God Makes you stupid

[Flyndaran]

If someone wants to believe that there is no God, they can go ahead. And if someone wants to believe that there is a god, gods, spirits, afterlife, or any other religion, they can go ahead too. For atheism to quarrel with the other religions is just as stupid as Christianity quarreling with Wicca, or Islam quarreling with Hinduism.

Granted, there are assholes on every side. But I am continually impressed by the people who claim that religion is a mass delusion and then proceed to start religious flamewars. Is it really that important? Why does it matter if you believe in the magical sky fairy and I don't? Is your mere belief so painful to me that I must stamp it out?

Do you really think that by boldfacing belief that it means something?
I don't believe there is no god any more or less than I believe there are no fairies, or butt unicorns. The idea is just too silly on the face of it. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. There is no evidence of a god or fairies, despite all the inumerable people that have tried to find it, so the debate is meaningless.

I know that I may come off somewhat hostile. The idea that the vast majority of the human race believes in things simply because they were told it at an early age, or simply because they refuse to admit that they and the universe itself is finite, scares the bejeesus out of me. It scares me not just because we born atheists are so fleetingly rare, but also because so many horrors have been and will continue to be perpetrated in the name of evidenceless causes.

Is it really that important that millions of people have died, been tortured to death, and predjudiced against all because of these beliefs? How on earth can you not see how human death and suffering is important?

You inbetweeners confuse me more than the believers.

[Sylvia727]

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

Some people find the claim that existance is a coincidence more extraordinary than the claim that a supernatural being is arranging matters. And that's their prerogative. Personally, I find the fact that almost every culture across time and the globe has evolved religion with similiar base values to be evidence of something in the human psyche.

It scares me <snip> because so many horrors have been and will continue to be perpetrated in the name of evidenceless causes.

Is it really that important that millions of people have died, been tortured to death, and predjudiced against all because of these beliefs? How on earth can you not see how human death and suffering is important?

Yes, it's religion that did that. Not human greed, fear, and lust for power. Religion, by its magical mystical nature, causes otherwise sane people to do horrible things. Or maybe religion, like any other institution, can be coopted by the corrupt for their own ends.

Maybe religion is a comforting fiction. But by itself, it is a harmless one, and even a beneficial one. Because it is so moving, however, people often use it to gain power - successfully. That's a shame, but it's a fact of human existance. If it wasn't religion, it would be some other scam to gain power. There's no reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

You inbetweeners confuse me more than the believers.

Thank you.

[Arcade Man D]

All this discussion of religion is reminding me, of all things, about my high school lunch table. It was myself and 3 friends, and we were all over the place on our beliefs, both religious and political.

We had myself, a liberal American Baptist, then my friends were a liberal atheist, a conservative Catholic, and a moderate Satanist.

And we'd discuss religion and politics calmly.


The problem with religious extremists, and why there seem to be more of them than other extremists is 1, public enemy number 1 uses religion to justify terrorism, so religious extremism is really in the news right now.

Second, religion speaks to a basic psychological need for the vast majority of humanity, the need to belong. And that makes it easy for a greedy person to manipulate religion to serve his or her needs.

However, with that said, religion is generally, when not abused, a positive force, providing a moral and ethical guide (not saying you have to be religious to have these, I know plenty of moral atheists), providing not just a "don't do these", but exemplars of good living.

[Flyndaran]

...
However, with that said, religion is generally, when not abused, a positive force, providing a moral and ethical guide (not saying you have to be religious to have these, I know plenty of moral atheists), providing not just a "don't do these", but exemplars of good living.

Yes, religion provides an ethical guide. The problem being that for the vast majority of religions and times that guide has been wrong and yet used as a justification for atrocity.
Every holy book I've ever read justifies slavery, rape, and violence in general. Trying to jury-rig a compassionate system of beliefs out of them by ignoring what societies don't like has nothing to do with religion and more to do with human cultural development.
I see religion as a net zero gain for individuals and a severe net loss for humanity in general totally aside from its creepy delusional nature... to me that is.

