OT - Is there an All Powerful entity out there?

pastey_boy

after reading the above posts let not forget that many drug users / hookers etc etc are a result of child abuse. then we need to look at how many child abuse cases have religious connections. i bet the high number of rent boys in scotland and messed up kids in ireland are from catholic backgrounds. we all know this but nothing ever gets done as the catholic church is way too powerful

suzyb

Wallace1492 wrote:

-null- wrote:

People will find a reason to hate each other and to fight each other regardless of whether religion exists or not. It's in our nature, a throw back to when we had to fight to survive and lived in small groups to do that.

Whether it's which god they believe in, or which character on a TV show they prefer, or which colour they like best. People will group with others of a similar mindset and in many cases be hostile to others who think differently.

Sort of agree here. Yes people will have conflict with other "tribes" and have always. However, history has shown that religious belief has caused more deaths than what TV character or colour is best.

As we have moved forward, we have become more tolerent, more accepting of others and have worked across different "tribes" for progress. But I really believe that religion is the biggest barrier to moving even further forward.

But organised religion is how many years old with how many people believing in it.

Beside which banning religion is only going to cause more problems than it would solve. How many wars have been fought because people have been prevented from exercising their beliefs or because a new belief has been forced onto them.

Also what about all those wars fought over differing social systems. We came how close to wiping out millions of people, mostly innocent people because the western capitalists didn't trust the eastern communists.

Instead we need to encourage integration between religions. Educate people that they can believe in whatever they want to but still be tolerant of those that believe differently.

pastey_boy

"But organised religion is how many years old with how many people believing in it. "


if you look at the results of the poll posted above it would seem only 2 out of 10 people here believe

roger_merriman

no banning please, just because, one doesn't agree with it's world view.

there are lots of world views that I don't much care for but banning isn't the answer.

suzyb

pastey_boy wrote:

"But organised religion is how many years old with how many people believing in it. "


if you look at the results of the poll posted above it would seem only 2 out of 10 people here believe

I'll rephrase...

But organised religion is how many years old with how many people believing in it over those years.

Better?

pastey_boy

yes much better. i thankyou for your prompt rephrase

suzyb

pastey_boy wrote:

yes much better. i thankyou for your prompt rephrase

np anything to avoid doing some work

Wallace1492

WheezyMcChubby wrote:

Wallace1492 wrote:

-null- wrote:

People will find a reason to hate each other and to fight each other regardless of whether religion exists or not. It's in our nature, a throw back to when we had to fight to survive and lived in small groups to do that.

Whether it's which god they believe in, or which character on a TV show they prefer, or which colour they like best. People will group with others of a similar mindset and in many cases be hostile to others who think differently.

Sort of agree here. Yes people will have conflict with other "tribes" and have always. However, history has shown that religious belief has caused more deaths than what TV character or colour is best.

As we have moved forward, we have become more tolerent, more accepting of others and have worked across different "tribes" for progress. But I really believe that religion is the biggest barrier to moving even further forward.

Going to come back to a lot of what has been posted on this thread, just don't have time now to do it justice right now.

For now I'd like to challenge the assertion that Religion has resulted in more deaths than anything else.

What are we basing this on? It seems to me a bit of a throw away comment with no real evidence to back it up.

Look at the major conflicts/ loss of life of the past century

World War I
World War II
The cold war and the advance of communism

Not a lot of religion there!

In previous centuries many conflicts included a religious element but I would argue that the religious element was a mere trojan horse for empire building and pursuit of power and wealth.


(I do recognise that the phrase quoted in bold is accurate, I was thinking more of the generalisation)

Yes, maybe it was a bit of a generalisation, but I do think it will br proven to be pretty accurate. As for communisn, WW1 and WW2 causes, these were caused by different ideologies, which were imposed on people who were brainwashed, rather like a lot of people are brainwashed with religion.

While, banning religion would be extreme and probably cause a lot more problem than it would solve, I do think that it will slowly die out if left to it's own devices.

