Religion, better off without it?

jaffa20

Dankoozy wrote: »

oh **** these atheists are annoying. will they ever **** off back to their own forum

I wouldn't categorise myself as an atheist. I don't really feel there is a need for a term for the lack of belief in something just like i wouldn't really see the need to call myself a christian if i was to believe. It's pedantic to look at something linguistically, actions are louder which was my point when i was looking at Nazism as a quasi religion. But i don't really care, most people have their beliefs firmly in place and there is no point in having debating it. I was just looking at it from a different angle which i think is important to do.

Stercus Accidit

jaffa20 wrote: »

I wouldn't categorise myself as an atheist. I don't really feel there is a need for a term for the lack of belief in something just like i wouldn't really see the need to call myself a christian if i was to believe.

The above video actually covers this nicely

JimiTime

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

Or that you would fail miserably?

It really does not make a blind bit of difference to me what you think of yourself or indeed me.

I fail to see the irony, but perhaps through the wool over your eyes it manifests itself.

Indeed. What was that about ignorance again.........

Sam Vimes

JimiTime wrote: »

'You are an eejit if you are an atheist'. Alot of your anti-christian arguement boils down to comments like this. You probably believe what you say, but what is it about so many atheists around here, that they must let everyone know that they are smarter than us? Are you afraid that your intended audience will not realise it of their own accord? Or maybe its that you are actually convincing yourself? I said it before, it reeks of intellectual insecurity.

But alas, I'm sure this could turn into an epic debate meandering no-where..........

None of my anti christian arguments boil down to anything of the sort. It's not my fault if you feel stupid after I point out what I see as flaws and you have no response

This brings back again a point I made previously, that you can disagree with someone on any topic on this website but if you disagree with their religion all of a sudden you're one of those arrogant atheists who forces their opinion on everyone. I can assure you that if religious people weren't here the whole time telling us all about their wonderful imaginary friend and how we should all accept him as our saviour I would scarcely if at all mention religion. Who are they trying to convince eh

Edit: what you've just done there is called an ad hominem argument btw. You are attempting to make me look ridiculous simply for responding to you without actually saying anything about the content of my posts. Luckily the good people of boards can spot the logical fallacy

edit2: Also I see Jakkass thanked the post. As someone who posts pretty much solely on the topic of religion he's hardly in a position to be thanking a post that describes such actions as intellectual insecurity

JimiTime

Jakkass wrote: »

JimiTime: There is no need to focus on what people think of us, people will always hold negative views of those who strive for the Gospel. If atheists think they are smarter than Christians, fair enough, let them go nuts with that assertion. Does it really affect Christianity at large or is it mere rhethoric that's what we need to ask ourselves

Of course I agree about the rhetoric and indeed about the negative views. It is a curious manifestation though, the whole 'I'm smarter than you' thing

Stercus Accidit

JimiTime wrote: »

Indeed. What was that about ignorance again.........

Ah, so my point flew over your head then?


Ignorance, in terms of being 'ignorant' of a religious fable and ignorance of actual science and evidence are not on a par, and if we have to chose 'ignorance' of one or the other, as posted by dvpower, quoted by you, I would chose 'ignorance' of your superstitous nonsense.

Understand?

I then in a subsequent post, referred to the ignorance perpetuated by religion of reality and science, and its damaging effect.

I think that's pretty clear, maybe you don't, but I would question the validity of a lot of what you would think tbh given your sun worship.

philologos

Stercus Accidit: Sun worship? Please explain your opinion. I'm just hoping that you won't be referring to myth that Pontious Pilate was meant to be Saggitarious despite the fact that he was a historical figure.

procure11

I understand why people would be upset and disillusioned about religion in Ireland,consdering that it is a predominantly catholic nation,which means that they are not practically conversant with other christain denominations not to talk of other religions,but it would be absolutely outlandish to suggest that religion should be banned because of their frustrations with the catholic church.

Lots of other things have been even more contributory to the historical and present problems of the world.What would the negros that were forcefully kidnapped,abused ,raped,exploited over a century ask to be banned?...Every phenomenon has complex variations...So we cannot effectively utilize a one size fits all approach in our attempt to potentially solve those problems.

JimiTime

Sam Vimes wrote: »

None of my anti christian arguments boil down to anything of the sort. It's not my fault if you feel stupid after I point out what I see as flaws.

