Maybe Religion is one of mankinds basic impulse's the need to believe in another higher order.
Is faith like a vaccum, sucking up credulity in a frantic effort to fill an otherwise empty void perhaps it is a part of mankinds genetic charactor to need to hunger for a spiritual solice.
It is a subject that debates a great many arguements. (If the almighty God does exist then the Devil has to exist.)

Is it really necessary for humanity to worship a higher being or is it because the image of God gives mankind hope in death.

I would say it's a bit of yes and no.

Religon, and when you get your own religon wrong, has led to many violent events in history.

But, i'm a buddist. And am greatly comferted by my own beliefs.

So I guess, it isn't the Religon it's self which is bad, but a few idiots that use it to there own ends.

Well said!

Me? I like having hope. Even if it may be false, I can't stand the thought of not being able to THINK or being nothing.

It doesn't help when the Bible has been re-written how many times now? And then other religeous material is interpreted so wildly, regardless of faith.

I don't think religeon is weak, it can give the believer strength. It's just how the believer sees the world and interprets what is written.

So I guess, it isn't the Religon it's self which is bad, but a few idiots that use it to there own ends.

I definitely support Lemex's idea.

I think people are just scared, so they like to believe that there is someone watching over them. Religion is also good to keep people in line and to behave - but obviously the people in control can misuse this and exploit people. I think I'd be happier in a delusion but all the religions i have tried out have just been so ridiculous. But I say believe in anything you want if it makes you happy, just don't push it on to other people.

I agree with Lemex. Most of the problems with religion arise when someone twists it around or outright ignores the meaning. This is a problem with almost any ideology or philosophy. Carl Marx is the best example I can think of besides religion. The revolutions in Russia certainly twisted around his concept (However flawed it may be) and turned it into a way to gain absolute control. The religion isn't the problem its the people who follow it.

Personally I love religion. My own and I love learning about others. It is comforting to believe that there is a higher power and something after death. Plus its good thinking food. One can laying around and ponder religion for hours and never get bored.

There is a side of humanity that feels a need to abdicate responsibility to a higher power. To me, that is akin to addiction, and is the greatest harm inherent in religion.

What atrocities people do in the name of religion, they would probably also do in its absence. Religion often just stands as a convenient scapegoat, a reason to give when man wants to lash out in hate but also wants to believe it is a noble cause.

Religion is responsible for a lot of bad things, and a lot of good things too. As an atheist, I hope one day mankind learns to live without it.

This is a few question for the athiest's of the board. What do you believe happens after death? Do you get scared thinking that after you die your just not "there", like you never existed or something? That's a scary thing to think about in my opinion.

All things have a beginning and an ending. It is the nature of reality. But it is an uncomfortable truth for many.

Religion Is It Mankinds Ultimate Weakness.

...one of his first!... and worst...


Maybe Religion is one of mankinds basic impulse's the need to believe in another higher order.

...the silly perceived need to have an answer to everything... so, when mentally-challenged man doesn't know something, he makes up a reason to make himself feel better about being clueless... a god who must keep some things secret for the supposed good of mankind was a great copout...

Is faith like a vaccum, sucking up credulity in a frantic effort to fill an otherwise empty void perhaps it is a part of mankinds genetic charactor to need to hunger for a spiritual solice.

...lacking the guts to admit one doesn't know everything and doesn't have to, 'faith' becomes a good excuse for all bad behavior and leaves the believer the loophole of 'divine forgiveness'... plus, providing the 'reward' of an afterlife, so one doesn't have to make the best of the only one they know they have...

It is a subject that debates a great many arguements. (If the almighty God does exist then the Devil has to exist.)

...not necessarily, but some like to think so... and subjects don't debate arguments... people debate controversial subjects by making statements... and statements start arguments...

Is it really necessary for humanity to worship a higher being or is it because the image of God gives mankind hope in death.

...of course it's not 'necessary' but people make it so, in their own minds, that they allow to be limited by others who preach this or that man-made religion... and the belief in a god is certainly not needed, to have some concept of an existence beyond death... but the raising of a god and a religion full of rules 'n regs is the best way for the few to control the many... 'nuff said...

Jesus, Maia, you make it sound like anyone who follows any sort of religion a gullible, weak, cowardly fool! (no pun intended there either).

.lacking the guts to admit one doesn't know everything and doesn't have to, 'faith' becomes a good excuse for all bad behavior and leaves the believer the loophole of 'divine forgiveness'... plus, providing the 'reward' of an afterlife, so one doesn't have to make the best of the only one they know they have...


Touche. The whole point of the after life is to reward those who fulfilled their lifes. You cant go through your life simply saying you believe in God but not showing it and expect to pass through the Pearly gates with open arms. Just goes to show how much you actually know about the 'rules n regs' my friend.

Personally, I'm catholic. I believe in God because I don't believe that everything around us happened by chance. Does that make me a coward? Does that make me a fool? Of course it does.

Religion and faith isn't the problem; the problem arises when it's used in extremities, as Lemex already pointed out.

I'll boldly state that yes, I am a Christian, but at the same time, I haven't been to a church 'religiously' for over ten years. I can't stand today's churches for one reason or another, so I don't go. And I don't believe it's a necessity in order to believe in a faith. My faith is my religion, not the other way around.

What's wrong with believing in something higher than ourselves? If it gives us hope, what's the big deal? As long as I stay in my corner and worship however I might, why must you consider that an impulse and a frantic effort at solace? (Rhetorical questions..)

It's necessary to those who find it necessary, and a complete fools hope to those who find it pointless.

I have no religion. I don't believe in atheism, nor do I believe in a theism (sorry for the clever language; it gets my point across).

People are not "weak" to have religion. People seek reason when things are inexplicable--they seek a truth where no truth can be presently found. This is not a weakness, but a strength. It is what has allowed us to intellectually survive for so long as a species. We seek out knowledge, whether that knowledge lies in the divinity of God, the prescripts of the Vedas, the transcendence of our physical being, or the end of a microscope.

Most people do not choose to believe in a religion. They are conditioned to believe in God just as we are conditioned to live in our culture in childhood. This is not a weakness on the part of the religious man, this is a matter of course. He has no control over who his parents are and what his parents will teach him. He, therefore, cannot be faulted for believing in God if that is what he feels in his heart to be truth.

Does God exist? The question is irrelevant and secondary! You do not need God to exist to lead a good life. If you do, then that is weakness. You have a billion reasons to live a good life that will exist regardless of the existence of some higher power. But truly, you should not need reasons to lead a good life; Being good is the ultimate end.

Does God exist? The question is irrelevant and secondary! You do not need God to exist to lead a good life. If you do, then that is weakness. You have a billion reasons to live a good life that will exist regardless of the existence of some higher power. But truly, you should not need reasons to lead a good life; Being good is the ultimate end.

I agree one hundred percent! Just remember that salvation/enlightenment in some religions is dependent on the realization or acceptance of a certain principle (Accepting Jesus Christ for example). So for some it is relevant if god exists or not.

I would say rather that the existence of god can niether be proven or disproven and its pointless to argue over his existence (Let each individual decide for themselves and let it be I say).