Where I think we need change is where it is enshrined in a countries constitution. I want to be free in a country that has no religious affiliation.

DonDaddyD

Wheezy,

On World War 2,

I was under the impression that 'Jews' are a people commonly identified by a religion which has shaped their social and culture practices. This shaping of said cultural and social practices (and I'm talking from biblical times) has led to a 'near' distinct ethnicity and ownership (again) of their own Country.

It cannot be denied that religion, Judaism, has contributed hugely to the Jewish identity. i.e. Jewish and Judaism are nearly synonymous with each other.

I would argue that the Holocaust (amongst other things) was very much an attempt at the destruction of a race as it was an attempt at destroying a religion, given how closely tied that religion is to its people. (If the Holocaust suceeded who would be Jewish and therefore would Judaism exist?)

That coupled with any number of wars before Christ and the Crusades I would say that yes religion or 'in the name of religion' is the single biggest cause of death/wars.

But I should also point out religion itself is not inherntly evil. Just some people who use it to justify their actions.

DonDaddyD

I was just reading up on Evander Holyfield and remembered a fight where his ring enterance involved dancing towards the ring singing Gospel music.

My Dad turned to me and said, "Anytime a guy walks to the ring singing and praising Jesus, he wins".

Holyfield won the fight.

Christophe3967

DonDaddyD wrote:

Wheezy,

On World War 2,

I was under the impression that 'Jews' are a people commonly identified by a religion which has shaped their social and culture practices. This shaping of said cultural and social practices (and I'm talking from biblical times) has led to a 'near' distinct ethnicity and ownership (again) of their own Country.

However it cannot be denied that religion has contributed hugely to the Jewish identity i.e. Judaism. Jewish and Judaism are nearly synonymous with each other.

I would argue that the Holocaust was about the destruction of a race arguably created and identified through their religion. It was very much the destruction of a race as it was the destruction of a religion, given how closely tied that religion is to its people. (If the Holocaust suceeded who would be Jewish and therefore would Judaism exist?)

That coupled with any number of wars before Christ and the Crusades I would say that yes religion or 'in the name of religion' is the single biggest cause of death/wars.

But it isn't religion itself, which is bad.

Yes, but aren't we discussing the cause of war, and in particular the World Wars? Whilst there was a religious aspect to WW2, in the sense that the rise of the Nazis was fed by propaganda that the Jews (who had widespread commercial interests and controllled most of the banks) were enriching themselves whilst other people were starving, of course the real seeds were sown by the arrangements made after WW1, and in particular by the intransigence of the French (although the Brits hardly covered themselves in glory).

artaxerxes

Yes, but aren't we discussing the cause of war, and in particular the World Wars? Whilst there was a religious aspect to WW2, in the sense that the rise of the Nazis was fed by propaganda that the Jews (who had widespread commercial interests and controllled most of the banks) were enriching themselves whilst other people were starving, of course the real seeds were sown by the arrangements made after WW1, and in particular by the intransigence of the French (although the Brits hardly covered themselves in glory).

People forget that more than 20 million people were killed in the Soviet Union during WW2 (although not all due to the Axis). Hitler's big idea was the creation of 'living space' for the master race in the East (i.e the Soviet Union).

With Japan, their aim was also the creation of an empire in Asia to rival other European empires (e.g British empire). Although they did use the national religion of Shinto to justify their plans.

Christophe3967

artaxerxes wrote:

Yes, but aren't we discussing the cause of war, and in particular the World Wars? Whilst there was a religious aspect to WW2, in the sense that the rise of the Nazis was fed by propaganda that the Jews (who had widespread commercial interests and controllled most of the banks) were enriching themselves whilst other people were starving, of course the real seeds were sown by the arrangements made after WW1, and in particular by the intransigence of the French (although the Brits hardly covered themselves in glory).

People forget that more than 20 million people were killed in the Soviet Union during WW2 (although not all due to the Axis). Hitler's big idea was the creation of 'living space' for the master race in the East (i.e the Soviet Union).

