# What is the purpose of religion?



## fgghjjkll (Dec 10, 2012)

I had quite a debate with a friend today and it really got me thinking about this.
My opinion on religion was that it was used as a mean to keep society civilized back in the time of Ancient Greeks and stuff. I mean, if you commit a sin, you are damned and go to hell. If you commit acts of kindness, you are blessed and go to heaven. Right? Also, I think that religion helped answer some questions that people had in the day like how humanity came into being or whether the sun or earth goes orbit each other.

What are you thoughts on this matter? What do you think the purpose of religion is?


----------



## uribemaster (Dec 10, 2012)

It's our whole purpose in life to find the true religion in which we can all be saved. Of course this is too much of a strong subject for a gaming forum but if you truly want to know, message me and i'll try to explain.


----------



## DinohScene (Dec 10, 2012)

It's complicated but let me give you an example.

You're in ancient something.
Someone has put lemon juice and a copper and steel wire together into a jar.
You touch the wire and you get a weird sensation.

You with your "inferior" brain (no offense) can't explain what happened so you call it a divine intervention.

Same could be said for lightning.
It's up in the sky and you can't explain what it's for.
Everything gets destroyed so you start to believe that there is someone up there who's mad.
Cause you know that when you're mad you start breaking stuff.


I know it's not the best example but yeah ;p
Try to look it through the eyes of early mankind.
Everything that has a scientific explanation now (mostly weather and other big event thingies) couldn't be explained back then.
So early mankind started to think higher powers where at work and that inspired religion.


----------



## Gahars (Dec 10, 2012)

Because we seem to live in a cold, uncaring universe, one that wouldn't even blink should we evaporate from existence. I mean, it's basically life in a nutshell; trying to find meaning and purpose in the seemingly meaningless and purposeless world. For a lot of people, the wisdom, solidarity, and spiritual enrichment offered by religion helps to fill that void. 

I'm not sure if this topic is such a good idea, though; a lot of users here haven't shown much maturity when it comes to the subject of religion and faith (to put it lightly). Can we discuss the matter with restraint and dignity, or is that asking too much?


----------



## DrOctapu (Dec 10, 2012)

Kings were more convincing if they said you'd get eternally damned if you didn't serve them.


----------



## jurassicplayer (Dec 10, 2012)

Silly fgg, religion was created for Suzumiya Haruhi.


----------



## gifi4 (Dec 10, 2012)

First off, I'm an atheist *so anything I say will probably be biased.*

*Anyway, to me*, Religion is a guiding finger for people who have no will to live if there's no superior force giving them a reason.

It was invented to give people a reason to continue their lives.
Due to the way I've thought it out (Note: That's the shortest summary I could perform, it doesn't truly express everything, or much of anything) it means that religous people are unable to handle the truth that we don't have an actual 'reason' to be on this planet.
I try to be careful with what I say when around other people but if someone spouts absolute bullshit then it tends to bother me. You can have an opinion but if I ignore because it's bullshit, no need to try and shove the beliefs in.


----------



## NightsOwl (Dec 10, 2012)

Because people don't want to accept the fact that when you die, you rot in the ground. So they cling to hope that there's an afterlife.

/brutalhonesty


----------



## ZAFDeltaForce (Dec 10, 2012)

For some people. religion gives them meaning in life


----------



## Psionic Roshambo (Dec 10, 2012)

Religion serves many purposes...  it varies from individual to individual.

But here are some generalizations I have observed in my studies on human nature.

For the young many times it is a control device the fear of "going to hell" if your bad... 
For the old many times it is a way to ease fears of death, many people find religion this way... You would be surprised at how many atheists are young people but as they age they "find" religion. 
For the ignorant it is a way to explain what they do not understand. 

These are just some generalizations and like I said religions purpose varies from person to person, so take none of it personally.


----------



## air2004 (Dec 10, 2012)

Religion is for those that are curious as to where we came from , or how we got started.
Some say that religion is only meant for control ( and they maybe right ) .Others say it has out used its usefulness because of science ( they maybe right but I think otherwise ) << those that say that are the same people that feel primordial human beings (our ancestors where all a bunch of idiots ) . Our ancestors where probably smarter than all of us , after all , if they didnt do the shit that they did , we could have never gotten to where we are.

The true purpose for religion is to find our creator .


----------



## Stephapanda (Dec 10, 2012)

I'm just finishing up this semester at school, and one of my classes is world religions. I think I can safely say that there are many answers to this question, none of which are better or worse than the others. 

There are three major perspectives that can answer this question - materialistic, functional, and belief.

The materialistic perspective is that humans invented religion and it doesn't really exist. The only thing that truly exists is the material world, and anything supernatural is only imagined. Ludwig Feuerbach, a nineteenth century philosopher, was especially influential in this perspective. He said that deities are just projections of desirable qualities that we have, but don't realize it - and then worship it as a supreme being which fits in perfectly with this perspective. There was also Karl Marx, a socialist philosopher who lived around the same time as Feuerbach who viewed religions as basically something to falsely pacify humans. Additionally, he accused Christian authority figures of supporting oppressive acts while explaining them as "punishment for sinners". Basically, authority figures using God to ensure their high status and power over people who are afraid of being punished.

The functional perspective is that religion is useful to us. For example, it supposedly helps to define us and gives us reasons for living. Many functional explanations are based on sociological concepts - social structure and whatnot. Biological concepts also come to play in the functional perspective, including its "survival value". There are also theories that religious potential is genetically inherent because of this. Many medical studies have been performed to study this sort of thing, and its value to our health and general well-being (such as how prayer can be a benefit to health, and etc).

The last main perspective is the belief perspective, which is exactly what it sounds like - belief that a supreme being or deity actually exists and there is another existing reality that can't be seen by humans. 

These are just a few different reasons what people think the purpose of religion is - there are many, many more. It's all a matter of opinion, I guess since usually you won't meet people with the exact same beliefs on why something is the way it is.


----------



## kupo3000 (Dec 10, 2012)

An ancient game of telephone that went horribly wrong.


----------



## Crimson Lotus (Dec 10, 2012)

What is the purpose of religion? That's rather hard to answer because all the men that authored the organized religions are all dead. What does religion do? This is a question that we can deliberate over. I think religion is a force of evil, an insult to human decency and our native morality. As the late Christopher Hitchens so brilliantly put it, "Name me one good deed I could not do as a non-believer. Now think of one sinister action taken for the sake of religion." You've already thought of one sinister action and you'll think of a couple more before this post is over. Religious apologists constantly ask how we would know right from wrong without the bible, the Quuran or whatever holy text. Then they go on to say that non-believers are immoral. See the fallacy there? They need some thousand year old text from when slavery was the norm, you could rape or murder children of your enemies to please a jealous celestial North Korea that requires you to praise it for the rest of eternity. You must praise this unparalleled dictator even if you are born sick and if you don't you will burn in a lake of fire for the rest of eternity so that you can become well again? This is an absolute disgrace and many of us will not be spoken to in such a manner. We've had a sense of morality long before religion otherwise we wouldn't be here, our species would certainly have debunked at the bud if we couldn't figure out that perhaps raping children, killing a stranger, stealing from the poor wasn't the best of ideas. Religion does not keep people civilized. A normal, morally well person would not hack off the clitoris of their new born daughter but he will if he's a believer. Normal good people wouldn't do stupid and evil things but they will when corrupted by religion. Going back to the purpose question, I can't answer it, at least not the intent of the vile and sinister that pioneered such evil. Whether it gives someone a purpose in life or answer questions (which it doesn't, creationism is so ridiculous that it's on par with being a holocaust denier) it certainly isn't the right way to go about it, in my view.


----------



## porkiewpyne (Dec 10, 2012)

For the lulz

In all seriousness, I think of it as a set of guidelines for peace purposes.

And also to give lives some bigger purpose.


----------



## Foxi4 (Dec 10, 2012)

To me, the main focus of religion was always to cater to the spiritual part of our being - religions were created to pass on sets of moral rules within societies as well as cultivate them. Not only that, religion also provides comfort - allows one to become a part of a greater whole - a group of people who share his or her beliefs. Even more importantly, it introduces the notions of God, afterlife and "soul", it gives hope that our current condition is not the end of the journey. Finally, it attempts to give answers to questions which science cannot answer not due to lack of data but due to the nature of the question - things like "the sense behind life?" or "who created the world?". I know where this thread is inevitably heading - discussions like this one require a certain level of maturity, so I'll just use this opportunity to say that the thought that there is, or at least might be another sentient being out there which carefuly designed the universe as if it was clockwork appeals to me.


----------



## kupo3000 (Dec 10, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> To me, the main focus of religion was always to cater to the spiritual part of our being - religions were created to pass on sets of moral rules within societies as well as cultivate them. Not only that, religion also provides comfort - allows one to become a part of a greater whole - a group of people who share his or her beliefs. Even more importantly, it introduces the notions of God, afterlife and "soul", it gives hope that our current condition is not the end of the journey. Finally, it attempts to give answers to questions which science cannot answer not due to lack of data but due to the nature of the question - things like "the sense behind life?" or "who created the world?". I know where this thread is inevitably heading - discussions like this one require a certain level of maturity, so I'll just use this opportunity to say that the thought that there is, or at least might be another sentient being out there which carefuly designed the universe as if it was clockwork appeals to me.


 
Carefully designed universe you say?


----------



## tatripp (Dec 10, 2012)

Religion should not be viewed as a conspiracy and exists in every culture. Even if some religions are used to control people (Anyone want some kool aid?), the purpose of religion in general is not to control, but to seek or explain truth.


----------



## Foxi4 (Dec 10, 2012)

kupo3000 said:


> Carefully designed universe you say?


Of course. Not in the sense of the Genesis or Intelligent Design, however designed nonetheless. The probability of life occuring naturally in the course of chemical reactions is pretty much non-existant - I firmly believe in the scientifically-proven origins of species and laws of nature, but that alone in no way disproves the existence of a higher intelligence setting the process up. Think of the world as a line of domino blocks with God or Gods as the force that pushed the first block.

One has to understand that religious stories are just that - stories. They are designed to pass on a core concept in a metaphorical way, reading them literally is a mistake.


----------



## Crimson Lotus (Dec 10, 2012)

Taking on beliefs and ideas without any testable means or any evidence, peer review and scrutiny is not what I call "seeking and explaining truth". It is blind and unwarranted, hence the term* faith*.

Foxi4: If we are to start debating on whether God or gods exist the burden of proof lies on the party that is making extraordinary claims and it would require extraordinary evidence for which apologists have not succeeded in providing. It's a spin on "God of the gaps" and that logic is flawed. Just because something is not known in its entirety does not mean it is defacto "oh, God must have done it".

Edit 2: Let me make a clarification so we can avoid some unnecessary conflict of ideas. I am taking the atheist position, which is very often misunderstood. It is not that I am saying God certainly does not exist but rather that there is no viable, sufficient evidence in believing in a supernatural power.


----------



## Foxi4 (Dec 10, 2012)

Crimson Lotus said:


> Foxi4: If we are to start debating on whether God or gods exist the burden of proof lies on the party that is making extraordinary claims and it would require extraordinary evidence.


You are making the cardinal mistake of all atheists - mixing up religion and science. Religion is not scientific, there is no burden of proof required, that's not the point of religion to begin with.


----------



## Crimson Lotus (Dec 10, 2012)

Then I rest my case. If truths are to be taken without any means of testing or evidence and on blind faith alone, for which no explanation is required, the conversation becomes entirely pointless. You have just proven that this form of truth seeking has no merit whatsoever.


----------



## Foxi4 (Dec 10, 2012)

Crimson Lotus said:


> Then I must rest my case. If truths are to be taken without any means of testing or evidence and on faith alone, the conversation becomes entirely pointless. You have just proven that this form of truth seeking has no merit whatsoever.


What truths do you mean? Religion is not based on truths in the scientific sense of the word - religions are based on metaphores which serve the purpose of self-improvement of the followers. Religion does not explain the world in testable terms - we have science for that. Moreover, treating religions as science entails that some religions are better than others just like some scientific theories have more proof behind them than others, when that's not the case. Again, religions are sets of principles, moral lessons, not scientific evidence towards anything.


----------



## Crimson Lotus (Dec 10, 2012)

Well you just said it there didn't you? We have science for explaining the world and the cosmos but religion for self-improvement/morality (which I disagree with and have given my response to on the previous page). If you are separating the two in their purpose, why do you claim that religion then explains the universe? You can't just flip flop around stating that a God or gods are responsible for the creation of the Universe, then say that science explains the material world and religion is for morality. Pick a position and stick with it good sir.


----------



## kupo3000 (Dec 10, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> What truths do you mean? Religion is not based on truths in the scientific sense of the word - religions are based on metaphores which serve the purpose of self-improvement. Religion does not explain the world in testable terms - we have science for that.


 
I really wish more religious people actually took the time to consider their belief system as mythological metaphors but when I keep hearing them say it's the only absolute truth, Jesus is lord of the entire universe and etc, that says otherwise.


----------



## Foxi4 (Dec 10, 2012)

kupo3000 said:


> I really wish more religious people actually took the time to consider their belief system as mythological metaphors but when I keep hearing them say it's the only absolute truth, Jesus is lord of the entire universe and etc, that says otherwise.


You and me both - religion should be reserved to the spiritual realm wheras explaining the rules governing the world we live in should be left to science. God/s is/are the Lord/s of the entire universe in the sense of its creation, but that's that. Many people choose to take religion literally, and that never ends well. On the other hand, some choose to "educate" religious people by going out of their way to disprove the existence of God/Gods when this is impossible by proxy - faith and proof rarely go together.

