Religion--yay or nay?

[Guest Risk]

I think most of the evils of "Christianity" come from the Roman Catholic Church.  They have been accused of idolatary, raping boys, starting wars, ect al.  I also hate the thing about "Priests" "forgiving" sins.  The Bible says ALL Christians are Priests and that ONLY God can forgive sins.

 

I believe in all of the New Testament and SOME of the Old.

[Guest Anteater]

Sure the Roman Catholic Church has commited some of the worst acts in Western History, but it is symptomatic of nearly all religions and groups that seek to use and wield power. The Protestant churches both during and after Martin Luther persecuted Catholics and others quite well, and have managed to support bans and limits on knowledge very well. Luther himself referred to Copernicus as "that silly astronomer who wishes to turn the world upside down."

 

And it's not just the main Western traditions that get bent and wraithed by people; the Chinese accuse the Tibetan Buddhists of much of the same terrible practices of Catholic priests. All religions, in the end, are about power: how to get it, maintain it, and weild it. It's a human construct, and most human things are very closely concerned with power.

[Guest DragonflyKid]

Like Nietzsche said "This world is the will to power-- and nothing besides! And you yourselves are this will to power-- and nothing besides!" Power is the driving force of all living creatures, when someone associates themselves to that which is omnipotent then they feel a sense of power and want to continue perpetuating that sense of power. All morals and commandments like "Thou shalt not kill" go out the window when one's instinctive drive for power can no longer be tranquilized by fear.  Homicide bombers(much like all religious fanatics of all faiths throughout history) have no fear because God will grant them paradise, they have the being with all the power on their side, they are the righteous and everyone else is evil and deserves to perish. In the end religion is just a means to power, fanatics will misinterpret religious doctrines to suit and justify their drives for power no matter how violent.

[Guest]

<As a Catholic, I get harassed by many people in our generation that think people who believe in religion are "unintelligent" because they believe in fairy-tales based on ancient myths with no evidence to support them.  

 

The argument of "faith" has no meaning for them, as they're dead-set on having concrete evidence of the existence of a higher power.  Their egos then take over based on the assumption that they "have risen above the foolish need for a creator to explain the existence of the universe."  Any attempts of mine to find a middle ground with them fall on deaf, un-negotiable ears.      

 

What do the people of this board think in disproving or defending religion?>

 

The actual stuff of Religion is pretty harmless (some people think that a guy created the world, big deal!) its the political ideology and the mindset that goes with orgainsed Religon.

 

For example the Catholic Church has loads of Political infulence in Europe espeacilly Poland (which might be used to campagin for the EU). However they use it very selectivly for example they helped bring down communism in Poland but supported the Nazi's and Fascists in Germany and Italy. And of course there's their oppresion of gays (which one poster supported!) and women.

 

Politicsed Religon is dangerous but also natural and pretty unadvoideable of non-state orgainsed relgion (as Napolean put "State religon is the states vacination from Relgion). It can either distablized states (France and Britian) or practically take them over (Italy and Ireland) and establish a monocultral state.

 

Also the mind set of blind faith religon encourages  is dangerous. The Anicent Greeks saw faith as a vice, it makes mine willing to do anything for the central authority (espeacailly the Catholic Church where your taught that teh word of the Pope is unfalliable and the word of God) and also determined to convert others by fair or foul means.

 

We in the west have know pretty much escaped this due to increasing secularisation although our new secular-Juadeo-Christain society still has a nasty aftertaste (i.e oppression of gays) however many in the Muslim (where Religon is far more

politicsed) and Hindu (where the problem is getting worse) worlds.

 

On whether Science can exist with religion. Yes it can but only in a stripped down form, based on questions that Science probably can never answer (Creation/ Development of Species) and on theoritical spirtual issues. If it doesn't it risks either being seen as reactionary by ignoring Science or as weak and pointless if after every Scientific Advance they role back (as mainstream Christian Churches have been doing i.e. Turning most of the Old Testament into fables).

 

The problem is that say the Christian Relgion its based on those who say that they have had an relationship with God. How can you (as much as I would) ignore the mysigonist and homophobic parts of the Bible and the prophets without undermining the whole basis of the Christian faith?

 

On whether Relgion is natural I think it is. Its seems very unsatisfying and false to say "I don't how the world was created and I don't care". Religon fills man's desire to know why he's here and what he's for. Even as an atheist I've concoted pretty much a story of creation summed as:

 

1) All mater has always existed (proof: Matter cannot ne destroyed or made) but orginally it was concerntrated into a solid mass.