With Japan, their aim was also the creation of an empire in Asia to rival other European empires (e.g British empire). Although they did use the national religion of Shinto to justify their plans.

I choose to believe that people don't forget - heaven help us if they ever do.

PBo

Wallace1492 wrote:

While, banning religion would be extreme and probably cause a lot more problem than it would solve, I do think that it will slowly die out if left to it's own devices.

Where I think we need change is where it is enshrined in a countries constitution. I want to be free in a country that has no religious affiliation.

I don't believe people should - or can - be banned from holding beliefs in deities. I have the problem with organised religion, which as I've said before a) don't have a monoploly on being good b) can be just as flawed/power obsessed as any other large institution.

I also don't like any enshrining of religion in law - either explicitl as in non secular countries, or even "softly" - such as blasphemy laws. Look at what's just happened in Ireland ffs

PBo

DonDaddyD wrote:

I was just reading up on Evander Holyfield and remembered a fight where his ring enterance involved dancing towards the ring singing Gospel music.

My Dad turned to me and said, "Anytime a guy walks to the ring singing and praising Jesus, he wins".

Holyfield won the fight.

I'm a fan of American football, and have seen several superbowls comedown to, literally, the final kick or throw.

This has usually involved sideline shots - just before the final play - showing circles of players on both sidelines, holding hands, on one knee, heads down, praying.

FFS WHAT IS THAT ALL ABOUT????????

They think God actually give a t0ss about who wins a game of football??????? (I guess if he'd covered the spread on a Vegas book.....).

It is this sort of superstitious behaviour which means that, although I respect religious peoples right to be so, I do not actually respect them if this is how they live their lives.

suzyb

PBo wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

I was just reading up on Evander Holyfield and remembered a fight where his ring enterance involved dancing towards the ring singing Gospel music.

My Dad turned to me and said, "Anytime a guy walks to the ring singing and praising Jesus, he wins".

Holyfield won the fight.

I'm a fan of American football, and have seen several superbowls comedown to, literally, the final kick or throw.

This has usually involved sideline shots - just before the final play - showing circles of players on both sidelines, holding hands, on one knee, heads down, praying.

FFS WHAT IS THAT ALL ABOUT????????

They think God actually give a t0ss about who wins a game of football??????? (I guess if he'd covered the spread on a Vegas book.....).

It is this sort of superstitious behaviour which means that, although I respect religious peoples right to be so, I do not actually respect them if this is how they live their lives.

Are you sure they're praying. I always thought it was just a team huddle.

PBo

-null- wrote:

Are you sure they're praying. I always thought it was just a team huddle.

no defo, praying - they often have players miked up, or sideline reporters - I've heared them praying. (they do have team huddles too, but defo prayers in these instances).

DonDaddyD

Christophe3967 wrote:

artaxerxes wrote:

Yes, but aren't we discussing the cause of war, and in particular the World Wars? Whilst there was a religious aspect to WW2, in the sense that the rise of the Nazis was fed by propaganda that the Jews (who had widespread commercial interests and controllled most of the banks) were enriching themselves whilst other people were starving, of course the real seeds were sown by the arrangements made after WW1, and in particular by the intransigence of the French (although the Brits hardly covered themselves in glory).

People forget that more than 20 million people were killed in the Soviet Union during WW2 (although not all due to the Axis). Hitler's big idea was the creation of 'living space' for the master race in the East (i.e the Soviet Union).

With Japan, their aim was also the creation of an empire in Asia to rival other European empires (e.g British empire). Although they did use the national religion of Shinto to justify their plans.

I choose to believe that people don't forget - heaven help us if they ever do.

All very true and solid points.

always_tyred

Christophe3967 wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Wheezy,

On World War 2,

I was under the impression that 'Jews' are a people commonly identified by a religion which has shaped their social and culture practices. This shaping of said cultural and social practices (and I'm talking from biblical times) has led to a 'near' distinct ethnicity and ownership (again) of their own Country.

However it cannot be denied that religion has contributed hugely to the Jewish identity i.e. Judaism. Jewish and Judaism are nearly synonymous with each other.

