Religious Double Standards They annoy the hell outta me (see what i did thar ;34)

[Dagoth Nereviar 0]

OK. Religion is a very questionable topic. Because EVERYONE seems to get incredibly offended by it. This brings me on to my first topic. Why the hell is everyone so hooked up on religion? I mean. If you say something bad to someone. And its about say. Their fashion sense. It's what they think look good so they'll be like. I see you disagree but I'm entitled to my own opinion ^.^. You are all like ^.^ okay then =D everyones fine. If you say, I think your religion is ridiculous and implausible they'll probably report you for racism, maybe cry, possibly never speak to you ever again. Why is it that people treat religion so much more seriously than everything else.Also another double standard is that priests seem to know everything about everything. Ok so theres an enormous earthquake and like 300,000 people die D: Everyone goes all emo and the scientists and geologists and other people that have been well educated in this field. OK so the news team goes to talk about the lovely people in white coats about what caused the earthquake. Bonny ^.^ Then they go ask a priest what he makes of it... Wait...WHAT?Yeah, I was watching an actual newsflash about an earthquake in some place I'd never heard of and they ask a priest what he thinks of the disaster. And he's like:It is punishment from god. Those people must have been sinners and deserved to die.I was sitting at my TV just like D: WHAT DID HE JSUT SAY!?Why did they even ask him! He clearly knows nothing about why earthquakes happen and is just rambling about his beliefs. Why are his opinions. Yes that's what they are, opinions. Better than everyone elses?? I quote Thomas Jefferson when I say "A proffessorship of theology should have no place in this instituion" He's right. Just cos someone has some belief thats totally diifferent to most other people makes him no expert in this field!I'm not going to start a religious debate on whether or not god exists. This isn't the place for it. I just think religion is totally overexaggerated. Whos with me.

[dre 0]

Being an expert only makes you an expert in your field. That applies to any side quite well, I think.

It is punishment from god. Those people must have been sinners and deserved to die.
I was sitting at my TV just like D: WHAT DID HE JSUT SAY!?

I agree with you there, however, religion doesn't preach that. If the priest thinks so, fine, but my moral values and teachings say otherwise (and I'm religious also).

I'm not going to start a religious debate on whether or not god exists. This isn't the place for it. I just think religion is totally overexaggerated. Whos with me.

Some places it is, others it's not. I agree that being arrogant because you're religious is wrong, but I myself don't think I am and I haven't met many people who are. I just happen to think that it's important to realize other points of view and if they're different doesn't mean the other person is the devil.
Bottom line: I think it's ok to disagree, but if you declare someone wrong because they disagree with you upon the kind of topics this post is about, then that's just stupid.
Edited December 12, 2007 by dre (see edit history)

[Mermaid711 0]

OK. Religion is a very questionable topic. Because EVERYONE seems to get incredibly offended by it. This brings me on to my first topic. Why the hell is everyone so hooked up on religion? I mean. If you say something bad to someone. And its about say. Their fashion sense. It's what they think look good so they'll be like. I see you disagree but I'm entitled to my own opinion ^.^. You are all like ^.^ okay then =D everyones fine. If you say, I think your religion is ridiculous and implausible they'll probably report you for racism, maybe cry, possibly never speak to you ever again. Why is it that people treat religion so much more seriously than everything else.

Okay, first of all, if you are hating on someone else's religion, you are not racist unless the person's mother is jewish, and that person is a practicing Jew. Yes, i know it's confuzing, go read some books on the holocaust, it should clear some things up. And I don't care what anyone has to say about my religon or anyone else's. It is my own damn opinion and they can get over themselfs.

The thing that bothers me is that it is not acceptable to have a bible club on school campus, but if were a torah, Koran, (insert your religious book her) club, it would be all good. That's not fair. That's the problem.

And as for the fashion thing: I would be quite offended if someone said I looked bad. A man obviously wrote this post, because men typically don't care what other's think, unlike women (or so I think- I am not a man so I don't know.)

Also another double standard is that priests seem to know everything about everything. Ok so theres an enormous earthquake and like 300,000 people die D: Everyone goes all emo and the scientists and geologists and other people that have been well educated in this field. OK so the news team goes to talk about the lovely people in white coats about what caused the earthquake. Bonny ^.^ Then they go ask a priest what he makes of it...

Ahhhhhhhh, I see where you're going with this. Have you noticed that the only religious figures you're using, are, infact, Christians? Just saying. . .
Anywho, nobody ever asks the Priest here anymore, but then again, I live fat in the middle of Christian conservitive Texas. . .

Wait...
WHAT?

Hahaha, that's what I am thinking.

Yeah, I was watching an actual newsflash about an earthquake in some place I'd never heard of and they ask a priest what he thinks of the disaster. And he's like:
It is punishment from god. Those people must have been sinners and deserved to die.

I was sitting at my TV just like D: WHAT DID HE JSUT SAY!?

Well, I, too, wonder why they always ask the preacher guy, it is beyond me. But keep in mind most of the people who run the media like that are phsyco liberals who want to make conservitive Christians look stupid-licious.

Just ignore it

Why did they even ask him! He clearly knows nothing about why earthquakes happen and is just rambling about his beliefs. Why are his opinions. Yes that's what they are, opinions. Better than everyone elses?? I quote Thomas Jefferson when I say "A proffessorship of theology should have no place in this instituion" He's right. Just cos someone has some belief thats totally diifferent to most other people makes him no expert in this field!

That brings up the whole, why does the media try to ask anyone. It was not so much the person's "fault" as it was the media!

I'm not going to start a religious debate on whether or not god exists. This isn't the place for it. I just think religion is totally overexaggerated. Whos with me.

Thank God. That is the last thing this forum needs. . . another religious debate. . . hahah

I think people make a bigger deal of religion than it really needs to be. But it isn't so much the religious that are making a huge deal, as it is the Atheist.

