Popular Stupid Myths Number 1: Religion kills people!

[Yakuza]

well, stalin killed far more of his own people, but neither event can be taken as slaughter in the name of religion

Actualy if you do your history you will find Hitler had a rather larg religious leg to stand on.

 

[PvtRyan]

There is no evidence to support aethism as well.

I think mchammer nicely disproved this one. So I'll leave it alone.

Therefore the burden of proof still lies with him to prove evolution and the big bang (and anything else I can think of).

First of all, being an atheist does not say anything about what you do 'believe' (for the lack of a better word) in. It's not that big bang is embraced by all atheists, neither for evolution. Which is a good thing because these theories are being debated and improved, or replaced by others. Religion doesn't work that way, no it has one fixed vision of something and that can't be changed.

About that burden of proof, imagine the world as a neutral gray infinite plane, with nothing on it. The atheist (I) and the creationist (you) walk around there somewhere. On one day, the creationist tells the atheist "you know, this world was created by a God." and the atheist will say "why do you think that?" and the creationist will reply with "it's what a guy here told us a long time ago.". And the atheist will ask the creationist for proof. And then
the creationist would reply with "proof to me it isn't."

Does that sound logical to you? And the reason why I talked about a 'neutral' world, is because when something isn't observed or proven, there's no reason to believe it. The real world is very much like the neutral world, there is no reason to believe in a god, so it's not logical to ask someone who has no reason to believe it, to proof it that it isn't.

I've got no reason to believe in pink magic elephants inside the sun, so it would be stupid if someone asked me to proof there are no pink magic elephants inside the sun.

Pretty funny link. (the funny part is that many atheists argue the same way. Funny how they have their own manipulated version of Christianity in their head).

The discussion in that link is between a guy who has evidence for his standpoint (the moon is made out of rock) and a guy who is making wild claims about cheese. I have never seen any discussion where the atheist is in the position of the cheese guy, and the creationist in place of the scientist guy.

Because after all, the rock guy has evidence that the moon is made out of rock, you and I both agree there's no evidence supporting God. And atheists can always back up their case with scientific evidence, so they have no reason to be the ignorant cheese guy making wild claims.

You guys practics reverse science, you come up with a conclusion (universe was created by god blablabla) and then ask science to disprove them. It doesn't work that way.

 

[Kadayi]

How'd you mean?

Eastern and Western Cultures are so deeply ingrained with the codes of religious thought that it is futile to attempt to extract them, let alone attempt to diminish their role in shaping of our world. Religions are the oldest form of human programming/social conditioning, all others (democracy, feudalism, communism etc) are merely derivatives of those initial codes of conduct.

Notions of right and wrong, just and unjust, the very questions and motivators that form the backbone to our political, legal and social infrastructure possess inherently religious origins.

 

[CptStern]

Actualy if you do your history you will find Hitler had a rather larg religious leg to stand on.

you picked my post out of all the other material in this thread? I feel honoured

hitler was a madman, but he was a good speaker and knew how to manipulate the people. He recognised the power of the mob mentality, and used it to fuel a misplaced nationalism based on race. Here's a good quote:

"Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country" - Herman Goering


basically hitler used the jews as a scapegoat for all that was wrong with germany at the time. His intense hatred led to the extermination of anyone who didnt fit into his master plan. Jews were his primary target, but thousands of gypsys, catholics, and other minorities groups perished in the death camps as well

 

[Yakuza]

refer further down for what I think on this..


If you want us atheists to prove that there isnt a god we cant, just like you cant prove he exists. Its something supernatural so there is no way we can know for sure, but there is a basis we can go on and what to accept and not based on logic.
Since I cant prove it wrong, Ill just demonstrate the reasoning I follow, up to you to take accept it or not:

Faith
First off you admited to there being no proof for your religion so I can only assume you accepted whatever religion you are based on faith alone. Ill argue that this is illogical, if no religion has any supporting evidence than how are we to know which religion is correct and which one is bogus? There are dozens of religions out there, how can you accept a religion based on faith alone? Its like drawing a card out of a hat, you have just as much chance of being right.

Now before you even say it, I dont (I cant speak for others) accept atheism on faith. It isnt the samething and this is what Im trying to demonstrate.

No religion is universal
One thing all religions have in common is they are all confined to their cultures and philosophies of their day. Why is it the bible only popped up in one small section of the world and not the rest at the sametime? If God wanted us all to worship him and follow the ten commandments then it makes sense he would allow the bible to be viewed by all at the sametime correct?
Not only that but doesnt it say in the bible that you cant go to heaven without first accepting jesus into your heart? So that means all those people who were (and there is still many out there now) never got to see the text went straight to hell. And if they didnt and got a free pass into heaven, whats the point of being saved?
Also dont throw the its God's plan at me, since that wont solve anything cause I could turn around and say the samething with any religion just insert a different God's name.

