and natural disasters, the number one killer of man is man. 10,000 years of religions haven't stopped this and neither has any political system ever created and practiced. It kind of makes you think that as a species, this must be part of our genome, part of our nature. Not every person has these traits, but enough do. Until we figure out why we want to kill other humans, this debate will rage on.

Carry on.

+1. Regardless of ones view on religion tolerance and respect need to be shown. religion itself isnt dangerous as such, its like a firearm, its isnt dangerous by itself, but its the person holding it that makes it dangerous. All religions will have their fanatics as history has so often shown, but i believe there are more good religious people than bad  out there (and this is coming from an atheist)

[JonMA1]

Just stumbled on this thread and thought "ah, the age old religion debate". Let me start by saying im an atheist. I believe in science, the big bang etc. and like to see proof. My wife is from a Irish Catholic family and while her generation do not practice her grandmother and great aunts do.

While i dont believe in the whole God thing myself i do believe that Jesus may have existed, and that his "miracles" such as healing the sick may have been more mundane by todays definition, he may have been the first practitioner of "modern" medicine. His turning water into wine and multiplying bread and fish may have been illusions (youtube Dynamo fishes in bucket and walking on water")

I must make it clear though that i do not begrudge anyones faith and i sometimes wish i could feel comfort like they do, however i dont like certain religions whos followers try to force it on you.

Historically religion has caused much trouble and while many think islam is the cause of a lot of it this is not the case.Christianity has caused more conflicts than any other religion starting with the "holy" crusades sanctioned and ordered by the Pope then in power. It was the Christians who termed the phrase "holy war" in the 3rd crusade (1189-1192) in arabic this is Jihad. If we all respected and accepted religions, whether we believe them or not the world would be a better place, its just a shame this will never happen.

Just my 2 pence (1.3cents) worth. I'll get off my soapbox now

Nice post. I agree that those who force their beliefs onto others are just obnoxious. I enjoy the discussions but dislike the "I'm right and this is why" mentality. It really shouldn't matter to anyone what someone else believes or doesn't believe. Even if I thought I had it all figured out, was 100% certain I knew the truth, I don't think I'd do much beyond just discuss it.

Everyone on this thread has heard every argument for and against, some of us for many years. Nothing new will be added by either side. Some are just better at articulating their opinions.

To try and ask someone for evidence or proof of a spiritual belief is silly. I don't think anyone has claimed religion to be a physical science. For me, there are things that science does not yet properly explain. It's far from evidence but enough for me to question. To an atheist, I assume that way of thinking might be looked upon as a weakness. It may very well be.

At a very young age, I tried to encourage my kids to think for themselves. If they had wanted to go to one of the many churches in this area, I would have taken them so long as it was their idea (they did not). Once in school, I encouraged them to differentiate between fact and opinion given by teachers. And when we would discuss issues at home, to do the same when I spoke.

[saevel25]

He is also so merciful that he takes a rest from giving a child polio or a mother of 7 cancer so that he can line up a few putts for Christian golfers.

God doesn't take a break. He's all powerful.

Apart from disease and natural disasters, the number one killer of man is man. 10,000 years of religions haven't stopped this and neither has any political system ever created and practiced. It kind of makes you think that as a species, this must be part of our genome, part of our nature. Not every person has these traits, but enough do. Until we figure out why we want to kill other humans, this debate will rage on.

Carry on.

Pretty much when you are the top of the food chain. Your only competition is starvation and your own species.

That brings up the classic philosophical question. Is human's inherently evil or good? Stay way from answering that it's off topic

To try and ask someone for evidence or proof of a spiritual belief is silly. I don't think anyone has claimed religion to be a physical science. For me, there are things that science does not yet properly explain. It's far from evidence but enough for me to question. To an atheist, I assume that way of thinking might be looked upon as a weakness. It may very well be.

At a very young age, I tried to encourage my kids to think for themselves. If they had wanted to go to one of the many churches in this area, I would have taken them so long as it was their idea (they did not). Once in school, I encouraged them to differentiate between fact and opinion given by teachers. And when we would discuss issues at home, to do the same when I spoke.

I have thought that religion is just a version of humanity's quest to explain the world.

Natural Disasters in ancient times = Deity was pissed off

Natural Disaster in modern times = An outlier occurrence of nature's typical want to be neutral and balanced.

As things got explained things got condensed. Polytheism to Monotheism.

Speaking of isms, that reminds me of this :)

[Ernest Jones]

He is also so merciful that he takes a rest from giving a child polio or a mother of 7 cancer so that he can line up a few putts for Christian golfers. He's just  AWESOME!