The wonderful thing about honesty Sam, is that I don't care if I feel stupid. If I've learned something, or put to bed something that I thought was right, but was actually wrong then its a price worth paying. So feeling stupid can be a very positive thing if a person actually values the truth and realises that they have been wrong. Sure, it can be embarassing, but I assure you, it doesn't bother me. I have felt stupid on so many occasions. Each occasion usually came with a valuable lesson. i would go as far as to say I am the better man for it.

I would point out though, 'you' haven't made me feel this way. Not yet anyway.

This brings back again a point I made previously, that you can disagree with someone on any topic on this website but if you disagree with their religion all of a sudden you're one of those arrogant atheists who forces their opinion on everyone.

Thats certainly not what I said. I made no such claims. I don't really care about disagreement. Its the assumption that you have rationale, logic and reason and we don't that I find bizarre. Actually, its not that I even find that bizarre, its that you seem to need to mention it on a regular basis. As I said, it reeks of insecurity to me.

I can assure you that if religious people weren't here the whole time telling us all about their wonderful imaginary friend and how we should all accept him as our saviour I would scarcely if at all mention religion. Who are they trying to convince eh

Funnily enough, I haven't really seen alot of these religious folk god bothering around here.

Edit: what you've just done there is called an ad hominem argument btw. You are attempting to make me look ridiculous simply for responding to you without actually saying anything about the content of my posts. Luckily the good people of boards can spot the logical fallacy

Well I thought it was clear what I was responding to.

Not all irrational worship is classed as religion

Its explaintives like the one above.

Stercus Accidit

Jakkass wrote: »

Stercus Accidit: Sun worship? Please explain your opinion. I'm just hoping that you won't be referring to myth that Pontious Pilate was meant to be Saggitarious despite the fact that he was a historical figure.

I try my best to view all religious beliefs equally, I may have mistaken the christian religion with tribal sun worship, but there are so many similarities between both, its hard to keep these things straight some times, sorry.

stovelid

Each to their own.

It's only when it adversely affects the lives of others that I care.

procure11

Sam Vimes wrote: »

None of my anti christian arguments boil down to anything of the sort. It's not my fault if you feel stupid after I point out what I see as flaws and you have no response

This brings back again a point I made previously, that you can disagree with someone on any topic on this website but if you disagree with their religion all of a sudden you're one of those arrogant atheists who forces their opinion on everyone. I can assure you that if religious people weren't here the whole time telling us all about their wonderful imaginary friend and how we should all accept him as our saviour I would scarcely if at all mention religion. Who are they trying to convince eh

Edit: what you've just done there is called an ad hominem argument btw. You are attempting to make me look ridiculous simply for responding to you without actually saying anything about the content of my posts. Luckily the good people of boards can spot the logical fallacy

edit2: Also I see Jakkass thanked the post. As someone who posts pretty much solely on the topic of religion he's hardly in a position to be thanking a post that describes such actions as intellectual insecurity

Totally false,...I think you visit the Politics forum more frequently,especially when it comes to issues of lisbon,immigration, etc:pac:

partyatmygaff

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

I try my best to view all religious beliefs equally, I may have mistaken the christian religion with tribal sun worship, but there are so many similarities between both, its hard to keep these things straight some times, sorry.

?
Thats possibly the most ill informed thing i heard all day

JimiTime

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

Ah, so my point flew over your head then?


Ignorance, in terms of being 'ignorant' of a religious fable and ignorance of actual science and evidence are not on a par, and if we have to chose 'ignorance' of one or the other, as posted by dvpower, quoted by you, I would chose 'ignorance' of your superstitous nonsense.

Understand?

I then in a subsequent post, referred to the ignorance perpetuated by religion of reality and science, and its damaging effect.

I think that's pretty clear, maybe you don't, but I would question the validity of a lot of what you would think tbh given your sun worship.

Would you like me to say, I give up, you won? I do not need to validate my intelligence (though admittedly, i did have to look up the spelling of 'intelligence', LOL) to anyone. I don't fear either loosing a debate, of indeed being percieved as losing a debate. Loosing a debate means I've learned something. Being percieved as loosing a debate is merely an ego thing, so no big loss.

squidge1

Hello. To answer your question, personally yeah I think that the world would be far better off without religion. Of course there are arguments for both sides, but overall I believe that if everyone acknowledged that it is just us here, that we aren't here for a very long time, that we are all in this together.. we would have a more loving, peaceful world. Now I'm not so naive that I think that if there was no religion there'd be no violence but rather that there would be less violence. I just don't see how a greater level of peace can ever be achieved when the very texts, which are the foundations of the world religions, are often so venemous and intolerant. I do sometimes wonder if humankind in general will ever fully be able to live without religion as we know it today but I sure hope so.

