Religions

[Flutterz]

I'm an atheist and I have been for several years when I realized I didn't believe in a god.

Of course religion affects society, that's obvious just based on the number of people who are religious.

 

Since this is a religion thread this might come in handy in the near future

 

 

As a student of history you'd also be familiar with the atrocities committed in the name of atheism, I assume?

10/10

 

[Mr Poltroon]

I'm too cynical for religions. 

I wasn't taught about religions because my catholic (in name only) parents couldn't be bothered (My sister turned out to be catholic, somehow). So now I don't care. I also don't believe in souls and all that, so I don't have much reason to believe in religions, either. 

The worst turn of events is if it all ends up being true and I go to hell for it, that wouldn't be too nice. (If I were to go to hell, I at least hope it's for a better reason than that )

I could go and talk about how historically religions allowed the manipulation of people and nations but I doubt that's what you're looking for. 

 

Does religion affect our current society? Depends on where you are, but yes. It makes a difference, if only very little compared to the past.

And does it affect us positively? Again, depends on where you are. Some people are driven by it, some are hampered and harmed because of it. 

 

[Narcosis]

I could go and talk about how historically religions allowed the manipulation of people and nations but I doubt that's what you're looking for.

Since people went out of caves and decided to form organised societies, religion exists solely because of and only for that reason. There's no better tool to manipulate people, and some religions (like christianity or islam) are exceptionally good at brainwashing people. Just look at them as they subdue people; telling everyone they're the voice of the only true god and make the common rabble tremble with fear, knowing they will burn in hell for the rest of eternity, if they won't obey the commandments.

[Darklord Rooke]

Since people went out of caves and decided to form organised societies, religion exists solely because of and only for that reason. There's no better tool to manipulate people, and some religions (like christianity or islam) are exceptionally good at brainwashing people. Just look at them as they subdue people; telling everyone they're the voice of the only true god and make the common rabble tremble with fear, knowing they will burn in hell for the rest of eternity, if they won't obey the commandments.

 

On the other side of the coin a core requirement of Communism is atheism, and Communist Countries are State Atheist. Just replace the term 'God' with ... say Kim Jong Un, and replace the term 'burn in hell' with 'torture you and possibly everyone you care about.' Communist countries also like to burn religion out of society, through torture or extermination. 

[Guest]

Just look at them as they subdue people; telling everyone they're the voice of the only true god and make the common rabble tremble with fear, knowing they will burn in hell for the rest of eternity, if they won't obey the commandments.

 

That's about 10% of them.

[SilverLi]

On the other side of the coin a core requirement of Communism is atheism, and Communist Countries are State Atheist. Just replace the term 'God' with ... say Kim Jong Un, and replace the term 'burn in hell' with 'torture you and possibly everyone you care about.' Communist countries also like to burn religion out of society, through torture or extermination. 

Indeed. But I don't support that kind of thing. That's similar to exterminating Jews or other minorities. Nothing good comes out from it. I think we can live believing what we want without hating on each other. Maybe not this century but perhaps the next. 

[Mr Poltroon]

Maybe not this century but perhaps the next. 

Just you keep on hoping and being positive. I'm sure good things always happen

[Yeah Way]

Religion is, and always will be, a hindrance to the development of society. All religions inhibit free thought and action by indoctrinating us when we're young and limiting our ability to think for ourselves. We see this most clearly in its approach to apostasy and cultural diversity. Christianity says that its adherents are God's "Chosen People", and that it is every Christian's duty to spread Jesus's message in order to save them, with no consideration for the non-Christian's beliefs/rights.

 

Islam's doctrine orders its adherents to "Slay the Idolators." And apostasy is, under sharia law, to be punished by death.

 

Even the supposedly "peaceful" Buddhism has been used to rally armies and slaughter peoples of differing faiths, all for the expansionist wishes of the ruling class. See for yourself if you refuse to believe me: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Buddhism_and_violence

 

Religion is no more than just another tool humans have invented to exercise control over the thoughts and actions of the masses.

[Mr Poltroon]

Religion is no more than just another tool humans have invented to exercise control over the thoughts and actions of the masses.