[Flyndaran]

...
Yes, it's religion that did that. Not human greed, fear, and lust for power. Religion, by its magical mystical nature, causes otherwise sane people to do horrible things. Or maybe religion, like any other institution, can be coopted by the corrupt for their own ends.
...
Thank you.

Wait, so religion is not responsible for anything evil done in its name, but it is for everything good?

[Sylvia727]

Wait, so religion is not responsible for anything evil done in its name, but it is for everything good?

A religion is responsible for the morals and lessons it teaches. In most religions, these morals are mostly positive. Christianity and Judaism have the ten commandments, of which two or three are about religion ("I am the Lord thy God") and the rest are about basic moral values ("Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor").

So Jane Smith is responsible for her own actions, be they good or evil. Her religion is merely a factor in her moral development.

[AdminAssistant]

My take on the whole...God...thing.

I was raised Southern Baptist (the churches I went to were all pretty moderate, though). Now, I identify as a Christian but I feel that most organized churches do more harm than good. So, I have my little belief set, I do talk to God occasionally (In a very, "Hey, what's up?" kind of way), and I think He listens. Well, it makes me feel better anyway.

I do think the amount of ceremony people put on religion is a little...amusing. It's like the whole dunk/sprinkle baptism debate. Do you really think the amount of water involved is the key to heaven? Really? I don't think these people are giving God enough credit. "Oooh, sorry, but only the top of your head got wet, not your whole body. Sorry!"

All that said, I have absolutely zero issue with whatever anyone chooses to believe or not believe. If somebody wants to set up the Church of the Golden Arches and make sacrifices to Ronald McDonald - go for it.

To tie all of this to the OP, I am an academic. I have studied a number of books and passages of the Bible in a very...academic manner. I have thought a great deal about my beliefs and why they make sense to me. I recognize the Bible as a book inspired by God, but edited (heavily) by man - and therefore, take it with many grains of salt. Nothing about my religion or beliefs is blind.

Hmm..this could win the award for long rambling post!

[ElMarko]

I was going to put in my two cents but others have said what I could say better than I ever could. Just go to youtube and seach "pat condell" and "Neil degrasse tyson"

[ElMarko]

I was going to put in my two cents but others have said what I could say better than I ever could. Just go to youtube and seach "pat condell" and "Neil degrasse tyson"

Actually the good Tyson video is here.

[AFPheonix]

To tie all of this to the OP, I am an academic. I have studied a number of books and passages of the Bible in a very...academic manner. I have thought a great deal about my beliefs and why they make sense to me. I recognize the Bible as a book inspired by God, but edited (heavily) by man - and therefore, take it with many grains of salt. Nothing about my religion or beliefs is blind.

I think every Christian should study the historical contexts behind the Bible. And not just the crap that Focus on the Family puts out. It puts a good perspective on one's faith and how much it can be manipulated by men if you let it.
But then, I went Agnostic in part due to that, so perhaps people don't want their faith challenged that much.
Actually now that I think about it, that really is the issue with a lot of Christians anymore. They don't want to hear or see or come in contact with anything outside of their belief system. I know mom tried to do that a bit with me and it backfired once I got into the real world. I see it with others that I know still stuck in that quagmire. They just have no hunger to learn about things that might make them the least bit uncomfortable.

[Mongo Skruddgemire]

Religion seems like a cultural defense mechanism to avoid dealing with mortality.

I would agree with you on a point, but for the large part I would have to disagree. You are correct that religion is often used as a defense mechanism to avoid the morality of certain actions. The witch hunts in Salem are a good example where Religion was used to cover the fact that many of the accusations were financially motivated. Case in point was Giles Corey who was accused because the local representative of the crown wanted his property (related to me on one several of the Salem Tours of the Witch Trials). The Crusades which some speculate were motivated not by a desire to "Free the lands of our lord savior" but by the chance to snap up some of the phat lewt that was in the hands of the Rulers of the Middle East.