Please don't load me with: "real peace will never fully be achieved. Mankind will always be violent so ridding the world of religions will do nothing in the struggle for peace." I got the memo.

Joey the lips wrote: »

Another anti religious thread!

I always think this is a daft pole, people are not better without religion what the op should have said is

"I could not be arsed living my life with a certain standard so feck it all i will do what i want"

But it all comes back to an anti religious pole. Build a bridge folks. I am religious I am proud of it but guess. I dont give a fcuk if you dont want to be! So why do you feel the constant need to ask people.

Is it your lack of soul?

I have no doubt have of these people with no life faith will apear on the PI in a few years " My life is empty and I have nothing to show"

You make life what it is! If you have no faith just bog off and leave it at that!

Whoa that's a lot of anger you got there. You seem almost triumphant at the thought of non-believers feeling disheartened. Shame on you! This standard you speak of sounds great though - where would be the best place for me to learn about it? I would say it might be this Bible I've heard so much about only for I've actually read it, so it couldn't be that. And I'm laughing to myself at the thought of a gang of atheists walking about the place knocking over bins 'cause we just don't give a fcuk'! Yeah that's really how it goes. Why, sometimes we pick on smaller kids too just because we can.

But to get back to the point, the recent findings of the Ryan Report on the inhumane abuse of children at the hands of the Christian Brothers et al. (however inadequate) were yet another piece of suffering which can be credited, in no small part, to religion. Would we had been without it.

Joey the lips

stovelid wrote: »

Each to their own.

It's only when it adversely affects the lives of others that I care.

Thats what I said 160 posts ago! I agree but I also think the OP has the religious concept wrong!

Stercus Accidit

partyatmygaff wrote: »

?
Thats possibly the most ill informed thing i heard all day

Sun worship - Sun, exists, imbued with mythical powers, it is a deity, can be prayed to and appeased.

Christianity - Christ, existed, imbued with mythical powers, he is a deity, can be prayed to and appeased.

JimiTime wrote: »

Would you like me to say, I give up, you won?

This is an internet forum, it is about debate, I'm engaging in the debate, my disagreeing with you is part of that.

JimiTime

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

This is an internet forum, it is about debate, I'm engaging in the debate, my disagreeing with you is part of that.

I stopped 'debating' with you though. Since then though, its like you've been guessing why. Of couse these guesses essentially amounted to, 'You just haven't an answer'. There are times, when it is wiser not to answer.

Stercus Accidit

JimiTime wrote: »

Would you like me to say, I give up, you won? I do not need to validate my intelligence (though admittedly, i did have to look up the spelling of 'intelligence', LOL) to anyone. I don't fear either loosing a debate, of indeed being percieved as losing a debate. Loosing a debate means I've learned something. Being percieved as loosing a debate is merely an ego thing, so no big loss.

Sorry I quoted your pre-edit, I'll address the new material.

It is religion, and its views and interferance with peoples lives which I have a problem with, not necessarily all its followers, as is the sentiment of many. Heres an example on thread.

stovelid wrote: »

Each to their own.

It's only when it adversely affects the lives of others that I care.

My issue is that religion propagates itself, and although it has passive followers, to continue it needs aggressive indoctrination, baptism at birth, preaching, imposing itself so as to gain members, where it can, control law and order also.

Religion has proven time and again its organisations are corrupt, its very nature is that of self propagation, and conversion.


Is the world better off without religion? Yeah, I'd say so.

diverdriver

It needs to be emphasised again that lack of belief in a supernatural God figure is not a belief. It's merely a rational conclusion based on available evidence or in fact the lack therof. Atheism is merely a label attached to people like me by religious people. I'm not going to met up with stercus, jaffa and Sam and read from and discuss the latest Richard Dawkins book. Although to be fair there are groups. But that simply proves that people like to form groups of like minded people.

But so called atheism represents a threat to religious people because their entire faith is based entirely on something that has absolutely no basis in day to day reality. Worse there is zero evidence for this belief. Once you sit down and actually think about it, the God thing is a fallacy. If you ever need proof just remember that virtually everyone in every religion has a different version of God in their head and different religions have their versions of good and evil.