Not originally. It started as a way to explain the unknown. But Science later went and rendered it useless.

Smart people then decided to make use of it for their own goals, and that's 2000 years of history.

[Yeah Way]

On the other side of the coin a core requirement of Communism is atheism, and Communist Countries are State Atheist. Just replace the term 'God' with ... say Kim Jong Un, and replace the term 'burn in hell' with 'torture you and possibly everyone you care about.' Communist countries also like to burn religion out of society, through torture or extermination. 

State communism. If you want to see real socialism, socialism that has worked, look into anarchism. 

[Darklord Rooke]

State communism. If you want to see real socialism, socialism that has worked, look into anarchism. 

 

There is no requirement for atheism in socialist countries and is therefore irrelevant to the conversation.

 

I would also point out that Atheism has caused more violence and atrocities over the years than Buddhism.

[Yeah Way]

Not originally. It started as a way to explain the unknown. But Science later went and rendered it useless.

Smart people then decided to make use of it for their own goals, and that's 2000 years of history.

Apologies, but that's a terrible historical summary. Religion was put to use by rulers long, long before people were even capable of challenging it logically. Religions such as those of Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia centred around the political leaders, giving them unquestionable authority over their peoples. Though I suppose justifying the rulers' right to rule could be classed as "explaining the unknown."

[Guest]

Religion is, and always will be, a hindrance to the development of society. All religions inhibit free thought and action by indoctrinating us when we're young and limiting our ability to think for ourselves. We see this most clearly in its approach to apostasy and cultural diversity. Christianity says that its adherents are God's "Chosen People", and that it is every Christian's duty to spread Jesus's message in order to save them, with no consideration for the non-Christian's beliefs/rights.

 

Islam's doctrine orders its adherents to "Slay the Idolators." And apostasy is, under sharia law, to be punished by death.

 

Even the supposedly "peaceful" Buddhism has been used to rally armies and slaughter peoples of differing faiths, all for the expansionist wishes of the ruling class. See for yourself if you refuse to believe me: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Buddhism_and_violence

 

Religion is no more than just another tool humans have invented to exercise control over the thoughts and actions of the masses.

 

You have no idea what you are talking about ...

[Yeah Way]

There is no requirement for atheism in socialist countries and is therefore irrelevant to the conversation.

I would also point out that Atheism has caused more violence and atrocities over the years than Buddhism.

No, but there is a requirement for equality, which you will find is incompatible with major world religions.

Never has there been a war waged in the name of atheism. If I'm wrong, tell me and I'll redact that statement.

You have no idea what you are talking about ...

I've been under religion's torturous grasp myself. I do know. Please explain to me how I'm wrong to make me change my mind.

[madvanced]

Well I believe in a higher being but I don't believe in a specific god or religion. But unlike some people here, although I know that both religious people and atheists committed atrocities, I don't believe that religions should disappear. At their core, their morals and ethics aren't bad, the problem is extremism. Also it isn't the religion itself that inhibits free though, even if there wasn't religion there would still people that would believe in whatever thing and be "blinded", that is just naivety to think that every human being would be better because of that. So whether religion exists or not there would always be gullible people and "blind" people, it's delusional to think otherwise. Continuing, religion can be used as a tool yes, but so can politics, money , etc. should they be wiped out because of it? Everything Humans ever created can be used in either a good or a bad way, so in blaming religion for everything is being just as close-minded as those you preach they are close-minded because they are religious, which is hypocritical to say the least.

 

This thread is going in a way that it's going to to the gutter. /thread

[Darklord Rooke]

No, but there is a requirement for equality, which you will find is incompatible with major world religions.

Never has there been a war waged in the name of atheism. If I'm wrong, tell me and I'll redact that statement.

I've been under religion's torturous grasp myself. I do know. Please explain to me how I'm wrong to make me change my mind.

 

 

Considering there are only 2 major religions in the world at the moment, out of many hundreds, it doesn't say much if anything at all.

 

Since when did 'war' become the deciding factor? The term 'war' assumes both sides of a conflict are armed, I think you'll find most atrocities committed by atheists are "massacres". There were "massacres" committed in the name of atheism, a far worst concept.

