A World Without A Religion?

[kasm 0]

I think being an athiest would be the best thing for everyone. I mean, when you die you dont want to go to heaven or hell or whatever. You would rather just die and thats it.

 

1. What will be if you were wrong?. In mean time , my belief not for fear but for doing the right thing. If there was no heaven or hell, I don't loose anything. In the opposite case you will the looser.

Please the thread not about religion or the evolution. It is about that you believe in God and in the science in the same time.

 

2. I don't use any verses from the bible because you can not convince non believer in the bible by giving verses from the bible.

 

3. The thread not about the necessity of religion . There are many thread about it.

 

4. The thread is not about wars and whatever the religions are their reasons of war. The war of Alexander , Napoleon, Xan and Hitler weren't for religion reasons. The British colonize in US, Australia, South Africa and India,... weren't not for religion reasons.

 

5. The thread is not about Evolution there are many about that and I believe in the micro-evolution [real science]. To be related to the subject, you can explain , if possible, how the primary cell was evolved and distinguished and have different functions. How it evolved to the cells in this gland what I lost [the core of the thread] and how it could control many from the human body functions. Moreover have anyone succeeded to create the primary cell from scratch . But we need that in reality not imagination or assumption [which make it science not belief]

 

6.

I have been reading "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins, a Nobel Prize Winner. He is a extremely intelligent man. To answer you question about this: How would we pick what religion? Let's say we didnt and just picked the best thing from each one, what is the right ones.? Everyone has a different belief. Next i want to say i absolutely, 100%, HATE when people try to convert me. I will only be able to convert myself. This goes for most people here....

Next i would like to say Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawking are both Atheist. You need to know the difference between religious as in God religion and religion as in a set of beliefs. I have my religion that i'm Atheist. that IS a religion. Did you also know that Thomas Jefferson was an Atheist and they think Abraham Lincoln was an Atheist also because he never said anything good about religion, but was quick to say bad things about it.

I studied a complicated theories of Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawking . I followed Einstein's mathematical formulas [From one equation to another ] but I have nothing to find what he said about re legion with or against. What Stephen Hawking said about belief, doesn't concern me but I study his theories and saw his gaps and contradictions with that of Einstein.

 

7.

If you look at religion as a place to go because your sad,

No, I don't go to religion for sadness.

[intmun 0]

A world without religion...thats a thought.. There would be much less war I think, but what really would human beings be able to put faith in then, becuase I think almost all human beings have to put faith in something, even if it is each other.

[BooZker 0]

2. I don't use any verses from the bible because you can not convince non believer in the bible by giving verses from the bible.

Thank you so much kasm. I hate it when people do that.

Kasm here are some quotes from him if you do not believe me. Remember all i was saying are some of the smartest people in the world were atheist. Example:

I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own -- a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotisms.

This was in the new york times.

do not believe in immortality of the individual, and I consider ethics to be an exclusively human concern with no superhuman authority behind it.

but my favorite is this. This is something he wrote when a child wrote to him and asked if scientists pray.

scientific research is based on the idea that everything that takes place is determined by laws of nature, and therefore this holds for the action of people. For this reason, a research scientist will hardly be inclined to believe that events could be influenced by a prayer, i.e. by a wish addressed to a Supernatural Being.

He received hate letters from people for saying things such as this, but the one that makes us know for sure he was that most people know is this quote:

It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.