Personal experience
Alot of religious people say they believe in whatever religion they adhire to because of a supposed divine experience, but here lies the problem. If a muslim says he has experienced something divine within his religion that he believes proves his religion and a christian thinks the same, then how do we know is having a genuine divine experience with god and whos just delusional? Or perhaps something different all together?

God can only be known through holy text
Well I think this one is pretty self explanatory, why is it that God can only be known through holy text? If hes all knowing and all powerful than he could definetely just preload us with the information, and let us accept or deny it. This may seem trivial but there are problems with having religious text:

1.)Text is too open to interpretation
Take genisus for example, so much controversy is going on on how we are supposed to accept this. Did he mean it literally, or are we supposed to look at it in terms of metaphors? And if we are supposed to interpret it to gain truth then how do we know we have arrived at the truth? Maybe we are mistaken all together; if the bible is open to interpretation than that means I can pull anything I want to out of this fabulous ass of mine and you cant tell me it doesnt fit since none of us would know the true meaning.

2.)authenticity
Consider for a moment how many times the bible has been rewritten, edited, and some parts even banned. Hell we dont even have copies of the copies of the copies of the original text.
So how do we know what is in the bible was really said by God in the first place?
Your a pretty smart guy so I dont think we would have any trouble agreeing on the fact that people, in the past and now, have used religion, politics..etc. o suit their own agendas. So if we are to accept the bible how it is, how do we know the bible wasnt manipulated by theologians in the past for their own benefit and what we have now is the result of that?

Miracles
I wont go into this because I think Im taking up too much space as it is, but Ill debate it if you wish. For now Ill refer you to:
http://skepdic.com/miracles.html
http://skepdic.com/placebo.html

Evolution
I wont get into this, plus I think pvtryan would be better at debating/discussing this, but I will refer you to a debate going on now between evolution and creationism at PF:
http://forums.philosophyforums.com/showthread.php?t=117

And these sites which will prove helpful:
http://physics.syr.edu/courses/modules/ORIGINS/origins.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=000D4FEC-7D5B-1D07-8E49809EC588EEDF&pageNumber=1&catID=2

Also one should note that evolution and atheism dont go hand in hand so if evolution was one day proved wrong (which it wont, its gone through my scrunity in the last 100 years than any scientific theory and it still holds water) it doesnt mean religion wins by default since nearly all arguments against the bible on a philosophical basis dont require evolution.
Also since I mentioned theory let me take this chance to clarify that scientists use a different lexicon that uses the word theory in the context of something that is demonstratable, observable, and is based on facts.
Note:think of this as in the context of ALL religions.

These are the main reasons why I dont believe in religion, Im sure there is some holes you can poke so poke away and Ill rebuttle. If its neccessary Ill even disect passages from the bible to show how they are..bollocks . Good day and God bless.

Man, maybe later when I have time I can go over the very basic of christian doctrin and information that you seem to not have.

1) Regarding the "Through Jesus" is the only way heaven aspect. Your right but you dont have the theological understanding in what this means. Again this is taking a piece of scripture out of the bible and blowing it out of context.

2) You dont have a basic understanding on how Bibles are written and yes we do have original transcrips...




The question that hasn't been asked yet is, what constitutes as evidence?

 

[Kadayi]

Does that sound logical to you? And the reason why I talked about a 'neutral' world, is because when something isn't observed or proven, there's no reason to believe it. The real world is very much like the neutral world, there is no reason to believe in a god, so it's not logical to ask someone who has no reason to believe it, to proof it that it isn't.

PvtRyan

There is a flaw in your argument. How do you prove to a blind man that the colour blue exists to you and I? He can't see it or percieve it (based upon the criteria that you suggest), the most he can do is invest a sense of faith in the notion of there being a colour Blue because we do, which goes beyond the remit of your neutral world. The world we as human beings inhabit is inherently driven more by the mind than the eye in almost everyway.

 

[CptStern]

I dont necessarily believe god doesnt exist (a religiously based god) ...I just think it's highly unlikely ...the universe is just too big for humans to be considered "special" or "the chosen ones"

 

[CrazyHarij]

I dont necessarily believe god doesnt exist (a religiously based god) ...I just think it's highly unlikely ...the universe is just too big for humans to be considered "special" or "the chosen ones"

Exactly. We're not special beings meant to save the universe or anything like that.