 

My mother's family was from China, I know all about the atrocities of State Atheism. Did you want to exchange stories?

[Yeah Way]

Considering there are only 2 major religions in the world at the moment, out of many hundreds, it doesn't say much if anything at all.

 

Since when did 'war' become the deciding factor? The term 'war' assumes both sides of a conflict are armed, I think you'll find most atrocities committed by atheists are "massacres". There were "massacres" committed in the name of atheism, a far worst concept.

 

My mother's family was from China, I know all about the atrocities of State Atheism. Did you want to exchange stories?

You're right, and I apologise for not considering such.

It wouldn't be quite right to say that such atrocities were for the sake of atheism in itself though, would it? They're to prevent dissident beliefs that go against, in this case, party doctrine. Religious atrocities are the same. I don't deny that. Militant atheism is just as bad as religion, in that it can be used to justify atrocious acts. I never advocated such a thing before, anyway: I support free thought. Also, just because I don't want to be seen as a defender of atheism, I myself am ignostic.

[Katatsumuri]

I'm not religious in any way, but I am always open to possibilities.

 

Also, I do have a large interest in religious buildings, symbolism, and traditions. But mostly just for the fun of it.

[Mr Poltroon]

Apologies, but that's a terrible historical summary. Religion was put to use by rulers long, long before people were even capable of challenging it logically. Religions such as those of Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia centred around the political leaders, giving them unquestionable authority over their peoples. Though I suppose justifying the rulers' right to rule could be classed as "explaining the unknown."

Little people on their little caves worshiped bears heads and whatnot, that's what I'm talking about.

The Egyptians believed in gods to explain the unknown (the rain, the rivers, the fire, the sun), then the Egyptian leaders believed they themselves were gods (or made others believe so), making them the rulers of the place. It's not the best way to explain it, but it went somewhat like that.

The reason why religions are centered around people is because said people picked up the gods steps and made others believe they deserved to be worshiped. But the various gods about various random things were created by people's imagination in order to explain the unknown.

 

Again, not the best way to explain it, but lost people that wanted to explain stuff, created gods. Smart people, (that maybe or maybe not, believed in gods) took advantage of other people by making themselves seem godlike. 

 

TL;DR I can't explain stuff properly, I just repeated the same sentence 3 times with different wording  Q_Q

But I mean that people created gods, and other people took advantage of it, since thousands of years ago. Gods weren't created by the leaders, but the leaders did make use of them to their own advantage.

 

 I did make a mistake when I said 2000 years of history, though. I meant thousands of years.

[Narcosis]

Ah, atheism. Such a broad term. You shouldn't mix communism with atheism, Rooke. It's more about the nations, and it's leaders and whatever they were or are up to, than their beliefs (or lack thereof).

I wouldn't even call myself an atheist. If anything, I'm an agnostic person, wishing to believe in some sort of universal, monistic perennialism. After all, there are no bad people; only bad ideologies.

[Yeah Way]

Little people on their little caves worshiped bears heads and whatnot, that's what I'm talking about.

The Egyptians believed in gods to explain the unknown (the rain, the rivers, the fire, the sun), then the Egyptian leaders believed they themselves were gods (or made others believe so), making them the rulers of the place. It's not the best way to explain it, but it went somewhat like that.

The reason why religions are centered around people is because said people picked up the gods steps and made others believe they deserved to be worshiped. But the various gods about various random things were created by people's imagination in order to explain the unknown.

 

Again, not the best way to explain it, but lost people that wanted to explain stuff, created gods. Smart people, (that maybe or maybe not, believed in gods) took advantage of other people by making themselves seem godlike. 

 

TL;DR I can't explain stuff properly, I just repeated the same sentence 3 times with different wording  Q_Q

But I mean that people created gods, and other people took advantage of it, since thousands of years ago. Gods weren't created by the leaders, but the leaders did make use of them to their own advantage.

 

 I did make a mistake when I said 2000 years of history, though. I meant thousands of years.

You do have a point. Its origin was most likely not as a tool. Though, even these incredibly early stages can be hijacked. Consider the shaman, medium, or other spiritualist who claims to be able to communicate with the animals/spirits. While I do agree with you, my point is that good intentions don't justify the continuing existence of organised religion.