But I don't confront the local priest and try to convert him away from religion. I don't really care because in fact he shares the same fate as me. So it would be no real benefit to him. Same with all religious people. I'm content for you believe in anything you want.

I just wish all you religious would just do us the same courtesy.

However I do think that the video above hit the nail on the head on one point. In this modern world where we have the capability to destroy the entire planet. The very idea that someone with an irrational religious viewpoint has the power to wipe out millions of people on the basis that God spoke to him is, frankly terrifying. Luckily that man is out of power right now. But what if another did gain power?

Religion is dangerous and it's irrational. Maybe I should go around and do my best to unconvert people. :rolleyes:

Sam Vimes

JimiTime wrote: »

The wonderful thing about honesty Sam, is that I don't care if I feel stupid. If I've learned something, or put to bed something that I thought was right, but was actually wrong then its a price worth paying. So feeling stupid can be a very positive thing if a person actually values the truth and realises that they have been wrong. Sure, it can be embarassing, but I assure you, it doesn't bother me.

I would point out though, 'you' haven't made me feel this way. Not yet anyway.

Well that's admirable, sincerely

JimiTime wrote: »

Actually, its not that I even find that bizarre, its that you seem to need to mention it on a regular basis. As I said, it reeks of insecurity to me.

You'll find pretty much all of my posts on religion are in response to a religious person. They put forward their arguments and I respond to them. You're probably right though but from the other perspective. I'm not the one going on about religion the whole time, I'm responding to other people who are going on about religion the whole time and pointing out the gaping holes in what they're saying, because it's fun. So yes I would agree with you that going on about religion the whole time reeks of insecurity.....................

JimiTime wrote: »

Funnily enough, I haven't really seen alot of these religious folk god bothering around here.

There aren't that many but there is a very vocal minority

JimiTime wrote: »

Well I thought it was clear what I was responding to.

Not all irrational worship is classed as religion

Its explaintives like the one above.

Firstly, it's a big leap to go from one line in one post to "most of my arguments boil down to". I find that insulting because I put a lot of time and effort into my arguments

But I can see why you would think this with regard to that post. It's not that I have an assumption that I am smarter than religious people, it's that I have yet to come across a religious person who can give me a rational argument for the existence of god despite extensive searching. I have given them more than a fair chance to present a solid argument and they have failed. Therefore, I feel secure in calling the beliefs irrational on the basis that anyone who challenges me on it, such as yourself, will be met with the full detailed explanation of why I see these beliefs as irrational so they don't keep the idea that it's simply an assumption. If something has been demonstrated to you dozens of times, it's no longer an assumption.

If you can supply me, right here and now, a logical explanation for the existence of the christian god as opposed to all the other gods that you would most likely believe in had you been born in a different place or a different time, I will retract everything I have ever said against religion and put an apology in my sig for all to see

Sam Vimes

procure11 wrote: »

Totally false,...I think you visit the Politics forum more frequently,especially when it comes to issues of lisbon,immigration, etc:pac:

Fair enough, it's a logical fallacy that's not just used against atheists.

philologos

diverdriver wrote: »

But so called atheism represents a threat to religious people because their entire faith is based entirely on something that has absolutely no basis in day to day reality. Worse there is zero evidence for this belief. Once you sit down and actually think about it, the God thing is a fallacy. If you ever need proof just remember that virtually everyone in every religion has a different version of God in their head and different religions have their versions of good and evil.

Does it? I'd argue that my faith has a lot to do with my every day reality. Just because you can't see any basis for faith in every day reality doesn't mean that others don't. God is more relevant to me now than He ever was in my life. I read the Bible, and I find something that challenges my former thinking on a particular subject. I read the Bible and passages make themselves apparent even if I read the very same section before without noticing it. Is atheism really a challenge to my faith? Nah, my relationship with God has got stronger and stronger and I'm able to share this with other Christians I know and I'm able to support them in the trials that we have to endure in this life. My atheist / agnostic friends all know that I am a Christian too, and they seem to have no problem with it. Why do people on Boards seem to have a problem with it though? It really beats me.

diverdriver wrote: »

But I don't confront the local priest and try to convert him away from religion. I don't really care because in fact he shares the same fate as me. So it would be no real benefit to him. Same with all religious people. I'm content for you believe in anything you want.