[hippiman 0]

When you talk about religion, you get down to people's core beliefs. For some people, the religion is who they are. So if you disagree with their religion, they take it as disagreeing with who they are. The main problem is when people just say that the other person is definitely wrong, it's like when people get in a fight and they think they're going to win by saying, "Well, you're stupid!" instead of actually making a point.You should never try and force your religion on others. The best thing you can do is tell people it's benefits, and any kind of proof that you have that your religion should be true. It's just being retarded to tell people that their religion is wrong and yours is right, because then they won't listen to you anymore.The reason religious arguments get escalated is because people think that people are saying their religion is definitely wrong. And you just can't say that. It's an opinion.

[SolidShadow 0]

I Agree With with hippiman. I think most people will listen to another thoughts on religion as long as nobody is offending the others beliefs.

It is no secret that people look to religion to find answers. Why did this happen and what is my purpose in life? But I believe there is a reason for everything. There is an answer to every question and that you cant believe or acknowledge in good with out acknowledging that there is bad in the world as well.

But to some degree I can understand what your saying about religion being over exaggerated. Religion is just a practice, a guide line of what you believe, in other words you don't need to be a Priest to believe in God or a monk to believe in budda. I think SOME religious people try to push there beliefs on others without caring what the other person feels or thinks. Also SOME I think are to judgmental and think that they're always right and that they have there gods personal phone number and can ask him(or her) what he thinks about this or that. I think there's a balance to everything and you can't have good without the bad or vise versa.

“In the middle of the journey of our life I came to myself within a dark wood where the straight way was lost.”Dante Alighieri- Dante's Inferno

Edited December 16, 2007 by SolidShadow (see edit history)

[sylenzednuke 0]

OK. Religion is a very questionable topic. Because EVERYONE seems to get incredibly offended by it. This brings me on to my first topic. Why the hell is everyone so hooked up on religion? I mean. If you say something bad to someone. And its about say. Their fashion sense. It's what they think look good so they'll be like. I see you disagree but I'm entitled to my own opinion ^.^. You are all like ^.^ okay then =D everyones fine. If you say, I think your religion is ridiculous and implausible they'll probably report you for racism, maybe cry, possibly never speak to you ever again. Why is it that people treat religion so much more seriously than everything else.
"It is punishment from god. Those people must have been sinners and deserved to die."

Why did they even ask him! He clearly knows nothing about why earthquakes happen and is just rambling about his beliefs. Why are his opinions. Yes that's what they are, opinions. Better than everyone elses?? I quote Thomas Jefferson when I say "A proffessorship of theology should have no place in this instituion" He's right. Just cos someone has some belief thats totally diifferent to most other people makes him no expert in this field!

I just think religion is totally overexaggerated. Whos with me.

I am certainly with you that religion is overexaggerated but as someone already mentioned, it's core characteristic is getting inside people. People take their religions at a upper pedestial than what they are anyone else around them are. But it's just a characteristic of religion, so there's not much we can help.

About what the Priest said, that's pretty obvious had to say something like that, it's funny how he didn't say something a bit more acceptable if he's supposed to nurture humanity but I guess we all are pretty accustomed to it. There's more politics in a Church than the USA. But after the Black Plague, I guess people had started to get an idea about the Priests, but anyway, that's not the point.

Asking the Priest to comment on the Earthquake was like asking a Scientist to comment on Creationism or God as a whole. A Scientist's view is certifiable only uptil it remains within nature.

[1]It is my own damn opinion and they can get over themselves.
[2]Ahhhhhhhh, I see where you're going with this. Have you noticed that the only religious figures you're using, are, infact, Christians? Just saying. . .

[3]Well, I, too, wonder why they always ask the preacher guy, it is beyond me. But keep in mind most of the people who run the media like that are phsyco liberals who want to make conservitive Christians look stupid-licious.

[4]Just ignore it

[5]That brings up the whole, why does the media try to ask anyone. It was not so much the person's "fault" as it was the media!

[6]But it isn't so much the religious that are making a huge deal, as it is the Atheist.

[1] I respect your view. But sadly religions don't let people define them, especially all the Abrahamic (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) religions.

[2] Just one thing I would like to say here. Look at the Moon he's pointing at, not the finger, please?

[3] Just like the Christians are after other religions, every religion is after another religion and every religion is after Atheism. Everyone wants to make the other look stupid.

[4] Trust me, everyone wishes that ignorance could be a way out.

[5] I definitely agree with you here. I don't know when will the media start growing brains, or atleast hold a disclaimer when they're trying to be sarcastic.

[6] No one really cared for Atheism until it stood out. People over-looked religious conflicts for centuries but when something new [actually, Atheism is older than Hinduism or even Hammurabi's code] came out, it was so much easier to point their fingers there. I have no idea what you are trying to say when you say we make a big deal out of religion, we don't even care unless and until your "ancient" scriptures come in between common sense, justice, equality and humanity.

[truefusion 3]

[1]Religion is just a practice, [2]a guide line of what you believe . . .

[1]Although some religions are just a practice, Christianity isn't "just a practice," for if it were just that, then there would be no drawbacks, there would be no reason to try to obtain followers, everything would be just a concept, a thing that was started for the sake of giving people something to do.

 

[2]This isn't possible, for people come to the faith, not the other way around. If that were so, then everyone would have a book that they are the author of, of which they follow, everywhere they go. There would be no mainstream religion, everything would be merely an opinion—nothing that can be established. Everyone would have the right to do whatever they want, for there are "entitled to their opinion."—even then, this statement would just be an opinion. However, there is absolute morality.

[SolidShadow 0]

Faith and Christianity go hand and hand. I think Christianity and its teachings is the core beliefs of the Theology (DEF) side of it. They all have there own unique "practices" and "ways of worship". Christian Theology and it's divisions are diverse and teach different doctrines. But they all Roman Catholicism, Protestantism and Eastern Orthodoxy and so, teach Jesus is the Son of God. So there are many ways of practice or worship, and there is more then one way to worship as long as one follows the core beliefs of there religion. I think the same goes for most religions that have different doctrines. Most teach love, peace and understanding but there are opposites side to every main stream religion. A balance so to speak, a rival deity. God is with us, who can be against us? Think about it.