[Darklord Rooke]

You're right, and I apologise for not considering such.

It wouldn't be quite right to say that such atrocities were for the sake of atheism in itself though, would it? They're to prevent dissident beliefs that go against, in this case, party doctrine. Religious atrocities are the same. I don't deny that. Militant atheism is just as bad as religion, in that it can be used to justify atrocious acts. I never advocated such a thing before, anyway: I support free thought. Also, just because I don't want to be seen as a defender of atheism, I myself am ignostic.

 

Tis fine don't worry about it.

 

Concerning Communist doctrine, I believe it goes something like this (I'm feeling quite ill today and I'm paraphrasing something I read a while ago, excuse me if I balls this up.) "Religion is a system which suppresses a human's potential and is therefore something that should be abolished." Marx wrote about it. It's not so much about abolishing dissident beliefs, The abolishment of religion is a requirement of Communism itself, it's a core part of their philosophy. I suppose it's the way these countries go about it which is the problem. 

 

I should also clarify I'm not a religious man. I believe in a higher being, but not in religion. And I only believe in a higher being because I find the concept of higher dimensions both fascinating and cool. And by higher beings, I of course mean Tenchi and Washu.

[Mr Poltroon]

You do have a point. Its origin was most likely not as a tool. Though, even these incredibly early stages can be hijacked. Consider the shaman, medium, or other spiritualist who claims to be able to communicate with the animals/spirits. While I do agree with you, my point is that good intentions don't justify the continuing existence of organised religion.

While I wouldn't want to compare us common people with brainless sheep, that's what most of the uneducated and ignorant people where like hundreds of years ago. Religion was a crucial part in keeping people happy and making sure there was some kind of leader. It's true that it lead to lots of wars, but I believe that the anarchy that would come up from not having a religion at all would have been just as bad. 

I will agree that nowadays, most of the people are educated and logical, meaning that religion has no significant advantages to the society. And unfortunately it still seems to start religious wars in this day and age, so I'd go as far as to say that it's disadvantageous to the society. But it was a crucial part of our past, and we can't just up and get rid of it. 

[Yeah Way]

Tis fine don't worry about it.

 

Concerning Communist doctrine, I believe it goes something like this (I'm feeling quite ill today and I'm paraphrasing something I read a while ago, excuse me if I balls this up.) "Religion is a system which suppresses a human's potential and is therefore something that should be abolished." Marx wrote about it. It's not so much about abolishing dissident beliefs, The abolishment of religion is a requirement of Communism itself, it's a core part of their philosophy. I suppose it's the way these countries go about it which is the problem. 

 

I should also clarify I'm not a religious man. I believe in a higher being, but not in religion. And I only believe in a higher being because I find the concept of higher dimensions both fascinating and cool. And by higher beings, I of course mean Tenchi and Washu.

It certainly does depend on the policies of the communists in question. Personally, I believe a gradual approach via secularism is the only way to go. Otherwise, the religious become the oppressed; and we're right back to square one. A form of universally accepting religion is certainly possible; but for that to happen, there must be reform. Perhaps it would have been wiser of me to have written "Religion, in its current form," in previous posts? 

 

On the second part of your post, I wonder if a thread about personal beliefs would be interesting.

[Yeah Way]

While I wouldn't want to compare us common people with brainless sheep, that's what most of the uneducated and ignorant people where like hundreds of years ago. Religion was a crucial part in keeping people happy and making sure there was some kind of leader. It's true that it lead to lots of wars, but I believe that the anarchy that would come up from not having a religion at all would have been just as bad. 

I will agree that nowadays, most of the people are educated and logical, meaning that religion has no significant advantages to the society. And unfortunately it still seems to start religious wars in this day and age, so I'd go as far as to say that it's disadvantageous to the society. But it was a crucial part of our past, and we can't just up and get rid of it. 

True. However, would you not agree that it functioned, at that crucial time, much like totalitarian state rule? In that it was fundamentally opposed to criticism and disagreement? While it had a stabilising effect on populations, this is, at best, a mixed blessing.