It probably wouldn't be to much avail or success.

diverdriver wrote: »

I just wish all you religious would just do us the same courtesy.

We do, this doesn't stop people from evangelising though. If you do not want to hear then merely say so. Quite simple. This guy is an atheist and he seems to get the idea:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7JHS8adO3hM

diverdriver wrote: »

Religion is dangerous and it's irrational. Maybe I should go around and do my best to unconvert people. :rolleyes:

Is my faith which tells me to love the other, and to strive to know God really dangerous? If you want to try and unconvert me, be my guest

Sam Vimes

Jakkass wrote: »

We do, this doesn't stop people from evangelising though. If you do not want to hear then merely say so. Quite simple. This guy is an atheist and he seems to get the idea:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7JHS8adO3hM

So he says of christians and atheists: "how much do you have to hate someone to not prostelytise"

and yet you constantly criticise me for "trying to make you give up your faith". Why does it only work one way? Why should you be lauded and I be criticised when we're both arguing from personal conviction?

philologos

Sam Vimes wrote: »

So he says of christians and atheists: "how much do you have to hate someone to not prostelytise"

He says that if you believe that there is such thing as eternal damnation it is cruel to not to evangelise.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

and yet you constantly criticise me for "trying to make you give up your faith". Why does it only work one way? Why should you be lauded and I be criticised when we're both arguing from personal conviction?

I don't aim to convert you to Christianity (I hope you do on your own accord, but that isn't what I specifically aim for). If you feel so inclined to come to Christ, that will be no work of mine. I don't aim to convert anyone to Christ I just aim to discuss the issues.

However, if we are talking about evangelists like diverdriver was [or at least I thought diverdriver was], it seems rather apt to link to this viddeo about proselytism.

Sam Vimes

Jakkass wrote: »

He says that if you believe that there is such thing as eternal damnation it is cruel to not to evangelise.

Yes, and he also said "and atheists" in the same sentence. He's saying that both should evangelise if they're firm in their convictions but you criticise me for doing so

Jakkass wrote: »

I don't aim to convert you to Christianity. If you feel so inclined to come to Christ, that will be no work of mine. I don't aim to convert anyone to Christ I just aim to discuss the issues.

What is the difference between talking about christianity all the time, putting forward arguments for it, saying how it's the one true religion, how it's the only path to salvation, etc etc etc, basically putting forward your christian point of view 27 hours a day.....and aiming to convert people

Why have "Clarifying common reasons for belief" and "7 Reasons Why I Believe In Christianity" in your signature if you're aiming to convince people?

edit: and if you're not aiming to convince people, why link to a video claiming it's cruel not to if you firmly believe?

philologos

Sam Vimes wrote: »

What is the difference between talking about christianity all the time, putting forward arguments for it, saying how it's the one true religion, how it's the only path to salvation, etc etc etc, basically putting forward your christian point of view 27 hours a day.....and aiming to convert people

I don't do it all the time I do other things throughout the day too (27 hours? - I think I'd be dead if I actually dedicated that much time)

I believe Christianity is the one true religion, yes. I don't aim for you to be converted by what I say. Infact I don't think I can convert anyone, if anyone comes to Christianity it will be about their own communication with God, not about what I or anyone else has said.

You also put forward your atheist view, I have yet to see your point?

squidge1

Jakkass wrote: »

I don't aim to convert you to Christianity (I hope you do on your own accord, but that isn't what I specifically aim for). If you feel so inclined to come to Christ, that will be no work of mine. I don't aim to convert anyone to Christ I just aim to discuss the issue.

Jakkass: forgive me for butting in but this has always baffled me. Rather than accuse you of trying to convert, I'm wondering why you aren't trying to convert people more!

If I was religious, I think I'd try to convert as many people as possible. If, like most religious people, you believe in hell - a place of eternal torment, pain etc. - then aren't you concerned about the welfare of the non-religious? When you talk to a non-religious person aren't you thinking: "Oh no, you're going to suffer so much in hell"? Doesn't that make you sad? Tbh sometimes I understand evangelical Christians more than run of the mill religious people in that regard.

diverdriver

I read the Bible, and I find something that challenges my former thinking on a particular subject. I read the Bible and passages make themselves apparent even if I read the very same section before without noticing it.