Only 4 more votes until 100. Never thought it would hit 100 votes.
Edited January 14, 2007 by BooZker (see edit history)

[SportsLegends 0]

Most world religions teach love for your God and your neighbor; put in this simple version, only good should come from the existence of religion. Of course, as we know, the Christians used religion as justification for the Crusades, and currently extremist Muslims are using Islam as justification for terrorism. But I don't think that religion was the only force behind these unfortunate occurences. Men fight wars not because of religion, but because our natural desire for power. Religion, in my opinion, is often merely a facade that covers up our real intentions.For those of you not familiar with the philosopher Thomas Hobbes, he wrote "The Leviathan", a book in which he describes human nature to be "selfish, nasty, brutish, and short." I tend to agree with this assessment of human nature. In the "state of nature", man is ruled by selfish desires. The institution of religion tries to teach men to give up these selfish desires and replace them with altruism and love. Saying that religion is bad (or that the world would be a better place without it) because of the few people who use religion as justification for war or terrorism is like saying that politics is bad because some people are tyrants, or language is bad because some people use foul language to offend people. Even though there are some terrible things that happen in the name of "religion", there are also a lot of tremendous things- from the big, Christian charitable organizations whose goal is to prevent children from starving, to the little old lady whose smile brightens every room she walks into.The removal of religion would not prevent wars- it would change the proclaimed reason for starting them. If not for religion, men would still divide along the lines of race, socioeconomic status, geographic location, or political beliefs.

[zyzzyvette 0]

I don't neccessarily think the world would be a better place by default, but I do think that people would be more willing to think about their actions, which would be a great help. Many times people are hurtful to others because they believe their religion excuses it, and because religion is a no-no to question, they don't want to believe their actions might be unfounded or inappropriate. If people did things based on their own personal thoughts of right and wrong, they might be more willing to acknowledge wrongdoing on their part. They might even be a bit more honest about their reasons for doing things, since I find that some people, rather than simply misinterpreting their religious texts, use religion as an excuse to follow their own paths of misanthropy. No religion, no excuse.On the other hand, a lot of people use religion as a crutch, to keep themselves happy, so no religion might mean more people who feel depressed or anarchic. These people could possibly go out and cause more problems. It's a really tough question, but I think that if there were ways to support the people who NEED to have religious beliefs, maybe counselling, or a society that focuses more on the emotional needs of people, the world would be a better place. If we didn't have proper support for those people, I think that our problems would stay at the same level, if not increase.

[truefusion 3]

He received hate letters from people for saying things such as this, but the one that makes us know for sure he was that most people know is this quote:

It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.

Ah, i remember that quote from Albert Einstien. It is true he didn't believe in a personal god.

Did Einstien Believe in a Personal God?--good reading.

 

And from the same mouth came:

Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.

[hr=noshade]

As for Stephen Hawking, here's a quote straight from a book he wrote (in A Brief History of Time, p. 175)(emphasis by me):

Then we shall… be able to take part in the discussion of the question of why it is that we and the universe exist. If we find the answer to that, it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason--for then we would know the mind of God.

[/hr][hr=noshade]

I don't neccessarily think the world would be a better place by default, but I do think that people would be more willing to think about their actions, which would be a great help. Many times people are hurtful to others because they believe their religion excuses it, and because religion is a no-no to question, they don't want to believe their actions might be unfounded or inappropriate. If people did things based on their own personal thoughts of right and wrong, they might be more willing to acknowledge wrongdoing on their part. They might even be a bit more honest about their reasons for doing things, since I find that some people, rather than simply misinterpreting their religious texts, use religion as an excuse to follow their own paths of misanthropy. No religion, no excuse.

Christianity is all based on judging your own actions. About feeling for each other--helping everyone. Putting everyone before yourself--even those who do you wrong. Christianity makes known to us just how wrong we are, and changes us--for the better. But some people don't let the Word affect them (properly). Many don't take it to heart. Like mentioned before, people will just use other excuses. People use religion as an excuse even though it's against their own religion to do so. For this exact reason, you can't judge religion by its people.