People whom I call Aggressive Atheists tend to coin religion as delusional - if believing in a higher order in the world and the moral principles of being truthful, not killing others etc. is delusional then I am comfortable in my delusion, thank you very much.

Things would probably go much smoother if we didn't butt into each other's business and get on with our lives instead of making it our priority to change the beliefs of other parties at all costs - Aggressive Atheism is as bad as religious extremism.


----------



## Prophet (Dec 10, 2012)

Predominantly, religions exist as mere postulations concerning the order and purpose of the universe. A wise religion will admit that there is no certainty in their particular postulations, but contend that _something_ must exist beyond the scope of our universe. If you disagree with that assertion you are a nihilist; congratulations your life is meaningless.

@Foxi4, if you aren't already familiar with Plato and Spinoza, you should read up on them. They are very in line with your own theological views. (As am I, for whatever that is worth.)


----------



## Zetta_x (Dec 10, 2012)

You can say I'm religious, but I actually came up with my own religion. I've never given much details about my beliefs, but the basic principles is that something in the realistic/transient universe can be defined as the universally most powerful object. I don't know what that is, I don't know if I can communicate with it, I don't know it's origins or if it can live forever or even living. I don't know if I will gain eternal life in some stupid place or burn in hell in another place. I don't know if this object converges to a major religion like Christianity. What I do know is at this moment, something can fit that definition and that's what I follow.

I used to be Christian, almost hardcore Christian. I went to Church every week with my family. This specific Church made me hate life more and more as I grew up through middle school. I often stared at the stars looking for something out there as if I would be able to see God. As I kept growing through this Church, me as a middle schooler was able to see how fake these people were. I hit a turning point at the beginning of high school. I kept going to Church, hung out with my family and other church doers. However, something evil grew into me. Everyone there had this sense of moral superiority over people who didn't go to this Church. Even other Christians who visited were talked down to as if their Church was not good enough. I continued going to this Church up until my first year in college. I was able to see what these people were, they were fake. I listened week after week of people who said "My car broke down, it could have turned out very bad, but God made traffic light this day letting me get out safely"and things like "I did something bad like _____ for that I am sorry God."

These people devoted their life like this lifestyle. I no longer saw friends or family. I saw a cult. I saw a cult who has turned their own mind against themselves. They believe what they want and they feel morally superior no matter what they think. My Dad never went back to Church as a kid after peeing on a nuns desk... My aunt told me and my cousins one day that Jesus was going to come back and we would have a war with the demons on earth. She told me that my dad was not going to be on our side. My cousins were convinced that my Dad was the anti-christ.

Everytime I went to any other Church outside my Church, I found the same people but with different flavor. I began to realize, it was not just the Christians I grew up with, but on average all of the Christians are just wrapped differently but have the same corrupt background. I began to realize that whatever this motivational speaker said (the pastor) they would follow without even questioning. For example, my cousins through out the last 6-7 years have predicted when the world was going to end and it never does. They think Jesus is going to come back and the rapture is going to happen..

---

The sad part is, he's not alone. You may be a Christian and you may say, not all Christians are like that. But trust me, you are not much different. You and that corrupt temple pushed me to who I am today.

So when you say that religion does not have any negative influences... look at my attitude towards life and tell me how that has not been influenced by my religious background.


----------



## Demonbart (Dec 10, 2012)

Most religions started out as a way of teaching people basic norms and values through metaphors, and to give them a sense of purpose when they were feeling like shit.
Then (in the case of chistianity) the romans started to use it as a tool to keep the people docile.
Nowadays there are basically two groups of religious people: idiots who take their religion way too seriously (westboro baptist church comes to mind) and people who see their religion for what it was originally meant to be and take the whole thing with a grain of salt. The latter also tend to be the ones who just find mental support in their religion, instead of the xenophobia that the former group seems to find.


----------



## Crimson Lotus (Dec 10, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> You and me both - religion should be reserved to the spiritual realm wheras explaining the rules governing the world we live in should be left to science. God/s is/are the Lord/s of the entire universe in the sense of its creation, but that's that. Many people choose to take religion literally, and that never ends well. On the other hand, some choose to "educate" religious people by going out of their way to disprove the existence of God/Gods when this is impossible by proxy - faith and proof rarely go together.
> 
> People whom I call Aggressive Atheists tend to coin religion as delusional - if believing in a higher order in the world and the moral principles of being truthful, not killing others etc. is delusional then I am comfortable in my delusion, thank you very much.
> 
> Things would probably go much smoother if we didn't butt into each other's business and get on with our lives instead of making it our priority to change the beliefs of other parties at all costs - Aggressive Atheism is as bad as religious extremism.


 
Incoming long reply but I would ask that you read it as I've got something to say about all the points you've raised.

First, you say "Aggressive Atheism" is bad as religious extremism. That's a load of hogwash. We atheists, agnostics and even deists (not to be confused with theists) do not fly ourselves into buildings believing that murdering innocents is a just cause and that we will receive 72 virgins from a heavenly dictator. We don't fight over holy land because no land is holy, all land is simply land. We don't start decades and centuries of inquisition where we burn, mutilate, torture and kill anyone that may have the slightest shroud of doubt in something we believe (or don't believe in the atheist case). So again, tell me how a non believer is as bad as people that are determined to kill you and see the downfall of your nation.

Another point I would like to raise is about conversion. I don't do this to deconvert, that would be as preposterous as those pesty Jehovah witnesses that bother me every month. No, I do this because I like to engage in open dialogue and don't see religion as something great, something sacred. It seems to have become oddly common place to treat religious belief with a veil of invulnerability. To this I say, it should be no different from criticizing a politician and his political beliefs. No belief is sacred and above scrutiny and religion should not be treated as something above all others.

Lastly, religion is not required for morality and spirituality. It's time that the religious stop thinking these two are exclusive to them especially considering how wrong it can go. I stopped being a Muslim when I was 10 years old, rather, I was probably never Muslim to begin with. I may have believed in God for about 3 months before thinking it didn't make any sense. I was never indoctrinated by my parents in my youth yet I've known not to kill, not to steal or to use violence my entire life. There are better ways to build morality, we have philosophy and logical reasoning. Religion is not required and it certainly does not own the domain of morality. It also does not exclusively own spirituality. When I looked into the clear night sky and saw the stars and the constellations and felt greater than myself, part of something truly enormous and wonderful, I didn't think, oh, this feeling must be from God and I still don't whenever I look at the natural beauty of this world and the universe. When I listen to a piece of music or look at art and feel moved and greater than myself, it's not because of God or religion, I too have spirituality. Religion has no claim on it and it shouldn't. Religion is one way to go about it but I don't think it's a good one or one that is required in this day and age, there are far better ways.


----------



## dickfour (Dec 10, 2012)

No idea what the purpose of religion is but it seems like most people need it. You have the new religion of phony global warming. These people are just as silly as the people they look down their nose at who thing they know when the world will end and Jesus comes back.


----------



## Valwin (Dec 10, 2012)

The original purpose was to make sense of the world is what we have before science came along for some reason we still use religion even do original purpose is lost seen how science works better


----------



## chavosaur (Dec 10, 2012)

In all honesty, I don't classify myself as an atheist. But I also do not acknowledge a specific Deity. You see, In my own personal opinion, I do not believe that once we die, it is the end. Rather, I choose to believe (and call me trippy if you want, but I seriously believe this) that time is looped.
Many scientists (I believe Einstein was one) have said that Time is circular. Therefore, the time frame you and I are born into right now, is our own Time Frame. I Believe when we Die, we do not Reincarnate or go to a paradise. Rather, we start the same life all over again. But we do not realize it. We do not notice it. For all you know, this could be the 18th time this topic has been brought up. This topic could have been in 18 lifetimes, and we wouldn't even realize it! 
The concept is called Eternal Return 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_return
If you'd like to read up on, you can.


----------



## Castiel (Dec 10, 2012)

Crimson Lotus said:


> Religion is one way to go about it but I don't think it's a good one *or one that is required in this day and age*, there are far better ways.


I always raise an eyebrow when I hear someone say that it isn't required today. If a part of religion is a belief in something bigger, or greater than us, then it is and will always be relevant no matter the age. Since we have no way of actually proving or disproving the existence of an omnipotent being, then it shall always be relevant. If it is false, then yes, it is irrelevant. But if as long as there are people (like me) who believe that there is a God then it will always be relevant and required. Saying it isn't required in this day and age is throwing away something that has the possibility of being truth.


----------



## totalnoob617 (Dec 10, 2012)

fgghjjkll said:


> I had quite a debate with a friend today and it really got me thinking about this.
> My opinion on religion was that it was used as a mean to keep society civilized back in the time of Ancient Greeks and stuff. I mean, if you commit a sin, you are damned and go to hell. If you commit acts of kindness, you are blessed and go to heaven. Right? Also, I think that religion helped answer some questions that people had in the day like how humanity came into being or whether the sun or earth goes orbit each other.
> 
> What are you thoughts on this matter? What do you think the purpose of religion is?


 
its a means of social control the "chosen people" use to keep everyone else(goy) stupid ,dumb down and oppressed,so they rule over the rest of us and keep us down ,(well the abrahamic ones anyway) just like the media and television ,media and religion are their 2 main means of control


----------



## Crimson Lotus (Dec 10, 2012)

Castiel said:


> I always raise an eyebrow when I hear someone say that it isn't required today. If a part of religion is a belief in something bigger, or greater than us, then it is and will always be relevant no matter the age. Since we have no way of actually proving or disproving the existence of an omnipotent being, then it shall always be relevant. If it is false, then yes, it is irrelevant. But if as long as there are people (like me) who believe that there is a God then it will always be relevant and required. Saying it isn't required in this day and age is throwing away something that has the possibility of being truth.


It's not required for morality or spirituality because it has no exclusive hold on the subject matter, there are different and I think better ways to approach those two subjects. That was my point in regards to it being not necessary in this day and age in that specific context.


----------



## wrettcaughn (Dec 10, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> What truths do you mean? Religion is not based on truths in the scientific sense of the word - religions are based on metaphores which serve the purpose of self-improvement of the followers. Religion does not explain the world in testable terms - we have science for that. Moreover, treating religions as science entails that some religions are better than others just like some scientific theories have more proof behind them than others, when that's not the case. Again, religions are sets of principles, moral lessons, not scientific evidence towards anything.


This is 100% correct. However, there is one major piece of the puzzle you're not recognizing. Religions may be "sets of principles, moral lessons" but they are taught and followed literally. They have figureheads whom are worshipped based on very literal beliefs in good/evil, moral/immoral, and historical figures.


I for one don't care either way. I was raised Catholic; went to Catholic schools from Kindergarten through high school graduation, attended mass twice a week for those 13 years. I believe it really was instrumental in my development as a member of society, husband, father, friend... It was late in high school before I finally started asking questions. I would never tell someone they are wrong, ignorant, incapable of dealing, gullible, etc... based on their beliefs. I just chose to go my own way understanding that the most basic foundation of nearly all religions is to treat others as you'd like to be treated. All religion has a place and serves a purpose. Absence of proof is not proof of absence.


----------



## BlueStar (Dec 10, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> The probability of life occuring naturally in the course of chemical reactions is pretty much non-existant


 
If something has odds of 'pretty much non-existant' then, given the absolutely mind-bogglingly huge area and epic amount of time in the universe, it will almost certainly happen.

The odds of you winning the lottery are tiny. The odds of SOMEONE winning the lottery are not.

Religion isn't about 'finding answers' it's absolutely the opposite. It's about starting with the answers and then trying to fit the questions around them.


----------



## Hyro-Sama (Dec 10, 2012)

Oh man

When Engert finds this thread, it's going to be the thread of year.


----------



## Foxi4 (Dec 10, 2012)

Crimson Lotus said:


> First, you say "Aggressive Atheism" is bad as religious extremism. That's a load of hogwash. We atheists, agnostics and even deists (not to be confused with theists) do not fly ourselves into buildings believing that murdering innocents is a just cause and that we will receive 72 virgins from a heavenly dictator. We don't fight over holy land because no land is holy, all land is simply land. We don't start decades and centuries of inquisition where we burn, mutilate, torture and kill anyone that may have the slightest shroud of doubt in something we believe (or don't believe in the atheist case). So again, tell me how a non believer is as bad as people that are determined to kill you and see the downfall of your nation.


Because so many Christians, Buddhists, Jews etc. fly themselves into buildings, right? No, religion is not at fault all by itself here - it's the misuse of religion as a political tool that it, and it was the same in the Cursades. People who "fly themselves into buildings" do it for a cause, religion is only misused to condition them, brainwash them in a way. Islam, when you go down to the basics, is a religion of peace - it's the extremist preachers that twist it. In any case, that's not the sense I meant and you know it - what I meant was that pushing Atheism on others is just as bad as pushing religion on others.



> Another point I would like to raise is about conversion. I don't do this to deconvert, that would be as preposterous as those pesty Jehovah witnesses that bother me every month. No, I do this because I like to engage in open dialogue and don't see religion as something great, something sacred. It seems to have become oddly common place to treat religious belief with a veil of invulnerability. To this I say, it should be no different from criticizing a politician and his political beliefs. No belief is sacred and above scrutiny and religion should not be treated as something above all others.


By no means, but that was not my original point - my point was that going out of your way to disprove the existence of God/s simply goes to show a lack of tolerance and understanding rather than enlightenment like many tend to believe. Of course religious beliefs should be subject to criticism as religions should change and evolve with time just like everything else.



