I know the topic of religion is a hotly debated one, just looking at these boards can easily prove that, but what I would like to talk about is not if it is true or not but how it is used and perverted to fit with certain ideas to justify things. My main point is the teaching of Jesus Christ, a man believed by many to be the son of God but even if not a man most are fairly sure existed around 2000 years ago in the Middle East and preached a message of peace. His message, from what we have recorded of it (history has a way of shaping things to fit with images), tells us that we should love our neighbor and turn the other check no matter what someone does to us, yet how many religious people do this. He was angered by people profiting off of religion from what I recall (I admit I haven't really read the bible, maybe skimmed a few pages once upon a time), yet today churches, especially mega churches, claim to preach his message while profiting off of millions, something from what I can gather the man himself was against. He lived (again, from what we know of the man through recorded history) a simple life dedicated to helping others and how many "religious" people do so? This all leads me to my point of, excuse my ramblings, how many people that claim to be religious (Christian for this example) actually follow these ideas? They seem to use the Bible to shout down the opposition, use it to prove them right and to justify evils, something Jesus never would have done. How can a religion that preaches to turn the other check justify going to war and how can the teachings of a simple carpenter's son who lived meagerly in order to help others justify getting rich off people? What I wish to ask is how many people are actually âChristianâ and how many use it to justify their evils. This isnât really a religious belief thing, but how many people live by this long dead manâs teachings and how many simply claim to in order to justify their twisted desires? Is religion a cause of great evil in our world, or is it simply an excuse, one that people use to control the masses that if lost would be replaced by something else the next day? Are the teachings of Jesus (or any other âprophetâ) worthwhile to our modern society or not, and what examples (besides the Crusades and Inquisition) can people think of of religion, especially Christianity, being used to justify evils?
Religion may or may not have been invented to control people originally, we may never know. But one thing I think we all can concur on is that everyone who believes in a religion now is sincere in their faith, as little is to be gained or lost today from belief in a certain doctrine or deity. Or at least, not in the world we have been exposed to.
Hasn't religion, though corrupted, served quite a purpose. The basic idea of it is wonderful; give the people a sense of morals that they follow without question. thereof serving its purpose, Serving justice. The only thing is that people do question. And if one person sees the lies they cannot be trusted not to use it against someone who hasn't. In turn, religion has done the opposite of its original purpose. Opposed justice.
I personally dont know if it is truly is serving or apposing justice, but its doing one of those things thats for sure.
and thats just the main basic idea, it gets even sketchier if you look closer to the details
Hasn't religion, though corrupted, served quite a purpose. The basic idea of it is wonderful; give the people a sense of morals that they follow without question. thereof serving its purpose, Serving justice. The only thing is that people do question. And if one person sees the lies they cannot be trusted not to use it against someone who hasn't. In turn, religion has done the opposite of its original purpose. Opposed justice. I personally dont know if it is truly is serving or apposing justice, but its doing one of those things thats for sure. and thats just the main basic idea, it gets even sketchier if you look closer to the details
Zombie, this is one of my favorite arguments against religion. =D Atheists do not commit any more crime than religious people do; in fact, entire wars are waged based solely on differing religions, and I consider war a crime. I would be far, far more concerned about someone who needs to be threatened with burning in hell for all eternity to behave, as opposed to someone who is lawful and generous of their own free volition. It is uncertain if the prophets of a religion truly believed they were spreading the word of their respective deity/deities(therefore they were insane or delusional in some way) or they simply wanted people under their command and power(in the case of Joseph Smith, this plan really backfired; he was killed by a mob because of his preaching of Mormonism).
Atheists do not commit any more crime than religious people do; in fact, entire wars are waged based solely on differing religions, and I consider war a crime. I would be far, far more concerned about someone who needs to be threatened with burning in hell for all eternity to behave, as opposed to someone who is lawful and generous of their own free volition.
Some of the most peaceful countries in the world are mostly atheistic While some of the most violent ones are theistic. I'm sure there are other factors involved, but I still find the correlation interesting.
Some of the most peaceful countries in the world are mostly atheistic While some of the most violent ones are theistic. I'm sure there are other factors involved, but I still find the correlation interesting.
The question is what would you gain in a world with no religion?
How about a much more peaceful, tolerant, and all around more enjoyable world. Where people worked to advance scinence, arts, and so on. A place where people would not worry about other people's lives and work to benefit the society.
How about a much more peaceful, tolerant, and all around more enjoyable world. Where people worked to advance scinence, arts, and so on. A place where people would not worry about other people's lives and work to benefit the society.
Wouldn't scientists disagree with each other still? What about gangs (like the Bloods and Crips)? Don't they fight each other over matters that are secular? Would their violence disappear as well? What about corporate greed? Would that go away? Wouldn't the government still screw you over with taxes, regardless of whether Religion exists or not?
If I may add to that daswiftarrow, we would also have a much greater curiosity and a wider outlook. We would look into and research miracles and phenamena instead of just dismissing such as the work of god. We would try harder to explain the world around us there of increasing human knowledge as a whole
Take lightning a long time ago, for example. those who did not beleive it was zues beleived it was the wind. You have to admit that is a lot more accurate even being with little basis.
Wouldn't scientists disagree with each other still? What about gangs (like the Bloods and Crips)? Don't they fight each other over matters that are secular? Would their violence disappear as well? What about corporate greed? Would that go away? Wouldn't the government still screw you over with taxes, regardless of whether Religion exists or not?
Scientists disagree because we all grow in knowledge constantly, and most scientists don't disagree. You mean the pursuit of money/drugs etc...? Well really anyone will commit crimes and such over that. Corporate greed fits into the same topic. I am not saying the World would be perfect...not by a long shot. But it would be much better.
Okay what about the Shroud of Turin? Regardless of whether you believe in it or not, havent they done several tests on it? These are straight from wikipedia but Im sure you could find a more reliable source for any of them. Below are lists of theories, methods, and hypothesis used to scrutinize, or hypothesis about, the shroud.
Maillard reaction hypothesis, Auto-oxidation, Photographic image production, Painting, Solar masking, or "shadow theory", Using a bas-relief, Dust-transfer technique, Miraculous formation, Second image on back of cloth.
Radiocarbon dating, Material historical analysis Biological and medical forensics: Details of crucifixion technique, Blood stains, Pollen grains.
Burial posture, Digital image processing, Textual criticism
Oh and deton8 your reply to daswift arrow was not a very good rebutle because saying that some problems will continue to exist is in no way saying that many others won't be solved. Its not stating any negative consequences either. So if a contradiction was not your intent I apologize. But if it was well let's just say you didn't quite get your point across. Though both of you could be correct in your own respects.