 

Wikipedia definition of Religion

 

A religion is a set of common beliefs and practices generally held by a group of people, often codified as prayer, ritual, and religious law. Religion also encompasses ancestral or cultural traditions, writings, history, and mythology, as well as personal faith and mystic experience. The term "religion" refers to both the personal practices related to communal faith and to group rituals and communication stemming from shared conviction.

Buddhism is Buddhism, but there are different doctrines. Both I am fond of and are worth checking out.

 

 

For me and this just me dont hate me for it it dont matter what religion you follow. I never judge a man or women by his or her religion, a long as there beliefs dont ask them to do physical harm, your cool in my book. I feel I must respect another's faith because thats something that they hold dear.

 

Here is a list of Adherents.

 

I fall in the 33% category.... What about you???

 

1. Christianity: 2.1 billion

2. Islam: 1.5 billion

3. Secular/Nonreligious/Agnostic/Atheist: 1.1 billion

4. Hinduism: 900 million

5. Chinese traditional religion: 394 million

6. Buddhism: 376 million

7. primal-indigenous: 300 million

8. African Traditional & Diasporic: 100 million

9. Sikhism: 23 million

10. Juche: 19 million

11. Spiritism: 15 million

12. Judaism: 14 million

13. Baha'i: 7 million

14. Jainism: 4.2 million

15. Shinto: 4 million

16. Cao Dai: 4 million

17. Zoroastrianism: 2.6 million

18. Tenrikyo: 2 million

19. Neo-Paganism: 1 million

20. Unitarian-Universalism: 800 thousand

21. Rastafarianism: 600 thousand

22. Scientology: 500 thousand

 

Edited December 17, 2007 by SolidShadow (see edit history)

[sylenzednuke 0]

[1] Although some religions are just a practice, Christianity isn't "just a practice," for if it were just that, then there would be no drawbacks, there would be no reason to try to obtain followers, everything would be just a concept, a thing that was started for the sake of giving people something to do.

 

[2] This isn't possible, for people come to the faith, not the other way around. If that were so, then everyone would have a book that they are the author of, of which they follow, everywhere they go. There would be no mainstream religion, everything would be merely an opinion?nothing that can be established. Everyone would have the right to do whatever they want, for there are "entitled to their opinion."?even then, this statement would just be an opinion. However, there is absolute morality.

Kind of the point why ignorance is not the way out of these things. And people still dream of possible co-existence.

 

In religious terms? Definitely. Almost every religion has a different code of ethics and levels of morality, mostly revisions of Hammurabi's Code, great man nonetheless. Though it's kinda funny how religions brag about their morality quotient and don't even get near to Buddhism. That's like the most moral religion you can ever get.

[truefusion 3]

Faith and Christianity go hand and hand. I think Christianity and its teachings is the core beliefs of the Theology (DEF) side of it. They all have there own unique "practices" and "ways of worship". Christian Theology and it's divisions are diverse and teach different doctrines. But they all Roman Catholicism, Protestantism and Eastern Orthodoxy and so, teach Jesus is the Son of God. So there are many ways of practice or worship, and there is more then one way to worship as long as one follows the core beliefs of there religion. I think the same goes for most religions that have different doctrines. Most teach love, peace and understanding but there are opposites side to every main stream religion. A balance so to speak, a rival deity. God is with us, who can be against us? [1]Think about it.
[2]Buddhism is Buddhism, but there are different doctrines. Both I am fond of and are worth checking out.
[3]For me and this just me dont hate me for it it dont matter what religion you follow. I never judge a man or women by his or her religion, a long as there beliefs dont ask them to do physical harm, your cool in my book. I feel I must respect another's faith because thats something that they hold dear.

I fall in the 33% category.... [4]What about you???

[1]I cannot surround my judgments on definitions alone, for even i have to check and see if they have defined the religion properly according to the religion's standards, etc, itself; and i can't consider generalizations. However, there are things that separate religion from practices and things that are beyond practices. One does not need to believe in good in order to act good, or i should say, one does not need to believe in commands by these religions in order to act them out. There are statements in my religion that goes beyond practices, that are spoken as a fact. By not believing in them, you cannot be considered a follower, at least by my definition, of this religion, for then it'll be just something on the side for you, nothing of importance. Many religions, i'll admit, agree upon many things, mostly concerning the ego, but like you said they each have their own doctrines. As for the denominations of Christianity: Each agree to what is clear. Somethings in the Bible require extra reading in order to understand what they're talking about. This is why many speak out of ignorance when they feel they have interpreted one part of the Bible as correct as they imply, but their ignorance is later shown. However, some are just forgetful. Think about this: Isn't the God with power the only one that can spread the belief of Himself to the majority of the earth's population, as the charts show? (Not to say the i believe the charts are 100% accurate, for that study could have been taken years ago.)

[2]I have studied Buddhism, i found that it implies a Divine Being. But the irony is that Buddhism is not a theistic religion, it's more atheistic than anything, yet it implies a Divine Being. How is this possible? I have taken the time to study many religions—even those that contradict my current faith. I have questioned them as hard as i questioned my current faith, and this is what i have found: my religion is more consistent with reality and logic. Some followers of my religion may even be inclined to say that i have tested my religion to a dangerous level, but this adds more to the reason on why i believe what i believe and will argue for it to whatever extent.