But any example that anyone could come up with is nothing more than how Religion is misused. Someone here said that religion is a tool and a tool can be used for good or for ill depending on the intent of the wielder. I can take a hammer and build a house...or I can take that same hammer and crush a skull. A priest can use his power to help a troubled child, or to intimidate that child to allow said priest to sodomize him.

Religion as it is meant to be is to be a guideline for morality. It is there to instill values on us. Take a look at Mother Theresa who did many great works for the public good in an impoverished area. Take a look at the Native Americans who use their religion to instill the values of living in close harmony with nature. In my religion (Wicca), the tenants of our faith are there to remind us of morality. It teaches us that we are free to do as we will, but we must face the results of our actions for good or for ill.

I hope humanity will eventually evolve to accept reality.

I understand that as an atheist, the concept of religion is hard to understand, but lack of evidence for something isn't evidence against something. Several thousand years ago (and in some areas not that long ago) there was no evidence that the Sun was the center of the Solar System. There was no way of proving it with the technology of the time. As we grew and learned as a species, we did find the evidence.

I am part of a growing movement that believes that the Divine (God or whatever form it actually takes) is the why and Science is the how.

"Let there be light!" Well an exploding super-massive quantum singularity would have released a hell of a lot of high-energy quanta, photons not being the least of them.

The one question that religion has yet to answer is "why is there something and not nothing?" The traditional answer is "God". Which leads to "Why is there a God and instead of no God?" All that question ever got me, was kicked out of Sunday School.

Funny thing is that Science can't answer that question either. Start asking and you get "the Big Bang" as an answer. Ask where that came from and one answer I read was "A space-time foam in which each bubble is a universe in of itself." Which begs the question of where did this foam come from and so on and so forth.

Why is there something and not nothing.

So why do we have to face reality when we have no idea what reality might be? Until God himself pops down and hands out business cards with his address on it, or science can state for 100% certainty that there is no God (and remember that lack of proof isn't proof in of itself) people are going to be living and holding onto a working hypothesis. Either believing in something higher than themselves or believing that mortality is as high as it gets.

Nothing wrong with either view as long as the people in question are happy in their lives and live by the laws of the land.

M

[CancelMyService]

I understand that as an atheist, the concept of religion is hard to understand

I know that you most likely didn't mean it this way, but that comes off as incredibly condesending when religious folks make comments like that. As if most athiests didn't start off as religous and and some point decide they no longer agreed with whatever indoctrination they were raised with.

Also this:

lack of evidence for something isn't evidence against something.

It's not evidence *for* something either. That's the same logic Donald Rumsfeld tried to apply to WMDs with "known knowns" and "unknown knowns". One of the big reasons religon has survived so long is that it's impossible to prove an invisible cloud man doesn't exist. Proving a negative can be difficult that way. If you set the burden of proof to an impossible level it's easier to maintain a belief system.


I don't want to sound like I'm just religion bashing, I happen to be of the opinion that the more you objectively look at religion, the more it seemed to exist to serve two purposes:

1. Explaining things people didn't have any way of scientifically testing at the time (Why's the sky blue? Cause God said so!).

2. Population control. What better way to keep a handle on the masses than to say either God commands them to do something? See also how Kings and Queens in history have claimed the divine right of royalty. Who's going to question you if you tell them you were picked by the Lord?


Finally, this:

believing that mortality is as high as it gets.

Why would this be so bad?

[Mongo Skruddgemire]

I know that you most likely didn't mean it this way, but that comes off as incredibly condesending when religious folks make comments like that.

I was actually responding to this comment made by another forum member.

I was born an atheist. The very concept of faith is alien to me.

I was not trying to be condescending and if I came off that way then I am sorry.

As if most athiests didn't start off as religous and and some point decide they no longer agreed with whatever indoctrination they were raised with.

