Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hoping4Astars)
    If I could eradicate one thing from this planet, it would be irreligion. It is the root of all evil.

    Do you not find this offensive? It has become acceptable to mock religious people, but if you offend atheists they get all annoyed.
    Not really offensive, I disagree with it but certainly don't think it should be stopped being said.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Emilia1320)
    Faith is not a good thing. As long as individual keeps it on themselves its neutral thing at best. When they start to try to convert others, raise their innocent children to faith and maybe even use it as reason or excuse to violence it turns into evil.

    Faith is like voluntary blindness. Its not smart to believe in something there is no evidence of existing. I could believe in god immediately if there was reason to.
    But god is logical paradox and we are yet to find the reason.
    Your problem is that you base everything off science. You're used to the old proof system: nothing exists unless you prove its existence. Unfortunately, science isn't always right: it constantly changes directions. Now, I'm not saying I think science is stupid; check my profile: I love science. It's just that it has been very misused, and needs to be put in its proper place.

    So for example, in the early 20th century, all the leading scientists were convinced that the Universe had been around forever. They would have laughed at the idea of a "Big Bang". Indeed, even when the evidence started coming in, some atheist scientists said that they disliked the idea of the Big Bang - it seemed too much like something from Genesis. And yet now people try to say that the Big Bang disproves the existence of God!

    I think the illustration of a kettle is very fitting here...
    Supposing I turned on a kettle full of water, and after a bit, the water began to boil. Why did it boil? Well, you could quite rightly suggest that it was because of energy, etc. If I pressed you further, you might start to talk about the electricity, and how it came from the mains electricity, etc. But you would be missing out on another vital point: the water boiled because I wanted a cup of tea.
    You see, science is one side to the explanation, but there is also another, completely true side. If I hadn't wanted a cup of tea, that water wouldn't have boiled because I wouldn't have turned the kettle on in the first place.

    So when you say that God is illogical, I think it's because you're actually taking him right out of the equation
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Emilia1320)
    Faith is not a good thing. As long as individual keeps it on themselves its neutral thing at best. When they start to try to convert others, raise their innocent children to faith and maybe even use it as reason or excuse to violence it turns into evil.

    Faith is like voluntary blindness. Its not smart to believe in something there is no evidence of existing. I could believe in god immediately if there was reason to.
    But god is logical paradox and we are yet to find the reason.
    Nonsense. The question is whether it is justifiable to do hold a belief. But all questions of whether an entirely speculative belief is justifiable arguably rest on utility, and this isn't dependent on your own perception of what it is -- it's not up to you whether it rests on utility. Utility, in this case, is determined subjectively: e.g., it brings X a lot of pleasure or comfort to believe in God. It doesn't matter if God doesn't exist; if X believing He does brings X a lot of utility (pleasure, comfort, happiness, etc.) then that's a reason for X to hold that belief, and it would arguably be irrational to withhold because some internet atheists said not to with little to no substantiation of why they shouldn't feel all the things listed above.

    Also, that's not what faith is typically defined by both academics and themselves so you're just beating a strawmen for the rest of it.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Assassin)
    Nonsense. The question is whether it is justifiable to do hold a belief. But all questions of whether an entirely speculative belief is justifiable arguably rest on utility, and this isn't dependent on your own perception of what it is -- it's not up to you whether it rests on utility. Utility, in this case, is determined subjectively: e.g., it brings X a lot of pleasure or comfort to believe in God. It doesn't matter if God doesn't exist; if X believing He does brings X a lot of utility (pleasure, comfort, happiness, etc.) then that's a reason for X to hold that belief, and it would arguably be irrational to withhold because some internet atheists said not to with little to no substantiation of why they shouldn't feel all the things listed above.

    Also, that's not what faith is typically defined by both academics and themselves so you're just beating a strawmen for the rest of it.
    http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/faith

    The point about definition of faith is a fair one, and I am using the second definition from this link in this context. I would still argue that I do not think its benefical to believe anything before there is evidence because there are countlless things we could believe in if we just believed everything that we are told or what we can imagine. I am not saying I know for sure that god doesn't exist because I cannot prove that either; its logically very difficult if not impossible to prove that something doesn't exist. However burden of proof lies on ones who make the claim, the claim has been made thousands of years ago, yet there is not a single piece of evidence supporting it. What really makes god different from fairy tales? Or what makes god of one certain religion different and more existant than other gods?