Yes indeed the bible is a good book, but not the 'good book'. Any book that's been in circulation has to have something going for it. Plenty of books challenge your former thinking on a subject. I just wish more people learnt from books of any sort even the bible. But even the bible has stuff that is either ignored or conveniently overlooked. Like the passages on slavery and such like.

The problem nowdays is that we have the internet generation. Many will happily tell me they never read a book but quite happily pontificate (sorry) on a subject which they obviously gleaned from the internet.

But that's off topic.

I'm glad your religion helps you through life. It's better than drink and drugs. (No, I'm not saying that's how I fill the void:D).

If religion was merely a belief in God and and an admonition to do no harm to other people. But to live and let live. That would be fine. But it isn't. Religion is like most 'isms'. It's a belief in something better than you whether a deity or a concept or a man. Communism and Fascism are not religions but in everything but the deity they follow the same rules. It's also used as a licence to kill or conquer without guilt because God deemed it Ok. Remember again the sixth commandment is not 'Thou shalt not kill' But the much more loosely phrased 'Thou shalt not murder'. If I was writing that law nowdays, any smart lawyer would point out it's ambiguity.

In the past Kings would take on the role of God on Earth. This simple ruse allowed them the power of life and death. Which they used as often as they chose. Without God behind them, they are mere men, thus have no power at all. It's recurring theme throughout history and civilisation. God is used by men to secure their position.

We want God to exist because we cannot believe that when we die that our conscious mind ceases to exist. This bothers me too because I know that when I die, it's over. I don't fear death but I avoid it all costs because it I know it's the end.

There are no atheist suicide bombers.

Sam Vimes

Jakkass wrote: »

I don't do it all the time I do other things throughout the day too (27 hours? - I think I'd be dead if I actually dedicated that much time)

I believe Christianity is the one true religion, yes. I don't aim for you to be converted by what I say. Infact I don't think I can convert anyone, if anyone comes to Christianity it will be about their own communication with God, not about what I or anyone else has said.

Then why have reasons for belief in your sig? Seems kind of pointless if you don't think anyone's going to accept the reasons

Jakkass wrote: »

You also put forward your atheist view, I have yet to see your point?

That you put forward your point of view constantly but criticise me for putting mine forward because I'm "trying to make you give up your faith", something which is admirable according to the video you just linked to.......?

philologos

squidge1 wrote: »

Jakkass: forgive me for butting in but this has always baffled me. Rather than accuse you of trying to convert, I'm wondering why you aren't trying to convert people more!

I don't go around looking for peoples names to add to my book of "converted". I don't think acceptance of Christianity works that well. I feel I can only lay the seeds for it in discussion with people, and maybe down the line people who I know in real life as opposed to people on this forum might think about the kind of guy I was and consider Christianity for themselves in a few years down the road. I'm also involved with the Christian Union at my university which I have found useful both for building up potential followers of Christ, and to have current followers of Christ build me up. We've had quite a few new members in the last year which is encouraging, one who has returned to Christianity after years of leaving it on the wayside. I think I'm trying to encourage Christianity in the best way I possibly can.

squidge1 wrote: »

If I was religious, I think I'd try to convert as many people as possible. If, like most religious people, you believe in hell - a place of eternal torment, pain etc. - then aren't you concerned about the welfare of the non-religious? When you talk to a non-religious person aren't you thinking: "Oh no, you're going to suffer so much in hell"? Doesn't that make you sad? Tbh sometimes I understand evangelical Christians more than run of the mill religious people in that regard.

As I say. I believe that God does the calling in every single case of acceptance to Christianity. Sometimes someone needs to bring up the prospect of Christianity to get them to notice it but ultimately it is God. I could list a number of influences in my acceptance but by and large it was down to current events that had happened in my life at the time that really led me to consideration.

I am concerned about the unreligious and I hope as many of them can hear about the Gospel as possible before they die. There are also 1.6 billion people in the world who haven't heard about the Gospel. I do hope that people come to Christ, and I think it's a wonderful thing when people do. Ultimately I think all I can do is lay the seeds. I'm also thinking for the future about what I could do to serve the church on the ground.

My main mode of discussion about religion doesn't concern hell. Even if hell and heaven were not real Christianity is still a fulfilling path to follow. I believe that God influences peoples lives in the here and now as well as in the afterlife. I generally would discuss to people (N.B only when they are interested, and generally when they initiate the discussion with me) and answer their questions, and deal more with Christs teachings and the teachings of the early Church.