[3]Because of how hard i have tested my religion, i am inclined to bring people to God via Christ, for i believe grace is the only way mankind can obtain salvation. However, i also take up this one part in this one verse concerning this matter, Eze 3:27:

Whoever will listen let them listen, and whoever will refuse let them refuse

I am fully content with, "At least i tried." But expect me to defend my beliefs when slander or false things are be-ing talked about it. And morality based on physical matters should not be your only basis for judging morality, for things can go beyond the flesh. I mean, is it okay to slander and debunk someone for the sake of entertainment, to just get a few laughs? How many people have committed suicide because of their emotional abuse received from others? To add to this, there are two kinds of faith: good and bad faith. If bad faith is something that they hold dear, though it contradicts your belief in "so long as it doesn't physically hurt others," is it okay to continue to respect their faith when you bear knowledge of their faith? Couldn't one argue, "You are just like them for allowing them to continue"? Here's my philosophy: If you're going to replace faith, replace it with a good or better one—don't let them wonder around without any faith at all. People need faith, or else they'd wander life confused and lost.
[4]I would fall into the 33%.

In religious terms? Definitely. Almost every religion has a different code of ethics and levels of morality, mostly revisions of Hammurabi's Code, great man nonetheless. Though it's kinda funny how religions brag about their morality quotient and don't even get near to Buddhism. That's like the most moral religion you can ever get.

No, even out of religious terms. For the sake of discussion, i shall—for now—consider what most atheists consider: that athiesm is not a religion. With that said, don't even atheists believe in absolute morality? Don't even they believe in a morality that everyone else considers as true? If you were to ask them, some may say, "It was done to me, and i didn't like it. That is why i consider it bad." As for Hammurabi's code: Hammurabi, according to Wikipedia, existed within the late 1,700s of B.C. With the information provided in the Bible and with the dating of these manuscripts, it can be said that the time of Abraham and those before him existed far before Hammurabi. During, before and after the time of Abraham, God was disciplining people for their sins, so absolute morality existed during these times, etc, as well. And there's also Gen 3:5.

[sylenzednuke 0]

[1]majority of the earth's population, as the charts show? (Not to say the i believe the charts are 100% accurate, for that study could have been taken years ago.)
[2]I have studied Buddhism, i found that it implies a Divine Being. But the irony is that Buddhism is not a theistic religion, it's more atheistic than anything, yet it implies a Divine Being. How is this possible? I have taken the time to study many religionseven those that contradict my current faith. I have questioned them as hard as i questioned my current faith, and this is what i have found: my religion is more consistent with reality and logic. Some followers of my religion may even be inclined to say that i have tested my religion to a dangerous level, but this adds more to the reason on why i believe what i believe and will argue for it to whatever extent.

[3]Because of how hard i have tested my religion, i am inclined to bring people to God via Christ, for i believe grace is the only way mankind can obtain salvation. However, i also take up this one part in this one verse concerning this matter, Eze 3:27: I am fully content with, "At least i tried." But expect me to defend my beliefs when slander or false things are be-ing talked about it. And morality based on physical matters should not be your only basis for judging morality, for things can go beyond the flesh. I mean, is it okay to slander and debunk someone for the sake of entertainment, to just get a few laughs? How many people have committed suicide because of their emotional abuse received from others? To add to this, there are two kinds of faith: good and bad faith. If bad faith is something that they hold dear, though it contradicts your belief in "so long as it doesn't physically hurt others," is it okay to continue to respect their faith when you bear knowledge of their faith? Couldn't one argue, "You are just like them for allowing them to continue"? Here's my philosophy: If you're going to replace faith, replace it with a good or better onedon't let them wonder around without any faith at all. People need faith, or else they'd wander life confused and lost.

[4]No, even out of religious terms. For the sake of discussion, i shallfor nowconsider what most atheists consider: that athiesm is not a religion. With that said, don't even atheists believe in absolute morality? Don't even they believe in a morality that everyone else considers as true? If you were to ask them, some may say, "It was done to me, and i didn't like it. That is why i consider it bad." As for Hammurabi's code: Hammurabi, according to Wikipedia, existed within the late 1,700s of B.C. With the information provided in the Bible and with the dating of these manuscripts, it can be said that the time of Abraham and those before him existed far before Hammurabi. During, before and after the time of Abraham, God was disciplining people for their sins, so absolute morality existed during these times, etc, as well. And there's also Gen 3:5.

[1] The only reason Judaism and the later faiths have remained until present day is because they could spread as the World was comparatively smaller. Now you may ask how Hinduism has existed, it was isolated in India and plus, not a single Hindu has any idea about his religion. Well, I haven't found one for 15 years. For how long did the Egyptians worship Isis? Or the Sumerians worship Ishtar? Or the Greeks worshiped Zeus? In fact the whole Christ figure was stolen from Greek and Hindu mythology. Hercules and Krishna of course. The civilizations they originate from leave easily noticable watermarks on all religions.

Religions come and go. All revisions, all called revealed truths. Even Hammurabi's Code was supposedly revealed to Hammurabi. I guess God just loves changing his mind.

[2] Buddhism does not imply a Divine being. It simply implies on the concepts of Karma and reincarnation. Which in the end implies on a universal Judging system. It doesn't define it, it doesn't go deep into it. Call it the energies reaching equilibrium. It in no way implies of a Divine being. And it isn't more Atheistic than Pre-Vedic Hindu (referring to the geography here) literature or Atheism itself. Early Sanskrit literature was deeply Atheistic, no wonder where Buddha got most of his stuff from. Though I immensely respect that guy.

And on Christianity; how does it matter if it's 'more consistent' than the others? Anyone can come up with a new religion tomorrow with more consistency, would you still believe in Christianity then? Anyone can use a bit of pseudo-Science and convince primitive man (Guess what did Muhammad did) that the only way to salvation is by jumping into a Black Hole!