 

2) A chemical reaction caused the big bang and succesive reactions have caused everything else.

 

Science to most people is a religion. They take it and it's unproven theories (Global Warming/ Evolution) and treat them as proven. Just as christians take the idea of one creator and treat it as proven.

 

Lots of Love

Will

xxx

[Guest]

Chrissakes. Evolution is not a theory. It is a fact. It has been proven beyond all reasonable doubt. The mechanism of graduated natural selection is a theory, and even so it isn't a "theory" in the casual sense of "speculation" or "conjecture." It is a sound, falsifiable, uncontradicted, scientifically acceptable set of rules that adequately explains observed phenomena.

[Guest]

"Christianity gets a lot of shit though, but at least people arent perverting it so they can go out and bomb people"

 

And what exactly was the Crusades, the HRE, the Inquisition, the 30 years war, or much of European history till the 7 years war? A result, at least in part, of Christianity and the Roman Church's desire for power in and over society. And fundamental christianity is just as insidious and evil as fundemental Muslisms and Hindi nationalists.

I meant right now.

[Guest Risk]

Maybe religion shouldn't be organized, maybe EVERYONE should have their own personal religion or lack thereof.

[Guest Risk]

I think the main problem with organized religion and/or science is the need for those on one side wanting everyone to believe in what they do.  That is really unrealistic.

[Guest El Satanico]

There's no doubt at all that Religion shouldn't be organized. People believing in whichever god they choose doesn't lead to violence the Organizations do. World would likely be well off with no religion at all however i won't hold my breath, but just losing organized religion would be a step in the right direction.

[Guest Risk]

Plus, you always have television channels and groups trying to push ideas on you.  MTV is one I have seen that does this.

[Guest Kahran Ramsus]

Chrissakes. Evolution is not a theory. It is a fact. It has been proven beyond all reasonable doubt.

 

No it hasn't.  There is very good evidence of it, but there is no real way of actually proving it.

[Guest]

There is very good evidence of it, but there is no real way of actually proving it.

Wrong.

1) Pepper moths have been observed to vary in coloration according to pollution density. Because of their short lifespan, it is possible to actually transplant moth populations and watch them change. Viruses evolve resistances to medicines all the time. This is direct evidence of evolution in action. Genetic variation through recombination and mutation is a fact, and it comprises the basic mechanism by which evolution works.

2) Countless transitional fossils exist which prove that species change over time. Snakes with hipbones. Whales with sockets for legs. The archaeopteryx. Structures and organs in our own bodies demonstrate very the same thing. All of this evidence proves beyond any reasonable doubt that we and other animals have evolved. This is not a theory. This is solid verifiable fact.

I cited several concrete examples in my response to Ripper. If you intend to continue in this vein, please refute those first - before making any more baseless statements. Please see also what I said about the difference between fact and theory, and the difference between the scientific use of the term "theory" and the mundane use. If the earlier definition is unclear, please refer to the next point.

3) Fact and theory are fundamentally different things in the scientific lexicon. Evolution, if anything, is both fact and theory. SJ Gould put it thus:

In the American vernacular, "theory" often means "imperfect fact" - part of a hierarchy of confidence running downhill from fact to theory to hypothesis to guess. Thus the power of the creationist argument: evolution is "only" a theory and intense debate now rages about many aspects of the theory. If evolution is worse than a fact, and scientists can't even make up their minds about the theory, then what confidence can we have in it? Indeed, President Reagan echoed this argument before an evangelical group in Dallas when he said (in what I devoutly hope was campaign rhetoric): "Well, it is a theory. It is a scientific theory only, and it has in recent years been challenged in the world of science - that is, not believed in the scientific community to be as infallible as it once was."

 

Well evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape-like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered.

Note: "Darwin's proposed mechanism" refers to the theory of natural selection, not the fact of evolution. The rest of Gould's column can be found here, along with even more extensive clarification.

 

One more time: evolution is a fact. No serious scientist anywhere in the world doubts this for an instant, and I get annoyed when I see people propagating a completely unfounded misconception of internal scientific debate and specialised nomenclature. Please don't make ignorant assertions that serve to perpetuate the completely unfounded idea that there is some kind of crippling flaw in evolution - as either a theory or a fact.