Sam Vimes: I don't come into a discussion with the motive to convert people. I come to be challenged and tested. I don't welcome childish or aggressive posts however, and I have every right to avoid them.

I have the reasons in my sig so people can understand where I come from better. It isn't really to convert people. They are to use in reference for when discussions continue on and on and when the same questions arise. It's rather handy to say that it's in my sig.

squidge1

Jakkass wrote: »

Sam Vimes: I don't come into a discussion with the motive to convert people. I come to be challenged and tested. I don't welcome childish or aggressive posts however, and I have every right to avoid them.

I have the reasons in my sig so people can understand where I come from better. It isn't really to convert people. They are to use in reference for when discussions continue on and on and when the same questions arise. It's rather handy to say that it's in my sig.

If you are suggesting that my comment was childish or aggressive I'm afraid I don't see where you're coming from but I'm new to this so I'll let it go.

philologos

No, I'm not. I was posting to Sam Vimes by that point. No harm done

squidge1

Jakkass wrote: »

No, I'm not. I was posting to Sam Vimes by that point. No harm done

My bad...:o

b28

conchubhar1 wrote: »

people kill people

religion has not and will not kill people

Religion is just one of many "excuses" used to kill people!
Stoning for example is used by muslims because their religion says adultery is wrong!

Get rid of religion, it destroyed so many lives here!
and for people who feel faith, you dont need religion! You can believe in something and yet not participate in "evil" organised religion!

corribdude

Well whatever about worldwide, here in Ireland there is absolutely no question that we would've been better off if religion never existed. We could've saved thousands from beatings, rape and murder if the Catholic Church never existed. I dont see how anything they do can ever make up for it bar they come up with the cure for cancer.

OneArt

Religion's like any other hobby: do it in your own time and don't shove it down other's throats.

I'd view it like I'd view, for example, football: I hate football and have no interest. But people who love it play it and enjoy it, but they don't try making me get involved. That's how religion should be.

af_thefragile

The vatican, maybe...
Religious thoughts and believes, no.

Min

We would be better off without religion.

People who tried to make a world without religion include Pol Pot, Mao, Stalin, Hitler, ok all these led to 10s of millions of people dying or into the hundred's of millions of people dying but we would be better off believing the world would be better off without religion.

Without religion we would have to thank someone/some other organisation for many universities, schools, hospitals, charities etc that help so many in a hope they would have formed they as quickly as religious organisations did in the past and present.

Without religion there would be a good excuse as an employer to say you should work more as there is no such thing as the weekend which contains a day of rest, there would be no need for 7 day weeks, we could have lets say 10 day weeks with 1 day off from work, yes we would be better off with no religion.

Without religion we could do away with the Christmas holidays, maybe just a day off work for new years day.

Without religion we could do away with St Patrick's day and get back another working day.

Without religion we could go crazy and form some fecked up society where we end up with cult personalities like what is the case in North Korea. Religion banned but you end up having to praise a midget for everything or end up in a concentration or worse still you and your entire family and extended relations killed for saying Kim Jong il looks like a comical midget and acts like such a eejit.....

All the many many deluded people who think religion is a problem should look at what some who enforced policies where they believed religion in general was/is a problem.

Anti-religion regimes have been the greatest killers in world history. These have been the real problem, not religion.
Look at China, the state formed their own Catholic church where the head of the church is the communist government, why?
They found they couldn't stop religion so they wanted to control it.

A world with no religion would be a world ruled by tyrants/murderous dictators.

Max Power1

definetly better off without.

CianRyan

Religion is as pointless as cheese figureens.(sp?)

Spear

Min wrote: »

We would be better off without religion.

People who tried to make a world without religion include Pol Pot, Mao, Stalin, Hitler, ok all these led to 10s of millions of people dying or into the hundred's of millions of people dying but we would be better off believing the world would be better off without religion.

Wrong.

Adolf Hitler wrote:

"We were convinced that the people need and require this faith. We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement, and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations: we have stamped it out".

"For their interests [the Church's] cannot fail to coincide with ours [the National Socialists] alike in our fight against the symptoms of degeneracy in the world of to-day, in our fight against a Bolshevist culture, against atheistic movement, against criminality, and in our struggle for a consciousness of a community in our national life".

People who tried to make a world without religion include Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, Albert Einstein, George Bernard Shaw, Frank Zappa etc etc.