I would argue that the Holocaust was about the destruction of a race arguably created and identified through their religion. It was very much the destruction of a race as it was the destruction of a religion, given how closely tied that religion is to its people. (If the Holocaust suceeded who would be Jewish and therefore would Judaism exist?)

That coupled with any number of wars before Christ and the Crusades I would say that yes religion or 'in the name of religion' is the single biggest cause of death/wars.

But it isn't religion itself, which is bad.

Yes, but aren't we discussing the cause of war, and in particular the World Wars? Whilst there was a religious aspect to WW2, in the sense that the rise of the Nazis was fed by propaganda that the Jews (who had widespread commercial interests and controllled most of the banks) were enriching themselves whilst other people were starving, of course the real seeds were sown by the arrangements made after WW1, and in particular by the intransigence of the French (although the Brits hardly covered themselves in glory).

Depends what meaning of the word "cause" you want to use.

You have made precisely the point about religion and war. There have always been reasons for war, but religion has often been a rallying cry beacuse its a good way to acquire lots of unquestioning support.

Wallace1492

Always Tyred wrote:

Depends what meaning of the word "cause" you want to use.

You have made precisely the point about religion and war. There have always been reasons for war, but religion has often been a rallying cry beacuse its a good way to acquire lots of unquestioning support.

Religion has often been a cause for war, but if not the main cause has at least been a contributary cause. As AT says it is a great rallying cry, therefore to me, it is a very big factor in battling the heathen/infidel/papist/A.N. Other it always has been and always will be.

Until we can throw off the shakles of religion then I do not think there is much chance of us living in peace.

tailwindhome

Wallace1492 wrote:

Always Tyred wrote:

Depends what meaning of the word "cause" you want to use.

You have made precisely the point about religion and war. There have always been reasons for war, but religion has often been a rallying cry beacuse its a good way to acquire lots of unquestioning support.

Religion has often been a cause for war, but if not the main cause has at least been a contributary cause. As AT says it is a great rallying cry, therefore to me, it is a very big factor in battling the heathen/infidel/papist/A.N. Other it always has been and always will be.

Until we can throw off the shakles of religion then I do not think there is much chance of us living in peace.

An alternative view would be that until the human race evolves to fully embrace the teachings of their chosen religion and not give way to the human lust for power, money and empire building there is no chance of us living in peace

Christophe3967

Totally agree with the premise that organised religion has invariably been a factor historically, but somebody made a very valid point that neither of the world wars were caused directly by religion, but were for economic and political reasons - the rise of Germany as a global power and France's desire to prevent this.

France having lost Alsace Lorraine etc after the Franco-Prussian war, and having paid reparations, wished to extract the maximum financial penalty from Germany after WW1- something around $2 trillion in today's terms - without consideration for the ramifications of crippling the German economy. Would Hitler have been able to make an impact otherwise? He was very careful to tone down the anti-semiticism until after he took power - it was all about fighting the communists at first.

Wallace1492

WheezyMcChubby wrote:

An alternative view would be that until the human race evolves to fully embrace the teachings of their chosen religion and not give way to the human lust for power, money and empire building there is no chance of us living in peace

Can't go with that, as you will then always get factional fighting between different religions. "Ours is the one true religion". Some will be tolerent, others will get interpreted as having to convert everyone else, by whatever means.

These "teachings" are only the made up ramblings of some long dead guy, whose relevence to the modern world is very questionable at the least.

It is difficuly for the human race to realise that there is no all powerful man upstairs, and until we can come to terms with that, then there will be tribalism, fighting splits and nationalistic jingoism.

To me the first step to uniting the people of the world is the realisation that there is no god/big man/allah. Then we can maybe start making this a better planet for everyone.

il_principe

Wallace1492 wrote:

To me the first step to uniting the people of the world is the realisation that there is no god/big man/allah. Then we can maybe start making this a better planet for everyone.

Religion or no religion there will always be discord among humanity I'm afraid.