    I do admit I might be slightly biased and sounded offensive earlier.
    The reason I despise religion so much is that I was raised to Christianity, and it messed up my mind and brought me a lot of sadness and fear when I was kid. Then once I turned atheist I felt very relieved, but my parents judged me. There might be good things religion causes, I am yet to see any good outcomes. Alas, if a Person wants to believe in god, santa Claus or toothfairy then so it be, what I am agaisnt is that those people sometimes try to convert others, make others follow their ideologies (like fundamental Christians often judge gay people), or raise their kids to religion what happened to me.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Treblebee)
    Your problem is that you base everything off science. You're used to the old proof system: nothing exists unless you prove its existence. Unfortunately, science isn't always right: it constantly changes directions. Now, I'm not saying I think science is stupid; check my profile: I love science. It's just that it has been very misused, and needs to be put in its proper place.

    So for example, in the early 20th century, all the leading scientists were convinced that the Universe had been around forever. They would have laughed at the idea of a "Big Bang". Indeed, even when the evidence started coming in, some atheist scientists said that they disliked the idea of the Big Bang - it seemed too much like something from Genesis. And yet now people try to say that the Big Bang disproves the existence of God!

    I think the illustration of a kettle is very fitting here...
    Supposing I turned on a kettle full of water, and after a bit, the water began to boil. Why did it boil? Well, you could quite rightly suggest that it was because of energy, etc. If I pressed you further, you might start to talk about the electricity, and how it came from the mains electricity, etc. But you would be missing out on another vital point: the water boiled because I wanted a cup of tea.
    You see, science is one side to the explanation, but there is also another, completely true side. If I hadn't wanted a cup of tea, that water wouldn't have boiled because I wouldn't have turned the kettle on in the first place.

    So when you say that God is illogical, I think it's because you're actually taking him right out of the equation
    If we for discussion for a second assume that god is real (I DONT believe that!) and it created the universe, what does that solve? If we put aside that you can eat chips in heaven and watch me suffer eternal torment, what does that help? When trying to find out origins of the universe, if we would find out god created it we would still need to know where god came from to answer the very question. Explaining birth of universe with god when there most likely is no god is like paying MasterCard bill with Visa. We cant go ahead of what we know, there could or could not be god, but if there is not we would be highly mislead if we just assumed there is.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I won't deny that religion does have a dark side. However, science also has a dark side, I won't go too in-depth, but I'm sure you guys understand. Science and Religion are ideologies; two very distinct ways of viewing the world. I use religion as a way to make sense of the world I live in and some of us use science as a way to make sense of how the world works. We have different ways of identifying how the world functions and what dictates our existence. Let's not be ignorant and disregard these differences but rather respect these differences.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by driftawaay)
    Yeah, I am gonna go and cry in a corner right now. Maybe even blow up some people/skyscrapers out of frustration.
    You could send people to gulags or deliberately starve millions to death or rape some nuns with bayonets. That's more like what atheists do/have done in history.

    You are Hungarian right? Strange that your people lived under the brutal, atheistic system of communism yet you don't seem to be too against it. At least most young Hungarians have some sense which is why Jobbik are the most popular party among the youth of Hungary.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Mighty_Bush)
    You could send people to gulags or deliberately starve millions to death or rape some nuns with bayonets. That's more like what atheists do/have done in history.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by driftawaay)
    Yeah, a 100 million dead is some irrelevance. Some of them would have even been relatives of people you personally know.

    Not only do you have a sick, immoral mind but you are also clearly anti-intellectual.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Mighty_Bush)
    Yeah, a 100 million dead is some irrevelance Some of them would have even been relatives of people you personally know.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by driftawaay)
    There is no point continuing to save you. You clearly have brain damage and a lost soul.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Mighty_Bush)
    There is no point continuing to save you. You clearly have brain damage and a lost soul.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Consider Religion as a way for people to be inspired to live a life of morals, humility and joy. I get that people do not like the contradictions and some of the disputable ways of Religion, but really what I wish everyone would realise is that we use Religion to inspire ourselves to appreciate life, have something and someone to believe in something when life decides to troll us, unite people of the same oppression and seek for ways to make each other's lives better. I feel as though some of the conflicts people have noted are acts of people who are not following the concept of Religion well, like the murder of Drummer Lee Rigby. Many argue that no God would condone such barbaric act, and it is true. I do not use the "devil" as a scape goat for his murder because there are literally evil people in the world who should have nothing to do with Religion.