[Guest Hogan Made Wrestling]

I think the greatest crime of organized religion against human civilization is how it completely stunted intellectual thought in the Western world for over 1500 years. In the begining there were the Greeks, thinkers far ahead of their time who laid a beautiful foundation upon which everything else is built. Then, the roman catholic church became a powerful entity, and scientific discussion was essentially frozen. The chuch decided that Ptolemy's system of cosmology and natural law was acceptable to them, and they essentially banned the discussion of other ideas. It took 1500 years before the Age of Enlightenment began with Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler, and Newton. The amount of progress that has been made in the last 500 years in mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology, industry, economics, and other fields is mind boggling.

[Guest Kahran Ramsus]

I think the greatest crime of organized religion against human civilization is how it completely stunted intellectual thought in the Western world for over 1500 years. In the begining there were the Greeks, thinkers far ahead of their time who laid a beautiful foundation upon which everything else is built. Then, the roman catholic church became a powerful entity, and scientific discussion was essentially frozen. The chuch decided that Ptolemy's system of cosmology and natural law was acceptable to them, and they essentially banned the discussion of other ideas. It took 1500 years before the Age of Enlightenment began with Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler, and Newton. The amount of progress that has been made in the last 500 years in mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology, industry, economics, and other fields is mind boggling.

 

Yes and no.  First of all, it is closer to 1000 years, not 1500.  The Roman Catholic Church had very little power until the mid-late 6th Century.  The Eastern Orthodox Church didn't stop much of anything.  The Byzantine Empire was just as advanced as the Islamic World, up until the Crusades.  Even in Western Europe, the Celts and Muslim Spain kept up scientific research.  England experienced its Renaissance after 1154, when Henry II came to the throne.  France & the Holy Roman Empire emerged from the Dark Ages at around the same time.  Not coincidently, this is around the time of the first serious backlashes against the Church, which would eventually lead to Wycliff, Calvin & Luther a few centuries later.  Scientific research returned at this time.  Although it was mostly things like Alchemy & Weapon Development, it was a step in the right direction.  The big deal with Copernicus and the like, is the fact that they were in Italy under the direct rule of the Church.

 

In short, I agree with you about the Church having a negative impact in the Middle Ages, but you overstated their actual influence.  Most kingdoms were too afraid to stand up to the Church (until the 1400s), so they pretty much just ignored them.  Do your own thing, and grovel when you get caught.

[Guest]

Yeah, Kahran's summary sounds a bit more accurate to me. The Church really only stifled widespread acceptance of scientific theories, and education, rather than research or experimentation itself. Of course, one could argue that stifling education is tantamount to stifling science, but overall, it has never had much direct influence on the scientific progress. By the time it gets around to witch-hunts, the ideas are in place already.

I think the Middle Ages were much more affected (in terms of development and scientific advances) by the brutality of the despots and the terrible internecine wars. Again, some of that can be laid at the door of the Church, but not all.

[Guest Kahran Ramsus]

I think the Middle Ages were much more affected (in terms of development and scientific advances) by the brutality of the despots and the terrible internecine wars. Again, some of that can be laid at the door of the Church, but not all.

 

Yep.  And also a reflection of the times.  Is the weather is great, and you have money and good harvest, then there will be an interest in culture.  During the Black Death, when you are just trying to survive, science and art aren't much of a priority.

[Guest Risk]

Maybe the scandals of today are the Catholic Church's misdeeds finally catching up to them.  They have put MANY races(Native Americans, Africans, ect al)through a lot of sht.  

Maybe I'm just biased, having Native American in me.

[Guest big Dante Cruz]

Okay, let's get a few things straight.

 

First off, the statement that the Pope is infallible is pretty ridiculous.  He's a human.  He may be an exceptional human, but he's a human.

 

Second, don't feed me any line of garbage about discrepancies in the Bible because the war between God and Lucifer isn't in the right place.  Let me clarify: IT ISN'T IN THERE!  What you're referring to is Paradise Lost, not the Bible.

 

Okay, so you're against organized religion.  You're for disorganized religion?  You think that would stop violence?  Um, no.  Zealots have been the thing that drive most religious people up the wall for centuries, because they latch onto something and run with it.  I'd say Bin Ladin is a zealot, but the man is only using religion as an excuse.  Zealots?  People that bomb abortion clinics in the name of God are zealots.  So, you get one guy with his own beliefs and thinks everyone else is wrong and they won't listen so you have to kill them.  Soon, you've got a guy with his own set of beliefs and a deer rifle ontop of a building.  Nice, eh?