But is is often their inability to wrap their minds around the stuff they are being taught about Religion that makes them turn away.

In a very real way it's the reason I went Pagan. I couldn't wrap my head around the concept of a God that teaches love, tolerance, understanding (love thy neighbor) and then says that "if you don't slap 3 billion mosquitoes in the Amazon, I'm going to condemn this undiscovered tribe that lives in peace and harmony with their neighbors and with nature to the darpests corners of Hell".

It's not evidence *for* something either. That's the same logic Donald Rumsfeld tried to apply to WMDs with "known knowns" and "unknown knowns". One of the big reasons religon has survived so long is that it's impossible to prove an invisible cloud man doesn't exist. Proving a negative can be difficult that way. If you set the burden of proof to an impossible level it's easier to maintain a belief system.

I believe in intelligent life on other planets. Like a belief in God, that one is hard to prove or to disprove since we have yet to find evidence of life anywhere much less intelligence.

I know about the things on Mars, but we're not sure if it's geological or bacterial fossils.

So there is no evidence for my belief which doesn't invalidate my belief since a lack of evidence doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. Likewise the lack of evidence that states that there is no life out there...doesn't mean that they exist either. I accept that and I still hold on to my belief that there is based on a few assumptions that are grounded in science and interpreted by me.

Which is a hell of a lot like religion, but because this belief of mine doesn't involve God, my arguments and reasonings get more attention and thought.

I don't want to sound like I'm just religion bashing, I happen to be of the opinion that the more you objectively look at religion, the more it seemed to exist to serve two purposes:

1. Explaining things people didn't have any way of scientifically testing at the time (Why's the sky blue? Cause God said so!).

Which doesn't happen as much in today's society. "Why is the sky blue?" has a scientific answer that can be put into a book and given to a child in a form that they can understand.

2. Population control. What better way to keep a handle on the masses than to say either God commands them to do something? See also how Kings and Queens in history have claimed the divine right of royalty. Who's going to question you if you tell them you were picked by the Lord?

The Pope says that anyone who reads Harry Potter is going against God's Will and is going straight to Hell. Which is funny since most Catholics with Children (and many who don't) have the entire series on their shelves. So that is once again not as much of an issue today.

And yes there are some sects out there that do control their people like that, but there are just as many that don't. Certainly the large majority of the Pagan faiths do not even try to bend the wills of their followers. In mine, I am given a set of moral guidelines (which happened to be developed by me before I discovered them) and allowed to follow them or not per my choosing. I am warned that all my actions have consequences for good or for ill so to be careful to make sure those consequences are worth the actions.

Why would this be so bad?

Now I'm going to be a bit cynical here. Why would mortality being the highest we can aspire to be so bad? Humanity constantly lets me down. They evacuate New Orleans because Gustav was looking to be a cat-4 on landfall. Every model said it would strengthen. Fortune smiled on them and it weakened instead. People in NO are pissing and moaning that they were forced to evacuate for a thunderstorm. Going from past examples this means that the next one that hits, too many people are going to dig in their heels and stick it out. They'll stand there while they get a Cat 4 in the face and then bitch "Why didn't you make us evacuate?"

Even going a little more general, this forum exists as a place to vent when we get frustrated by the idiocy of humanity. Customers Suck exists because we're frustrated by the assholes and douchebags that feel that by making money for college as a waitress/cashier we're somehow lesser beings than they are since they were born with a silver spoon jammed up their asses and have had everything handed to them on a silver platter.

I stopped watching the news because it is so depressing seeing humanity at it's "best".

Believing in something greater may be a bit daft of me, but if I only believed in humanity I think I'd have tossed my ass in front of a bus a long timg ago.

[AFPheonix]

Your mortality does not have to equal all of humanity and their failings.

My life includes much more than just other humans, and I'm content with that. If I should die and cease to exist, well, that's no skin off my nose.