[/hr]

[Yratorm, LightMage 0]

Hmm, just my personal take on the subject.Religions exist (remember, this is JUST my personal opinion, nothing more) for two reasons:1) They offer hope and solace on a personal level to people, AS WELL AS the support of a community when disaster strikes the individual (such as a death or illness in a family, for instance), and..2) They allow (in some religions, in past or in the present) a certain section of the population (the priests, or the equivalent) considerable power.Now, what is GOOD in religions is contained in the first point, and what is BAD in them is contained in the second. God may or may not exist, but the truth is that religions make the ups and downs of human existence easier to take for many people. And that's not really a bad thing.The second point, however, works against religion. Who was it who said 'Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely?' - well, it's true, power does have a corrupting influence.I think that the best thing for the world would be to have religions that exist on a more 'personal' plane - a direct human-to-god relationship (I think many humans today still need this in their lives), but WITHOUT the existence of powerful priesthoods, who have generally spelled trouble whenever they existed throughout history.

[truefusion 3]

I think that the best thing for the world would be to have religions that exist on a more 'personal' plane - a direct human-to-god relationship (I think many humans today still need this in their lives), but WITHOUT the existence of powerful priesthoods, who have generally spelled trouble whenever they existed throughout history.

 

Welcome to true Christianity. How many times have you heard from Christians that Christianity is not a religion, but a real relationship with our Maker? A true Christian would not use any power given to him by God for evil, for they are God-fearing; is not a throne built on righteousness? They realise they're only dust, and that God can take away their power and discipline them. Anyone who upholds peace and justice will not be uprooted, nor shaken. Be sure of this: God will repay the wicked for the evil that they've done (Psalm 94:23).

[Yratorm, LightMage 0]

A fascinating post, truefusion, really. Very, VERY well put, I think.I am not religious in any sense of the word, yet your post symbolizes all that I believe a religion SHOULD BE. I believe that such a 'personal relationship with the maker' does more good to the believer than anything.I have studied a great many religions under a great many teachers all over the world when I was younger, and I think an unselfish relationship with the god-head is the finest form of belief. Emphasis on the unselfish As I said, I'm not religious. I stand on the outside, but I'm an interested observer, nonetheless.I'm not for or against the existence of a god. It's just that religion is not my way, personally. My way is just to do the most good to the people and the world around me in the shortest time possible that I can. And I'm not just talking about helping people here, but about helping any creature that needs help, whether it's a tree blown down in a storm that needs to be pushed up, and propped up so it will never fall again, or a little bird that's been wounded by a cat - anything that needs help. I don't need to go to heaven, and I don't seek enlightenment. I don't look that far at all. I guess I'm a very simple man.

[QuickSilva 0]

I personally think religion causes war and disruption. Civil wars occur and people fight there own men. Without religion would mean a whole different world, no churches, no mosques and a load of other different things. Religion and all has been round for thousands of years, and I think it is hear to change. I may be a Atheist myself, but I still wouldn't like a world with no Religion.

[truefusion 3]

A fascinating post, truefusion, really. Very, VERY well put, I think.

Oh hey, thanks! I wasn't expecting this.

I am not religious in any sense of the word, yet your post symbolizes all that I believe a religion SHOULD BE. I believe that such a 'personal relationship with the maker' does more good to the believer than anything.

It truly does. I say this through experience.

My way is just to do the most good to the people and the world around me in the shortest time possible that I can. And I'm not just talking about helping people here, but about helping any creature that needs help, whether it's a tree blown down in a storm that needs to be pushed up, and propped up so it will never fall again, or a little bird that's been wounded by a cat - anything that needs help.

Your thoughts are in the right place, or should i say your heart? But when trouble comes, or when your good is paid back with evil, how will you handle it? The hard part is dealing with evil being paid for your good.

I don't need to go to heaven, and I don't seek enlightenment. I don't look that far at all. I guess I'm a very simple man.

Ah, one of my main reasons to wanting to go to Heaven is to give thanks to God--you can't do such in hell ; although i deserve hell. Truly, God has been very good to me--so good that it requires praise for all eternity to pay Him back for it.

[glenstein 0]

1. What will be if you were wrong?. In mean time , my belief not for fear but for doing the right thing. If there was no heaven or hell, I don't loose anything. In the opposite case you will the looser.