[3] Why can't the animals attain "salvation" when we are just like them? Why can't the organisms on some other planet attain "salvation" and why is the Creator of Everything so obsessed with just Us? The greatest reason for why we plagued ourselves is our sophistication and ego; and religion is undoubtedly the biggest ego of all. Good existed before God, good will exist after God. Goodness is one thing this hypothesis just never brought to Earth. The insecurity of man makes him require a supernatural road-map to a simple path of goodness, a map which doesn't even correspond to nature and Earth as we know it. No one asks for my religion when I save some guy from getting bullied just outside the Church (I have a Church in my school), no one asks for my religion when I help someone on the road. I don't ask anyone to become an Atheist for a simple humanitarian intervention in their lives. I don't need to belong. For the good, I guess. People don't need faith, but it's easily to sell one to them. Sell 'em hope, tell 'em to pray instead of getting up and doing something yourself. It's easier.

[4] Atheists in no way believe in absolute morality, you can't even club the morals of all Atheists into one. I know an Atheist who is against incest, I know one who takes part in it. Most Atheists are pro-Homosexuality only because we currently live in more enlightened times. For an Atheist like me there is no absolute morality. I know an Atheist who believes in remaining a virgin till he marries, I know one who is a bit less touchy about it and I know one who'll just do it for the fun of it. Pretty similar morals, I guess.

Information in the Bible? From when did stories become information? And I would rather not believe in a book which asks me to believe that all the animal species lived in walking distance from Noah's house. I wonder how he calculated the number of species he got on there, biologists would love to have God reincarnate him. Genesis 3:5, yes we have an insecure God. How did Adam live for another 930 years? I would surely love to know. If he ever existed at all since going according to the Bible he couldn't possibly be African.

[Galahad 0]

I think this discussion will change course, and stray into yet another religious debate...To return to the original question, I too agree that religion is being exagerated... But I think religion is being used by politicians mostly, and used for not so honest pourposes... I don't know how things function in Islam, or other religions, as I don't have that much contact with them, so I'll stick with christianity, Orthodox and Catholic...In days past, Church had a lot of power, and I mean a LOT... They practicaly ran everything, and they had a say in every matter possible... But in time, they lost all that power... Yet, they still try to regain all that lost power... And they seemingly have that opportunity, given to them by politicians... Religious leaders would side with one or the other candidate for the office of the president, prime minister, secretary or any other position... Of cousre, claiming that he is honest and sincere in their intents... In return, (s)he would promise to return some of the property back to the Church, possibly some donations, or any other way, that would appear to return old powers to the church... Of course, believers, seeing their leader supported that one candidate, would vote for him/her... Not all, but most of them... And the game goes on, and on... Also, politicians more and more start to use religious speech... Now, I can't claim that for other countries, but that's how it looks like here in Serbia... Many believers think they're better than me, just because they believe... Well, they're not...I have never, ever in my life, asked anyone what their religion was, as it doesn't matter to me... I really don't like anyone trying to convert me, though I must say Orthodox Christians tend to try and convert me much more... Possibly because it's the dominant religion here... Anyways, I really don't like when someone thinks (s)he's better than me, just because I'm and atheist, and they're religious...I, as an atheist, have some set moral values, mostly based on my own oppinions and thoughts, but also by the way my parents brought me up, and educated me... They were always teaching me to use my own head, whenever possible... And so, I always think about stuff, criticize them, analize them, question them... And I don't think I'll stop doing that, any time soon... Simply, I\m just too curious... And, truth be told, religious leaders don't like too curious people in their midst...

[sylenzednuke 0]

[1] I think this discussion will change course, and stray into yet another religious debate...
[2] In days past, Church had a lot of power, and I mean a LOT... They practicaly ran everything, and they had a say in every matter possible... But in time, they lost all that power... Yet, they still try to regain all that lost power... And they seemingly have that opportunity, given to them by politicians... Religious leaders would side with one or the other candidate for the office of the president, prime minister, secretary or any other position... Of cousre, claiming that he is honest and sincere in their intents... In return, (s)he would promise to return some of the property back to the Church, possibly some donations, or any other way, that would appear to return old powers to the church... Of course, believers, seeing their leader supported that one candidate, would vote for him/her... Not all, but most of them... And the game goes on, and on... Also, politicians more and more start to use religious speech... Now, I can't claim that for other countries, but that's how it looks like here in Serbia... Many believers think they're better than me, just because they believe... Well, they're not...

[3] I, as an atheist, have some set moral values, mostly based on my own oppinions and thoughts, but also by the way my parents brought me up, and educated me... They were always teaching me to use my own head, whenever possible... And so, I always think about stuff, criticize them, analize them, question them... And I don't think I'll stop doing that, any time soon... Simply, I\m just too curious... And, truth be told, religious leaders don't like too curious people in their midst...

[1] I guess so.

[2] Yes, those times were known as the Dark Ages. Being a 'secular' country, guess what is written on almost every government building in America. Living in a 'secular' country, I know how every religion rapes my nation in each and every possible way. Politicians simply use the Churches or Temples to gather them some balance in their vote banks. Well, Atheist has more or less become an abuse, just as 'gay' or 'lesbian', it's simply considered heresy.

[3] That's the entire point. You don't follow some morality, you have set one for yourself based on your experiences, learnings and the life you lived. Moralities change based on experiences and thinking, you aren't born coded with one inside you. Religion itself hates curiosity. I have always believed, there is no absolute Truth, but Change- subject to all. And so far, I haven't found a single reason to differ.

[truefusion 3]

I think this discussion will change course, and stray into yet another religious debate...

Where there is disagreement, there is debate.

 

[1] The only reason Judaism and the later faiths have remained until present day is because they could spread as the World was comparatively smaller. [1:2]Now you may ask how Hinduism has existed, it was isolated in India and plus, not a single Hindu has any idea about his religion. Well, I haven't found one for 15 years. [...] [1:3]In fact the whole Christ figure was stolen from Greek and Hindu mythology. Hercules and Krishna of course. [1:4]The civilizations they originate from leave easily noticable watermarks on all religions.

 

[1:5]Religions come and go. All revisions, all called revealed truths. [...] [1:6]I guess God just loves changing his mind.

