problems with religion

Post Reply New Topic

I completely understand you don't believe in a God and why, and don't think highly of religion overall, but why the hell speak it out so much? What are you trying to prove? Why HATE religion? Why not just be... apathetic? Give your mind, and the minds of those poor religious people you attacked, some rest.

I don't like religion much, but I don't like the world much either. I lose myself in fiction and if they think their book is worth living for, they might as well do it. I just wish they wouldn't try to pass off their beliefs onto me, I don't try to make them love the same things I do. But sometimes I find my life only worth living for fictional things, books, movies, stories. So I don't hate them. If they're right and I will burn in Hell then their God isn't worth worshipping anyway for feeling the need to inflict such pointless pain on his own creations who didn't have any way of verifying whether he was real.

I think that cyberscan means that a theory which explains where we came from can be termed a "religion." Gravity holds our feet to the ground. It doesn't explain where we come from. Therefore is not a religion. I was going to disagree and say that a religion must involve a belief in a God, but then I remember Budhists don't believe in God, so I can't argue that point.

[/quote]

Gravity also explains where our Earth comes from

The problem arises when Cyberscan accused the government of peaching evolution. Science has replaced astrology, alchemy, naturalistic philosophy etc. as the way of understanding the universe. Teaching science should not be compared with preaching.

For those who think that atheists should leave them alone, think about the religious who want to push their belief onto other first.

I'm from a family of atheists so I never believed anything. But even if you're absolutely right and they're wrong, why does it bother you if they choose the wrong thing? It's like if you have a friend who choose a career that's low-paying, or risky, or not respectable, well it's their problem, not yours. Relax and stop worrying about other people's choices.

Link --> Evolution Demonstrated in the Lab

Evolution is hard to see because it occurs on a time scale that goes far beyond a single human's life span. But the fact that a thing is not directly visible does not make it false. If you close your eyes, the whole world does not disappear. So scientists collect evidence and must make intelligent assessments of that evidence. Much of what we understand about the world comes, not from direct observation, but from intelligent inferences made from evidence.

I think the people who claim that evolution is a religion do not have a clear idea of what science or religion is. Science is an attempt to understand the world through the collection of evidence and the construction of effective theories based on that evidence. These theories grow and evolve as we collect more information. Darwin developed the theory of evolution through natural selection through collecting a huge quantity of evidence which pointed, undeniably in one direction. The theory, like all good scientific theories, has a predictive quality. Although he knew nothing of genetics and could not explain the mechanism that passed traits from one generation to another, his theory suggested that something like that had to exist. The basic process was later discovered by Gregor Mendel and further refined by other scientists like Watson and Crick.

Obviously if someone discovers errors in the process by which scientists collect information to support a hypothesis or theory, then it would be very valuable for that person to show clearly why the scientists might be in error. If cyberscan has discovered an error in how scientists are collecting and interpreting data, I strongly recommend he inform the scientists of their error.

Religion, as I understand it, begins with the answer you are seeking, that the earth was created by a god, for example, and leaves it at that. Religion begins with an answer and refuses to accept any information that contradicts it. Science begins with raw evidence and draws conclusions about the world from that. In religion, if evidence comes to light that casts doubt on a particular religious view, the usual reaction from some religious people is to refuse to acknowledge the evidence. Or once the evidence is generally accepted (the earth going around the sun, for example) the religious position is that it is not relevant evidence on the question of religion. My point here is that people with this view regard their belief as superior to any evidence that might contradict it. It is as if they believe that their conclusion is correct and it is the duty of the evidence to fall into line with that conclusion.

I think it can be useful to look at religion as a combination of mythology and philosophy. Most, perhaps all, religions have philosophical ideas that are useful to anyone. The Christian bible contains many suggestions on how to live and behave that are valuable to any atheist. These are philosophies. If you stripped out all the mythology from the bible you might well be left with a decent enough philosophy book. At worst, it would be the sort of thing you might find in the self-help section of the bookstore.

