Is religion a farce?

CorkB

There are two things getting confused here and I feel it is important to separate them. The pursuit of God is not the same as religion.

I don't like religion. To me it conjurs up images of man made traditions, formality, stuffiness, dogmatism, legalism, hypocrisy and boredom. We all know stories of people doing something out of religion that God would never do or approve of. God Himself doesn't like religion. If God was on the side of the Catholic Church in the abuse scandal, He'd have a lot to answer for. God is not religion.

I gave up on church and tried to pursue Christian fellowship free from the shackles of what I listed above, and it is far better, as well as being closer to the New Testament model. God came that we might have life to the full. Religion reins that in. We can't put God in a box (or a building), and to do so would reduce Him to mere religion. Please don't make the mistake of thinking the two are one and the same.

Hank_Jones

Please God, no more religion in AH. :pac:

py2006

Whatever we think about Religion it has brought a lot of inner peace to people! There are people who led a crime filled life who have turned to religion and turned their lives around.

If its a "farce" then so what, if it does good for some then there is nothing wrong with it.

Toby Take a Bow

ddef wrote: »

well said.
when it comes to religion, I ironically find it is atheists who force their beliefs (or lack of) much more so than the churches.

Really? You should check out my area, I've had the mormons, jehovah's witnesses and the Legion of Mary knocking on my door to proselytize. Also, if you're thinking that a Church isn't trying to force its beliefs on you, it's doing something wrong. Most religions I can think of are proselytizing ones. The modern atheism you find a problem with is a reaction to the more extreme proselytizing elements of religion.

keithob wrote: »

example ... ive two young children... they will be educated in the irish education system which is tied in with the catholic church... and hence they will be reared good irish catholics

however i nor my partner believe in the church but we do think it will teach our kids good morals and help develop them as ''good citizens'' of this strange world...

Would you not have taught your kids morals were it not for the Church? That's fairly mad, to be honest. Also, if they're really being reared as 'good Irish Catholics' you do realise you'll have to bring them to mass every Sunday? I'd say it'd be a lot less work just to teach your kids right from wrong.

nozzferrahhtoo

py2006 wrote: »

If its a "farce" then so what, if it does good for some then there is nothing wrong with it.

What one must question there however is whether religion really had anything to do with their turn around. People in desperate situations turn to anything when they want to change. However it is the desire to change… and the admission that one HAS a problem that needs changing… that most people working in self help groups etc will tell you is the first and single most important step in recovery.

Religion may be very good at accepting people in who want to change, but it is the person themselves who wants to change and the person themselves that does most of the work in achieving that.

Religion has just become very good at associating itself with such positive changes and even very good at making people who did all the hard work at changing themselves to give the credit away too easily to those who barely did anything.

However even despite all that I still do not think that such things justify religion in any way. Remember it has been said that Hamass provides social services in Gaza. How nice, but that does not mean they are not a militarized terrorist organization running on a fanatic anti-Semitic ideology. It has been said Louis Farrakan gets young black men off drugs but does that in any way justify a racist crackpot cult?

Be careful of justifying bad things simply because they are good at associating themselves by proxy with good things.

py2006

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

What one must question there however is whether religion really had anything to do with their turn around. People in desperate situations turn to anything when they want to change. However it is the desire to change… and the admission that one HAS a problem that needs changing… that most people working in self help groups etc will tell you is the first and single most important step in recovery.

Religion may be very good at accepting people in who want to change, but it is the person themselves who wants to change and the person themselves that does most of the work in achieving that.

Religion has just become very good at associating itself with such positive changes and even very good at making people who did all the hard work at changing themselves to give the credit away too easily to those who barely did anything.

However even despite all that I still do not think that such things justify religion in any way. Remember it has been said that Hamass provides social services in Gaza. How nice, but that does not mean they are not a militarized terrorist organization running on a fanatic anti-Semitic ideology. It has been said Louis Farrakan gets young black men off drugs but does that in any way justify a racist crackpot cult?

Be careful of justifying bad things simply because they are good at associating themselves by proxy with good things.

Good points!! But to be honest, if religion is providing a catalyst for some to do better with their lives or bring them an inner peace after a loss of a loved one etc then its perfectly fine.

It may not be the ultimate solution but if it helps some positively then who are we to tell people if they believe in their religion or turn to 'god' for help that they are wrong.

py2006

Its the fanatical religious people and the fanatical atheists that get my goat up!!

nozzferrahhtoo

py2006 wrote: »

if religion is providing a catalyst for some to do better with their lives or bring them an inner peace after a loss of a loved one etc then its perfectly fine.