 

[2] Buddhism does not imply a Divine being. It simply implies on the concepts of Karma and reincarnation. Which in the end implies on a universal Judging system. It doesn't define it, it doesn't go deep into it. Call it the energies reaching equilibrium. It in no way implies of a Divine being. And it isn't more Atheistic than Pre-Vedic Hindu (referring to the geography here) literature or Atheism itself. Early Sanskrit literature was deeply Atheistic, no wonder where Buddha got most of his stuff from. Though I immensely respect that guy.

 

[2:2]And on Christianity; how does it matter if it's 'more consistent' than the others? [2:3]Anyone can come up with a new religion tomorrow with more consistency, would you still believe in Christianity then? [2:4]Anyone can use a bit of pseudo-Science and convince primitive man (Guess what did Muhammad did) that the only way to salvation is by jumping into a Black Hole!

 

[3] Why can't the animals attain "salvation" when we are just like them? [3:2]Why can't the organisms on some other planet attain "salvation" and why is the Creator of Everything so obsessed with just Us? [3:3]The greatest reason for why we plagued ourselves is our sophistication and ego; and religion is undoubtedly the biggest ego of all. Good existed before God, good will exist after God. Goodness is one thing this hypothesis just never brought to Earth. [3:4]The insecurity of man makes him require a supernatural road-map to a simple path of goodness, a map which doesn't even correspond to nature and Earth as we know it. [3:5]No one asks for my religion when I save some guy from getting bullied just outside the Church (I have a Church in my school), no one asks for my religion when I help someone on the road. I don't ask anyone to become an Atheist for a simple humanitarian intervention in their lives. [3:6]I don't need to belong. [...] [3:7]People don't need faith, [3:8]but it's easily to sell one to them. Sell 'em hope, tell 'em to pray instead of getting up and doing something yourself. It's easier.

 

[4] Atheists in no way believe in absolute morality, you can't even club the morals of all Atheists into one. I know an Atheist who is against incest, I know one who takes part in it. Most Atheists are pro-Homosexuality only because we currently live in more enlightened times. For an Atheist like me there is no absolute morality. I know an Atheist who believes in remaining a virgin till he marries, I know one who is a bit less touchy about it and I know one who'll just do it for the fun of it. Pretty similar morals, I guess.

 

Information in the Bible? [4:2]From when did stories become information? [4:3]And I would rather not believe in a book which asks me to believe that all the animal species lived in walking distance from Noah's house. [4:4]I wonder how he calculated the number of species he got on there, biologists would love to have God reincarnate him. [4:5]Genesis 3:5, yes we have an insecure God. [4:6]How did Adam live for another 930 years? I would surely love to know. If he ever existed at all since going according to the Bible [4:7]he couldn't possibly be African.

[1]People had the ability to verify the information presented to them, just like they do now. Because of this, it cannot be dependent on the size of civilization.

[1:2]Actually, i'm more inclined to ask how it became a compilation of many beliefs. I cannot see how it can have believers but practitioners. And because it's a compilation, i can understand why not a single Hindu can fully know about their religion.

[1:3]You claim as a fact and refer to two mythical figures. But Jesus Christ existed on earth, you can even visit the locations he walked through, and there's more empirical proof for many figures in the Bible.

[1:4]Whenever two (or more) religions mention an event that can be compared and contrasted with each other—that does not make them false. What makes them false is how they add up to reality and logic. The event could still have happened, but only the way that the one proven to be true has said how it happened.

[1:5]But as it has been said, the end will prove the truth.

[1:6]Just because it has been said that it was revealed by a divine being does not mean that this divine being was God. There are, also, beings known as angels. Even the angels have laws which they have to abide to.

 

[2]Karma is known as a law, and with each law, something before it had to have established it. Judging requires a thought(-out) process. Without some form of previous conscious, there can be no (universal) judging system. When another law (by law, i'm also implying truth or fact) is present and contradicts a previously established law, one must overcome the other. And an absolute law cannot be contradicted. Karma is said that it can be summarized into this: "Do good, and so be rewarded with good; do bad, and calamity shall come upon you." If that is false, then correct me. There is a known fact in the world: good people also receive calamity, and bad people also receive good. So, unless Karma is "lazy" though it is a law, then there is a Being that has full control over what is said to be Karma and allows things to happen.

[2:2]It matters to me, because it is my way of verifying truth or what is said to be true.

[2:3]Although I cannot see how it can be more consistent, whether on life or itself, than what has already been revealed, but if it were more consistent, i would be inclined to believe it. And in order for it to be more consistent, it cannot be by just anyone, for no one knows about everything in the universe. So if it were by a human, it would only include what has been made known by mankind or Science—and this wouldn't be enough to persuade me.

[2:4]By providing psuedo-Science, that would already push me away from it. And i am not sure what you are attributing Muhammed to.

 

[3]Animals have not been given laws to abide to, or at least there is no reference that says that they have. Because of this, there is no condemnation for animals, for as it has been said, where there is no law, there is no sin.

[3:2]To answer your question: God cares for His creation—whether or not they care for Him. And if there is a similar civilization as ours outside of planet earth, then i'm sure they bare witness of God's existence as well. God has made it clear that He cares for His creation. There is no verse that says that He doesn't. No one can claim that He doesn't take into consideration anything other than humans, for the text says that He takes care of His creation.

[3:3]God is good; it's impossible for good to exist before God. And if religion has the biggest ego, then it must also promote it. But then why does religion promote against it? My religion promotes that no-one is better than another, to proclaim how evil you are, to seek peace and love, that salvation is not by works but grace—all of these contradict the ego, for unless you do away with the ego, you can't come to repentance.

[3:4]The security you speak of or imply cannot be obtained in this world, therefore one other path can be taken. It is not wrong to seek security. How it became wrong in some people's eyes is beyond me. But this path could not have been created by human will, for then it could not be reachable.