Oh @Shorty , I'm trying so hard to stay out of this morass, but this one cracked me up!

[newtogolf]

People believe in a God because there are too many things we can't comprehend or understand.  As an agnostic, we don't ask for proof there is or isn't a God, we accept that as a possibility without committing to a specific organized religion that has interpreted who or what this God is and expects from us.

The fact that we are part of a world order that we don't understand nor fully appreciate our role in leads even scientists to believe there is something greater than us at work.

I'll stop believing in a God when science can prove without any question how life in a single cell organism began.  Something created "life", until we know for certain what that is, what harm is there in assigning that creation to something that is beyond our intelligence to grasp.

As for why most people believe in organized religions it's quite simple, they believe out of fear, comfort or a means to defer to a higher power when the world around them is too confusing for them to understand.

[Lihu]

I'll go with the confusing part. ;-) Seriously, life is too complicated and short for me to think about every single situation for myself and determine the right course of action. I went though a phase where I contemplated everything and took a ton of philosophy courses. In the end I realized that millions of people went through the same phase as I, and it was out of a desire to do something useful in my life that eventually drove me back. As an engineer, I like to reuse inventions and ideas of other people. In this case, probably thousands of other people, and God. This way I can focus on new problems and solutions instead of wasting time working out stuff someone or many people else already did. Is out of laziness? Or is it using wisdom and knowledge regarding things that have no definitive answer? Or is it the fact that the more fascinating things that I learn about our world, the more amazed I become seeing all the miraculous and non-chaotic things around us? . . .

[Ernest Jones]

[JazzFatCat]

First let me say that it is a challenge to moderate threads like this. Posters tend to have longer posts and we mods really have to skim all the words to make sure posters are behaving. So far you all have impressed me with being in control.

That being said, one thing I notice about religious and political discussions in general is a lack of tolerance for the the opposing point of view. Tolerance is the key word because in most religious belief and belief in democracy, we are supposed to be tolerant and even accepting of diverse points of view. In religion and politics, that has never been the case since the dawn of time. We spend hours and days arguing points that will never change the other's mind. We kill and go to war over political and religious differences. It is all very sad.

Apart from disease and natural disasters, the number one killer of man is man. 10,000 years of religions haven't stopped this and neither has any political system ever created and practiced. It kind of makes you think that as a species, this must be part of our genome, part of our nature. Not every person has these traits, but enough do. Until we figure out why we want to kill other humans, this debate will rage on.

Carry on.

That bold bit is the "Killer Ape" theory.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killer_ape_theory

[Elmer]

And that brings us to the question I kept asking in the other thread and never got an answer.

Why do you think those are myths and that yours is real?

Mine is real because some dude wrote it in book saying if I dont believe what he said I would go to a bad place.

God doesn't take a break. He's all powerful.

And this is where I have the biggest issue believing in Jebus!

If we accept, for argument sake, that there is "all powerful" G*d.

Than why would this "all powerful" G*d, who created everything and watches over us, feel the need to give us his only "son" (even though we are all G*d''s children)?

It simply doesnt make sense to me. It sounds like the thinking of a human, not an "all powerful" G*d.

[saevel25]

Than why would this "all powerful" G*d, who created everything and watches over us, feel the need to give us his only "son" (even though we are all G*d''s children)?

It simply doesnt make sense to me. It sounds like the thinking of a human, not an "all powerful" G*d.

Because Humans are stupid and ignorant. They tend to cower before a God, at least in the Old Testament. Is it better for Humans to cower or be enlightened. That is how I take the New Testament. God had to send down Jesus to enlighten the people. He had to humanize himself so that people made a significant mental change away from fear to love. The Old Testament was about fearing God. Obey these laws or you will be punished. The New Testament was about Love God and Love they Neighbor. Yet, if God just showed up what would have happened. All the people would have cowered on the ground in fear. He needed a neutral party.

God allowed Humans free will, sin and emotion and he needed a way to fit into that scheme he created to change human perspective. Could God have just said, everyone is getting a mental reboot. Lets go to from OT version 2.1 to NT version 1.0. Sure, but he didn't because he wanted to abide by the fact he created free will and allows Humans to make a choice. If this was still the Garden of Eden then yea he probably would have snapped his fingers and we would all be hippies.

God created light on the first day not the fourth. The meme is wrong ;)

[Lihu]

And this is where I have the biggest issue believing in Jebus!

If we accept, for argument sake, that there is "all powerful" G*d.

Than why would this "all powerful" G*d, who created everything and watches over us, feel the need to give us his only "son" (even though we are all G*d''s children)?

It simply doesnt make sense to me. It sounds like the thinking of a human, not an "all powerful" G*d.