The "if" is the important word there because I see no reason to think it IS being a catalyst for that. I think the catalyst is whatever in a persons life makes them realise they have a problem and need help. Admitting one has a problem is the massive first step. They then do the work to change and become better.

In their desperation they will turn to anyone or anything to help them and Religions have become very good at targeting the weak, vulnerable and needy and while that person works hard to change and better themselves religion sits back, does almost nothing, and takes all the credit.

The fact is religion appears to have nothing to do with it. It is just one of the "clubs" in which people find other people who are willing to help and it is PEOPLE that is important here. There are many such clubs, religion is not the only game in town, and those other clubs have less downsides than religion has.

As I always say, if X gives no good that can not be achieved without X, and X causes some bad. Then X has gone into negative equity of usefulness, has become harmless and should be discarded.

Religion gives us nothing we could not get without it. It provides little "good" and what "good" it actually does provide and has not just associated itself with, can be gotten just as easily without it.

Yet it causes much harm. So I think it fits my "X" definition above. If it does not, no one has yet adumbrated to me the reasons why it does not.

As for the loss of a loved one comment... self delusion to refuse to face up to the reality of a tragic situation is rarely the right answer. Maybe religion does give people comfort at the loss of a loved one, but I do not accept that that type of comfort is really required, helpful or anything short of harmful.

In fact I have seen people go through the trauma of a loved one dying... used religion to lessen that... eventually learned to cope.... but then later when they realised religion is a farce they essentially went through all the trauma AGAIN because they had to re-lose the person they thought was up there looking down on them all over again and arguably the second time can be worse than the first.

Self delusion might provide a quick fleeting comfort, but in the long run it does not.... much like alcohol might make the pain go away now but clearly alcohol is not the answer to medicating emotional pain.

the groutch

All religions are BS, believing in some sort of "higher power" which nobody has any real proof of existing, and going to a church/temple to churn out mindless repitive chants. They're all the same, Catholics, Muslims, Hari Krishnas, Movementarians, the only difference is who they pray to.

Ghost Buster

TimeToShine wrote: »

gives older people comfort i suppose, it's reassuring to think that there's something to look forward at the end of it all but religion won't have much if any impact on the next generation.

Like hell....

Scanlas The 2nd

Deleted User wrote: »

True, but at least it gives them hope, rather than complete hopelessness.

I don't believe in religion personally (and never will), but these days I expect more people to turn to religion as the economic situation continues worsen.

Hope for what? What's all this I keep hearing about some mystical "hope"?

What's wrong with life now in the present?

Ghost Buster

ddef wrote: »

well said.
when it comes to religion, I ironically find it is atheists who force their beliefs (or lack of) much more so than the churches.

Psssssssssssst. Boards is not representative of the real world...........
Ive never heard an atheist preaching on the street, had them call to my door, crash a plane into my building, have its fellow atheists fund a large ornate building to preach atheism in every morning, have a minute every day handed over to atheist bell ringing, have special pleading within the law, shoot doctors who carry out abortions etc etc etc..
So. What are your experiences of pushy atheists outside of boards.?
I'll match 5 pushy religious to every one of your atheists.

Ghost Buster

Deleted User wrote: »

True, but at least it gives them hope, rather than complete hopelessness.

I don't believe in religion personally (and never will), but these days I expect more people to turn to religion as the economic situation continues worsen.

Ah. To paraphrase:
Religion = Clasping at straws in desperation.
Ok

optogirl

PseudoFamous wrote: »

While its possible, there's nothing to promote morality under atheism, no carrot on a string for being well behaved.

perhaps atheists don't need a carrot on a string - perhaps the ulitmate goal is a respectful society wherein we each act according to a shared set of rules (laws). Surely Utimately we want to create a society that we are proud to be part of. Atheists want and believe that this can happen without threat of punishment or promise of reward in an after life.


"They make the laws that chain us well;
The clergy dazzle us with heaven or they damn us into hell.
We will not worship the gods they serve:
The god of greed that feeds the rich while poor men starve."

Monty Burnz

PseudoFamous wrote: »

Morality is the main argument for religion these days. I know atheists rararant about morality being found in atheism, but I'm afraid that there is no reason for an atheist to act morally.

That old chestnut again. To rephrase your question more accurately, you mean, there's no reason an atheist will act morally out of fear of hell. Most atheists act morally because they are moral people. Doing the right thing because you believe it to be right is a lot more noble than doing the right thing because you think the sky-demon will cast you into a fire.

PseudoFamous wrote: »

I do not claim to be religious, but I refuse to call myself an atheist under the grounds that I don't want to be associated with bigoted, dogmatic, thoughtless arseholes without any regard for a persons beliefs.