> Lastly, religion is not required for morality and spirituality. It's time that the religious stop thinking these two are exclusive to them especially considering how wrong it can go. I stopped being a Muslim when I was 10 years old, rather, I was probably never Muslim to begin with. I may have believed in God for about 3 months before thinking it didn't make any sense. I was never indoctrinated by my parents in my youth yet I've known not to kill, not to steal or to use violence my entire life. There are better ways to build morality, we have philosophy and logical reasoning. Religion is not required and it certainly does not own the domain of morality. It also does not exclusively own spirituality. When I looked into the clear night sky and saw the stars and the constellations and felt greater than myself, part of something truly enormous and wonderful, I didn't think, oh, this feeling must be from God and I still don't whenever I look at the natural beauty of this world and the universe. When I listen to a piece of music or look at art and feel moved and greater than myself, it's not because of God or religion, I too have spirituality. Religion has no claim on it and it shouldn't. Religion is one way to go about it but I don't think it's a good one or one that is required in this day and age, there are far better ways.


Good for you, I'm all for enjoying who you are. If you found your way of life, that's great. As for religion being required of not for morality and spirituality, I mentioned it as a tool, not a requirement.




BlueStar said:


> If something has odds of 'pretty much non-existant' then, given the absolutely mind-bogglingly huge area and epic amount of time in the universe, it will almost certainly happen.


The probability of "something" being created out of "nothing" is zero, and yet it happened - we exist. Wrap your head around that.



> The odds of you winning the lottery are tiny. The odds of SOMEONE winning the lottery are not.


The odds of winning a lottery when there is no lottery are zero, and yet we won the lottery.



> Religion isn't about 'finding answers' it's absolutely the opposite. It's about starting with the answers and then trying to fit the questions around them.


Religion isn't about starting with the answers and trying to fit the questions around them, it's about establishing moral and spiritual principles for people to follow and at the same time, attempt to aproximate an answer to questions that have no answers.


See? We can both use slogans!


----------



## smile72 (Dec 10, 2012)

To fool the masses into believing in something.


----------



## pyromaniac123 (Dec 10, 2012)

The purpose of religion is to give people on gaming forums something to talk about.


----------



## Gahars (Dec 10, 2012)

smile72 said:


> To fool the masses into believing in something.


 
Okay, buddy.

Thanks for the constructive feedback.


----------



## Foxi4 (Dec 10, 2012)

smile72 said:


> To fool the masses into believing in something.


See, this is exactly what I was talking about earlier - yes, you are so smart to be an Atheist, so much smarter than I am.


----------



## Veho (Dec 10, 2012)

smile72 said:


> To fool the masses into believing in something.


I thought that was the purpose of television.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Dec 10, 2012)

Oh boy another one of these threads.

Can't we just accept that some aspects of religion are to give people hope? So they can believe there's something after death, that their sorrow isn't in vain, that they can become better people through good works?

Yeah there's the assholes of religion but just as much so as there's the assholes of anything.


----------



## Foxi4 (Dec 10, 2012)

Veho said:


> I thought that was the purpose of television.


Foxi's Foolin' Formula (F3 for short): _"X was invented to fool the masses into believing in something." where X, insert any form of communications as where there is a story to be told, there's someone to be trolled._


----------



## notmeanymore (Dec 10, 2012)

Christianity is about a relationship with God himself. Christianity in and of itself is not a religion. I can delve further into that, if you like.

Organized religions (including most subdivisions of Christianity) has a dual-purpose. One is to bring more into Christianity (I'm not going to delve into Islam and the others, as I'm not foolish enough to speak about what I do not know) which is a noble goal, the other is to keep the people happy and in line. Some organized religions beat the message of staying in line into you, others gently preach it every now and then, still others teach about radicalism (essentially obeying God and his commandments more than is traditionally done in today's world.)


----------



## Wizerzak (Dec 10, 2012)

NightsOwl said:


> Because people don't want to accept the fact that when you die, you rot in the ground. So they cling to hope that there's an afterlife.
> 
> /brutalhonesty


This. Basically.


----------



## evandixon (Dec 10, 2012)

Depending on who you talk to, the universe is either a miracle, or an accident.  People like me look at how complex the universe is and decide that it could not be an accident, and choose to believe that a higher power created it.  Some things (like flagella on cells, eyes, DNA, particle physics, etc.) are way too complex to have been formed accidently.  And that's with our current scientific knowledge.  God reveals himself through His creation, both to ancient civilizations (that we consider primitive), and even to our civilization with all its current understanding of the universe.

(And who's to say that God never audibly spoke to people like mentioned in the Bible?)


----------



## Gahars (Dec 10, 2012)

TehSkull said:


> Christianity is about a relationship with God himself.


 
...Which right off the bat makes it a religion; there are different sects with varying values, mindsets, etc., sure, but they still fall under the umbrella of the Christian religion. The dictionaries would also most certainly agree that it fits the definition.

Jon Stewart had an excellent take on the subject; I could choose a few quotes, but I feel like that would be doing him a disservice, so I'll just provide a link here. 

This isn't a dig at Christianity by any means, but let's just call a spade a spade.

(Also, I cut the quote off there to be more succinct, so please don't take it as a sign that I ignored the rest of your post)


----------



## Issac (Dec 10, 2012)

Others have said it before me: But I see religion as different for each and every individual. Some find comfort in faith. Some use faith as understanding, making death easier, et.c...
I don't believe in anything, haven't found a reason to yet. I am not an Atheist (Anti-theist)... I am more of a passive agnostic. There might be something, maybe not.
I have no reason to believe, and have no reason to search for something to believe either. But I think highly of those who has faith, or found their god. It's something nice, and I would never take that away from anyone. And in the same way, No one should force his or her religion on me.


----------



## notmeanymore (Dec 10, 2012)

Gahars said:


> ...Which right off the bat makes it a religion; there are different sects with varying values, mindsets, etc., sure, but they still fall under the umbrella of the Christian religion. The dictionaries would also most certainly agree that it fits the definition.
> 
> Jon Stewart had an excellent take on the subject; I could choose a few quotes, but I feel like that would be doing him a disservice, so I'll just provide a link here.
> 
> ...


None of those completely line up with my words, but I see where you're coming from.
I don't mean to say Christianity is a philosophy like Bill O'Reilly, I just see that Christianity's many subdivisions are themselves religions. Catholicism is a religion and Protestantism is also a relgion, but they're both Christianity. Assemblies of God, Baptist, Methodist, Mormon, and on and on.

I guess I just see it in a weird way. I honestly couldn't put my view on it into words.


----------



## wrettcaughn (Dec 10, 2012)

TehSkull said:


> None of those completely line up with my words, but I see where you're coming from.
> I don't mean to say Christianity is a philosophy like Bill O'Reilly, I just see that Christianity's many subdivisions are themselves religions. Catholicism is a religion and Protestantism is also a relgion, but they're both Christianity. Assemblies of God, Baptist, Methodist, Mormon, and on and on.
> 
> I guess I just see it in a weird way. I honestly couldn't put my view on it into words.


 
The word Christian simply means "one who believes in/follows Christ".  Catholicism, Protestantism, Baptist, Methodist, Mormon...are all sects of Christianity.


----------



## BlueStar (Dec 10, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> The probability of "something" being created out of "nothing" is zero, and yet it happened - we exist. Wrap your head around that.



If it happened, the odds were not zero. If something cannot come out of nothing, God cannot have come out of nothing, which means god must have been created, so god cannot be the ultimate creator.

This is one of the weakest arguments there is for religion. Like most arguments in favour of the supernatural, it basically boils down to "I can't explain this, therefore I can explain it." 

"I can't explain how something can come from nothing, therefore I know it was God." Something unexplained is exactly that. Unexplained. It's no better an argument than "We can't explain how the sun moves across the sky, therefore it must be the sun god pulling it with his chariot."


----------



## DJ91990 (Dec 10, 2012)

IMHO: Religion was created by those in power back in the bronze age to prevent the poor from questioning the power of their overlords.

You see, back then, there was no middle class. There were more poor than rich and the poor could have very well overthrown the wealthy, but when you restrict the education of the poor so that they think lightning is the wrath of an omnipotent almighty being then you have immunity. A tyrant could rule a nation back then because he was appointed by the almighty that would strike down any man, woman, or child daft enough to question his power.

To question the power of a man appointed by God is the question the power of God, and that results in being sent to eternal damnation. Religion is nothing more than a fear tactic to enslave the under-educated and ignorant.

Religion has always been against science and scientific discovery because it disproves God in just about every conceivable way. Think about it; if your God is dis-proven, then that means that those willing to overthrow you won't be sent to a "Hell". People were put to death for even sharing their discoveries about the true nature of the "world" with the public. It wasn't until Freedom of Speech (Which is not exclusive to America) that the world began to prosper.

Back in the bronze ages, people would live to about 20 years old, 30 if you were lucky. Science provided us with modern medicine and cures to terminal illnesses. Remember Small Pox? No? That's because science developed a cure.

Religion's only purpose in the modern world is to make people feel good. My mother even says how she feel's "drained" at the end of the week and goes to church to be "recharged with the holy spirit." That's right, Religion has become a sort of mental/spiritual feel-good drug.

The worst part about religions is that it often causes wars and acts of terrorism. 9-11 was caused by religious extremists. Any religion could develop extremists that are willing to kill for their God. This is not limited to Islam.

I used to believe that God existed and watched over everything when I was a child. When I was a teenager I began to question everything because of the knowledge that I have acquired at my non-religious school, finally as an adult I have decided to "Grow Up" and stop believing in fairy tales.

Does this make the universe less interesting? No, it makes the universe more beautiful and life more valuable, because we are the product of millions of years of natural selection and macro evolution, and we only have one life to make our existence count.


----------



## Mindzpeed (Dec 10, 2012)

I believe that the purpose of all religions is to understand life and the mysteries beyond science. Yet I think that science provides a better understanding of life and the reason why Im catholic is not because my family is also catholic, but since I was very little I realized that every time someone despised my grandmother she still cared for them and she told me that there's no reason why I should hate others. I have to say that she is catholic but never goes to church and I rarely see her praying but her actions are her interpretation of her faith.
I want to find a meaning to religion and understand her way of living (and mine).  Im not very good at expressing my opinion but the last  the thing that I want to say is that religion's strict rules were made to be questioned for seeking an answer and not to be blindly followed.


----------



## Castiel (Dec 10, 2012)

BlueStar said:


> If it happened, the odds were not zero. If something cannot come out of nothing, God cannot have come out of nothing, which means god must have been created, so god cannot be the ultimate creator.


This here just leads into a giant circle. "God cannot have come out of nothing, which means God must have been created." "Okay, so where did the thing that created God come from?" "Well, it was created by this." Blah blah, on and on and on. In the end, something had to have come from nothing in order to start creating. That thing is what would be called God.


----------



## BlueStar (Dec 10, 2012)

It's hilarious that people can be look at the enormous, chaotic, deadly universe, with one tiny speck which humans can survive on, humans who can only live on land with fresh water, on a speck that is 70% saltwater, and say this whole universe was designed for us. When even the process of our birth is so deadly, when so many of us 'die' before our mothers even know they're pregnant, in an existence where the same biological quirk that allows us to speak makes us the only animal who can choke to death just by eating, when a relic of our evolutionary history, the appendix, is completely useless for any purpose other than exploding and killing us, when some of us die when our immune system over reacts to a harmless peanut, when our cells so often go into a crazy orgy of multiplication and kill us in the form of cancer... If we were a product, we'd have a worse return rate than the Xbox 360. And people think we were 'intelligently designed'? And that this entire universe was "made" for us?



Castiel said:


> This here just leads into a giant circle. "God cannot have come out of nothing, which means God must have been created." "Okay, so where did the thing that created God come from?" "Well, it was created by this." Blah blah, on and on and on. In the end, something had to have come from nothing in order to start creating. That thing is what would be called God.


So God is nothing?


----------



## Foxi4 (Dec 10, 2012)

BlueStar said:


> So God is nothing?


More and more people start treating "God" as the creative force behind the universe, whatever it may be, rather than a guy with a white beard, sitting on a cloud and watching over us. The difference between Atheists and these "new" religious people is that Atheists choose to treat this force as a natural occurrence wheras religious people usually attach some form of sentience to it - that's that.

It's like I said earlier - there are numerous scientifically-proven, or at least hypothesized mechanisms that lead to the creation of the universe, and they're like domino blocks. "God" pushed the first block, starting the chain reaction.


----------



## Valwin (Dec 10, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> To me, the main focus of religion was always to cater to the spiritual part of our being - religions were created to pass on sets of moral rules within societies as well as cultivate them. Not only that, religion also provides comfort - allows one to become a part of a greater whole - a group of people who share his or her beliefs. Even more importantly, it introduces the notions of God, afterlife and "soul", it gives hope that our current condition is not the end of the journey. Finally, it attempts to give answers to questions which science cannot answer not due to lack of data but due to the nature of the question - things like "the sense behind life?" or "who created the world?". I know where this thread is inevitably heading - discussions like this one require a certain level of maturity, so I'll just use this opportunity to say that the thought that there is, or at least might be another sentient being out there which carefuly designed the universe as if it was clockwork appeals to me.


 
is this the same religion that says that the sun goes around the earth ?   cuz if they were wrong about that i don't think it can be right about many other things


----------



## Gahars (Dec 10, 2012)

Castiel said:


> In the end, something had to have come from nothing in order to start creating. That thing is what would be called God.


 
Well... not quite. I know I've been trying to steer clear of the argument for the most part, but this argument bugs me a bit.