Please the thread not about religion or the evolution. It is about that you believe in God and in the science in the same time.

That's called Pascal's wager, which has been abundantly refuted by various thinkers throughout history. Wikipedia summarizes a few a these, and I'll share them.

 

1. It argues from the assumption that a belief is simply something you can choose, like choosing a stock you hope to get rich from.

 

Related to this point, since you can not choose a belief, a "chosen" belief can't be a legitimate belief, and no all knowing creator is going to get duped by a believer who merely believes because he knows it would give him access to the riches of heaven.

 

2. It argues from the assumption that the creator is specifically Christian. Pascal's wager is still hopelessly unlikely, based on the sheer number of religions that exist (or the infinite different religions or ways a creator could exist that we simply don't know about).

 

I have more responses for you, but those are a decent start.

 

[hr=noshade]

4. The thread is not about wars and whatever the religions are their reasons of war. The war of Alexander , Napoleon, Xan and Hitler weren't for religion reasons. The British colonize in US, Australia, South Africa and India,... weren't not for religion reasons.

You should really read up on your history. Nazism and Hitler's ascension, and policies had everything to do with religious fanaticism, which was used to rally and propagandize the public into wholeheartedly supporting his horrifying war atrocities. Crosses were painted on their planes and Hitler constantly talked of his work being the creators work, etc. etc.

 

There is just a staggering, overwhelming volume of literature that confirms this. You can start at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism_and_religion and then work from there. And that is probably the central reason that this was brought up, so your naming a few wars and saying those "weren't for religion reasons" misses the point. Religion facilitates extremism, opens up crowds to people and policies that try to align themselves with that religion and helps persuade people to do things they otherwise wouldn't do. Like support war.

 

As far as British Colonies, one of their main objectives was to culture and christianize the lands they conquered.

[/hr]

[hr=noshade]

Next i would like to say Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawking are both Atheist. You need to know the difference between religious as in God religion and religion as in a set of beliefs. I have my religion that i'm Atheist. that IS a religion. Did you also know that Thomas Jefferson was an Atheist and they think Abraham Lincoln was an Atheist also because he never said anything good about religion, but was quick to say bad things about it.

I've been waiting to use this quote for a long time, here's my chance:

 

Calling atheism a religion is like calling bald a hair color.

Atheism is a stance toward religious questions, but it in no way is a religion or does things a religion does. If atheism were a religion, it wouldn't be atheism.

 

And Thomas Jefferson never affiliated himself with any religion, but he was not an atheist. At the least, he was a deist.[/hr]

Notice from truefusion:

Merged.

Edited January 23, 2007 by glenstein (see edit history)

[truefusion 3]

[1]Atheism is a stance toward religious questions, [2]but it in no way is a religion or does things a religion does. [3]If atheism were a religion, it wouldn't be atheism.

[1]Religious questions? I thought it was a stance against religious beliefs.

[2]Careful with this tiny part here, some might find it offensive (let those who have understanding, understand). ;) But you must not have seen plenty of atheists to make such a claim.

[3]Then why is it still called atheism?

[glenstein 0]

[1]Religious questions? I thought it was a stance against religious beliefs.

[2]Careful with this tiny part here, some might find it offensive (let those who have understanding, understand). ;) But you must not have seen plenty of atheists to make such a claim.

[3]Then why is it still called atheism?

 

1- or that. You phrased it better than me. No argument there!

 

3- Because it's not actually a religion?

[crayolabox 0]

With all the religious wars going on today, i cant help but think the word would be more peaceful without religion. I think it'd be good if everyone would just believe that there's a Higher Being up there and live life according to their personal principles. Nobody should have the right to say the others' principle is wrong while mine is right. It's more like LIVE AND LET LIVE. More like, let's all believe that there's someone greater than all of us, then it's up to you to believe who He is. Nobody judges anybody, and nobody gets judged. Nobody has the right religion, nobody has the wrong one.