 

Something else.  Science and religion seem contradictory when you don't take a real close look at it.  The closer you look, the more it seems that science and religion go hand in hand.  You want specifics?  You go find another professor with a History of Science PhD and ask them about it.  There aren't very many.  Do I take his word as law?  No.  But this evolution from primordial ooze thing is NOT what Darwin had in mind.  Darwin was going to join the clergy before he signed onto the HMS Beagle.

 

I'm a religious person, I like to think.  I have faith.  Why?  Because of what I've experienced, and what I know to be true.  I'm not going to waste my time trying to explain it to you, partially because even if I do, it won't get me anywhere.  Why am I so upset?  Because I'm some close-minded right wing Baptist psycho?  Not quite.  I can get along with about everyone.  Very few people do I not get along with.  If you want to have your beliefs, fine.  That's your buisness.  I may not agree with them; I may think they're wrong, but I'm not going to stand here and blast your beliefs or proclaim you're going to Hell.  THOSE are zealots.  Those are some people that I can't get along with.  I'll let you have your beliefs and if you'll let me have mine, we'll be great.  However, when garbage like bashing religion just because you don't believe in it starts, just because you haven't given it a chance, just because YOU have to so damn right you can't see straight, that's when I start getting quite righteously upset.

[Guest Risk]

Well said Dante.

[Guest RetroRob215]

Maybe religion shouldn't be organized, maybe EVERYONE should have their own personal religion or lack thereof.

That's what I've been saying for years now.  Why should people be sheep and follow a 2,000 year old book, or a 4,000 year old scroll?  People should form their own beliefs.  They don't need "higher powers" to tell what is right and what is wrong.  

 

I'm personally an atheist because I don't feel the need for "faith" or "god" in my life.  I can handle my problems on my own, so I'm OK.  I was raised Catholic, but I left the church as soon as I made my confirmation and never looked back since.  

 

Does anyone know of a way to revoke confirmation in the Catholic church?

[Guest DrTom]

Rob, I think you can go to a church and state your apostacy.  I'm sure it's not something they do often (or without trying to convert you back into the fold), but you should be able to wipe your religious slate clean at any Catholic church.

[Guest RetroRob215]

Thanks for the tip Tom, thats probably the only way to go about it.  Now I'll just have to get myself to go inside a church, this could take a while...

[Guest]

Personally, I believe in the Christian God but I have some other beliefs to go with it:

 

First off, I believe in evolution just that I believe that God created the first creatures to set the ball rolling.

Second, I believe God is still alive today, just not active. He doesn't really interfere (is that the right word?) with our lives except if we really need it like for a very complex operation, a life or death situation, or something like that. Or if you really pray hard enough. This would explain why there is so much pain and suffering in the world. Plus, it saids in the Bible that God gives us what heKNOWS we can handle so more evidence to that.

Thrid, God has always been there even before the beginning of time.

Finally, I believe in a higher power because human beings are the most complicated creatures on earth. We couldn't be created by chance. And when you look at nature, you just feel a spritual presnece in it.

 

I hate religious fundamentalists cuz they are usually hyprocrites.

[Guest]

He doesn't really interfere (is that the right word?) with our lives except if we really need it like for a very complex operation, a life or death situation, or something like that. Or if you really pray hard enough.

Oh, I see. So those people who died on 9/11 either didn't really need him, or they weren't praying hard enough. It's their fault. How silly of me to ever think otherwise. Praise the Lord! I HAVE REDISCOVERED MY FAITH!

 

Well, no, not really.

 

I believe in a higher power because human beings are the most complicated creatures on earth. We couldn't be created by chance.

You're wrong. This has been dealt with in detail already. We could have been and we were. You are familiar with evolution, right? You know, that thing you say you believe in? Or do you apply it to everything but humans?

It's funny, but I think I find selective stupidity more contemptible than complete ignorance.

[Guest]

He doesn't really interfere (is that the right word?) with our lives except if we really need it like for a very complex operation, a life or death situation, or something like that. Or if you really pray hard enough.

Oh, I see. So those people who died on 9/11 either didn't really need him, or they weren't praying hard enough. It's their fault. How silly of me to ever think otherwise. Praise the Lord! I HAVE REDISCOVERED MY FAITH!