Stephen Hawking created a fascinating program centering around this subject. It's definitely worth watching the whole way through (it builds up to his ultimate conclusion), but if you are really short for time, you could probably start around 35:00.



Whether or not you agree with Mr. Hawking's conclusion,  it does demonstrate that as we're understanding more about the universe, we're coming to see that God isn't necessarily an integral, essential part of the equation. We're trying to handle a scope that stretches the very limits of human comprehension, but just because there are blanks doesn't mean we should fill them in and write them off.


----------



## Foxi4 (Dec 10, 2012)

Valwin said:


> is this the same religion that says that the sun goes around the earth ? cuz if they were wrong about that i don't think it can be right about many other things


Read through the last four pages - don't take religious stories literally. Their writers did their best to represent the world as accurately as they could at the time, but that's not the point of those stories - they're supposed to teach you moral lessons, not scientific facts. For scientific facts, you should depend on science.


----------



## Jan1tor (Dec 10, 2012)

It is a big form of control, and to give purpose to peoples lives. It is an excuse to kill in Gods name, it is an excuse to bash gay people, it is an excuse to bash other cultures. It brings wars against people, it puts down women (Put them in their place). It brings people together. It says your God is wrong, mine is right. It says if you do not obey you will be punished (FOREVER). It makes you bring deformed and unwanted children into the world. It makes doing the wrong thing right by saying your are sorry for your sins. It gives you something to argue with an atheist about. 

All in all Religion love it or leave it. No one can prove it one way or the other. Just lead a good life and you will be ok. Myself I tend to find more cons with it than pros though.


----------



## JoostinOnline (Dec 10, 2012)

Valwin said:


> is this the same religion that says that the sun goes around the earth ? cuz if they were wrong about that i don't think it can be right about many other things


AFAIK, no religion says that.


----------



## Foxi4 (Dec 10, 2012)

Jan1tor said:


> It is a big form of control, and to give purpose to peoples lives. It is an excuse to kill in Gods name, it is an excuse to bash gay people, it is an excuse to bash other cultures. It brings wars against people, it puts down women (Put them in their place). It brings people together. It says your God is wrong, mine is right. It says if you do not obey you will be punished (FOREVER). It makes you bring deformed and unwanted children into the world. It makes doing the wrong thing right by saying your are sorry for your sins. It gives you something to argue with an atheist about.
> 
> All in all Religion love it or leave it. No one can prove it one way or the other. Just lead a good life and you will be ok. Myself I tend to find more cons with it than pros though.


Just like _every other congregation/belief of people in the history of human kind. _Any kind of differentiation may breed animosity - all of the things you mentioned could just as well be caused by a political ideology, take communism, socialism, nazism, fascism, nationalism etc. as an example. Even if an ideology is "good" at its core, it can easily be misinterpreted and twisted.


----------



## Valwin (Dec 10, 2012)

JoostinOnline said:


> AFAIK, no religion says that.


no longer they do after they were proven wrong


----------



## DiscostewSM (Dec 10, 2012)

Just making a theory here, but if anything, the purpose of religion is to bring about science. The belief in something greater than yourself and what you see/hear/know is enough to make anyone curious, and therefore experiment.


----------



## JoostinOnline (Dec 10, 2012)

Valwin said:


> no longer they do after they were proven wrong


You are confusing religion and general belief.


----------



## injected11 (Dec 10, 2012)

JoostinOnline said:


> You are confusing religion and general belief.


Pretty sure the catholic church tried to lock up Copernicus for his ideas on heliocentric cosmology.


----------



## Valwin (Dec 10, 2012)

JoostinOnline said:


> You are confusing religion and general belief.


around the 1400s the Cristian church give  as fact that the earth was the center of the universe


----------



## Foxi4 (Dec 10, 2012)

Valwin said:


> around the 1400s the Cristian church give as fact that the earth was the center of the universe


...and they improved with time, so let's bash them now, because that makes sense! 

You're over 600 years late to the criticism party.


----------



## Nah3DS (Dec 10, 2012)

Im just gonna leave this here:


the first part makes sense, but then (around the end of the video) it starts with all those silly conspiracy theories about mind control and implanted "chips" in humans brains


----------



## JoostinOnline (Dec 10, 2012)

Yes, but that was just what most everybody believed.  The Catholic church was corrupt, and committed evil acts in their power, ignoring basics in the Bible for their own gain.  Punishing people like Galileo for challenging their assumptions is an example.  However, nowhere in the Bible does it say that the Earth is the center of the Universe.

History is full of instances when people have distorted what the Bible says for their own gain.  The people were wrong, not the Bible.


----------



## Valwin (Dec 10, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> ...and they improved with time, so let's bash them now, because that makes sense!
> 
> You're over 600 years late to the criticism party.


 
they improve only after the were  found out what there saying was bullshit


----------



## heartgold (Dec 10, 2012)

What is the the purpose of religion?

I haven't looked into other common reglions other than the background from my family. I have not ever tried to understand it but rarely read some sentences. What I can tell is it is wanting us to meet with the creative force(wonderful lord) through good means. 

Yes I believe there is a creative force, weather the name is god or anything people would like to call it, there is a higher up and has the universe under its control. 



Foxi4 said:


> More and more people start treating "God" as the creative force behind the universe, whatever it may be, rather than a guy with a white beard, sitting on a cloud and watching over us. The difference between Atheists and these "new" religious people is that Atheists choose to treat this force as a natural occurrence wheras religious people usually attach some form of sentience to it - that's that.
> 
> It's like I said earlier - there are numerous scientifically-proven, or at least hypothesized mechanisms that lead to the creation of the universe, and they're like domino blocks. "God" pushed the first block, starting the chain reaction.


Took the words right out of my mouth.


----------



## Foxi4 (Dec 10, 2012)

Valwin said:


> they improve only after the were found out what there saying was bullshit.


That's not my point. My point is that you use the argument of _"__600 years ago t__hey treated something as fact but it turned out to be wrong"_ to support your claim that religion isn't the way to go _now_, which by itself is pretty silly. Moreover, that was the _globally-accepted belief at the time._


----------



## Nah3DS (Dec 10, 2012)

If you ask me.... religion is the manipulation of human faith


----------



## JoostinOnline (Dec 10, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> That's not my point. My point is that you use the argument of _"They treated something as fact despite the fact that they were wrong 600 years ago"_ to support your claim that religion isn't the way to go _now_, which by itself is pretty silly. Moreover, that was the _globally-accepted belief at the time._


Exactly.  It wasn't a religious belief.  The Catholic church was corrupt and punished people for disagreeing with them, so people make the assumption that it was a religious belief that the Earth was the center of the Universe.


----------



## RodrigoDavy (Dec 10, 2012)

Valwin said:


> around the 1400s the Cristian church give as fact that the earth was the center of the universe


 
I am not supporting the 1400s Church, but according to Einstein's relativity theory, saying the sun goes around the earth or the earth goes around the sun are neither wrong and only depends on the point of view. In fact, considering the Sun the center of the solar system is easier for studying planets movements, that's why cientists of the time created the heliocentric theory, because it was more convenient scientifically speaking but it doesn't necessarily represents the absolute truth.


----------



## kupo3000 (Dec 10, 2012)

NahuelDS said:


> the first part makes sense, but then (around the end of the video) it starts with all those silly conspiracy theories about mind control and implanted "chips" in humans brains


 
Keep in mind that the comparative religion part is just a brief summary of D.M. Murdock's research.
Which sadly and ironically many atheists reject first hand without investigating more.


----------



## Valwin (Dec 10, 2012)

RodrigoDavy said:


> I am not supporting the 1400s Church, but according to Einstein's relativity theory, but saying the suns goes around the earth or the earth goes around the sun are neither wrong and only depends on the point of view. In fact, considering the Sun the center of the solar system is easier for studying planets movements, that's why cientists of the time created the heliocentric theory, because it was more convenient scientifically speaking but it doesn't necessarily represents the absolute truth.


the sun is the one pushing us we follow him


----------



## Castiel (Dec 10, 2012)

Gahars said:


> -Snip-


I'll check it out when I'm not making pizza 


Valwin said:


> they improve only after the were found out what there saying was bullshit


Isn't that how anyone improves? Only once they realize they are wrong is when they change?


----------



## Foxi4 (Dec 10, 2012)

Castiel said:


> Isn't that how anyone improves? Only once they realize they are wrong is when they change?


_Everyday I'm Valwinning _is at work here, I believe. I think he knows very well what we mean, right Val?


----------



## Valwin (Dec 10, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> _Everyday I'm Valwinning _is at work here, I believe. I think he knows very well what we mean, right Val?


for what i read you say the bible is a book written by sandy people that like fairytales  and for some reason you believe there's some magical force that controls the universe so i don't know what to think


----------



## RodrigoDavy (Dec 10, 2012)

Valwin said:


> the sun is the one pushing us we follow him


 
You're absolutely correct.

In physics, you can say the earth attracts your body to the ground or that your body alone attracts the whole earth to your body. They're are both correct, really.

Trust me, I am an engineer! ^^


----------



## Nah3DS (Dec 10, 2012)

kupo3000 said:


> Keep in mind that the comparative religion part is just a brief summary of D.M. Murdock's research.
> Which sadly and ironically many atheists reject first hand without investigating more.


I didn't know there was a general consensus among atheists.
May I ask why they reject this? It kinda proves the whole point of not believing in Christ or any other religion.

But I guess it's much more complicated than that


----------



## Foxi4 (Dec 10, 2012)

RodrigoDavy said:


> You're absolutely correct. (...) your body alone attracts the whole Earth (...) Trust me(...) !


I agree. 

...now, we were talking about religion at some point...


----------



## kupo3000 (Dec 10, 2012)

NahuelDS said:


> I didn't know there was a general consensus among atheists.
> May I ask why they reject this? It kinda proves the whole point of not believing in Christ or any other religion.
> 
> But I guess it's much more complicated than that


 
Not really a general consensus but after lurking sometimes on reddit's /atheism you kinda get that perspective.


----------



## RodrigoDavy (Dec 11, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> I agree.
> 
> ...now, we were talking about religion at some point...


 
Since I'm already in this thread might as well express my opinion. 

I believe most religion purpose is seeking the truth. But sadly when those religions become big enough they get corrupted and are often used as some form of control over their believers. I also see in more radical groups of certain religions that there's often use of some level of brainwashing, many times non-intentional but the fact remains. I say this because I've been a member of a semi-radical catholic group.

I am not an atheist since I do believe in God, but I doubt that the gods often mentioned in religions are in fact the true God. So I am more of a no-religion person.


----------



## Nah3DS (Dec 11, 2012)

RodrigoDavy said:


> You're absolutely correct.
> 
> In physics, you can say the earth attracts your body to the ground or that *your body alone attracts the whole earth to your body*. They're are both correct, really.
> 
> Trust me, I am an engineer! ^^


I'm an engineer too!
a human body attracts the whole earth? really? why would you say that?

You see... in physics... gravity force depends on mass. More mass = more gravity force = more attraction.
That's why our bodies are attracted by the earth, because the relative mass of the planet is bigger than our body mass.
You could say the same about the sun, it's bigger than the earth, that's why our planet orbits the sun, not the other way around.

But maybe Valwin's body is the exception to the rule 

btw... what type of engineer you are? I'm an Environmental Engineer


----------



## Valwin (Dec 11, 2012)

RodrigoDavy said:


> Since I'm already in this thread might as well express my opinion.
> 
> I believe most religion purpose is seeking the truth. But sadly when those religions become big enough they get corrupted and are often used as some form of control over their believers. I also see in more radical groups of certain religions that there's often use of some level of brainwashing, many times non-intentional but the fact remains. I say this because I've been a member of a semi-radical catholic group.
> 
> I am not an atheist since I do believe in God, but I doubt that the gods often mentioned in religions are in fact the true God. So I am more of a no-religion person.


 
what is this real god?


----------



## The Catboy (Dec 11, 2012)

I think the purpose of a religion really varies from person to person or from organization to organization. To some it's to find hope in this world and the idea that there is a bigger picture, something to guide them and something to hold onto during the darkest hours and something to love during the brightest.
Or even it's purpose is unity, trying to unify like minded people in one organization to better understand and lead one another.
On the flip-side it is also a weapon, something used against others who don't share the same views. It's an excuse to war and reason for peace. 

Maybe it doesn't hold a single purpose and reason, maybe just maybe every religion is just as wrong as they are right. Quite honestly I don't think it's something that can be explained no matter how hard one tries.


----------



## RodrigoDavy (Dec 11, 2012)

Valwin said:


> what is this real god?


 
I believe there must have been some kind of force with its own will to create life, which I consider a non-ending miracle. How can non-living things just turn into living? Sadly, I can't answer this question properly. As far as I know, this God could be "dead" or be something way beyond our imagination.



NahuelDS said:


> I'm an engineer too!
> a human body attracts the whole earth? really? why would you say that?
> 
> You see... in physics... gravity force depends on mass. More mass = more gravity force = more attraction.
> ...


 
Let's just say when you use a different reference, it could make the physics law or at least its results to change too. If you say your whole body attracts the earth, the reference is probably yourself. So in this case you're always still and everything else is moving, therefore if you jump the entire earth will be considered to be moving away from you but you will be considered to be still.

Answering your last question, I am a computer enginnering!