Wallace1492

Il Principe wrote:

Wallace1492 wrote:

To me the first step to uniting the people of the world is the realisation that there is no god/big man/allah. Then we can maybe start making this a better planet for everyone.

Religion or no religion there will always be discord among humanity I'm afraid.

There always has been, but does not mean to say there always will be. Discord is far easier when fuelled by religious differences.

Look at Western Europe, we have had peace for nearly 60 years, no conflict between France and GB for over a century, yet we were going at it hammer and tongs for hundreds of years before that. We can live in peace.... without religion.

A cartoon is drawn of a religious character and dozens die in mob protest.... sounds like the middle ages in Christianilty, but is happening now in another religion. We do have a long way to go, but I hope we get there.

suzyb

imho the human race will not be able to live in peace until we evolve so our physical nature match the world we live in i.e. we no longer have to fight to survive but it is still in our nature to do so.

DonDaddyD

To me the first step to uniting the people of the world is the realisation that there is no god/big man/allah. Then we can maybe start making this a better planet for everyone.

Wallace,

How can you be so sure they or a God doesn't, in some capacity, exist?

How is what you're proposing any different from a religious persons attempt to 'unite people to the realisation that a god/big man/allah does exist and should be worshipped'?

Lastly, have we learned nothing? A stance supporting the banning of religion and religious practices is just as intollerant as those 'pro-religion' who believe that everyone should worship their religion.

So lets get this right, we've had religious wars where Zealots seek to destroy all that does not adhere or follow said religion albeit for the purpose of bettering humanity. - And you claim, quite rightly that religion has been the cause of some of the most bloodiest wars Man has ever had. - What's next? A World wide ban on the concept of religion where we persecute all those who practice a or any religion for the purpose of bettering humanity. :roll:

Sounds like the other side of the same coin.

Wallace1492

DonDaddyD wrote:

To me the first step to uniting the people of the world is the realisation that there is no god/big man/allah. Then we can maybe start making this a better planet for everyone.

Wallace,

How can you be so sure they don't, in some capacity, exist?

How is that any different that a religious persons attempt to unite people to the realisation that a god/big man/allah does exist and should be worshipped.

Lastly, have we learned nothing? A stance supporting the banning of religion and religious practices is just as intollerant as those pro-religion who believe that everyone should worship their religion.

So lets get this right, we've had religious wars where Zealots seek to destroy all that doesn't adhere to said religion for the purpose of bettering humanity. - And you claim, quite rightly that religion has been the cause of some of the most bloodiest wars Man has ever had. - What's next? A World wide ban on the concept of religion where we persecute all those who practice a or any religion for the purpose of bettering humanity. :roll:

Sounds like the other side of the same coin

DDD very valid point. Obviously I can only comment from my point of view, which is probably quite plain, that there is no god/allah etc.

I have not advocated a ban on religion, (though I would dearly love it, it would just cause far more trouble).

What I do believe is that as we mature as a species, we will drift away from religion. We can seperate out the concepts of right and wrong, good and evil, make laws, have sophisticated societies and economies, all without the need for religion behind it. As we further mature, the need for religion decreases, and I think it will naturally die out.

It will however take some time, as a lot of religion's are at different points and there are a lot of splinter groups that get formed for their own purposes, from virtually all religions.

Unless of course, there is a blinding flash and the Big Man appears to judge us all....

tailwindhome

Wallace1492 wrote:

What I do believe is that as we mature as a species, we will drift away from religion. We can seperate out the concepts of right and wrong, good and evil, make laws, have sophisticated societies and economies, all without the need for religion behind it. As we further mature, the need for religion decreases, and I think it will naturally die out.

How would we do that?

always_tyred

WheezyMcChubby wrote:

Wallace1492 wrote:

What I do believe is that as we mature as a species, we will drift away from religion. We can seperate out the concepts of right and wrong, good and evil, make laws, have sophisticated societies and economies, all without the need for religion behind it. As we further mature, the need for religion decreases, and I think it will naturally die out.

How would we do that?

We could have a referrendum.