 

Well, no, not really.

 

I believe in a higher power because human beings are the most complicated creatures on earth. We couldn't be created by chance.

You're wrong. This has been dealt with in detail already. We could have been and we were. You are familiar with evolution, right? You know, that thing you say you believe in? Or do you apply it to everything but humans?

It's funny, but I think I find selective stupidity more contemptible than complete ignorance.

They didn't expect to die that day. It all happen in a split second. They didn't have time to pray or anything else. All they concetrated on was getting the fuck out of the twin towers and Pentagon.

[Guest]

Funny, I remember seeing people on the edge of the building, and at the windows, knowing full well that they were going to die. They leapt into empty space and splattered themselves across the pavement rather than wait to get crushed to death in tons of falling rubble. You think they didn't pray first? Christ. Even I was praying as I watched them.

Oh wait, I forgot, that was suicide and so they're eternally damned to hell, right?

[Guest]

Funny, I remember seeing people on the edge of the building, and at the windows, knowing full well that they were going to die. They leapt into empty space and splattered themselves across the pavement rather than wait to get crushed to death in tons of falling rubble. You think they didn't pray first? Christ. Even I was praying as I watched them.

Oh wait, I forgot, that was suicide and so they're eternally damned to hell, right?

They aren't going to hell because they have no choice. Sucicide is when you have a choice.

 

God would understand.

[Guest TheMikeSC]

<<<Funny, I remember seeing people on the edge of the building, and at the windows, knowing full well that they were going to die. They leapt into empty space and splattered themselves across the pavement rather than wait to get crushed to death in tons of falling rubble. You think they didn't pray first? Christ. Even I was praying as I watched them.>>>

 

 

Umm, considering that you've taken a fairly anti-religion standpoint up to this point---WHY exactly did you pray in the first place?

 

You don't seem to believe in it.

 

 

<<<Oh wait, I forgot, that was suicide and so they're eternally damned to hell, right? >>>

 

 

Seeing as how they'd die anyway, then no, they weren't eternally damned.

 

God knows how much man can take and when man cannot take anymore, he lets man leave the world and join him in heaven.

 

Those who jumpedare experiencing happiness like we will never know on Earth.

 

And the monkeys who flew the planes into the buildings are experiencing misey unlike anything we can hope to imagine.

                 -=Mike

[Guest]

WHY exactly did you pray in the first place?

You don't seem to believe in it.

Were you always this sensitive, you nasty little asshole, or did you have to study? It's called an involuntary reaction. If I hit my funny bone I might yelp "Christ;" that doesn't mean I believe Jesus died for my sins. My prayers were an involuntary reaction born of shock and horror and grief. When an atrocity like that occurs our natural instinct is to hope against all experience and logic that someone out there will do something. I wanted God to reach out of the sky. He didn't, and I knew he wouldn't. I prayed anyway. That no more implies I believe in God than a frightened kid pissing his pants implies he believes urinating is going to save him.

 

I really can't believe how mean-spirited and vicious you can be sometimes.

[Guest TheMikeSC]

Quote  

WHY exactly did you pray in the first place?

You don't seem to believe in it.

Were you always this sensitive, you nasty little asshole, or did you have to study?>>>

 

 

Wow, ask a simple question and get this response?

 

 

<<<It's called an involuntary reaction.>>>

 

 

Heck, I'm RELIGIOUS and I don't pray all that often. It's not that involuntary.

 

 

<<<If I hit my funny bone I might yelp "Christ;" that doesn't mean I believe Jesus died for my sins.>>>

 

 

Of course, praying to a higher being that you don't believe exists is completely illogical.

 

 

<<<My prayers were an involuntary reaction born of shock and horror and grief. When an atrocity like that occurs our natural instinct is to hope against all experience and logic that someone out there will do something. I wanted God to reach out of the sky. He didn't, and I knew he wouldn't. I prayed anyway. That no more implies I believe in God than a frightened kid pissing his pants implies he believes urinating is going to save him.>>>

 

 

Nice try.

 

Hindus believe cows are sacred. I eat cows regularly.

 

You know why?

 

Because I DON'T BELIEVE THEY'RE SACRED. I believe they're tasty when cooked properly.

                     -=Mike

 

...Just pointing out the inconsistency in praying to something that you don't believe exists.