[3:5]So you admit atheism is a religion. But no one asks for ours either. Many just assume what we or others are, and some already know what we believe in, so there's no need.

[3:6]Why my religion is preached is not for a sense of belonging, especially in areas where they are persecuted for their beliefs, but to bring the knowledge of salvation to others.

[3:7]People do need faith, it brings them hope and secures love. Hope and love is another thing people need. Hope prolongs life, and without love, people become hateful. These three work together.

[3:8]Not necessarily. And consider these verses: James 2:14-26. Prayer alone is perfectly fine if you are incapable of helping.

 

[4]You don't have to believe in it in order for it to be true. And you're right, i can't pack all morals into one. But absolute morality is realized when one properly contemplates on (their) actions. If one gives in to their lusts, they cannot properly contemplate on things. One reason the Bible gives against incest is that it disgraces one's family members; there are more reasons, though. And marriage is a whole other area, which i'm not going to dive into, for it requires considering a whole lot of things.

[4:2]Have you ever taken History class?

[4:3]Well, they were within walking distance. The interpretation you heard concerning this is wrong. You see, Noah only needed to bring in 2 of each kind, both male and female, of the surrounding animals. God did not flood the entire earth. Here's an interesting article concerning this: http://godandscience.org/apologetics/localflood.html Note, even the Qur'an agrees that it is a local flood.

[4:4]I'm sure it wasn't hard, since it was just the surrounding animals.

[4:5]How does that make God insecure? What harm can man cause God that God should be insecure? Perhaps i should ask for your definition of "insecurity."

[4:6]He did not live for another 930 years. But he did get a feel of immortality; he was eating from the tree of life before he ate from the tree of knowledge. As we see further in the text, in Genesis 5, the years of people keep dropping. From this, we can state that it took a while for the effects of this experience from immorality to wear off.

[4:7]This implies two things: (1) Only Africans can live for that long. (2) The East contists of only Africa. Therefore i do not understand why you stated origin from Africa.

[sylenzednuke 0]

Where there is disagreement, there is debate.

[1]People had the ability to verify the information presented to them, just like they do now. Because of this, it cannot be dependent on the size of civilization.

[1:2]Actually, i'm more inclined to ask how it became a compilation of many beliefs. I cannot see how it can have believers but practitioners. And because it's a compilation, i can understand why not a single Hindu can fully know about their religion.

[1:3]You claim as a fact and refer to two mythical figures. But Jesus Christ existed on earth, you can even visit the locations he walked through, and there's more empirical proof for many figures in the Bible.

[1:4]Whenever two (or more) religions mention an event that can be compared and contrasted with each otherthat does not make them false. What makes them false is how they add up to reality and logic. The event could still have happened, but only the way that the one proven to be true has said how it happened.

[1:5]But as it has been said, the end will prove the truth.

[1:6]Just because it has been said that it was revealed by a divine being does not mean that this divine being was God. There are, also, beings known as angels. Even the angels have laws which they have to abide to.

 

[2]Karma is known as a law, and with each law, something before it had to have established it. Judging requires a thought(-out) process. Without some form of previous conscious, there can be no (universal) judging system. When another law (by law, i'm also implying truth or fact) is present and contradicts a previously established law, one must overcome the other. And an absolute law cannot be contradicted. Karma is said that it can be summarized into this: "Do good, and so be rewarded with good; do bad, and calamity shall come upon you." If that is false, then correct me. There is a known fact in the world: good people also receive calamity, and bad people also receive good. So, unless Karma is "lazy" though it is a law, then there is a Being that has full control over what is said to be Karma and allows things to happen.

[2:2]It matters to me, because it is my way of verifying truth or what is said to be true.

[2:3]Although I cannot see how it can be more consistent, whether on life or itself, than what has already been revealed, but if it were more consistent, i would be inclined to believe it. And in order for it to be more consistent, it cannot be by just anyone, for no one knows about everything in the universe. So if it were by a human, it would only include what has been made known by mankind or Scienceand this wouldn't be enough to persuade me.

[2:4]By providing psuedo-Science, that would already push me away from it. And i am not sure what you are attributing Muhammed to.

 

[3]Animals have not been given laws to abide to, or at least there is no reference that says that they have. Because of this, there is no condemnation for animals, for as it has been said, where there is no law, there is no sin.

[3:2]To answer your question: God cares for His creationwhether or not they care for Him. And if there is a similar civilization as ours outside of planet earth, then i'm sure they bare witness of God's existence as well. God has made it clear that He cares for His creation. There is no verse that says that He doesn't. No one can claim that He doesn't take into consideration anything other than humans, for the text says that He takes care of His creation.

[3:3]God is good; it's impossible for good to exist before God. And if religion has the biggest ego, then it must also promote it. But then why does religion promote against it? My religion promotes that no-one is better than another, to proclaim how evil you are, to seek peace and love, that salvation is not by works but graceall of these contradict the ego, for unless you do away with the ego, you can't come to repentance.

[3:4]The security you speak of or imply cannot be obtained in this world, therefore one other path can be taken. It is not wrong to seek security. How it became wrong in some people's eyes is beyond me. But this path could not have been created by human will, for then it could not be reachable.

[3:5]So you admit atheism is a religion. But no one asks for ours either. Many just assume what we or others are, and some already know what we believe in, so there's no need.

[3:6]Why my religion is preached is not for a sense of belonging, especially in areas where they are persecuted for their beliefs, but to bring the knowledge of salvation to others.

[3:7]People do need faith, it brings them hope and secures love. Hope and love is another thing people need. Hope prolongs life, and without love, people become hateful. These three work together.

[3:8]Not necessarily. And consider these verses: James 2:14-26. Prayer alone is perfectly fine if you are incapable of helping.