As much as human beings have an affinity for knowledge and understanding, they also have an affinity for the spectacular and the mystical. To ignore one side of human nature completely in favor of another is irresponsible.

This is all well and good for those who have their lives together, but how about we consider the minority? For some people, who have experienced profound, near infallible pain in their life, honestly, if believing in something supposedly greater than themselves gives them hope and relieves their suffering, even slightly, then I'm all for religion. For example, my close friend's Mother has a crippling spine disorder and she suffers from bipolar, yet what helps her continue living? It’s her personal spiritual search for something greater than herself. Does this make her weak, gullible, cowardly? You decide.

Religion makes no one cowardly, much like it makes no one kill--it can be used as an excuse for cowardice and closed-mindedness. The flaw lies not in the religion! It lies in the person who is guilty of such weakness.

Religion makes no one cowardly, much like it makes no one kill--it can be used as an excuse for cowardice and closed-mindedness. The flaw lies not in the religion! It lies in the person who is guilty of such weakness.

That I can't refute because it is perfectly stated.

This is a few question for the athiest's of the board. What do you believe happens after death? Do you get scared thinking that after you die your just not "there", like you never existed or something? That's a scary thing to think about in my opinion.

As an atheist I don't find death scary. I don't want to die, but thats not so much from being scared, as I like living.
I don't know what happens after I die. If I cease to exist (likely), I won't be around to care.
Did I care about anything before I was born. No.
Will I care about anything after I die. No.
So that keeps me from seriously worrying about my afterlife. Personally though I find the thought that if I did something wrong, didn't pray enough, didn't worship my ancestors enough, spit when I shouldn't have, that I'll end up in a Hell, or be reincarnated as a dung beetle.

Now for the original question. Religion has all too often been used badly. It can be a great comfort to people, and keep people striving to achieve great things.
But too often it's been used as an excuse to kill and abuse your neighbour, to keep people from thinking, or advancing, and to keep us weak and powerless sheep.
So when I see people shouting to the masses that something is immoral and a disgrace to God, gods, whatever, and should be destroyed, I get very nervous, and start looking for a way to stop them.

Just wanna say...
People who 'worship the devil'
Have to believe in god.
So why worship the devil if you believe in god?
Thats a sure ticket to hell.
Plus
Scientlolgy.. anyone want a laugh? Look that one up *chuckles*
Just to put this out there, scientology was invented by a non-fiction writer ( I hope that's the one where you write fantasy )
And he also has been quoted before his 'discovery', to have said "the only way to make money, is to invent a religion".. Bit typical when his religion requires thousands of dollars to 'learn' the high levels...
Religion is stupid.

There is a side of humanity that feels a need to abdicate responsibility to a higher power. To me, that is akin to addiction, and is the greatest harm inherent in religion.

I have to disagree with your first sentence, Cogito: I think the greatest part of humanity is self-willed, determined to do things its own way, rather than giving any consideration at all to a higher power.

To me, there is an important difference between abdicating responsibility and submitting to the will of someone you believe to be wiser. If there is a higher power, it stands to reason that It has the right to dictate how we live. Otherwise, it's not a higher power: it's just a...lateral power.

Isn't it a heavy responsibility to consider a higher power's will, and to submit to it, regardless of what you'd prefer to do? To me, that kind of thoughtful living is very different from abdicating responsibility to a higher power.

Just to be clear, I see a real difference between inner faith that guides a person's life, and a formal system of rules that can be exploited to whatever ends are convenient, though both could be called "religion." What you've described happens with the latter, in which case, I end up agreeing with your second sentence wholeheartedly.

I like the quote from Kingdom of Heaven. "I've seen more men kill in the name of religion than anything else. There is a difference between being holy and being religious."

My point really was in the first sentence though. It is easier to just shrug and say "it's God's will," than to take on the problem head on and trust in your own strength.

That is the side of religion I find most intrinsically harmful.

This is a few question for the athiest's of the board. What do you believe happens after death? Do you get scared thinking that after you die your just not "there", like you never existed or something? That's a scary thing to think about in my opinion.

Why would that be scary at all? Death is nothing to fear. It happens to everyone and everything...

As for Religion...I don't believe but I don't exactly not believe. Either way you look at it human kind makes a lot of mistakes and we look for an easy escape route. A lot use religion as an escape route.

What if we abolished religion what would happen then if we denounced all religion every different one.

What if we abolished religion what would happen then if we denounced all religion every different one.

Muslim extremists won't be the only ones flying planes into buildings... I assume. Not to mention the complete collapse of a crucial aspect of human culture. Besides as long as there is man there will be religion. Its part of what humans as a species are and you really can't destroy it by denouncing it.

Jesus, Maia, you make it sound like anyone who follows any sort of religion a gullible, weak, cowardly fool! (no pun intended there either).

...that's your own conclusion... i wouldn't say that, even if i thought it was true... however, most people can't help believing in what they've been taught all their lives... if they were left to figure the matter out on their own, i'm sure there'd be a lot more agnostics and atheists in the world...

...as for the question about death, i will just welcome it with open arms, not liking this human-made world i'm stuck in, happy to be 'released'... if there's any sort of existence beyond life as we know it, i'll find out then... don't have to know in advance...

Many people have pointed out the "damage" that "Religion" has done. I'd like to point out two things.

Firstly, while many horrible things have been done in the name of "religion," the religion of one man is not necessarily the religion of another. If someone does something wrong in the name of Islam, does that mean that he was in the right, that all other Muslims believe it, or that it is approved of by Allah? No, not necessarily. As a result, I think it's unfair to group all people in all sects and all sects in each faith and each faith into "religion." The term religion is so vague and vast that one cannot simply blame "religion."

The second thing I'd like to point out is that yes, "religion" may have resulted in many conflicts and troubles, but it has also brought much good to the world. There have been countless good things that have resulted from various faiths.

however, most people can't help believing in what they've been taught all their lives... if they were left to figure the matter out on their own, i'm sure there'd be a lot more agnostics and atheists in the world...

I don't think there'd be more agnostics, they'd just be more obvious. There'd be less "fake" Christians (for example). No longer would there be Christians in name only; fakes masquerading like the real thing.

don't have to know in advance...

Well, according to "religion" - namely Christianity - you kinda do.

Does God exist? The question is irrelevant and secondary! You do not need God to exist to lead a good life. If you do, then that is weakness. You have a billion reasons to live a good life that will exist regardless of the existence of some higher power. But truly, you should not need reasons to lead a good life;

What about leading a better life?

Being good is the ultimate end.

... care to elaborate on this point?

Muslim extremists won't be the only ones flying planes into buildings... I assume. Not to mention the complete collapse of a crucial aspect of human culture. Besides as long as there is man there will be religion. Its part of what humans as a species are and you really can't destroy it by denouncing it.

One could argue that persecution actually can help religion.

Daniel, I agree with pretty much all of what you said there.

I think it's ignorant and short minded to blame war on religion. Wars aren't caused by religions, they're caused by people. Religion is an excuse.

What about leading a better life?
I'm talking about an ethically good life. Everyone commits sins and unethical acts; That does not make them bad people. We all strive to be ethically good. We simply have different definitions of what ethical good means.