----------



## Jan1tor (Dec 11, 2012)

There are some atheists that just don't believe (Like me, I just don't care) then there are devout atheists like my wife who blatantly don't believe and go out of their way to prove there is no so call God. And if there is a God who or what created him/her?  I have also watched Zeitgeist last year and found it interesting. And I didn't want to go off cause the original question was what is the purpose of religion but someone brought up the Bible which is another story all together. The bible is a book plain and simple (written by man in many versions)........ you know the story one person says one thing, the next is a little different, the next is a little different... and so on. And after a while a lot of the story can turn to that bull stuff.



RodrigoDavy said:


> I believe there must have been some kind of force with its own will to create life, which I consider a non-ending miracle. How can non-living things just turn into living? Sadly, I can't answer this question properly. As far as I know, this God could be "dead" or be something way beyond our imagination.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
It is like a recipe, put the right chemicals together with the right conditions and you get life. Rub two sugar cubes (crystals) together you get electrical sparks. Rub flints you get fire. You just need the right ingredients & conditions. They are breaking down the genomes now and learning how to do this. It is very complicated but the way you mix them get different life forms.


----------



## RodrigoDavy (Dec 11, 2012)

Jan1tor said:


> It is like a recipe, put the right chemicals together with the right conditions and you get life. Rub two sugar cubes (crystals) together you get electrical sparks. Rub flints you get fire. You just need the right ingredients & conditions. They are breaking down the genomes now and learning how to do this. It is very complicated but the way you mix them get different life forms.


 
Lmfao! Wish I could try this recipe at home, xD!

I see what you meant, but what are the odds of cakes making themselves? What I mean is, making a living being is probably a really difficult recipe to work just by luck. It's just easier for me to believe that there is something way beyond our imagination that triggered all of this. Of course, I may be wrong and if something or someone can convince me of that I'll definetely become an atheist.


----------



## heartgold (Dec 11, 2012)

What if this whole world is just a dream state, everything which seems real but it is not. When we pass away we wake up from this dream state. Just like when we are in our actual dream, everything feels and seems real, yet it's just an illusion. Who's to say this universe is not an illusion too and we are just in the same dream of this universe.


----------



## RodrigoDavy (Dec 11, 2012)

heartgold said:


> What if this whole world is just a dream state, everything which seems real but it is not. When we pass away we wake up from this dream state. Just like when we are in our actual dream, everything feels and seems real, yet it's just an illusion. Who's to say this universe is not an illusion too and we are just in the same dream of this universe.


 
You can eat the blue candy and continue living in this illusion or you can eat the red candy and know the truth. #matrix #hashtagsaregay


----------



## WiiUBricker (Dec 11, 2012)

Humans are afraid of the death because deep down they know after they die, there is nothing. Their entire existens will be erased. Religion is meant to take the fear away from them.


----------



## Psionic Roshambo (Dec 11, 2012)

WiiUBricker said:


> Humans are afraid of the death because deep down they know after they die, there is nothing. Their entire existens will be erased. Religion is meant to take the fear away from them.


 
I think that's what comforts me the most about death, or rather my own death. I honestly hope there is no such thing as an afterlife because no matter how you cut it this life sucks, you want to live longer? too bad! You want your loved ones to be alive when they are dead? Too bad! Don't want to grow old and get sick? Too bad! Now if there is some sort of afterlife you mean I am going to have to remember all that crap AND be happy about it? Of fuck that shit. When I die I wan't oblivion, it sounds perfectly delightful no worries no wants no nothing. Ultimate sleep? I don't have to wake up? Shit sign me up! lol


----------



## Castiel (Dec 11, 2012)

Gahars said:


> -Snip-


That was a really well done, and really well made video. It certainly is very difficult to argue against it. It's not something I am going to just try and brush off so easily. But I want to say this. They ended the video by saying that God couldn't have created to world because before the Big Bang, there was no such thing as time, and God couldn't have existed if time itself didn't exist. But one of the definitions of an omnipotent being is that it transcends both space AND time. I'm not going to argue that the Big Bang wasn't the cause of universe because I am a strong believer that God may have used the Big Bang to push His great plan into motion. There are just too many things that work together so perfectly for the Big Bang to have been able to cause all by itself.

Thanks for sharing, though. I really do appreciate it


----------



## naved.islam14 (Dec 11, 2012)

It's purpose is to stop threads like this from ever being created but it must've failed.


----------



## Mindzpeed (Dec 11, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> More and more people start treating "God" as the creative force behind the universe, whatever it may be, rather than a guy with a white beard, sitting on a cloud and watching over us. The difference between Atheists and these "new" religious people is that Atheists choose to treat this force as a natural occurrence wheras religious people usually attach some form of sentience to it - that's that.


 
You dont have to be atheist to believe that god is a force of nature since thats almost exactly how I interpret God's prescence.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Dec 11, 2012)

I would like to say God in a "non-magical" capacity is not unreasonable.

A lot of people when they think of God think he's some magic Gandalfian wizard who just uses his magic powers to start and end shit. It's not unreasonable to think of it from more scientific terms. The universe is infinite, whose to say there isn't a single being vastly more powerful than us.

Basically...







Star Trek explores this pretty well actually. They present numerous alien races that are omnipotent or much, much more powerful than us. It does raise the question: What does God need with a spaceship?


----------



## Valwin (Dec 11, 2012)

Mindzpeed said:


> You dont have to be atheist to believe that god is a force of nature since thats almost exactly how I interpret God's prescence.


them just call it nature  so god now takes orders fro nature ?


----------



## Gahars (Dec 11, 2012)

Castiel said:


> That was a really well done, and really well made video. It certainly is very difficult to argue against it. It's not something I am going to just try and brush off so easily. But I want to say this. They ended the video by saying that God couldn't have created to world because before the Big Bang, there was no such thing as time, and God couldn't have existed if time itself didn't exist. But one of the definitions of an omnipotent being is that it transcends both space AND time. I'm not going to argue that the Big Bang wasn't the cause of universe because I am a strong believer that God may have used the Big Bang to push His great plan into motion. There are just too many things that work together so perfectly for the Big Bang itself to have caused.


 
I completely agree that that's a bit of a hole in his reasoning. I deeply respect Hawkings and his work, but I don't think his proposal is the be-all, end-all of the debate (despite all the "Checkmate, theists" posts you're sure to find in the comments may tell you) - still, I think it's a great demonstration of how science is becoming more and more capable of grappling the once-unthinkable.


----------



## Valwin (Dec 11, 2012)

Castiel said:


> That was a really well done, and really well made video. It certainly is very difficult to argue against it. It's not something I am going to just try and brush off so easily. But I want to say this. They ended the video by saying that God couldn't have created to world because before the Big Bang, there was no such thing as time, and God couldn't have existed if time itself didn't exist. But one of the definitions of an omnipotent being is that it transcends both space AND time. I'm not going to argue that the Big Bang wasn't the cause of universe because I am a strong believer that God may have used the Big Bang to push His great plan into motion. There are just too many things that work together so perfectly for the Big Bang to have been able to cause all by itself.
> 
> Thanks for sharing, though. I really do appreciate it


  an omnipotent being is that it transcends both space AND time.


we humans made up that definition


There are just too many things that work together so perfectly
thats the thing they are not  if you look into nature your will see is very imperfect


----------



## Castiel (Dec 11, 2012)

Valwin said:


> an omnipotent being is that it transcends both space AND time.
> 
> 
> we humans made up that definition
> ...


----------



## Valwin (Dec 11, 2012)

Castiel said:


> *Another example: How the earth is placed at just the perfect place in space in order for us to survive.*


as the sun gets older that will change this planet just happen to be in the right time at the right moment  eventually the planet will be destroy by the sun it self



> So it doesn't transcend both space and time then? Just because humans made up the definition, doesn't necessarily mean it is completely wrong.


i have no idea we have never seen such god


----------



## Castiel (Dec 11, 2012)

Valwin said:


> as the sun gets older that will change *this planet just happen to be in the right time at the right moment* eventually the planet will be destroy by the sun it self


Some would call that coincidence. I would call it intelligent planning.


----------



## Valwin (Dec 11, 2012)

Castiel said:


> Some would call that coincidence. I would call it intelligent planning.


*I would call it intelligent planning*

whats intelligent  about placing the planet near a nuclear reactor that will eventually destroy it  
is a coincidence


----------



## Castiel (Dec 11, 2012)

Valwin said:


> I would call it intelligent planning
> 
> whats intelligent about placing the planet near a nuclear reactor* that will eventually destroy it *
> is a coincidence


I like how out of all the people in the world, you, Valwin, are the one that knows how the world will end.
The Bible talks about how the end of the earth will come at some point.


----------



## BlueStar (Dec 11, 2012)

It's not that the 'earth was placed perfectly so we could survive' it's that the only life forms that could survive in the conditions on earth are the only ones that passed on their genes and survived. There are billions upon billions of planets, all various distances from stars. Life evolved on the one that was just right. That's just numbers, not magic. 

'It's impossible for something to come out of nothing and everything has to have had a beginning, so there must have been a God to start it all who came out of nothing or who has always been around' is also not a particularly great argument by anyone's standards.


----------



## Valwin (Dec 11, 2012)

Castiel said:


> I like how out of all the people in the world, you, Valwin, are the one that knows how the world will end.
> The Bible talks about how the end of the earth will come at some point.


 
according to the bible the world should have ended 100 times already  because the stuff it says are so generic


stars die

the sun our sun is a star and like all other stars will eventually explode the planet will be destroy is the only end of the world thats guaranteed to happen


----------



## Castiel (Dec 11, 2012)

Valwin said:


> according to the bible *the world should have ended 100 times already* because the stuff it says are so generic


Proof?


Valwin said:


> stars die
> 
> the sun our sun is a star and like all other stars will eventually explode the planet will be destroy is the only end of the world thats *guaranteed* to happen


You're entitled to your own opinion. I'd watch what you pass off as fact, though.


----------



## BlueStar (Dec 11, 2012)

Imagining earth must have been 'placed' in a perfect position is like sitting on a pebble beach, sticking your arm out and being amazed that there's a pebble EXACTLY an arm's length away. Surely it must have been put there just for you? I mean, it can't just be an accident. It's EXACTLY the right distance away for YOUR arm. Someone must have put it there just for you. Why? What are they trying to tell me? Enlighten me, oh pebble placer!


----------



## kupo3000 (Dec 11, 2012)

Castiel said:


> Proof?
> 
> You're entitled to your own opinion. I'd watch what you pass off as fact, though.


 
Oh for crying out loud. These nebulae (star death remnants) are literally scattered everywhere in the universe.


----------



## Castiel (Dec 11, 2012)

kupo3000 said:


> Oh for crying out loud, these things (star death remnants) are literally scattered everywhere in the universe.


I'm not doubting that the stars explode. I'm doubting that this is what is going to be what destroys the earth. It is a reasonable explanation but we have no proof of it being the absolute sure way of being the cause of the end of the earth.


----------



## Valwin (Dec 11, 2012)

Castiel said:


> Proof?
> 
> You're entitled to your own opinion. I'd watch what you pass off as fact, though.


 
so your telling me stars are not real ?

from the evidence that we have about about the dead of stars we come to the conclusion our star will die too


if you have evidence that stars don't die you could like share it

if the sun dies we go with it is that simple




> according to the bible *the world should have ended 100 times already* because the stuff it says are so generic


WW1, WW2, Cold war ,the crusades , 100 year war , the dark ages the black death ,napoleon ECT


----------



## kupo3000 (Dec 11, 2012)

Castiel said:


> I'm not doubting that the stars explode. I'm doubting that this is what is going to be what destroys the earth. It is a reasonable explanation but we have no proof of it being the absolute sure way of being the cause of the end of the earth.


 
In the mean time if nothing else destroys Earth, the Sun will.
Like all dying stars do when surrounded by a planetary system.


----------



## Castiel (Dec 11, 2012)

Valwin said:


> so your telling me stars are not real ?
> 
> from the evidence that we have about about the dead of stars we come to the conclusion our star will die too
> 
> ...


 


Castiel said:


> I'm not doubting that the stars explode. I'm doubting that this is what is going to be what destroys the earth. It is a reasonable explanation but we have no proof of it being the absolute sure way of being the cause of the end of the earth.


 


Valwin said:


> WW1, WW2, Cold war ,the crusades , 100 year war , the dark ages the black death ,napoleon ECT


"Later, Jesus sat on the slopes of the Mount of Olives. His disciples came to him privately and asked, 'When will all this take place? And will there be any sign ahead of time to signal your return and the end of the world?' Jesus told them, 'Don't let anyone mislead you. For many will come in my name, saying, 'I am the Messiah.' They will lead many astray. *And wars will break out near and far, but don't panic. Yes, these things must come, but the end won't follow immediately. The nations and kingdoms will proclaim war against each other, and there will be famines and earthquakes in many parts of the world. But all this will be only the beginning of the horrors to come.'" *Matthew 24:3-8 (NLT) 



kupo3000 said:


> *In the mean time if nothing else destroys Earth*, the Sun will.
> Like all dying stars do when surrounded by a planetary system.


This I can agree with


----------



## Valwin (Dec 11, 2012)

Castiel said:


> "Later, Jesus sat on the slopes of the Mount of Olives. His disciples came to him privately and asked, 'When will all this take place? And will there be any sign ahead of time to signal your return and the end of the world?' Jesus told them, 'Don't let anyone mislead you. For many will come in my name, saying, 'I am the Messiah.' They will lead many astray. *And wars will break out near and far, but don't panic. Yes, these things must come, but the end won't follow immediately. The nations and kingdoms will proclaim war against each other, and there will be famines and earthquakes in many parts of the world. But all this will be only the beginning of the horrors to come.'" *Matthew 24:3-8 (NLT)
> This I can agree with


 
so you made my point good 

see how generic it is all this happen at many points in history


----------



## kupo3000 (Dec 11, 2012)

It seems worldwide peace isn't a viable option when many want these so-called prophecies to actually happen.