Yes - religions are in no way (and never have been) associated with bigotry, dogma, or disregard for another person's beliefs...:rolleyes:

How can a person have a brain and write that stuff??

Ghost Buster

Artur Foden wrote: »

I don't believe in a god, or many of them. Nor am I particularly spiritual. But atheism is a farce as well. Just irritates me that people would make it their personal business to not accept that others have beliefs other to their own.

Real atheists: don't believe in god
Modern atheists: 'hey look, man, Im an atheist!!! religion totally suxs'

edit: and those who are religious, I for one do not think you are somehow stupid for doing so. that is all

But thats is all atheism is. What people do and how they act after the fact of their lack of belief is simple 'personality'. How is lacking a belief in gods a farce then?

krudler

ddef wrote: »

well said.
when it comes to religion, I ironically find it is atheists who force their beliefs (or lack of) much more so than the churches.

tell you what right, the day a group of athiests knock on your door trying to convince you god doesnt exist, or an athiest group sends an envelope in your letterbox asking for a donation to something or other. let us know and I'll eat my sizeable hat.

krudler

As for the no religion=no morality argument, bullsh1t, utter, utter bullsh1t of the highest order. does anyone seriously believe as a species we wouldnt have realised it was wrong to kill each other and take each others stuff until Moses arrived down with his stoney rulebook?

wild_cat

Gold told Michelle Backmann to run for president apparently.

Atheists could well end up being persecuted....

wild_cat

krudler wrote: »

As for the no religion=no morality argument, bullsh1t, utter, utter bullsh1t of the highest order. does anyone seriously believe as a species we wouldnt have realised it was wrong to kill each other and take each others stuff until Moses arrived down with his stoney rulebook?

That's what makes us human after all we have morals. We're programed to have them. Not because of the religion we "learned" them from. They were always going to be there in the first place.


Also...

It also turns out that the human mind is also wired to believe in an upper being. So it is actually all in your head.

py2006

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

The "if" is the important word there because I see no reason to think it IS being a catalyst for that. I think the catalyst is whatever in a persons life makes them realise they have a problem and need help. Admitting one has a problem is the massive first step. They then do the work to change and become better.

In their desperation they will turn to anyone or anything to help them and Religions have become very good at targeting the weak, vulnerable and needy and while that person works hard to change and better themselves religion sits back, does almost nothing, and takes all the credit.

The fact is religion appears to have nothing to do with it. It is just one of the "clubs" in which people find other people who are willing to help and it is PEOPLE that is important here. There are many such clubs, religion is not the only game in town, and those other clubs have less downsides than religion has.

As I always say, if X gives no good that can not be achieved without X, and X causes some bad. Then X has gone into negative equity of usefulness, has become harmless and should be discarded.

Religion gives us nothing we could not get without it. It provides little "good" and what "good" it actually does provide and has not just associated itself with, can be gotten just as easily without it.

Yet it causes much harm. So I think it fits my "X" definition above. If it does not, no one has yet adumbrated to me the reasons why it does not.

As for the loss of a loved one comment... self delusion to refuse to face up to the reality of a tragic situation is rarely the right answer. Maybe religion does give people comfort at the loss of a loved one, but I do not accept that that type of comfort is really required, helpful or anything short of harmful.

In fact I have seen people go through the trauma of a loved one dying... used religion to lessen that... eventually learned to cope.... but then later when they realised religion is a farce they essentially went through all the trauma AGAIN because they had to re-lose the person they thought was up there looking down on them all over again and arguably the second time can be worse than the first.

Self delusion might provide a quick fleeting comfort, but in the long run it does not.... much like alcohol might make the pain go away now but clearly alcohol is not the answer to medicating emotional pain.

I think you are missing my point. If church/religion or merely talking to a priest just happens to be the 'club' available to a person in need then surely its a good thing.

There are people who through desperation have turned to religion and it has helped them immensely. Even after trying other avenues! In that regard I don't have a problem with religion.

By the way, I am not a religious person. I was born into the catholic religion like most of us here but I don't practice. At the same time I am not arrogant enough to shout over people who do.

krudler

wild_cat wrote: »

That's what makes us human after all we have morals. We're programed to have them. Not because of the religion we "learned" them from. They were always going to be there in the first place.


Also...

It also turns out that the human mind is also wired to believe in an upper being. So it is actually all in your head.

exactly, I mean its not like religion ever caused anyone to be stoned to dea...
or crucifie...or honor kille....errr...never mind.