I agree Dan.

One could argue that persecution actually can help religion.

We talked about that in my religion class actually. In reference of why Christianity grew so rapidly within the Roman Empire despite a great deal of persecution.

I'm talking about an ethically good life. Everyone commits sins and unethical acts; That does not make them bad people. We all strive to be ethically good. We simply have different definitions of what ethical good means.

While we all do, some commit more than others. And if it doesn't make them "bad" people, what does? Is there no such thing as good or bad and right or wrong? I know plently of people who don't strive to be ethically good. Some of them actually try to be ethically bad. They believe in God, but they don't like him too much.

While we may have different opinions of what makes something ethically good or bad and right or wrong, I would venture to say that there is a universal standard. I think that something is either right or it's wrong; there is no middle ground.

I think that something is either right or it's wrong; there is no middle ground.

I absolutely agree with that. I hear alot of people tell me good or bad is based on point of view. If you look at history though many cultures have alot of the same things listed as good and bad.

Stealing is bad.
Giving to those less fortunate is good.

Killing in cold blood is bad.
Saving a life is good.

Cheating on your spouse is bad.
Being faithful and devoted to your spouse is good.

The only time any culture begins to disagree on things like this is in the fine details and when the idea of exceptions comes up. In a moral sense, I don't believe there are any exceptions to something bad that would make it good. If something is wrong its wrong. Certainly there are times when, its unfair to hold something against someone (A soldier killing enemey combatants in a time of war) but the fact of the matter is that killing is still wrong even if sometimes necessary.

I don't think "good" and "bad" are as simple as that. Is something good in one culture, but bad in another? Right in one situation, but wrong in another? Do the ends ever justify the means?

For example, is suicide a mortal sin, as some brands of Christianity claim, or is it an honorable exit from the world, as the Japanese Shinto/Samurai believed, and some Muslim extremists still do?

Which is a worse sin: to lie, or to destroy another person's dignity? What if you have to choose between the two?

What if you're technically faithful to your wife, but have a predilection for pornography? Is that the same as being unfaithful, or is it ok? (The wives might have very different opinions about this than the husbands.)

If there are shades of gray to morality, who gets to decide what's right and what's wrong? Those are all rhetorical questions; I'm not looking for answers. My point is, matters of right and wrong are not always a stark black or white.

While we may have different opinions of what makes something ethically good or bad and right or wrong, I would venture to say that there is a universal standard. I think that something is either right or it's wrong; there is no middle ground.
I don't agree. I once took a class called Contemporary Moral Issues taught by professor Barush Brody, who asserted that "Every moral issue has a unique solution, that can be determined." I never bought into that thesis, and found it (and him) so rigid and distasteful that I dropped the class (it didn't help that even his screeching voice grated on my nerves) .

To begin with, even if some of the key elements of morality are agreed upon by most people, the relative priorities differ by culture. That in itself affects what is regarded as right or wrong in any group of people. Who is to say that one cultures assignment of priority is right, and all others are wrong?

Then there is always the question of specific definitions. Nearly all ethical systems oppose the taking of a human life. But apart from whether there are priorities that supercede that, what defines a human life? When you get down to questions of abortion or stem cell research, the disagreements over what makes it a human life and when become critical, and the definitions become arbitrary, while at the same time emotionally loaded. So whether a particular principal applies is not always black and white.

A couple decades later, I took another class in Ethics and Critical thinking, and the focus of the course was much more in line with the thinking I have touched upon here.

I would just like to say that I have seen religion save peoples lives before. A guy I met had done some pretty rotten things to some of my close friends and to myself. He really messed his entire life up and the rate he was going he would have ended up laying dead in a gutter some where all on his own.

Somehow he ended up going to church with a friend of his and after that day he was a completely different person and made up for everything he had done wrong by others. Now he is married and has two wonderful children.

Religion, like everything else has its good and bad points. Nothing is perfect, nothing will ever be perfect. Everything is flawed in some way and we just have to accept that. I don't believe it is so much religion that causes the wars and all that. The only thing that can cause war, etc. is human kind.

We all have minds of our own and make our own decisions and need to stop trying to find something or someone else to blame for all of that.

One question springs to mind. Why do you choose to beleive in God. What stems your faith to beleive in the almighty.

One question springs to mind. Why do you choose to beleive in God. What stems your faith to beleive in the almighty.

That's a tough one. I'd say it definetly halps that I was exposed to Christianity at a young age. What really set into my mind the existence of god though was a few years back with a series of events.

At the time I suffered from deep depression and anti-social behavior. I actually found a specific psychological term for it in my psychology class but have since forgottne the word. A series of events however after I started praying for help lead to me having no doubt that there is someone out there looking out for me because after that point everything started turning around. It started with little things and then went on the big things that completely changed my life and made me happy for the first time in about 5 years.

In the 31 years of my life I have seen many things that would tell me there is no god.

And secondly I have to wonder why we live for roughly 80 plus years and spend eternity in Heaven damn its got to be pretty crowded.


[Disclaimer] This is just my opinion and not meant to offend those that have faith.

And secondly I have to wonder why we live for roughly 80 plus years and spend eternity in Heaven damn its got to be pretty crowded.

lol Heaven. Population. Everyone.

I don't know about religion being the greatest weakness but I do think it is one of the greatest dividers.
I was raised in the United Church community and now I have no religion at all. I saw too many "good people" treat others with such contempt it turned me off entirely.
My husband believes in the native way that nature is the most important thing to a certain extent. But God is non existant. He is considered bad by his christian family but if someone needed something and he was able to give it he would.
Treat others as you would like to be treated is sort of a creed of mine.
One thing we both try to do is pass it along.

I beleive in the Pay It Forward Syndrome. You do a good deed for someone who in turn feels compelled to do a good deed for another and thus a chain reaction of events unfolds and who knows comes full circle and thus begins again creating good feeling.

I knew there was proper name for what Don and I do just couldn't think of it.
thanks Raven.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mammamaia
don't have to know in advance...

Well, according to "religion" - namely Christianity - you kinda do.

my point, dan, is that I don't, as i'm not a christian...one of the many benefits of being an unbeliever... ;-)

Why would that be scary at all? Death is nothing to fear. It happens to everyone and everything...

As for Religion...I don't believe but I don't exactly not believe. Either way you look at it human kind makes a lot of mistakes and we look for an easy escape route. A lot use religion as an escape route.

As an atheist I don't find death scary. I don't want to die, but thats not so much from being scared, as I like living.
I don't know what happens after I die. If I cease to exist (likely), I won't be around to care.
Did I care about anything before I was born. No.
Will I care about anything after I die. No.
So that keeps me from seriously worrying about my afterlife. Personally though I find the thought that if I did something wrong, didn't pray enough, didn't worship my ancestors enough, spit when I shouldn't have, that I'll end up in a Hell, or be reincarnated as a dung beetle.