----------



## Castiel (Dec 11, 2012)

Valwin said:


> so you made my point good
> 
> see how generic it is all this happen at many points in history


It's generic, I agree. But your argument that it should have happened 100 times in the past remains invalid.
"Yes, these things must come, *but the end won't follow immediately.*" 
"But all this will be only the beginning of the horrors to come."
They are signs, not the causes of the end times.


----------



## Valwin (Dec 11, 2012)

Castiel said:


> It's generic, I agree. But your argument that it should have happened 100 times in the past remains invalid.
> "Yes, these things must come, *but the end won't follow immediately.*"
> "But all this will be only the beginning of the horrors to come."
> They are signs, not the causes of the end times.


 
*but the end won't follow immediately.*" <<<<  how convenient   we have been getting signs for a millennia they sure are taking their sweet time with 
something so generic we could stay like this forever


next your going to tell me the earth is 10.000 years old


----------



## Castiel (Dec 11, 2012)

Valwin said:


> *but the end won't follow immediately.*" <<<< how convenient we have been getting signs for a millennia they sure are taking their sweet time with
> something so generic we could stay like this forever
> *There have been signs since the beginning of time. The Old Testament is based around nations fighting nations. I'm in no rush. As much as I want to go be with Jesus, I quite enjoy gaining relationships with people and debating with people about this kind of stuff.*
> next your going to tell me the earth is 10.000 years old
> *No, the earth is much older than 10 years old, considering I'm almost double that age ***


----------



## BlueStar (Dec 11, 2012)

UniqueGeek said:


> Some things (like flagella on cells, eyes, DNA, particle physics, etc.) are way too complex to have been formed accidently.


 
The Theory of Evolution doesn't say those things were formed 'accidentally', quite the opposite. It's not like it's just chance we have teeth in our mouth and hair on our head and if it wasn't for a coin toss it'd be the other way around. Those things have been honed very specifically by environment and natural selection. If you took a copy of the solar system at a time when simple organisms were occurring on earth and plonked it in a big galactic cupboard, when you came back billions of years later you'd find the life forms on each earth had evolved very similar methods to fit into their environment, including eyes.

It's like saying when you throw a handful of marbles in a funnel they all accidentally come out of the same place. What are the odds?


----------



## Augusta (Dec 11, 2012)

BlueStar said:


> The Theory of Evolution doesn't say those things were formed 'accidentally', quite the opposite. It's not like it's just chance we have teeth in our mouth and hair on our head and if it wasn't for a coin toss it'd be the other way around. Those things have been honed very specifically by environment and natural selection. If you took a copy of the solar system at a time when simple organisms were occurring on earth and plonked it in a big galactic cupboard, when you came back billions of years later you'd find the life forms on each earth had evolved very similar methods to fit into their environment, including eyes.
> 
> It's like saying when you throw a handful of marbles in a funnel they all accidentally come out of the same place. What are the odds?


 
You undermine the complexity of DNA if you think it could just randomly happen by chance.
If there is no intelligent designer involved, it is chance. Accidental. Coincidence.

If there's a lottery and you have to pick 100 numbers in order to win, what are the odds of winning?
That would be a better analogy to describe the odds.


----------



## Amber Lamps (Dec 11, 2012)

It is pretty simple.  It was a way to do the following:

-keep people sane by making provisions for a gathering place (people go insane if they aren't around other living creatures or human beings)
-explain things that can't be explained and basically give logic and explain whether something is right or wrong (modern psychology didn't exist back then, to give example without getting into some politically correct crap on this forum for we all know that leads to someone becoming a big baby and crying cussing like one)
-give people more hope and less fear of death

maybe more things that I haven't thought of just now but that is the bulk of it.  is religion a good thing? for the most part it is.  there is good in every religion as long as it doesn't include radicals.  seems like every religion has radicals but we all know there is one that is very deadly and insanely destructive that gets in the news all the time which is pretty shameful.  some countries practice that religion in peace.



fgghjjkll said:


> I had quite a debate with a friend today and it really got me thinking about this.
> My opinion on religion was that it was used as a mean to keep society civilized back in the time of Ancient Greeks and stuff. I mean, if you commit a sin, you are damned and go to hell. If you commit acts of kindness, you are blessed and go to heaven. Right? Also, I think that religion helped answer some questions that people had in the day like how humanity came into being or whether the sun or earth goes orbit each other.
> 
> What are you thoughts on this matter? What do you think the purpose of religion is?


----------



## BlueStar (Dec 11, 2012)

Augusta said:


> You undermine the complexity of DNA if you think it could just randomly happen by chance.
> If there is no intelligent designer involved, it is chance. Accidental. Coincidence.
> 
> If there's a lottery and you have to pick 100 numbers in order to win, what are the odds of winning?
> That would be a better analogy to describe the odds.



Except it's not at all, because not every gene has the same chance of being passed on. How about a lottery where some of the balls are the size of tennis balls and some are the size of marbles. Is that totally random chance, accident? If you pick the balls out 500 times and throw away the ones that didn't get picked out 3 times in a row, is it pure chance you end up with bigger balls? It's religion that says we know that things (gods) came out of nowhere, and 'just happened' not science.


----------



## Clydefrosch (Dec 11, 2012)

religion has many many purposes. and they change with time too.

believing in deities obviously is a way to comprehend  the uncomprehendable.
turning it into a cult or religion is in some way social. the first religions probably started out by accident, without any real intention behind them and ended up uniting some people beyond family or racial or geographical boundaries.

but i believe that some of the younger religions, like mormonism or scientology (i dont believe its a religion in the traditional sense, but it helps the argument here) among them even christianity, started out with a purpose. an idea  to start a religion. mormons and scientology both pretty much started with 'i want to start my own church'. there were motives behind it. getting money, getting power, maybe even saving people and doing the lords work.

christianity may be a combination, where it didnt exactly start, but simply developed by many people believing in a certain thing. but it was then seized by other people with some desires like power and influence. humanity hat quite enough time to understand what a religion could do and how its a great way to make some people leaders and others followers for pretty much no good reason at all (by inventing the reason oneself)

obviously, religion brought us some good and some bad. the social aspect is visible even today, though i'd guess its almost lost all importance as we now find other things to bind and unite us socially.
power and money can still be found plentyful, more so in the new age religions, as in those that already were there 2000 years ago.
religion can still be a crutch for many people having a hard time. and providing faith, some sort of ethnics and morality, one way or another, i guess is a good thing still, even if its not rational.
being rational, sadly, is one of the worst ways for a world to be, cause it opens up too many of those scary options. those that we sometimes have to tell ourselves that we are better than to go that way. (just imagine, a single large act of violence may easily solve a dozen or so of the greatest problems we face globally in our time.)

so yeah anyway, theres many purposes of religion. some better, some worse than people often make them out to be.


----------



## TrolleyDave (Dec 11, 2012)

I love these types of discussions, and I know I'm a little late to the party but I'll throw in my tuppence here.

Belief in gods came a long time before organised religion.  Humans are pattern seeking beings, it's something we evolved with as a survival instinct.  Those that had a natural tendency to assign things to the rustling in the grass tended to live longer than those that ignored it.  If a hunter heard the bushes moving behind him it was much safer to assume that it was a predator then it was to assume it was a bird or the wind.  As our consciousness evolved, so did our tendency to assign things to the unknown.

Back during when we first started forming tribes we began assigning things to natural processes such as the wind, lightening etc. simply because humans knew nothing of the natural processes governing the universe.  As we became braver, stronger and more curious we began to check the bushes to see what was there, so to speak.  Humans began noticing that when the bushes rustled, sometimes there was nothing there but the wind.  So we assigned a personality to the wind to make it easier to understand and less threatening.  Eventually the spirits evolved into gods.

As our consciousness and pattern seeking abilities evolved humans began to make false correlations between what they saw and what was happening around.  Nature is indifferent and harsh, and they saw suffering everywhere.  Just as we find we have a need to explain suffering today, so did the people back then.  When there was a drought, a flood or any other natural disaster, humans back then would assign it a cause.  That cause was gods (it was a long time between the idea of spirits, gods and a monotheistic belief).  People were being punished by whichever god had emerged in that area.  It also gave people hope, because they felt that they could do something to avoid natural disasters.  It made the world a less indifferent, less harsh place.  Religion then began to emerge from belief in gods.  Sets of rules designed to please the gods were developed, to ensure that the gods stay pleased with the tribe.  It was also a way to pass on myths such as their creation story, as well as history - albeit distorted over time.

That's how religions began, and that was their purpose originally.  Religion went through an evolution again when tribes began to merge into city-state style settlements.  Not only was it used to pass on rules to the local population, along with threats and promises in the after-life, it was also used to install kings and emperors.  While a human was likely to rebel against a harsh king, they were far less likely to rebel against a king that their god had chosen.  After all, rebelling against the king was akin to rebelling against their god.

As city-states began to build up armies large enough for conquest, religion was then used to guarantee a loyal fighting force willing to die.  Not just willing to die, an army that wanted to die fighting for their god, religion and king.  The promise of a special after-life for warriors is evidenced in several religions.  The religion was also then used to unite the conquered lands to the conqueror.

Religion, like any other school of thought, has evolved and adapted itself to time and place.  It would never have survived otherwise.  Of course, this is a very condensed version of the history of religion.  To write it out fully would take pages and pages, something I'm pretty sure nobody here wants to read.

In modern times there is no single purpose to religion.  It's purpose depends on country, type of religion and the person following it.  Most people glean what they what from their particular religion.  It can be everything from hope and purpose to control of a nation.  It's a large subject unfortunately, and there is no quick and simple answer.


----------



## Fear Zoa (Dec 11, 2012)

Religion is whatever you need it to be. Its the answers to the questions you don't understand, the thing you can turn to when all else is lost. It gives comfort to the human mind and its lust for knowledge, perhaps because its easier to say an almighty deity did it rather than accepting the fact that the answer is simply beyond human comprehension. 

Another reason is as a weapon. I really hate to say this but historically religion has been a weapon, an excuse to kill people. Even today its often used to justify homophobia and racism which is just plain fucked up. Back in the day it was used to control people, keep them in line, prevent them from questioning the king and his motives. Say god is ruler of all, then say he tells you his will and that your words are his, suddenly your rule is solid and you've effectively quashed free thinking. 

I hope I didn't offend anyone here i'm just speaking my opinion, and if you couldn't tell I am in fact an Atheist.


----------



## DragorianSword (Dec 11, 2012)

It's just a lot more simple to explain our existence and everything that happens if you just say: It was a god.
Then they just add some moral sense to it (no killing, stealing, eating this because...) and you have religion.
There is nothing wrong with religion of course although I prefer a scientific way to look at life.
I have seen people who got through really difficult times thanks to a religion.


----------



## shoyrumaster11 (Dec 11, 2012)

Fear Zoa said:


> I hope I didn't offend anyone here i'm just speaking my opinion, and if you couldn't tell I am in fact an Atheist.


 
Not offended. Heck! A whole lot of my friends either do or don't have a religion. One of my best friends does believe in god. But she's not christian, same with her older sister. That kinda makes no sense to me personally but, I and all my friends are at a young age. Even though I do plan on keeping my religion. Just because, yeah! In my opinion having a religion or not is a part of our personality. Also, I'm so glad I could come to this thread and not see a flame war. I mean, seriously!

EDIT: Got ninja'd by DargorianSword!


----------



## Narayan (Dec 11, 2012)

oh, nice thread, though i didn't read it all. 
But I've made something like this before: http://gbatemp.net/threads/religion-is-somehow-a-type-government.325775/


----------



## FAST6191 (Dec 11, 2012)

Augusta said:


> You undermine the complexity of DNA if you think it could just randomly happen by chance.
> If there is no intelligent designer involved, it is chance. Accidental. Coincidence.
> 
> If there's a lottery and you have to pick 100 numbers in order to win, what are the odds of winning?
> That would be a better analogy to describe the odds.



That is a terrible analogy

The very sort response is yes things are random after a fashion but given enough events, enough time and the nature of the chemistry involved random does not mean roll of a single many sided dice and probability of life as you know it is likely not as low as that analogy would lead you to believe.

First there is increasing complexity- a fully formed eye did not appear out of goop but likely started as a single light sensing cell. Moreover different species evolved light sensing organs in different ways (some of the underground sea animals being a good example of alternative light sensing cells appearing), more on that in a moment.

Going back to basic chemistry or indeed basic physics it is noted I can in no way know where all subatomic particles are (Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle), this line of thought then leads to entropy which also agrees you can not know but given a single gram of an element contains something in the order of 10^23 atoms (see Avogadro constant) the singular distribution does not really matter. This gives us chemistry for even if I can not know where things are I can still with certainty that a reaction will happen at a given temperature and pressure every time and this definitely takes entropy into account (see the free energy equation).

On DNA itself- many things happen here. As mentioned there is not just one type of DNA that works which seriously damages the "how to win" thing. Life is also fairly self selecting (certain errors in DNA lead to a self destructing/non dividing cell) let alone stuff at a macroscopic level (see "conventional" evolution). Most of the more successful types of life also split their DNA in half and have it recombine it and saying "in half" also fails to account for other interesting combinations (mitochondrial DNA and later in life other interesting aberrations (recently wheat was kind of sequenced and it is noted it is the combination of a few ancient grasses), copying errors, radiation induced errors..... ).