There are probably a shitload of other beings in the universe, as there are a shitload of other beings in the astral.

Some new age people even have theories that the human race was created only for other more powerful beings to have something to play around with..

 

[Yakuza]

you picked my post out of all the other material in this thread? I feel honoured

hitler was a madman, but he was a good speaker and knew how to manipulate the people. He recognised the power of the mob mentality, and used it to fuel a misplaced nationalism based on race. Here's a good quote:

"Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country" - Herman Goering


basically hitler used the jews as a scapegoat for all that was wrong with germany at the time. His intense hatred led to the extermination of anyone who didnt fit into his master plan. Jews were his primary target, but thousands of gypsys, catholics, and other minorities groups perished in the death camps as well

Oh yeah I totaly agree, especialy with you Voice or no Voice argument. I see alot of that in the states around this time of year.

Hitler was a brilliant speaker. At a time when Germany was in a state of mass deppression not only economicaly but with a bitterness of their defeat in WW1, Hitler offered the people a light of hope. Hitler even used words like Resurrection of Germany and that God will give them power.

Yet it wasn't until the Church (luthern I believe) gave Hitler the "Okay", that hitlers movment went into full swing. Hitler had to have the churchs backing to make his claims against the Jews and all of the stufff he was mumbling about legit.

 

[Yakuza]

Exactly. We're not special beings meant to save the universe or anything like that.

There are probably a shitload of other beings in the universe, as there are a shitload of other beings in the astral.

Some new age people even have theories that the human race was created only for other more powerful beings to have something to play around with..

How does that constitute not Honoring and serving God.

 

[Yakuza]

PvtRyan

There is a flaw in your argument. How do you prove to a blind man that the colour blue exists to you and I? He can't see it or percieve it (based upon the criteria that you suggest), the most he can do is invest a sense of faith in the notion of there being a colour Blue because we do, which goes beyond the remit of your neutral world. The world we as human beings inhabit is inherently driven more by the mind than the eye in almost everyway.

But thats not the same faith as believers claim to. Because to the blind man there is no blue. Even if we reason it to him there still will never be blue. Faith from a believers perspective is rather different. Its based on experiance and evidence. Yet they evidence cant be 100% cause then all would be forced to believe and thats not what God wants. And faith as a believer who reads Gods word knows that his faith isn't even his own but given to us by God, so no one can boast.

 

[ComradeBadger]

Eastern and Western Cultures are so deeply ingrained with the codes of religious thought that it is futile to attempt to extract them, let alone attempt to diminish their role in shaping of our world. Religions are the oldest form of human programming/social conditioning, all others (democracy, feudalism, communism etc) are merely derivatives of those initial codes of conduct.

Notions of right and wrong, just and unjust, the very questions and motivators that form the backbone to our political, legal and social infrastructure possess inherently religious origins.

That's true, but that's not my point

My point is, religion is not to blame for anything at all.

And the guy saying they were based on fear.. odd, the majority of religions preach love

 

[blahblahblah]

Not like he was adding anything insightful to the arguement, instead...attempting to answer questions with questions, being arrogant, and 'playing word games'.

**cough** weak **cough**

Word games, eh? I wasn't even trying to play word games too much yesterday. Glad to see that you proved your point so well. Oh wait, you had somebody else do it for you. Nice to see you have such debate skills.

If I must say, you are the weak one. And the flamer I must add. I will also say I don't like you as well.

I've got a bunch of research I have to do today, so I can't be arguing every little fact today. Sorry about some of the scatter brained response, a bit busy right now.

But here are a few snippets.

Well, I could argue that the lack of evidence for god is evidence supporting atheism.

Lack of evidence does not mean evidence. You should know better than that.

Additionally, if you look up the definition of religion I think you'd have a hard time fitting atheism into it. Religion is defined as primarly being a belief in the supernatural. It is further defined as a belief system held on faith. Atheism is neither about the supernatural or is it based on faith.

Look from my perspective. A frog eventually turning into a dog (through evolution), isn't supernatural? Just because it *apparently* takes longer doesn't mean it isn't supernatural.

 

[Kadayi]

But thats not the same faith as believers claim to. Because to the blind man there is no blue. Even if we reason it to him there still will never be blue. Faith from a believers perspective is rather different. Its based on experiance and evidence. Yet they evidence cant be 100% cause then all would be forced to believe and thats not what God wants. And faith as a believer who reads Gods word knows that his faith isn't even his own but given to us by God, so no one can boast.

I'm not substituting the idea of blue for the idea of god or faith. I'm just illustrating the point that to try and discuss the subject purely within the realms of the physically neutral is a mistake. We as creatures exist more within our mind states, both individually and collectively than we do as physical creatures, like cows, dogs etc.