Now for the original question. Religion has all too often been used badly. It can be a great comfort to people, and keep people striving to achieve great things.
But too often it's been used as an excuse to kill and abuse your neighbour, to keep people from thinking, or advancing, and to keep us weak and powerless sheep.
So when I see people shouting to the masses that something is immoral and a disgrace to God, gods, whatever, and should be destroyed, I get very nervous, and start looking for a way to stop them.

I guess it's just me. It justs seems to me that it would be scary thinking that that after you die that there's no more, uh, how would i put this? I guess I mean "no more life". You get what I'm saying...

One question springs to mind. Why do you choose to beleive in God. What stems your faith to beleive in the almighty.

For me, all roads lead me back to nature or, as I believe it's more accurately called, Creation. I have a bachelor of science degree, and no matter what other theories I investigate, my education and observation always force me back to the conclusion that no way did all of this--the intricacy, majesty, pattern, and scope of nature--happen by accident. I was--reluctantly--convinced of this before I ever really believed in God.

I also know I continually experience God's moment-by-moment involvement with me. The reality of that anchors me; centers me; guides me. I am 37 years old: for the first half of my life, I didn't believe in God; lived my life as though He didn't exist. Now, having experienced Him for the latter half, I cannot even imagine going back. I don't want to.

So to sum up an answer to your question, Hulls Raven, for me, faith stems from balance of objective observation and subjective experience.

If God created Man in his image and Man is violent, does that mean God is violent?

As I've grown older I wonder if God is real, or something made up. Why is it that we have to believe? Why can't we just see?
Sounds sorta like Santa Claus. You believe until either someone tells you different or you figure it out on your own. Any way you cut it, you were lied to.

Does that apply to God?

These are my own thoughts, and in no way do I bash anyone or their believes. Everyone has the right to think and believe what they want without the fear of being attacked verbally or physically.

If God created Man in his image and Man is violent, does that mean God is violent?

This is why bibal verses and concepts should always be looked at in groups and in context rather than on their own (No offense Gunslinger :) but your comment brings up a point I can make).

I think that one of the primary reasons why some are so hostile to religion is because too many people take its concepts out of context and spread them around. Then these verses taken out of their context can be turned into meaning something else, either on purpose or completely by mistake. Such action in turn creates misconceptions.

Gunslingers reference for example. On its own it certainly seems like it could mean that god is violent but take the whole section from which the verse his comment is based on is taken.

"Then God said, "Let us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness, let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all that creeps on the earth." So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female he created them." ~ Genesis Chapter 1, Verses 26-27 (New King James Version)

The key words being image and likeness. Rather than saying the men are in the image of god as a whole, it rather states that god created them to his image in the sense of a work of art. God had an image and he created men to fit it, and his image was in his likeness (Which menas similarity rather than a exact copy). The us of the word "our" would seem to empply god was talking to someone, possibly angels, which would in turn suggest angels were also created in gods likeness.

I'm sure different denominations of christianity interpret this differently, this is just how I read it.

Again though I'd like to point out I'm not attacking Gunslinger, just looking at his post and seeing a point that could be made from it.

If God created Man in his image and Man is violent, does that mean God is violent?
In my worldview, it means that man, having been gifted with free will, chose to live differently than God wanted him to live, and continues to reap the consequences.

As I've grown older I wonder if God is real, or something made up. Why is it that we have to believe? Why can't we just see?
Sounds sorta like Santa Claus. You believe until either someone tells you different or you figure it out on your own. Any way you cut it, you were lied to.
Does that apply to God?
Again, having grappled with these same questions myself, I think the only answer is that you can't own someone else's faith; it will never be enough for you. You have to work through the questions yourself, and own the conclusions you reach.

As far as seeing vs. believing [without seeing]... We all believe things without seeing them, in a hundred different ways in our lives. Why is it such a stretch to do it when it comes to the divine?

No offense taken Lordofhats.

Does man have free will or just an ultimatum?

I'm Catholic, but I find questioning Religion more helpful than just accepting it. It's not the destination, but the journey.

I like questioning, it provides answers. One thing I can't stand is the answer a lot of parents give their kids, because I said so. I hate that answer. Explain why so they can understand. If anyone asks me why, I try and answer their question to the best of my ability.

So in this forum I provided a question, and I recieved multiple answers. Thank you for taking the time to explain what you believe.

ivy, as for your question about seeing over believing of the devine, I believe it is because of science. Science is something we can see and understand, but the devine works in the opposite manner. Everything has an opposite, religions is science.

Well put Gunslinger. Those who merely believe but never question arn't doing everything they should for their religion. I listen to my parents and my preacher but I'm always careful to examine the bible (The final word on any Christian matter) and find the answers for myself (Simply hearing what others say and accepting it is not beliving, is blind obedience).

Didn't we have this thread already? Like, with the exact same title and everything?

Didn't we have this thread already? Like, with the exact same title and everything?

I think this is the same one actually.

No, we had a religeon thread ages back. Ended up getting locked because it started getting heated. It was unlocked but then it didn't even get that many posts in it after that. I'm not sure if it got locked again. But we did have one. Just a different title. Someone asked opinions of our relegions because they were curious in finding somethign for themselves.

So yeah, trust me, This thread gets heated? It's going to get locked but that's the same with all the other threads.

Man does not have free will in the scope of all things. To his own consciousness, though, man appears to have free will. It's an odd scenario, but basically everything we do is predetermined by all the things that have happened before. We inevitably arrive at this moment and do what we are doing now because of the trillions of things that have happened in the space of time between the beginning of the universe and now.

The practical fact of the matter is, though, that we do have free will in our perception. There may be no chance in the universe, but for us there is; it is because we cannot see cause-and-effect outside of the sphere of our perception. Our perception is all we have of the world, and thus we must live with what it gives us or risk utter meaninglessness.

No, we had a religeon thread ages back. Ended up getting locked because it started getting heated. It was unlocked but then it didn't even get that many posts in it after that. I'm not sure if it got locked again. But we did have one. Just a different title. Someone asked opinions of our relegions because they were curious in finding somethign for themselves.

So yeah, trust me, This thread gets heated? It's going to get locked but that's the same with all the other threads.

Better keep the flames low... I like this thread. Its probably the tamest religious discussion I've ever seen.

For me, all roads lead me back to nature or, as I believe it's more accurately called, Creation. I have a bachelor of science degree, and no matter what other theories I investigate, my education and observation always force me back to the conclusion that no way did all of this--the intricacy, majesty, pattern, and scope of nature--happen by accident. I was--reluctantly--convinced of this before I ever really believed in God.

I have talked to many people who have said, "Well, I've studied science, and there are just some questions that science can't answer." I have yet to be presented with a satisfactory example. (One of these people actually tried to tell me that if humans have been around for longer than the Bible says, that there would be at least one person for every square inch of the Earth, including the ocean floor. :confused: )

Also, we know that there is a lot we have yet to discover about our planet and our universe. The absence of information doesn't necessarily imply the presence of anything supernatural. It just means that we have a lot to learn. Look at how far science has come in the past couple centuries. It's not stopping here.

I have talked to many people who have said, "Well, I've studied science, and there are just some questions that science can't answer." I have yet to be presented with a satisfactory example.

I personally find the exact method through which god created existence irrelevant. He made it in my mind and thats really all I need.