 

[4]You don't have to believe in it in order for it to be true. And you're right, i can't pack all morals into one. But absolute morality is realized when one properly contemplates on (their) actions. If one gives in to their lusts, they cannot properly contemplate on things. One reason the Bible gives against incest is that it disgraces one's family members; there are more reasons, though. And marriage is a whole other area, which i'm not going to dive into, for it requires considering a whole lot of things.

[4:2]Have you ever taken History class?

[4:3]Well, they were within walking distance. The interpretation you heard concerning this is wrong. You see, Noah only needed to bring in 2 of each kind, both male and female, of the surrounding animals. God did not flood the entire earth. Here's an interesting article concerning this: http://godandscience.org/apologetics/localflood.html Note, even the Qur'an agrees that it is a local flood.

[4:4]I'm sure it wasn't hard, since it was just the surrounding animals.

[4:5]How does that make God insecure? What harm can man cause God that God should be insecure? Perhaps i should ask for your definition of "insecurity."

[4:6]He did not live for another 930 years. But he did get a feel of immortality; he was eating from the tree of life before he ate from the tree of knowledge. As we see further in the text, in Genesis 5, the years of people keep dropping. From this, we can state that it took a while for the effects of this experience from immorality to wear off.

[4:7]This implies two things: (1) Only Africans can live for that long. (2) The East contists of only Africa. Therefore i do not understand why you stated origin from Africa.

[1] Verification needs knowledge. Something we are not born with, but gain over time. Even the upper Paleolithic were as intelligent as us, sadly they just didn't know much.

[1:2] Current political India once was a piece of Earth divided into 3 parts, by natural conditions of course. Pagan deities existed from the time language and human settlement came into existence. Later in the Vedic era, the Vedas (most Hindus don't even know how many Vedas exist) organized almost every known Pagan deity into one spirit, the Par-Brahma. Thus, irrespective of which part of India you go to, any local deity is pulled into Hinduism. In fact, there is a new supernatural entity in every village. Due to this, every state has it's own dominant religious celebration, the names and the myths.

[1:3] You failed to get the point entirely. And whether Krishna was a mythical entity or not is highly debatable as there have been excavations which might turn out to be the lost city of Dwarka. A seal has been excavated which would only be found in a city where Krishna ruled. The gaps filling the vacuum of Jesus' early years has way too many similarities to both the mythical figures.

[1:4] Missed my point again. The surroundings the religions originate from leave their traces onto the religion. Jesus had to be nailed, wasn't the Roman Empire a giant killing machine? Muhammad had to do with Arabic itself, since 23 years of being stranded in a desert with a psychological disorder didn't give him much artistic choices. God had to prefer the tribes of Israel and chose Hebrew as the language. Brahma had to wear a crown with a design similar to the crowns of Indian rulers.

[1:5] If that's the case, then God is pretty much an a**hole to first "create" humans with enquiring minds and then later on expect them to believe in something not proven until it's too late to change paths. He's just filling Hell for the fun of it. Guess the Absolute Truth isn't moral enough Himself.

[1:6] The same can be slapped back at Christianity by any other faith.

 

[2] Circular logic. Sorry, I'd prefer not wasting my time.

[2:2] For me, nothing can be Truth unless it verifies itself completely and not a bit more than the counter-parts. I guess it doesn't take much for you.

[2:3] You sadly underestimate the imagination of Human beings.

[2:4] And that's because we are aware of a few things now. We weren't long back when plagues were written down as Divine words. Why did the people lose faith in Priests after the Black Plague? Why aren't homosexuals burned on *BLEEP* anymore? Why are Blacks now welcome to Islam? We are more enlightened then we were.

 

[3] and [3:2] Then why aren't there any rules or revelations for animals since they're His creation too? I don't really expect you to answer this since not even your God knew exactly what did he create first, the humans or the animals.

[3:3] Religion is widely-known for hypocrisy. Islam has it's own what I call "silent-trinity", the Prophet, Qu'ran and Allah. Religion IS ego, it's a direct descendant of the egoistic nature of humans. What makes us think that even if there is some guy up there, he'd only care for us? And why not the put on the revelations on the whales instead and create laws for them since their language being more complex and better than us, they could surely understand and abide God's words in a better way than we ever will.

[3:4] Circular logic again. Goodness is subjective, a completely humane way of grading an activity or thought, therefore the path is subjective. There is no Path of Goodness, hence it's not reachable, no wonder it requires a supernatural road-map 'cause nature doesn't support non-existent things. Each human creates a different path him/herself, some chose to follow someone else's out of fear and want.

[3:5] If I wouldn't have taken that as a joke, you would've proved my point that religion degrades the logical reasoning aspect of the human brain. People don't usually ask whether I even have a religion or no, 'cause simply due to dogma unfaith cannot exist. People simply ask me, if ever, which religion I have. My simple answer is, I don't have a religion.

[3:6] Read the next point you yourself made.

[3:7] Faith is not the only thing that brings them hope and/or love. Landing up on the conclusion that faith is needed is blatant ignorance of everyday life. I have a hope for the future of the race, only if we stop messing with the environment and don't end up nuking ourselves. I have love for my family, my friends and special people without the interference of a hypothesis or faith in any known/unknown religion.

[3:8] Missed my point completely.

 

[4] Without diving into marriage, I disagree with the term "incest" itself. If two sound mature humans want to enjoy something in consent with one and another, I am absolutely no authority to deem their activity wrong. I have no idea how it "disgraces" once family members, and now for the reason why some Atheists deem incest wrong is the biological barrier put upon reproduction after the mating of direct/first-wave family members. So no, when Atheists deem incest wrong, they aren't being silently religious in any way.

[4:2] In the education system I did my schooling, I didn't have the choice to chose a single subject. History, English, Hindi, Math, Science, etc. all were mandatory.

[4:3] Saw the link, read just what I expected I'd read. Circular logic again.

[4:5] Eternity.

[4:7] None of them. Wikipedia can't be trusted but this will give you the basic idea; Mitochondrial Eve and Y-chromosomal Adam.