But do we need the mythology part? Can those mythologies be supported by any evidence? Is there anything to suggest that the world was actually created in about a week. Is there any evidence to suggest that one person convinced a mating pair of every animal in the world to get in a boat and spend nearly a year afloat before the land dried out? These may be interesting metaphors and may indeed be valuable "just-so stories" but are they realistic descriptions of actual events?

The only things we can be sure of is the stuff we have evidence for. We can construct theories and as more evidence comes in, we can refine those theories. If a whole theory is proved wrong, we throw it away. If a little bit of the theory is proved wrong, we throw away only that little bit... not the whole thing, and we continue to refine and improve our understanding. But to begin with an answer and to insist it is the truth despite evidence against it is just willful ignorance. We will never have absolute knowledge, but we can make some pretty intelligent guesses. That is all science is. The theory of evolution is science and NOT religion.

Lars

Well, it is only possible to be apathetic about something when a thing in question doesn't affect you at all. When people start making public policies based on brain-dead beliefs though, they automatically lose any "it's my opinion" protection. ("Belief" is the offending word here, "brain-dead" just makes whole thing a little worse)

Bravo!

No, it is a sciense. Sciense is based upon observation, experimentation, comming to a conclusion based upon a proovable hypothesis. Religion isnt - it is just beliving. No matter what YOU think is going to change that. Period.



Assumptions? It is called sciense, and while Carbon 14 dating isnt an exact sciense, it is precise enough too prove that the world is WAY older than 3000 years.


School is for learning. Sciense belongs in school, religion does not. Theology and the study of different religions *do* belong in school. Bible/quoran studies does not - that kind of extremist religious activities belongs in right wing nationalist training camps and caves in afghanistan.


Most people who do present such "scientific" papers usually get angry when they are required to undergo peer review and scientific scrutiny.


Atheism (a-theism, the lack of theism) isnt denying god, it is denying belivers being rational. Its as pathetic as claiming that someone who is not intrested in sports hates a certain football team, and then claiming that their football team is SOOO necessary for the world.

It's important in life to learn how to respect the views of others on some matters, even if you have a different view. You have to understand that not everyone's brain works the same way, as each brain is wired slightly differently.

Religion is one such aspect of life that it is usually advisable to agree to disagree on, or at least just not talk about and keep your views to yourself among friends. Otherwise you risk losing them as friends.

In my opinion, it is illogical to stop being friends with someone simply because you disagree on something such as religion, or certain other points, because they usually have far more "good" qualities than bad ones.

I'm half an half. I was raised up in Christianity, but I believe in evolution too. It's kind of hard to not believe in evolution and be into science. There's more concrete proof of evolution than there is of religions.

My mum and her friends would rag on about something to do with God or the church and I just keep quiet. She even laughs at the dhows I watch about evolution. If I laugh at some of the notions in the Bible that I don't believe I'd get a lecture and a clip to the ear.

I still believe in God but find evolution really interesting.

I know it's hard to hold back your views but to avoid a confrontation it's what you've got to do.

Um... evolution does not, per se, explain why we are alive. And evolution does not, per se, explain what happens after death.
There goes evolution being a religion.

Religion and evolution don't have to be mutually exclusive. I'm a practicing Lutheran, but I believe whole heartedly in a theistic evolution. I find most people who I've discussed this matter with agree with me.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

I guess it's different in the US. Religion isn't quite such a big thing over here.

And nice quote, but even if you do have an actual reason to fear and then hate religion, you're not getting rid of religion by lashing out at people who believe. You don't reach anything by doing so. You just get more pissed off yourself and the christians will retract further into their safe little religious shell, and say some more prayers.

Thanks for pointing it out. Just another reason why I should no longer attend the place of worship I do. Not that it's just a social gathering, but no one really says hi to me or anything there. And if so, things are on a surface level. I've got better things to do with my time than that.

not all