For an example I would sight Macroevolution. Most fossils are incomplete and what peices they have are put together from multiple locations (A femer from here and skull from there you get the point). There is also no way to see the actual chang eover time because there aren't enough fossiles (You can't collect the bones and see a Velociraptor become a bird. You have a velociraptor and then something that is not a velociraptor but is a bit like a bird and is similare to a velociraptor). There is great evidence of Microevolution but with numerous holes in the chain of the fossil record macroevolution is easily refuted.

I have talked to many people who have said, "Well, I've studied science, and there are just some questions that science can't answer." I have yet to be presented with a satisfactory example.
Isn't it interesting that, when it comes to this issue (which is supposed to be about science, which is supposed to be objective) what's a satisfactory explanation to one person isn't going to cut it for the next person? For instance, the Big Bang Theory, which is a cut-and-dried issue for many people--including better scientific minds than my own-- has holes in it that I, personally, cannot accept.

It's an odd scenario, but basically everything we do is predetermined by all the things that have happened before. We inevitably arrive at this moment and do what we are doing now because of the trillions of things that have happened in the space of time between the beginning of the universe and now. Maybe this is why different people--equally intelligent and informed people--can study the same matter and come to different conclusions about it?

Also, we know that there is a lot we have yet to discover about our planet and our universe. The absence of information doesn't necessarily imply the presence of anything supernatural. It just means that we have a lot to learn. Look at how far science has come in the past couple centuries. It's not stopping here. Right on all counts. The absence of information in no way implies the presence of the supernatural. That's not science or faith: that's superstition.

And look how far science has come: past the geocentric view of the solar system; past the theory that the world is flat; past belief in spontaneous combustion... Who knows what we'll discover next? :p

When people say that the universe is too complicated or too perfect or too something to have happened naturally I always have one question.
If a perfect or at least working universe can't appear naturally, how can a perfect, all powerful entity appear out of nothing?

I'm not trying to be insulting, this is just the basis of much of my belief that there is no God.

I not religious persay. Ive not been christened, my family calls me Spawn of Satan, so I dont technically have a religion. Howver, I do think there is a great spirit, maybe a God and I dont doubt that Jesus and the other Prophets wernt special but I dont think Jesus was anything other than a human. If he was a human, his message would be more relevant I think, but thats just me!!!!

I still rekon that there is something out there, waaay bigger than us laughing it's head off as he watches us trying to work out who is the 'real' God or being.

When people say that the universe is too complicated or too perfect or too something to have happened naturally I always have one question.
If a perfect or at least working universe can't appear naturally, how can a perfect, all powerful entity appear out of nothing?

I'm not trying to be insulting, this is just the basis of much of my belief that there is no God.

That's sort of flawed logic though, because here we have the natural plane of existence. Where God hangs is the super natural plane, where nothing is the same. There are no Newtons law, there are no atoms and quarks and what not. It's all supposed to be completely different, completely unexplainable. And let's face it, there's no way any human could ever expect to explain God.

If God created Man in his image and Man is violent, does that mean God is violent?

yup!... just go read the OT and you'll see how much of a 'loving' whatever man's self-fashioned god is supposed to be... here are just a few examples, taken from the intro to an essay of mine, titled, "(THE NAZIS,) THE JEWS, PALESTINE & ISRAEL '...as ye sow, so shall ye reap'":

Deut. 3: 3-7 "We slaughtered them and left no survivor... in all we took sixty cities... Thus we put to death all the men, women and dependents in every city."

Josh. 10: 28-40 "So Joshua massacred the population of the whole region... the hill country, the Negeb, the Shepelah, the watersheds... and all their kings. He left no survivor, destroying everything that drew breath, as the Lord the God of Israel had commanded."

Num. 31: 17 "Kill every male dependent (child/infant) and kill every woman who has had intercourse with a man, but spare for yourselves every woman (girl child) among them who has not had intercourse."

Num. 31: 32-35 "...sheep, cattle, asses and thirty-two thousand girls who has not had intercourse with a man (Yet!).

nice, huh?... now try to tell me a god who'd issue those orders could possibly be a 'loving' or a 'good' one!... and keep in mind that this bloodthirsty egomaniac happens to be the father of the guy christians like to think of as a 'savior'... saving who from what?... everybody from his own daddy?... but even if so, christ is still seen as being a loving and obedient son, right?... i rest my case...

here's a link to the whole piece, in case anyone wants to read the rest: Says Mom - Writing Content (http://saysmom.com/maia/content.asp?Writing=288)

love and hugs, maia [confirmed atheist-leaning agnostic]

nice, huh?... now try to tell me a god who'd issue those orders could possibly be a 'loving' or a 'good' one!... and keep in mind that this bloodthirsty egomaniac happens to be the father of the guy christians like to think of as a 'savior'... saving who from what?... everybody from his own daddy?... but even if so, christ is still seen as being a loving and obedient son, right?... i rest my case...

Someone said before you have to see each one of those stories in context. It's like when someone quotes a sentence someone else said, which by it self might be totally self-incriminating, but with the whole picture isn't. Can't say I'm familiar with the Old Testament, which is where you seem to be getting these stories (they don't occur in the new, bar Revelation). Christ was a loving and obedient son. He never hurt anyone who didn't deserve it, and did exactly as his father said. What's wrong with that? What was he saving us from? Sin, supposedly. For some reason he had to be crucified in order to be able to come back once more and judge the living and the dead. Whether or not all this is true is hard to say. I believe in God, and Jesus and all that sort of thing, but even I find some of the stuff hard to swallow.

I find it harder to swallow again that a bunch of gasses just chilling up in space exploded to form everything we know (and don't know) with out some sort of divine intervention.

Just keep in mind that religious documents such as the bibles are interpretations of the message by fallible humans, with their own agendas, and that there are also translators who may further have muddied the message.

Just look at the range of interpretations of jihad, that range from inner spiritual cleansing to outright genocide. The outward message may be quite separate from the "original" intent.

Just keep in mind that religious documents such as the bibles are interpretations of the message by fallible humans, with their own agendas, and that there are also translators who may further have muddied the message.

Just look at the range of interpretations of jihad, that range from inner spiritual cleansing to outright genocide. The outward message may be quite separate from the "original" intent.

uh-huh!... which is why i can't see why anyone would believe that the 'word of god' they choose to follow can actually be such, when it's clearly only the 'word of man' who wanted to think [or pretend] some god or other was speaking to/through him...

Indeed Cogito. The word Jihad means "To fight" but for a long time was only believed to refer to the inner battle against sin. Low and behold the Crusades come charging in and someone turns it into something completely different.

By the way Maia, Deutoronemy 3:3-7 indeed says that but look at the verses just before it:

"Then we turned and went up the road to Bashan; and Og, King of Bashan came out against us, he and all his people, to battle at Edrei. And the lord said to me, Do not fear him, for I have delivered him and all his people into your hand; you shall do to him as you did to Sihon king of Amorites, who dealt in Heshbon." Deuteronomy 3:1-2.