Min

Spear wrote: »

Wrong.




People who tried to make a world without religion include Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, Albert Einstein, George Bernard Shaw, Frank Zappa etc etc.

Lincoln?
What was Obama doing with Lincoln's bible earlier this year....?
Jerusalem post where Einstein praises the Catholic church for its role in German society during the Nazi era- http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost%2FJPTalkback%2FCommonFrame&tbId=1241968136316&tbNum=326&type=Show

So we should shut our eyes and say it didn't happen when the dictators I mentioned who were anti religion went on the rampage and killed millions of people.
You should visit North Korea sometime and see how religion is banned but the people instead are made worship the greatest leader ever seen on this planet, the great Kim Jong Il, everything that is good that happens to the people of North Korea is thanks to the great Kim Jong Il.
There is no need for religion when you got this alternative and the concentration camps are good for those who disagree.

Spear

Min wrote: »

Lincoln?
What was Obama doing with Lincoln's bible earlier this year....?
Jerusalem post where Einstein praises the Catholic church for its role in German society during the Nazi era- http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost%2FJPTalkback%2FCommonFrame&tbId=1241968136316&tbNum=326&type=Show

So we should shut our eyes and say it didn't happen when the dictators I mentioned who were anti religion went on the rampage and killed millions of people.
You should visit North Korea sometime and see how religion is banned but the people instead are made worship the greatest leader ever seen on this planet, the great Kim Jong Il, everything that is good that happens to the people of North Korea is thanks to the great Kim Jong Il.
There is no need for religion when you got this alternative and the concentration camps are good for those who disagree.

Lincoln quotes

"The Bible is not my book nor Christianity my profession."

"My earlier views of the unsoundness of the Christian scheme of salvation and the human origin of the scriptures, have become clearer and stronger with advancing years and I see no reason for thinking I shall ever change them."

There's a whole bunch more here.

http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/quotes/lincoln.htm

And how is any less of a religion to worship the dogma of Ki Jong Il instead of the dogma of Christianity?

Min

Spear wrote: »

Lincoln quotes

"The Bible is not my book nor Christianity my profession."

"My earlier views of the unsoundness of the Christian scheme of salvation and the human origin of the scriptures, have become clearer and stronger with advancing years and I see no reason for thinking I shall ever change them."

There's a whole bunch more here.

http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/quotes/lincoln.htm

And how is any less of a religion to worship the dogma of Ki Jong Il instead of the dogma of Christianity?

Not a based link then.......

Kim Jong il is very anti-religion.

Nowhere has anyone who wanted and tried to bring about a religion free world has it worked it without killing millions of people and then it still failed.
The anti-religion people always believe they are so right with regards to religion. Atheism is an integral part of communism, what did this form of anti-religion offer the world apart from estimates of 100 million plus people dying in the past century under these regimes.

Spear

Min wrote: »

Not a based link then.......

Kim Jong il is very anti-religion.

Nowhere has anyone who wanted and tried to bring about a religion free world has it worked it without killing millions of people and then it still failed.
The anti-religion people always believe they are so right with regards to religion. Atheism is an integral part of communism, what did this form of anti-religion offer the world apart from estimates of 100 million plus people dying in the past century under these regimes.

Atheism is not the intent of communism, a different socioeconomic model is. Besides, how does mass murder by communists make mass murder by theists acceptable?

ozzirt

Religion, particularly Christianity is it's own worst enemy breaking nearly all of it's own teachings.

It is violent, irrational, intolerant, allied to racism, tribalism and bigotry, invested in ignorance, and hostile to free enquiry, contemptuous of women and coercive towards children.

In fact it really has not got much going for it. Thankfully, belief in religions generally, and Christianity in particular is on the wane.

i hate religion and think it's one of the worst things to happen to the world. it has saved no one and hurt so many. it will kill itself eventually and disappear.

Beanstalk

Religion is in part largely responsible for all the wonderful differences in culture across the world. Religion isn't only about belief itself, it also promotes music, literature and morals among other things and is a way of life for some.

Its perfectly acceptable to view some of these religious attributes as questionable, but how would the world be better off without it?

Would we just have one big generic world culture? I think that would be terrible.

Beanstalk

Beanstalk wrote: »

Would we just have one big generic world culture? I think that would be terrible.

was the repressed culture that was part of ireland for so long better?