SteelyDanJalapeno

Does a bear shiit in the woods?

nozzferrahhtoo

py2006 wrote: »

I think you are missing my point. If church/religion or merely talking to a priest just happens to be the 'club' available to a person in need then surely its a good thing.

No I am well aware of the point. I have heard it innumerable times in the past. I just do not think the point carries. All you are doing is putting a good front on a bad thing. Like I said hitting the bottle might “help” a person in need, but I think we both agree that hitting the bottle is not the way to solves ones problems.

Just being there for someone is not enough. Religion can do that. Alcohol can do that. You and I can do that. The local football club can do that. It is while being there do you actually do any use at all that matters… and while doing things of use are you using that use as a front for all the bad things you do.

And if the “help” being offered is only of fleeting and temporary consolation but causes more damage in the long run then you are better not helping at all.

So no I am not “missing” the point. I understand it entirely I am just disagreeing with it and attacking it head on. There is a difference worth noting between missing a point and disagreeing with it.

py2006

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

No I am well aware of the point. I have heard it innumerable times in the past. I just do not think the point carries. All you are doing is putting a good front on a bad thing. Like I said hitting the bottle might “help” a person in need, but I think we both agree that hitting the bottle is not the way to solves ones problems.

Just being there for someone is not enough. Religion can do that. Alcohol can do that. You and I can do that. The local football club can do that. It is while being there do you actually do any use at all that matters… and while doing things of use are you using that use as a front for all the bad things you do.

And if the “help” being offered is only of fleeting and temporary consolation but causes more damage in the long run then you are better not helping at all.

So no I am not “missing” the point. I understand it entirely I am just disagreeing with it and attacking it head on. There is a difference worth noting between missing a point and disagreeing with it.

Sorry but appear to be one of these people who equates the sinister side of some priests associated with the catholic church and the religion itself.

Religion is not necessarily a 'bad thing' and surely you are not serious in your comparison to drinking alcohol.

CorkB

Religion causes division. With the bible, the focus os on unity. There was no talk of denominations in the bible, only the body of Christ. People are either in or out. The rest is man made, including religion.

The man made stuff that is far removed from the God ordained gives a bad name to it. The best way to pursue God is out of church and out of religion

nozzferrahhtoo

py2006 wrote: »

Sorry but appear to be one of these people who equates the sinister side of some priests associated with the catholic church and the religion itself.

I am not sure how as I never suggested anything of the sort... nor mentioned catholics.... or priests..... or any of that farce. I am talking generally. I fear you may be assigning words to me I never said and giving me positions I do not hold. I am saying enough things without you adding more on my behalf. There are enough problems with religion in general without me having to get specific and opportunistic by leaping on specific transgression by elderly virgins in dresses who have a penchant for either small children, or for protecting and facilitating the crimes of other elderly pederasts in dresses that do.

py2006 wrote: »

Religion is not necessarily a 'bad thing' and surely you are not serious in your comparison to drinking alcohol.

Semi serious yes. The point in the comparison is that "quick fix" solutions might help at the time but are not useful in the long run. The point of the comparison is to show that just because something or someone is "there" for someone when they need it, that this does not make that someone or something good by default. Some things may help at the time but in the long run you would have been better off without.

I see nothing useful in religion, and I see much harm. It may allow people to engage in a bit of comforting self delusion, but at a price that I do not think is worth the benefit.

raah!

Some sweet arguments against that morality thing . Some of them were even oneliners! "bull****!", "I disagree emphatically" , "that's not true"! thankthankthankthankthank. Sweet "rationalism" there.

Doc_Savage

sorry guys... there are a million problems with the arguments being used here and they have been done to death a million times!

but the one that struck me was when a guy mentioned athiests "Dogma"!

Dogma is basically a set of rules that must be followed unquestioningly!
point them out to me please if you want to...

atheism only deals with the belief system, and wants to remove it from day to day life... ie. no government protection or funding for religions etc.

Atheists have only come to the fore recently because there has been a danger of religion interfering with their lives. Is that not understandable?

saa

Yes. The idea of having faith in a God is fine I see it as a coping mechanism to aid the damn right depressing thought that in a handful of decades I'm gone and that's it. Religion should be to guide people morally, connect people and give them hope but sometimes the issue of control crops up, I believe another person can guide someone but I don't believe you can tell me what I have to do. Religion as an institution is very much flawed.

I just got a flyer in from the lifegate church that says "We all deserve the judgement for sin which is death and hell."
I'm sorry but the sin they are referring to is trivial, even those who commit terrible crimes do not necessarily deserve death as a penalty never mind eternal misery.

I will never let any man tell me that, quoting from the bible which was written by men.