The key aspect of much of the Israelite journy into the land that would become Israel was that they were ironically walking around and everyone already in the area attacked them. In the above verse the king of the area brought all his people out to fight. You don't send everyone to battle and not expect them to get killed (Especially in that day and age). A key aspect of the bible is also that the lord says there is a time for war. I note that you reference Nazi's in your above post. Tell me it wasn't worth going to war to bring Hitler down?

As for the other verses, I will point out there are no parathetical insertions in the bible.

Its also key to remeber that the first half of Deuteronomy inparticular is barely a book of theology at all but rather a book of history. The Israelites, being very religious, no doubt mixed their religion into recording it and as such added it to the Torah. An example of how the people who follow a religion don't always do what their religion demands. Its also key to note that for over 1000 years the only people with access to the Torah where the priests, and as made clear in the New Testement it seems rather clear that these priests weren't exactly the pinicale of their caste. Its already been nearly proven that several verses in the New Testement were fabricated and added to the books after their original writing, I wouldn't be surprised if certain Jewish priests did the same.

Frost - "I find it harder to swallow again that a bunch of gasses just chilling up in space exploded to form everything we know (and don't know) with out some sort of divine intervention."


Think about this - A tiny sperm swims and finds an egg, implants itself and creates life. In the same context that must also be hard to swallow. No one questions it, but is it not called the MIRACLE of LIFE?

Just food for thought.

loh...
I note that you reference Nazi's in your above post. Tell me it wasn't worth going to war to bring Hitler down?

i don't 'reference nazis' in my post.. i do reference a title of one of my essays that includes that word... and i'm not going to answer such a facetious, spoiling-for-a-fight type of question...

as for parentheticals, did you really need to be told that those are my additions, inserted for clarification?... that's a common reason for using parentheses, after all... sorry i didn't add a note to that effect, to save you the confusion...

I apologize maia. I was not attempting to start a fight. I did take it that you were referencing Nazi's when I read over the paper and probably should have clarified that (It was long and it was late so I didn't read the whole thing). Yes I know the insertions were for clarification but adding them is a good example of how verses can be turned into saying what they want (I will conced I did not check the other verses for that fact and probably should have looked it up before posting). Like I said it was late and I get cranky...

Think about this - A tiny sperm swims and finds an egg, implants itself and creates life. In the same context that must also be hard to swallow. No one questions it, but is it not called the MIRACLE of LIFE?

Im not sure what your asking me to think about man. Care to clarify?

That's sort of flawed logic though, because here we have the natural plane of existence. Where God hangs is the super natural plane, where nothing is the same. There are no Newtons law, there are no atoms and quarks and what not. It's all supposed to be completely different, completely unexplainable. And let's face it, there's no way any human could ever expect to explain God.

So...okay. I don't understand how you religious folk can explain your belief in God by citing holes in scientific theory, yet when questioned on the nature of God, respond with "God cannot be explained."

Seems a bit counterproductive to me.

Right on all counts. The absence of information in no way implies the presence of the supernatural. That's not science or faith: that's superstition.

What exactly, then, is the difference between religious faith and superstition? I fail to see how, "If I'm good and say my prayers and go to Church, God will bless me." is much different from, "If I step on a crack, I will break my mother's back."

Think about this - A tiny sperm swims and finds an egg, implants itself and creates life. In the same context that must also be hard to swallow.

Sig'd.

Frost - Some people say that the universe is created by divine intervention, these same people also say that life is created by divine intervention. Other people say that the universe was created by the Big Bang Theory, and that life stems from it.

I guess I'm trying to say that life is created everyday with/without divine intervention (we know that a sperm implants an egg and creates life). We can watch this process through microscopes, and if this process is due to divine intervention then I guess you can say that we have witnessed divine intervention as it took place.

So, if the sperm implanting into an egg, creating life, is just a part of life and science (results of the Big Bang Theory) and is not divine intervention (since we can see this through microscopes), could it then be possible that gases swirling around in space exploded creating the universe?

This is just simply something to think about. I am not challenging anyone or their beliefs.

Frost - Some people say that the universe is created by divine intervention, these same people also say that life is created by divine intervention. Other people say that the universe was created by the Big Bang Theory, and that life stems from it.

I guess I'm trying to say that life is created everyday with/without divine intervention (we know that a sperm implants an egg and creates life). We can watch this process through microscopes, and if this process is due to divine intervention then I guess you can say that we have witnessed divine intervention as it took place.

So, if the sperm implanting into an egg, creating life, is just a part of life and science (results of the Big Bang Theory) and is not divine intervention (since we can see this through microscopes), could it then be possible that gases swirling around in space exploded creating the universe?

This is just simply something to think about. I am not challenging anyone or their beliefs.

Ah I see now. You raise good points here. Some would say the miracle lies not in existance itself, but in the spirit of life. What makes each of us different, and what makes each of us similar. That's what is said to be result of divine intervention, as opposed to the simple existance of life. Others would say that yes, we witness divine intervention everyday. Others again would say there's nothing divine to see. It's really quite subjective.

So...okay. I don't understand how you religious folk can explain your belief in God by citing holes in scientific theory, yet when questioned on the nature of God, respond with "God cannot be explained."

Seems a bit counterproductive to me.

At the same time, many people will try and disprove God, or at least blacken his name through holes in the Bible. Then when we say, 'what about this hole in the thoery? what about this missing link?' you say "we cannot know everything." Seems a little counterproductive to me.

However, you are correct: a loophole in science doesn't prove a god. I have no doubt that the big bang is the scientific explanation for life. What's the explanation for the Big Bang? God. That's just how I see it.

And don't worry, Im not weirdly religious. I'll never push my views down your throught. I don't even go to church most sundays. But I still believe.

At the same time, many people will try and disprove God, or at least blacken his name through holes in the Bible. Then when we say, 'what about this hole in the thoery? what about this missing link?' you say "we cannot know everything." Seems a little counterproductive to me.

However, you are correct: a loophole in science doesn't prove a god. I have no doubt that the big bang is the scientific explanation for life. What's the explanation for the Big Bang? God. That's just how I see it.

And don't worry, Im not weirdly religious. I'll never push my views down your throught. I don't even go to church most sundays. But I still believe.

See, the difference there is that science is evolving and changing based on new discoveries and information. We know we don't know everything, but we are working toward it. And we have come a long, long way. Less than twenty years ago, most scientists didn't think that we would find planets orbiting around other stars. Now we know that it is relatively easy for planets to form, and that they can be found in even the harshest environments.

A century ago, there was no theory of general relativity. Now it's pretty much common knowledge.

Black holes, pulsars, quasars. Things that up until fairly recently were science fiction. Now we know that they are there, and we are learning more about them all the time.

The religious admit that they don't know, and they call it faith. Scientists admit that they don't know, but they'll get back to you with an answer later. That's the difference between moving forward and remaining stagnant.

See, the difference there is that science is evolving and changing based on new discoveries and information. We know we don't know everything, but we are working toward it. And we have come a long, long way. Less than twenty years ago, most scientists didn't think that we would find planets orbiting around other stars. Now we know that it is relatively easy for planets to form, and that they can be found in even the harshest environments.

A century ago, there was no theory of general relativity. Now it's pretty much common knowledge.