As is all of science.

The thing that gets me is that modern philosophy is written by a bunch of wealthy thinkers in the so called enlightenment era came up with such groundbreaking items such as "Cogito ergo sum" (I think therefore I am). Yeah, it took him "years" to discover this "fact". The joke's on people who think they think. . .tell me something I don't know and or applies to life in general.

Meanwhile, the Bible was mostly written by a bunch of slaves, shepherds, peasants, and transcribed by some poor mostly uneducated monks. . .

[Elmer]

Mine is real because some dude wrote it in book saying if I dont believe what he said I would go to a bad place.

And this is where I have the biggest issue believing in Jebus!

If we accept, for argument sake, that there is "all powerful" G*d.

Than why would this "all powerful" G*d, who created everything and watches over us, feel the need to give us his only "son" (even though we are all G*d''s children)?

It simply doesnt make sense to me. It sounds like the thinking of a human, not an "all powerful" G*d.

As is all of science.

The thing that gets me is that modern philosophy is written by a bunch of wealthy thinkers in the so called enlightenment era came up with such groundbreaking items such as "Cogito ergo sum" (I think therefore I am). Yeah, it took him "years" to discover this "fact". The joke's on people who think they think. . .tell me something I don't know and or applies to life in general.

Meanwhile, the Bible was mostly written by a bunch of slaves, shepherds, peasants, and transcribed by some poor mostly uneducated monks. . .

Actually the old testament was transcribed by Rabbi's who were teachers and usually the ones who could read.

But to get back to my point I have been willing to keep and open mind and no one can explain to me the the whole "only son/jebus" thing.

But science and religion are all made so that "man" can understand it. And if there is a G*d, we should not be able to understand its motives, it should be well beyond our capacity for thought!

[Lihu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elmer

Mine is real because some dude wrote it in book saying if I dont believe what he said I would go to a bad place.

And this is where I have the biggest issue believing in Jebus!

If we accept, for argument sake, that there is "all powerful" G*d.

Than why would this "all powerful" G*d, who created everything and watches over us, feel the need to give us his only "son" (even though we are all G*d''s children)?

It simply doesnt make sense to me. It sounds like the thinking of a human, not an "all powerful" G*d.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lihu

As is all of science.

The thing that gets me is that modern philosophy is written by a bunch of wealthy thinkers in the so called enlightenment era came up with such groundbreaking items such as "Cogito ergo sum" (I think therefore I am). Yeah, it took him "years" to discover this "fact". The joke's on people who think they think. . .tell me something I don't know and or applies to life in general.

Meanwhile, the Bible was mostly written by a bunch of slaves, shepherds, peasants, and transcribed by some poor mostly uneducated monks. . .

Actually the old testament was transcribed by Rabbi's who were teachers and usually the ones who could read.

But to get back to my point I have been willing to keep and open mind and no one can explain to me the the whole "only son/jebus" thing.

But science and religion are all made so that "man" can understand it. And if there is a G*d, we should not be able to understand its motives, it should be well beyond our capacity for thought!

Right!

[SavvySwede]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elmer

Than why would this "all powerful" G*d, who created everything and watches over us, feel the need to give us his only "son" (even though we are all G*d''s children)?

It simply doesnt make sense to me. It sounds like the thinking of a human, not an "all powerful" G*d.

Because Humans are stupid and ignorant. They tend to cower before a God, at least in the Old Testament. Is it better for Humans to cower or be enlightened. That is how I take the New Testament. God had to send down Jesus to enlighten the people. He had to humanize himself so that people made a significant mental change away from fear to love. The Old Testament was about fearing God. Obey these laws or you will be punished. The New Testament was about Love God and Love they Neighbor. Yet, if God just showed up what would have happened. All the people would have cowered on the ground in fear. He needed a neutral party.

God allowed Humans free will, sin and emotion and he needed a way to fit into that scheme he created to change human perspective. Could God have just said, everyone is getting a mental reboot. Lets go to from OT version 2.1 to NT version 1.0. Sure, but he didn't because he wanted to abide by the fact he created free will and allows Humans to make a choice. If this was still the Garden of Eden then yea he probably would have snapped his fingers and we would all be hippies.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ernest Jones

God created light on the first day not the fourth. The meme is wrong ;)

Created light on the first day and separated the light from the darkness and created night and day. But it wasn't until the fourth day that God said "Let there be lights in the dome of the sky to separate the day from the night; and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years, and let them be lights in the dome of the sky to give light upon the earth."

So the meme is correct. The second account of Genesis has everything happen on the first day. The people who originally compiled the parts of the Old Testament included both and saw no issue with the two accounts having very different timelines.