Related to basic chance you have to also consider if life has been around for however many millions of years and life cycles tending to measured in years at best (especially as complexity decreases) multiplied across the number of "reactions" happening is not a "wow that was lucky" event, doubly so when combined with the self selecting nature of DNA based life.

Back to the main idea of the topic I think I will have to echo TrolleyDave and say religions evolved from attempted explanations and got warped/taken in by various things along the way. Personally I find the evolution of religions quite fascinating (both how they merge, adopt parts of others and branch and overall trends like the trend towards monotheism*), I can not say I especially see them being especially useful today (indeed in the past I have said net negative as of fairly recent history and I stand by that).

*going evolution again the more interesting one for me on the trend to monotheism was that polytheism necessitates a spread of worship which leads to a less unified front against a monotheistic faith.


----------



## Valwin (Dec 11, 2012)

Castiel said:


> *There have been signs since the beginning of time. The Old Testament is based around nations fighting nations. I'm in no rush. As much as I want to go be with Jesus, I quite enjoy gaining relationships with people and debating with people about this kind of stuff.*
> next your going to tell me the earth is 10.000 years old


well sorry that's too generic and convenient i could make up my own predictions as generic as that


----------



## Sanoblue (Dec 11, 2012)

the answer is simple..... to control the masses with a unified belief and moral structure.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Dec 11, 2012)

sanoblue said:


> the answer is simple..... to control the masses with a unified belief and moral structure.


 
Despite the fact that religions (even sects within religions) are significantly different and have different beliefs.


----------



## Valwin (Dec 11, 2012)

Guild McCommunist said:


> Despite the fact that religions (even sects within religions) are significantly different and have different beliefs.


 
well not everyone lives in the same place each came up with something diferent


----------



## DinohScene (Dec 11, 2012)

Am I on GBATemp.net or r/Atheism?


----------



## shortz1994 (Dec 11, 2012)

religion was started by the rulers of each country.( the old world.)
 1 to keep the people in each kingdom/country. in line an under thumb.
 2 to give their subjects false hope, that if they do good for king an country, then they have a reward waiting for them after death.( nights templers, are a real good example of this.).yes there are more that followed their example but they are the only ones that i can think of at this time.
 3 to start a revolution/war...( christian's are the best i can think of right now.)
 i'm neither an atheist or a religious person, i don't fault others for believing in what they want to believe. but i do keep an open mind..
 to me  religion= war. an this is how it's been since religion hit the world stage.


----------



## Narayan (Dec 11, 2012)

DinohScene said:


> Am I on GBATemp.net or r/Atheism?


you must have forgotten the old blogs.


----------



## Engert (Dec 11, 2012)

Hyro-Sama said:


> Thank me later
> http://gbatemp.net/threads/what-is-the-purpose-of-religion.338921/


Got your PM Hyro-Sama.
I thought i was too edgy for you guys but thanks for thinking of me.
I don’t want to add anything more than what’s already written here because they are all valid points.
My only problem with religion is this. Why do you have to force it on other people?
Do you see scientists knocking on your door trying to convert you into a scientist? No.
Do you see scientists waging holy wars in the name of science? No.
That’s the biggest problem with religion which has impeded human progress for thousands of years.
Just think of the dark ages in Europe. If religion didn’t exist those would actually be boom years for science and today we’d roam freely in our galaxy and our life expectancy would be ten times longer than what it is today.
That’s my only problem with religion. I don’t have a problem with people believing whatever they want to believe even if it’s not based on facts. After all people are free to pursue their happiness and live life freely.


----------



## Shoat (Dec 11, 2012)

Originally most religions were meant to make people feel secure about the things they don't know and all the horrible things that happened around them.

Telling someone who was having a rough time a happy story about jesus was probably similar to how we read bedtime stories to our children nowadays (as opposed to the fanatic blind belief in "that one truth depicted in that one book" it is now).

But eventually, all of them devolved in some way or the other, to the point where they were the *cause* of suffering (Half of all wars ever fought in the history of mankind, used as a tool to keep the tyrant rulers of old in power, terrorist attacks, people demonstrating to prevent others from gaining equal rights and using their religion as an excuse) instead of reducing it.


----------



## Gahars (Dec 11, 2012)

Engert said:


> That’s the biggest problem with religion which has impeded human progress for thousands of years.
> Just think of the dark ages in Europe. If religion didn’t exist those would actually be boom years for science and today we’d roam freely in our galaxy and our life expectancy would be ten times longer than what it is today.


 
I take umbrage with the first part of your post, but I always see this argument spring up and it grinds my gears to no end.

The Dark Ages didn't come about because of religion (some scholars would argue that it really didn't come about at all, but that's something else entirely), nor did it conspire to keep the masses ignorant; crushing poverty and the Feudal system took care of that. In fact, the Church was one of the few (if not only) institutions that offered any sort of education at the time; if you could read, it's likely because the Church had taught you. And this is just the Christian world; Islamic nations preserved and expanded upon scientific literature that would have been entirely lost otherwise, for example.

Plus, only focusing on "Religion stopped science!" ignores another crucial aspect - art. Religion has been a fundamental driving force behind the development of art, and this period was no different. Music, painting, literature - all owe a significant debt to religion.

Was there repression, and ignorance, and all that? Yes, absolutely. But treating religion as the only culprit, and asserting that without it we'd be galaxy-faring supermen, is mind-numbingly asinine.

Your hypothesis seems to have more of a basis in a Family Guy sketch than in anything resembling reality.


----------



## Engert (Dec 11, 2012)

I am aware of all of those gahars (even though these might be new concepts to you). The problem is that religion would never allow real science to progress and would burn people to the stake if they said anything heretic. That was the reality back then.
And again, yes I am aware of all the art during a period when church was reining supreme.


----------



## Gahars (Dec 11, 2012)

Engert said:


> I am aware of all of those gahars (even though might be new concepts to you). The problem is that religion would never allow real science to progress and would burn people to the stake if they said anything heretic. That was the reality back then.
> And again, yes I am aware of all the art during a period when church was reining supreme.


 
Aw, you're trying to be condescending here, Engert? That's cute.

So you're aware that religion actually fostered education and preserved scientific knowledge and reasoning... while at the same time asserting that religion opposed science at every turn. That seems to be a bit of a contradiction there.

I don't know, maybe you could admit that the big bad wolf of religion wasn't the only factor at play here. Perhaps you could acknowledge that religion actually played  a big role in fostering the development of science and education, and so acting as if it was the only thing "keeping us back" from a Jetsons-like utopia is a laughable display of ignorance.  You might want to concede that religion isn't unique in instigating conflict and hatred; if history has shown us anything, it's that people can and will always find something to fight over. And maybe you could just accept when you're wrong and not try to play it off as if you're the real expert.

I know that's a lot of nuance to ask from the guy who said that religion "turns you into a retard," but hey, I tried.


----------



## Engert (Dec 11, 2012)

I can see that you’re religious gahars and the type of religious guy what would go to war for his belief with no proof but let’s try this another way. 
I accept all that you mentioned regarding religion. Ok? They are all true.
Now here is a simple question: Why burn someone for believing in facts?
Do you see science burning people for believing? No.
This is the base of the argument. Not details. So don't dance around and jump all over. Just focus on the fundamentals. This is where everything boils down. At death. 
When you take someone’s life that’s where things get really serious. 
And that's why religion has been impeding human progress. Because they took the lives of people who were observing and noticing that things were different and not what the church said.


----------



## Lucifer666 (Dec 11, 2012)

Engert said:


> Got your PM Hyro-Sama.
> My only problem with religion is this. Why do you have to force it on other people?
> Do you see scientists knocking on your door trying to convert you into a scientist? No.
> Do you see scientist waging holy wars in the name of science? No.
> ...


 
That, and indoctrination. Drilling beliefs into a child's brain with constant repetition, leaving no space for any freedom to contemplate the universe and how it came into existence independently.

I, for one, am a serious atheist; however, if I were to become a parent, my child's beliefs are his/her choice completely. I will provide textbooks and resources, and he/she can decide what to go about believing, so long as it does not hinder anyone else's freedom to believe in whatever deity/lack of one.

Edit: Also, please note that my username should not influence the seriousness of this post whatsoever. I know what it looks like.


----------



## Gahars (Dec 11, 2012)

Engert said:


> I can see that you’re religious gahars and the type of religious guy what would go to war for his belief with no proof but let’s try this another way.


 
And I have to stop you right there, because... wow. Swing and a miss, right? (If you had bothered to read the thread this should've been obvious, but reading, schmeading, am I right?)

Also, let's say for a second that I was religious. That is one of the most blatant, obvious dismissals I've ever seen anyone resort to. I know reflection and critical thinking aren't easy, but are you that desperate to avoid contemplation? I mean, for a guy who hates religion for blocking progress and free thought, you seem to revel in your own ignorance.



Engert said:


> I accept all that you mentioned regarding religion. Ok? They are all true. *Then you should already have your answers here, but hey...*
> 
> 
> Now here is a simple question: Why burn someone for believing in facts? *We're talking about a scared, uneducated population here (even most lords and kings were illiterate, after all). Fear and panic, not rationality, prevails. Anything can be twisted to justify such behavior - religion is certainly no exception, but it's not the be-all, end-all either. If anything, this argument makes a scapegoat out of religion rather than accepting that this is an ugly, unfortunate part of human nature.*
> ...


----------



## Engert (Dec 11, 2012)

I don't see an answer here Gahars. All i see is you dissecting my post because you disagree with me and you kind of lost track of the point.
Let me simplify it even further.
Do you think it's right for a belief which has no facts to take the lives of other people?
Let’s start from here and than we’ll branch off. Ok? How does that sound?


Ps: i did read the whole thread but you come across as a fundamentalist.


----------



## shortz1994 (Dec 11, 2012)

@Engert, i do see your point of view cause it's right in line with my own.
 the problem i have with the whole issue that just popped up with religion an science is this. 
  as long as the science was in line with what the church was saying to the people, it's was all good, but as soon as it went against the church the person was burned at the stake. called a witch or the devil. we can see it in the greatest  works of all, deviance, an others works at this period in time.  
 why do you think they are just finding some of their work now.( cause it was hidden from the church, if it had not they would have been hung)
 even now when people start talking about  evolution vs creation. evolutionist are called "nutts" or "crazy". whats crazy to me is thinking god, or who ever you believe in, sneezed, had a bowel movement, an we were created. (or snapped their finger.).


----------



## Engert (Dec 11, 2012)

Like i said Shortz1994 the line is drawn at death. People are free to believe whatever they want to believe as long as they don't harm others physically. I totally respect whatever they want to believe.
I just don't want Evangelists knocking at my door trying to convert me or people waging holy wars 'cos their religion is better.

Edit: And i also want religion out of the government. I know that's kind of whishful thinking but that's what i would prefer.


----------



## BlueStar (Dec 11, 2012)

Excellent, latest census shows 4 million less Christians in the UK than ten years ago, number of people with no religion doubles in the same period to 14m. I'd say the majority of people who describe themselves as Christian just mean culturally rather than actually having accepted Jesus Christ as their personal savior, and the vast, vast majority don't go to church apart from funerals. Keep getting even more secular like this and the CoE will fade (further) into irrelevance.


----------



## Smuff (Dec 11, 2012)

C of E only exists so Henry VIII could get divorced.


----------



## SoraK05 (Dec 11, 2012)

http://gbatemp.net/threads/the-game-of-life.336612/
Religion connotes practicing the teaching of life from God.


----------



## Engert (Dec 11, 2012)

SoraK05 said:


> http://gbatemp.net/threads/the-game-of-life.336612/
> Religion connotes practicing the teaching of life from God.


I quickly read your pdf about the game of life. Some of the points in that pdf are already done by regular people somewhere in the world without being religious or believing in god. Having said that, that's how religion should be. Theoretically. But practically is another matter.


----------



## Sanoblue (Dec 11, 2012)

Guild McCommunist said:


> Despite the fact that religions (even sects within religions) are significantly different and have different beliefs.


exactly it doesnt matter what they believe as long as the general populous is united.... and when that happens you get... religious wars (or more accurate) war in the name of a bearded white man sitting on a cloud... >.>;


----------



## shortz1994 (Dec 11, 2012)

> bearded white man


  he wasn't white i hate to burst this christian bubble.. if he was born in the middle east as it is "said". that would make him a tan, golden brown complection as most of the people from that region are.  (got to love those fake southern baptist. the worst christian there is.)


----------



## Shinigami357 (Dec 11, 2012)

Religion is a balm. It's the cure-all for whatever horrible fuckery we've done. Owait, no, that's faith.

Actually, religion [for the most part] is just a bunch of doddering old fools telling people what to do because 'God told them so'. They can go on and on about how religion is good and whatnot, but last time I remembered, aside from race, religion is the most divisive force humanity knows. Sometimes, they're even connected [i.e. the white man is the 'chosen race' or some shit].

I mean, not to be ranting, but I've had it up to here with people shoving religion [or, well, trying to anyway] up my nose. The highlight of this was someone telling me on the internet that 'the pope is like God on earth'. Seriously, if your religion teaches you that any human, and I mean anyone at all, is even close to 'being' God, then all of you need to be removed from the gene pool, IMHO.


----------



## Castiel (Dec 11, 2012)

One of the things that really irks me is that people seem to expect followers of a religion to be perfect, even many people in those religions. And so when they make mistakes people get these judgmental thoughts and feelings about believers of a certain religion. But the majority of believers that I have run in to agree that no one is perfect. In fact that's one of the descriptions of a Christian. To accept the fact that we are all sinners and fall short of the glory of God. We're human. We make mistakes. We aren't and will never be perfect.