Black holes, pulsars, quasars. Things that up until fairly recently were science fiction. Now we know that they are there, and we are learning more about them all the time.

The religious admit that they don't know, and they call it faith. Scientists admit that they don't know, but they'll get back to you with an answer later. That's the difference between moving forward and remaining stagnant.

And you think that one day we'll know everything?
One day we'll be able to answer if every single plausable question with science?
Do you think that one day, we'll be able to truly and 100% prove or disprove God, or any other theory of creation?

I hope not, because that's more arrogant than anything I can imagine.

Let's face it, we'll never know everything. We might think we know alot when in reality we might know very little. We don't know, we've got nothing to compare ourselves against.

Take this for example. All matter is made up of atoms. All atoms are supposed to be made up of quarks and bosons. They're made up of what? Technically, everything must be made of something. The only thing that thing that simply exists is supposed to be God. But surely, you can't tell me that the big bang happened, and these things called quarks popped from nowhere, out of nothing, and formed everything around us.

And you think that one day we'll know everything?
One day we'll be able to answer if every single plausable question with science?
Do you think that one day, we'll be able to truly and 100% prove or disprove God, or any other theory of creation?

I hope not, because that's more arrogant than anything I can imagine.

Let's face it, we'll never know everything. We might think we know alot when in reality we might know very little. We don't know, we've got nothing to compare ourselves against.

Take this for example. All matter is made up of atoms. All atoms are supposed to be made up of quarks and bosons. They're made up of what? Technically, everything must be made of something. The only thing that thing that simply exists is supposed to be God. But surely, you can't tell me that the big bang happened, and these things called quarks popped from nowhere, out of nothing, and formed everything around us.

The holy grail (pardon the metaphor) of science is a unifying theory of everything. It's possible, I think. Unfortunately, chances are that we will die out before we achieve anything like that. For now, it's only something we can work toward. Will we know absolutely everything one day? Probably not. Questions will continue to arise, and we will continue to look for answers.

I personally think that God is the easy way out. Of course, why analyze a phenomenon or a process when we can just hold God responsible?

Going to Christian school (yeah, believe it or not, I used to be a pretty hardcore Christian), I remember one of my teachers telling me that God has no beginning or end, He just is. We as humans have a hard time wrapping our minds around that because we are used to everything having a beginning and end. Birth and death, dawn and dusk, etc. I think that there is something to that, though not necessarily applying to God. We know (or we think we know) that energy can neither be created nor destroyed, but that it exists in a cycle. No beginning or end. The same premise as god, with the actual being removed from the equation.

Physics aside, proof aside, my point from the beginning of the discussion was simply this: Scientific theory is not all proven, but it is working on getting there. Religion is simply not proven, and no one seems to have a problem with that.

Physics aside, proof aside, my point from the beginning of the discussion was simply this: Scientific theory is not all proven, but it is working on getting there. Religion is simply not proven, and no one seems to have a problem with that.

That's because it can't be proven, so it's a waste of time trying. You either have faith or you dont. But having faith doesn't denote being a hardline religion freak. It can be that, or it can be as simple as acknowledging the presence of God (as I do). Indeed, it's a little unfair that scientists have their every word analysed and cross-analysed and a priests is taken as truth, though...

I have a problem with "just acknowledging the presence of God," though. Do you know how many gods have come and gone over the millennia? What makes the Jewish/Christian/Muslim god any different?

I wonder how much room could there possibly be in Heaven its going to get full sooner or later.

I wonder how much room could there possibly be in Heaven its going to get full sooner or later.

It's God, he'll just make more room.

Jewish/Christian/Muslim god is one of the oldest still being worshiped. Jewdisim can trace its roots back to the 2nd Millennia BC. Its older than Buddism, Taoism, Shinto and the only older religions I can find still in practice today are Hinduism and Zoroastrianism (Spelling, wrong).

The Abrahamic god is also unique in the concept of personnal salvation through his grace. The only other non-abrahamic religion I can find with a similar concept is Zoroastrianism and several mystery religions that Christianity defeated by popular support in the days of Rome and their ideas of it are still slightly different. The Abrahamic god is also has numerous smaller differences. The Trinity is uniquely Christian and is unfound in any other religion. Baptism is an old tradition but takes a new meaning in Christianity. The concept of sin being "awayness from god" rather than a bad deed as it is often misconcieved (In a christian sense) is also unique.

Those are some simple easy to go through differences. Sorry I only listed Christian ones. I'm still studying up on my Islam and Jewdism.

I think many people treat "acknowledging the presence of god" to lightly. I think it goes a little bit furthur than simply saying "Ok god I believe in you." Each individual comes to their own conclusions about god and for those who choose to believe its oftne much more personal.

How can he make more room when he runs out of room. Even god must have his limits

How can he make more room when he runs out of room. Even god must have his limits

He has met his limit, and is now sneaking people in the back door.

He's god. THe whole point of the cocnept is that he's all powerful. If he does exist and he created the entire universe I think it stands to reason he can make more room in heaven.

Also If god exists it stands to reason that the laws of physics do not apply to him.

All power has its limits.

Are we not gods. We create life... We created Dolly the sheep also... We have our limits....
Who created God?
Why was God created?
how was God created?
Does God have a God?
Is God alone?
Does God have friends?
What Does God do to entertain himself?
What Form does God Have?
Why did God Create life?

All power has its limits.

Are we not gods. We create life... We created Dolly the sheep also... We have our limits....
Who created God?
Why was God created?
how was God created?
Does God have a God?
Is God alone?
Does God have friends?
What Does God do to entertain himself?
What Form does God Have?
Why did God Create life?

These are easy to answer (sarcastically)
Q - Who created God?
A - Ask God.

Q - Why was God created?
A - Ask God.

Q - How was God created?
A- Ask God.

Q - Does God have a God?
A - Ask God?

Q - Is God alone?
A - Ask God.

Q - Does God have friends?
A - Ask God.

Q - What does God do to entertain himself?
A - Ask God.

Q - What form does God have?
A - Ask God.

Q - Why did God create life?
A - Ask God.

If and when you find the answers can you post them here for me?

Indeed. :p

What exactly, then, is the difference between religious faith and superstition? I fail to see how, "If I'm good and say my prayers and go to Church, God will bless me." is much different from, "If I step on a crack, I will break my mother's back."

Right. Me too. "If I'm good and say my prayers and go to Church, God will bless me," has nothing to do with my kind of faith. So if anyone else can explain how the two are different, I'm all ears.

If god is perfect, thus having every need fulfilled, why would god need create flawed beings, or any beings at all?

If god is perfect, why wouldn't god's message have reached every part of the world; decreasing the possibility of war and suffering created from others believing in different ideologies?

Free will?

Originally humans were not flawed. According to Christianity, Islam, and Jewdism human beings were without sin until Adam and Eve fouled it up.

Blasted leaf wearing freaks.

Contrary to popular beliefe Adam and Eve wore Old Navy jeans and the latest shirts from Gap!

Contrary to popular beliefe Adam and Eve wore Old Navy jeans and the latest shirts from Gap!