 

[Yakuza]

You have to ask an athiest to clarify what athieism is to him. Some of you guys are arguing on the basis of your own assumptions.

So...to the athiest, What do you blieve? what is athieism to you?

 

[Yakuza]

I'm not substituting the idea of blue for the idea of god or faith. I'm just illustrating the point that to try and discuss the subject purely within the realms of the physically neutral is a mistake. We as creatures exist more within our mind states, both individually and collectively than we do as physical creatures, like cows, dogs etc.

Sorry bout that.

 

[CptStern]

Look from my perspective. A frog eventually turning into a dog (through evolution), isn't supernatural? Just because it *apparently* takes longer doesn't mean it isn't supernatural.

you dont seem to understand evolution ..frogs dont come from dogs or vice versa, evolution happens through like species, that's why Darwin went to the Galapagos to study the evolution of species.

But I have to agree with Neutrino, there seems to be a bit too much mumbo jumbo hocus pocus surrounding most religious doctrine. According to some bible scholars the world is only 10,000 years old yet we have concrete evidence that the world is much older than that ..if that isnt supernatural I dont know what is

 

[Kadayi]

According to some bible scholars the world is only 10,000 years old yet we have concrete evidence that the world is much older than that ..if that isnt supernatural I dont know what is

I doubt very much that Jesus fed the 5000 with a couple of fish and some bread, but simply because the math doesn't add up I wouldn't necessarily dismiss the content of his messages. That kind of policy of thought, is what allowed OJ to walk free from court.

 

[CptStern]

I doubt very much that Jesus fed the 5000 with a couple of fish and some bread, but simply because the math doesn't add up I wouldn't necessarily dismiss the content of his messages. That kind of policy of thought, is what allowed OJ to walk free from court.

I'm not dismissing christianity, I've always maintained the bible is a nice collection of morality stories much like Homer's Iliad

 

[PvtRyan]

PvtRyan

There is a flaw in your argument. How do you prove to a blind man that the colour blue exists to you and I? He can't see it or percieve it (based upon the criteria that you suggest), the most he can do is invest a sense of faith in the notion of there being a colour Blue because we do, which goes beyond the remit of your neutral world. The world we as human beings inhabit is inherently driven more by the mind than the eye in almost everyway.

Yes, but what does the blind man base his faith upon? Because someone says so? I hope not. Would he also believe me or you instantly when we tell him the sky consist of smiling faces and there's a ghost in front of him that he would be able to see if he weren't blind?

He bases his faith upon the knowledge that you are a man that has eyesight, and if that is in doubt, the blind man can test whether or not you have eyesight. The blind man could perform experiments to verify that you are speaking the truth that there are things like colors. See where I'm getting at? It's not blind faith, like religion is, it's faith based upon verifiable evidence.

It's blind faith because of the fact that there is no reason whatsoever that religion A has more chance of being right than religon B or C. The blind man however has a reason to put that faith into the thought there is a color blue, you proved to him beyond reasonable doubt that there is a color blue.

Of course, the blind man always has the risk everyone is playing a prank on him, you can never proof anything 100% watertight , but you can however proof something beyond reasonable doubt. Like I said, proof to me the world still exists behind you when you turn around. You won't be able to, but you can make it so likely that it removes all doubt.

 

[Yakuza]

you dont seem to understand evolution ..frogs dont come from dogs or vice versa, evolution happens through like species, that's why Darwin went to the Galapagos to study the evolution of species.

But I have to agree with Neutrino, there seems to be a bit too much mumbo jumbo hocus pocus surrounding most religious doctrine. According to some bible scholars the world is only 10,000 years old yet we have concrete evidence that the world is much older than that ..if that isnt supernatural I dont know what is

10,000 years is only the holding of a small group of religious people, not the majority.

The problem is with agruments like the feeding of the 5,000 is that we attempt to understand the dealings of God by using the understanding of humans. We are capable of understanding only so much, were are finite beings. Yet we attempt to bound up an infinite being into something he doesn't fit into.

 

[Yakuza]

See where I'm getting at? It's not blind faith, like religion is, it's faith based upon verifiable evidence.

It's blind faith because of the fact that there is no reason whatsoever that religion A has more chance of being right than religon B or C.

How does religion have blind faith? Are you a Christian, I am and my faith is not blind.

My faith is based upon evidence.


But what if I can show you were religion B and C contradict and self-defeat each other.