One of the most popular sayings I have ever heard is, "The past in in the past. Learn from your mistakes and make yourself a better person today." Or some other variation of this. Yet, when it comes to religions or some sort of belief people often times judge based on the past. Everyone makes mistakes when they are growing up. Back then we didn't have much to go on. We have learned so much since then and the majority are coming to realize their mistakes, or the mistakes of their ancestors. There have been very terrible times in the history of the Church, yes, and there are still some very terrible times nowadays. There have also been more than enough problems between people who don't have a particular religious belief too. There will always be those who end up taking their belief too far.

One of my beliefs and the beliefs of the Church I go to is that, since the New Testament, we don't believe God would sent us to kill people. Extremists and radicals of a certain belief do take it way too far. I also don't believe we should try and force our beliefs on others. Sure, we can share and discuss what we believe, but it is up to the other person to come to the conclusion of what it is that they believe. As Foxi4 said earlier, 


Foxi4 said:


> Things would probably go much smoother if we didn't butt into each other's business and get on with our lives instead of making it our priority to change the beliefs of other parties at all costs


Obviously I can't speak for everyone, and I don't even know if I can speak for the majority. It saddens me whenever I hear news about someone who went out and killed someone else "for their God." I don't believe that to be truth or a right thing to do at all. Another example is when that guy from that one place (I know, descriptive eh?) went out and was going to have a "National Burn a Quran Day." That was just wrong and disrespectful. People are entitled to believe whatever they so wish.

It seems like a lot of the hatred towards people who have a certain belief is coming from focusing only on the radicals rather than the people who do things like coming to a thread like this and try to have a civil discussion about it.

/rant


----------



## Engert (Dec 11, 2012)

You (castiel) sir are a rational human being. There should be more like you. 
I also believe this: 


> The past in in the past. Learn from your mistakes and make yourself a better person today


I have one question for you. What are your thoughts on people like LDS or Evangelists who feel like others need to be saved?
I would like to understand (from a believer's point of view) what makes people feel that they need to save me or that i must hear about Jesus Christ (the carpenter from Jerusalem who lives in Heaven). 
Does it ever occur to believers that knocking into my door and talking about things that i find ridiculous would make them more popular or successful in their quest? Why this need basically? Why do believers feel that I’m missing out on the message of Jesus Christ and his teachings?
I believe that this is the fundamental problem which leads to animosity and wars later on. 
If you believe something you don’t have to push it down my throat and try to affect the laws of a certain country. 
And that’s where the contrast with science lies. Because there is no belief involved, there’s no need to advertise. Science can say “We found X, Y and Z in Mars, here are the pictures. End of story”.


----------



## smile72 (Dec 11, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> See, this is exactly what I was talking about earlier - yes, you are so smart to be an Atheist, so much smarter than I am.


I just believe that religion is just a bunch of lies... that was created to control the mass amount of people...I mean look at Catholicism.


----------



## air2004 (Dec 11, 2012)




----------



## Foxi4 (Dec 11, 2012)

smile72 said:


> I just believe that religion is just a bunch of lies... that was created to control the mass amount of people...I mean look at Catholicism.


What about it? Because I happen to be a Catholic and there has been a series of changes within the Church as of late - the process started under John Paul IInd's rule, and we all know how much of an open-minded person he was.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Dec 11, 2012)

sanoblue said:


> exactly it doesnt matter what they believe as long as the general populous is united.... and when that happens you get... religious wars (or more accurate) war in the name of a bearded white man sitting on a cloud... >.>;


 
The worst wars have been fought over money but we don't exactly get up in arms over money.

We had wars of religion... a long, long time ago.


----------



## Valwin (Dec 11, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> See, this is exactly what I was talking about earlier - yes, you are so smart to be an Atheist, so much smarter than I am.


well he was shown hard proof  so yea he really smart


----------



## Hadrian (Dec 11, 2012)

What is the purpose of religion?

MY MOM!!!


----------



## Foxi4 (Dec 11, 2012)

Valwin said:


> well he was shown hard proof so yea he really smart


No he hasn't - he typed a single sentence that made him look like a twat, and I called him out on it. If you want to voice out an opinion like that, you should at the very least support it, which he did later on.


----------



## wrettcaughn (Dec 11, 2012)

If I can't see it, taste it, touch it, hear it, or smell it...it must not exist.  Right?  Perception is a fickle thing, innit?


----------



## WiiUBricker (Dec 11, 2012)

PsionicRoshambo said:


> I think that's what comforts me the most about death, or rather my own death. I honestly hope there is no such thing as an afterlife because no matter how you cut it this life sucks, you want to live longer? too bad! You want your loved ones to be alive when they are dead? Too bad! Don't want to grow old and get sick? Too bad! Now if there is some sort of afterlife you mean I am going to have to remember all that crap AND be happy about it? Of fuck that shit. When I die I wan't oblivion, it sounds perfectly delightful no worries no wants no nothing. Ultimate sleep? I don't have to wake up? Shit sign me up! lol


Are you kidding? The most valuable thing in life or rather the meaning of life is to gain experience. If I die, I don't want to lose everything that I have learned. I don't want my HDD to be wiped and start over.


----------



## air2004 (Dec 11, 2012)

Your HDD wont be wiped clean . Where do you think deja vu comes from ? You will live this life again but with different faces and places until you get it right.


----------



## Engert (Dec 11, 2012)

WiiUBricker said:


> Are you kidding? The most valuable thing in life or rather the meaning of life is to gain experience. If I die, I don't want to lose everything that I have learned. I don't want my HDD to be wiped and start over.



Call me crazy but that's what people will do in 10.000 years. They'll transfer their conscience from unit to unit (there won't be a human body anymore) and they'll live forever (or until the end of this Universe). And when they'll look back at us ... they'll look with admiration kind of like we look at the now-extinct Neanderthal species.


----------



## Castiel (Dec 11, 2012)

Engert said:


> You (castiel) sir are a rational human being. There should be more like you.
> I also believe this:
> 
> I have one question for you. What are your thoughts on people like LDS or Evangelists who feel like others need to be saved?
> ...


In the Bible, just before Jesus got taken back into Heaven, He commanded His followers to go out and make disciples. I wouldn't go door to door and try to shove my beliefs down someones throat. If I felt really compelled I might go and try to gain a relationship with them, or have a conversation with them and try and make the conversation go in a direction that would allow me to mention what I believe. But I would never disrespect what someone else believes or shove it in their face. They are free to believe whatever they so choose.



Old8oy said:


> If I can't see it, taste it, touch it, hear it, or smell it...it must not exist. Right? Perception is a fickle thing, innit?


Just curious, but then how would you describe love, or hate, or any feeling really? (Unless you were being facetious and I just totally misunderstood  )


----------



## Foxi4 (Dec 11, 2012)

Castiel said:


> In the Bible, just before Jesus got taken back into Heaven, He commanded His followers to go out and make disciples. I wouldn't go door to door and try to shove my beliefs down someones throat. If I felt really compelled I might go and try to gain a relationship with them, or have a conversation with them and try and make the conversation go in a direction that would allow me to mention what I believe. But I would never disrespect what someone else believes or shove it in their face. They are free to believe whatever they so choose.


Many people misinterpret that passage (Jehova's Witnesses, for one) - what he meant was exactly what he was doing - praise God, and if someone's interested in the preaching, accept him or her into the community. That doesn't entail going door to door - we have professional preachers and if anyone's interested in attending Church, he or she is always welcome to do so.


----------



## Wizerzak (Dec 11, 2012)

Old8oy said:


> If I can't see it, taste it, touch it, hear it, or smell it...it must not exist. Right? Perception is a fickle thing, innit?


I cannot see, taste, touch or smell subatomic particles... are you saying they don't exist too?


----------



## Engert (Dec 11, 2012)

Just an FYI. If you use science as an analogy to prove the existence of God, you're in the wrong path of understanding.


----------



## Foxi4 (Dec 11, 2012)

Wizerzak said:


> I cannot see, taste, touch or smell subatomic particles... are you saying they don't exist too?


He was being sarcastic - do note the comment about _perception being fickle._

What he really meant was that the fact that we don't perceive something doesn't mean that it doesn't exist, and in fact, the other way around as well.


----------



## BORTZ (Dec 11, 2012)

Hadrian said:


> What is the purpose of religion?
> 
> MY MOM!!!


 
Quoting for truth.
Anyways i have my beliefs, but it will be a dogs cold breakfast before i get into a fight on the internet about religion.


----------



## Hadrian (Dec 11, 2012)

BortzANATOR said:


> Anyways i have my beliefs, but it will be a dogs cold breakfast before i get into a fight on the internet about religion.


What is the point of having the internet if you're not going to force your opinions on people?


----------



## BORTZ (Dec 11, 2012)

Ill open a new thread for that one.


----------



## Gahars (Dec 11, 2012)

Engert said:


> I don't see an answer here Gahars. All i see is you dissecting my post because you disagree with me and you kind of lost track of the point.
> Let me simplify it even further.
> Do you think it's right for a belief which has no facts to take the lives of other people?
> Let’s start from here and than we’ll branch off. Ok? How does that sound?


 
Either you're just not reading, or are you refusing to think on what you are reading... unless pointing out that the situation was far more complex than "Religion kills because they think science bad!" is somehow dodging the issue.

TL;DR (Because I suppose anything more than a "Yes, Engert, your blatant oversimplifications with no basis in reality are totally correct," won't sustain your interest...):


Spoiler









It's good. Seriously.





Engert said:


> Ps: i did read the whole thread but you come across as a fundamentalist.


 
Because saying that religion can help people find comfort, asserting that Christianity is a religion and not a philosophy, and disagreeing with the notion that God had to exist in order to create the universe (and supplying a video where Stephen Hawking uses science to argue that there is, in fact, no God) sounds like a real fundamentalist, right?

Either you're desperately lying here to save face (hint: it isn't working), or you honestly believe that having to gall to show respect towards religion (and note its positive contributions to society, rather than mindlessly bash it) is akin to being a fundamentalist.

That's a pretty warped and twisted worldview... but, Engert, at this point, I can hardly say I'd be surprised.


----------



## Engert (Dec 11, 2012)

So you still didn't answer my question.
This (our conversation) is a perfect example of people not finding middle ground. If we who speak the same language can't find middle ground how do you expect Israel and Palestine to find middle ground?
I guess it's all cool even if it ends like this, as long as we don't wage holy wars that is.


----------



## Castiel (Dec 11, 2012)

Engert said:


> So you still didn't answer my question.


Just to make you happy Engert, I shall try to explain.


Engert said:


> Now here is a simple question: Why burn someone for believing in facts? *Because some people don't think before acting.*
> Do you see science burning people for believing? No.
> This is the base of the argument. Not details. So don't dance around and jump all over. Just focus on the fundamentals. This is where everything boils down. At death.
> When you take someone’s life that’s where things get really serious.
> ...


----------



## Foxi4 (Dec 11, 2012)

I'm being used as a Source (or perhaps I should say _sources that I dug up_) - I should probably feel humbled now...


----------



## Castiel (Dec 11, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> I'm being used as a Source (or perhaps I should say _sources that I dug up_) - I should probably feel humbled now...


You tend to get around in these topics


----------



## Foxi4 (Dec 11, 2012)

Castiel said:


> You tend to get around in these topics


I usually can't help myself but waltz into them, especially when I hear the _"Rarara, Religion stalls science!"_ when in many cases, religion just happens to be the very inspiration behind it. Sure, there was a period of book burning and other nonsense, but Christianity grew out of it - it's a dark chapter in its history, but most, if not all movements have such chapters.

Condemning Christianity as a whole is like condemning the U.S because at one point a good portion of it strongly supported slavery and racial segregation.


----------



## wrettcaughn (Dec 11, 2012)

Engert said:


> So you still didn't answer my question.
> This (our conversation) is a perfect example of people not finding middle ground. If we who speak the same language can't find middle ground how do you expect Israel and Palestine to find middle ground?
> I guess it's all cool even if it ends like this, as long as we don't wage holy wars that is.


Sorry dude, but the only one failing to see a middle ground in that convo is you. Gahars is pretty far from a fundamentalist, but he's also not someone to bash other people's religious beliefs merely because he disagrees with them. Christians, Muslims, Buddists, Jews, Atheists, Agnostics...are all great, so long as they don't infringe upon one another claiming righteousness or scientific deduction. Sadly, the bigger men are too few.


----------



## air2004 (Dec 11, 2012)

I love twisted logic when it comes to religion , and how it often plays on peoples emotions in order to justify its self. God is real or something bigger than ourselves anyway. Seriously the big bang ? ok I will let you have that , but what caused the big bang ? what was before the big bang ? and yes I know these questions could be asked about god ....like before god was god where did god come from ? and if god always was , what was prior to the big bang was ......who or what created god ? who or what created the big bang ? its a hard thing to wrap our heads around.


----------



## Psionic Roshambo (Dec 11, 2012)

This movie explains going door to door pushing religion perfectly.... lol


----------



## Sanoblue (Dec 12, 2012)

the great thing about science is you don't have to believe it.... its still true 

>.> cant say that about the bearded man in the sky.... or whom ever (other religions)


----------



## Vulpes Abnocto (Dec 12, 2012)

This thread went far better than any of us expected it to.
I was very pleased to see some very thoughtful contributions.
Thank you to everyone who did more than post slogans, rhetoric, and comedy to support your views.

It seems that we actually can still have civilized discussions here.


----------