Oops! Old Navy jeans and Gap wearing shirt freaks.

Indeed!

Just a note to all forum members if you beleive in God and take your beleif seriously please bare in mind this is light hearted humour.

If Adam and Eve were perfect beings, I don't believe they would have been so easily corrupted by temptation.

They weren't perfet. Just without sin. They had free will and were tricked into doing the wrong thing (Adam probably should of told Eve about the tree if you ask me. That way the mess would have never happened. Then again Adam probably should have asked where the fruit came from.).

hey, loh!... i guess my reply mighta been a tad cranky, too, so let's call it a draw and be glad we're still friends, despite our at-odds pov re religion/gods, ok?

love and hugs, maia

I so bloody hate these threads. Religeon sparks all kinds of bad feeling right down to war.

No hard feelings on this end. I hope I caused no hard feelings, if I did I am sorry.

Agreed maia. The last thing I want is any sore feelings for anyone.

The last one of these ended up as a flame war...

Thats my point. Thats why I hate these threads. But I too have to respect the freedom of posting as long as it remains in the guildlines and rules. But these threads there trouble always have been and always end with bad feeling. Remember Max Vantage

Do I have to? That was a bloody nightmare. And the worst part was the collateral which hung around the thread like a bad smell, for days after the thread itself was closed.

Yeah it sparked a hell of a lot of bad feeling infact if memory serves me well I think a few bans were also enforced. Religion is always such a dodgy subject and really does spark some nasty flaming and bad and ill feeling across the place.



Just to say if anyone notices and bad feeling flame syle posts ignore them and report post do not reply to argumentative flame posts. Keep this thread civil lets priove we can have a religion thread remain civil.

Perhaps we are all God(s). That is to say, maybe God simply exist to experience all that is an ever will be. I don’t think that this would diminish the idea that he/she/it is the creator of all things. Good and Evil could just be an illusion in the traditional sense of the definition of each, yet exist in a real plane of reality and therefore we would as Gods and as individuals make up a multidimensional existence that has no boundaries or end; simply because there can always be the slightest variation in something, which would then make it new and unique. And endless circle perhaps, on a progressive scale that has only one polarity—forward (positive) and exist without regression.

Then this might explain the idea of fate as the different manifestations of what we perceive as God to co-exist and are so close to one another as having the appearance of overlapping. This would explain the conceptual idea of uniqueness, yet make us all God(s) and allow us to commit the atrocities that we do toward one another all in the sickest of games to satisfy the Almightiest need to know, feel, and experience the whole enchilada.

For me the traditional concept of religion falls apart at the seams when I walk into a burn unit and see a child whose body has become a grotesquely deformed piece of flesh that bares no resemblance to it original state, or take into consideration the most hideous acts perpetuated by each of us against one another.

I will say that the golden rules of all religions form the bulk of what we term as humanity, however loosely bonded as they are and with the ability to disintegrate into a useless nonfunctional and chaotic mess in the twinkle of an eye they are still worth mentioning as a postive aspect of organized religion. In my opinion the idea of a harmonious existence between the diverse manifestations of man is unachievable and a completely unrealistic goal. Even if we voluntarily chose collectively to use science to manipulate the gene pool to achieve the elimination of all aberrant behavior and social and ethical differences man(God) would still cease to achieve any noteworthy goal.

Man was never meant to unravel the most well kept secret of existence, and for anyone group of social order to claim that they have a lock on the purpose and existence of humankind is absolute fallacy. And for all the crap I just said who gives a big **** anyway?

Although, you may find this statement somewhat sweepingly broad and at times sarcastically put, it is not my intention for that to be. I believe at this point in my existence I am neither cynical nor optimistic about the future of man’s existence in the true sense of the definition of each term, but rather a realist. At least that is what I would like to believe. Who knows, we live in a state of constant flux and I am subject to be a holly roller tomorrow.

My answer to the original question of the thread:

“Religion Is It Mankind’s Ultimate Weakness.”

I would have to answer yes.

Please Note: Nothing said by me here was intended to offend anyone in anyway, and if I have done so then I apologize now.

Then you're wrong.

Religion is not mankinds ultimate weakness.
Man is.

Or the power of suggestion and thought.
The chances are Religion is an excuse.

The chances are good, to.

No-One is wrong and No-one is right either. We are all entitled to our opinions.

Indeed we are DoZ.

Sadly on a global thought Opinions become excuses which lead to war. Then they blame the good old....

I worship Norse Paganism :) in the Æsir we trust.

I'm more intrested in wicca but to be honest, my religeon is about trying to be a good person. Trying not to hate.

I have no religion I believe we'll find out when we die if there is more or nothingness.

Yup! We all find out in the end!

My previous post was simply my pondering and response to the question as it was asked in the thread. However, I would go on to add that in questions of “good” and “evil” and/or “wrong” and “right” I can only say the I do not believe that I have ever done anything evil or wrong that I was not immediately aware of what I had done and felt some degree of remorse at what I had done.

I have done some things that others might declare evil or monstrous, which I did in self defense. And I can tell you that even to this day; I feel no remorse for those acts that I committed in self defense.

I do not believe that man is inherently brought into this world with any sense of consciousness of good and evil or right and wrong. I personally believe that it is a matter of nurture and socioeconomic factors which mold and determine ones conscious. I don’t believe in being born evil not-with-standing and extra Y chromosome or two. And then there are the possibilities of other birth defects or deficiencies that might predispose one to lack the ability to develop a conscious.

Since religion is based on ones morality and belief in, most often, the existence of a superior being which exist outside our own ability to perceive that existence beyond what is called faith; then I would have to say that I am an agnostic at best.

And when I see a child who in my opinion is innocent destroyed in the most inhumane ways imaginable then I am very upset with the concept of an all loving God, and sickened by the concept that God has a reason or purpose behind such torturous acts.

So if I believe in a God it would have to be the God of Benedict de Spinoza (1632-77) His theories and believes on the subject of religion I can swallow to some degree.

I worship Norse Paganism :) in the Æsir we trust.

I'm getting a tatt of Thor on me. Seriously.

I'm going to use a symbol that Odin has for something, though I'm not exactly sure what it is.

I know the one... I reckon it would make a cool band symbol.

Why is it that people strongly believe, that if you do not sell your heart to one godly figure, you are doomed into eternal damnation?

Divinelemon,

Because, some people are fanatical and can only look at religion in terms of subjective analysis. If they admitted that other possibilities existed beyond their own narrow minded viewpoint then they would be invalidating their own believe or at least questioning it to one degree or another.

Religion is a very complex issue. Psychologically it provides a security blanket against the question of our existence and the inevitable issue of death. And further for the more sophisticated minds in our society it acts as a way of controlling the populace to some degree.

So this is only a few reasons why some true believers feel it necessary to damn other to an existence in hell of which they themselves have no iota of evidence that it even exist in the first place.

Thanks for posting,

Trailer Trash

Trailer Trash i couldn't have put that any better.

There are so many of us on this globe and we all have different belief's. Its important for us all to recognise that.

Like I believe that I rule the higher plains of hte ninth level of 'heaven' and Raven is the ruler of the underworld.