 

[CptStern]

10,000 years seems to be the consensus of the catholic church. Some christian groups put it closer to 6000 years, but I digress ...the point being many of the stories of the bible can be discounted by even a lay person just by using observation and common sense

 

[Yakuza]

10,000 years seems to be the consensus of the catholic church. Some christian groups put it closer to 6000 years, but I digress ...the point being many of the stories of the bible can be discounted by even a lay person just by using observation and common sense

Like.......?

 

[CptStern]

noah's ark :E

 

[j__]

i came here a day later just to see if anything interesting had been written

i must say i laughed out loud when i saw yakuza say his faith is based upon evidence


comradebadger, almost all religions r based on fear, for example: if u r not a good christian, u will not go to heaven. is that not fear?

but anyways, this has become pointless discussing this, religious people, think what u want, people aren't jews, muslims, christians etc, they r just humans, and u will all rot in the ground exactly the same, its your own time u r wasting so go ahead


my final word in this argument:

NEVER BELIEVE ANYTHING
beliefs r set in stone
HAVE IDEAS
ideas can change and adapt when there is a need

good bye

 

[blahblahblah]

NEVER BELIEVE ANYTHING

I believe you don't exist.



Sorry for the mindless chatter.

 

[PvtRyan]

Like.......?

The order in which the universe was created for example. The earth was created before the stars, the sun and the moon were created. While they are all much older (accept for the moon, which is younger than earth).

 

[Kangy]

Religion kills people.

Ritual sacrifice, duh.

 

[DoctorGordon]

You dont exist

 

[blahblahblah]

You dont exist

How did you know? I'm really another fragment of your mind seeking to take control over your body. PH34R me.

 

[DoctorGordon]

No one exists, nothing exists

 

[CptStern]

Nietzsche? or maybe Kierkegaard?

 

[Gray Fox]

Religion is neceserry for evry civilization to begin, because in primitive times you need something that explains what people don't understand, and it binds people, giving them something in common and gives them a reason to follow rules, because then its not ike some person is telling you must behave but a god, it gives a foundation on wich a society can prosper at the beginning, now I'm not saying that there can be no rules without it it just makes it easier to follow for a lot of people because of the above excuse that the rules are from diving beeings and not some person, because then who the **** is that guy to tell you what to do, religion is also something that gives people hope. the bad side is that it is incredibly easy to misuse religion, becuae even horrible things can be excused if they are in the name of a divin beeing, another bad thing is that religion is very hard to get rid of once it's inbedded in society, so religion and science are bound to clash with one another and unfortunatly that makes religion a pain in the ass in a modern society.

( first if you are wondering I don't belive in any religion, that doesn't mean I don't belive in god, but just that none of the religions that exist today I think represent one, but were just made up by megalomaniacs( flaming me because of thjis will not help, I won't go in an argument) in my opinion there is 50/50 chance that there is a god and afterlive.,

second: excuse my english i am from Holland)

 

[Yakuza]

noah's ark :E

Haha, I knew your gonna say that. I am at work and the boss might kill me so Gotta wait for a respons later.

:cheers:

 

[Yakuza]

The order in which the universe was created for example. The earth was created before the stars, the sun and the moon were created. While they are all much older (accept for the moon, which is younger than earth).

Just curious, how does one gage the age of things like the moon.

 

[CptStern]

easy ...check the mold on the sides and that should tell you how old it is :E

 

[CptStern]

Haha, I knew your gonna say that. I am at work and the boss might kill me so Gotta wait for a respons later.

:cheers:

NO NO NO!!!! we filled 20 pages on the subject ...what was our conclusion? :

"I'm ok, you're ok, lets do lunch"

 

[Rupertvdb]

10,000 years seems to be the consensus of the catholic church. Some christian groups put it closer to 6000 years, but I digress ...the point being many of the stories of the bible can be discounted by even a lay person just by using observation and common sense

I can't believe no one shot you down with this comment, i will.

The Bible is a piece of literature, it contains multiple accounts of various events, allegorys, and ritual description.

You cannot discount the Bible in this way because it ignores the essence of what the Bible is. You may as well say that the Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe can be discounted because there is no Narnia, you are missing the point of the book.

Besides there are some very good creationist theories out there, I don't believe them but you would do well to look into it before discounting them.

 

[CptStern]

I can't believe no one shot you down with this comment, i will.

The Bible is a piece of literature, it contains multiple accounts of various events, allegorys, and ritual description.

You cannot discount the Bible in this way because it ignores the essence of what the Bible is. You may as well say that the Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe can be discounted because there is no Narnia, you are missing the point of the book.

no I discount it because most of it makes no sense today

Besides there are some very good creationist theories out there, I don't believe them but you would do well to look into it before discounting them.

please elaborate