    If you want an example for where Religion has influenced acts of good, then I'll give a little anecdote.

    There was a period in my life where I had lost contact with my faith by not going to mass and not praying (I'm Catholic). I had never lost faith in God, but I wasn’t acting like a “Christian”. 2 years ago, I decided independently that I'd get Confirmed into the Catholic church. The experience helped me realise my passion for volunteering and genuinely wanting to follow God's will for His people to help one another. I volunteer in a hospital and teach debating as well as volunteer in my college for charity and tutoring and in my community. The fact of the matter is, whether there is a "God" or not, the idea of one existing has helped me become a better person. It helped me overcome my social anxiety and made me feel confident with choosing to pursue a career in science (despite the conflicts). Most importantly, I decided to do all this on my own. I felt no pressure from anyone (parents, other Catholics etc), and it's made me feel independent and mature.

    Everyone needs to understand that you cannot judge someone for believing in something you do not. As a Catholic, I "should" stereotypically hate the LGBT community, divorcees, etc. But guess what: I don't. This is because of a little piece of scripture called "The 10 commandments" which says to "Love thy Neighbour". I realise that as a Christian, we should embrace each other and not judge anyone. I literally have to just leave it to God! To me, judging is an absolute NO, and that I’d be an absolute fool and hypocrite to start. As long as we agree to not change each other and not question each other’s way of living, everything is fine. Even as an Atheist, tolerance is just moral obligation. So please, don’t hate Religion, just leave it alone! Peace and Love xx
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by moggis)
    Good.

    Honestly I'm bemused at how many people think that 3 billion people actually believe that there's an invisible ' man' in the sky and that when they die they will live again and meet all their loved ones whereas a lot of other people won't and even worse will go to 'another place' where they will suffer for all eternity!


    Using Occam's razor,which is the more likely, that so many believe in something so utterly fanciful in spite of there being not a shred of evidence to support it....

    Or that for reasons that we have speculated on -and/ or other reasons - a lot of people feel the need or benefit in making such a claim?


    Also ,the next time you see on the TV news a religious person dealing with sudden tragic loss take a good hard look.

    The grief you see is nearly always the grief of someone who knows they won't be seeing their loved one ever again.


    Religious people seem to take unforeseen death even harder than non religious people it seems to me.

    Could it be that they are dealing with both the grief of the loss of their loved one and the acute knowledge that their 'belief' did not help them?


    I hope no one takes this the wrong way. These people have my utmost sympathy.
    I really find your explanation interesting! It's true, but to an extent.

    What you are describing is the initial grief of loss. It's a natural human instinct that could never be lost even with fundamental trust and faith in God. This initial grief varies in duration depending on the individual. These people will hopefully then have time to reflect and realise that their grief would later be relieved. You cannot judge someone on their faith by the initial grief they show because in all honestly, no matter how much you pray and believe in God etc, you're never prepared for such a loss: it's almost not fair to make this point. Trust me when I say I speak from experience. If you have a chance to trace the emotional development and healing process of a truly religious person, you'd probably see what I mean. The community that supports you during the process with the same faith is beautiful. HOPE and CLOSURE is the best healer, and this is what is encouraged in communities and families of religion facing grief.

    Also perhaps we feel more grief because we have a really deep and emotional concept of life, and sometimes religion does that to people: it makes us more vulnerable to loss.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JW22)
    Believing in a religion and living your life by the ideology from that religion limits your experiences in life. Life is all about experiences, and regardless of what you may believe there is no evidence to suggest there is an afterlife, therefore you are limiting everything you can do because of your belief. Also to believe in a religion is completely illogical, the only logical reason to believe is because you don't want to be punished for your decisions, and what is to say the religion you believe in is the right one?

    If you are religious the place where you were born will most likely determine the religion you believe in, it has nothing to do with one religion being more possible than another. There are many contradictions and inconsistencies within religion yet people blindly follow. Also when people say things like 'It's part of Gods plan' is an incredibly damaging idea, passing the blame of what has been done and what we could change to an imaginary God is lazy and disgraceful. What happens in the world is down to us and us alone.
    Saying life is all about experiences is SUBJECTIVE in all circumstances; that's a fact.

    You saying people following religion limits their experience is you being CLOSE MINDED.

    In fact, why are YOU judging them on how they live their life? You're actually doing the opposite of what you're speaking about; that's called HYPOCRISY.

    Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Christians, Sikhs and others have FREE WILL to live how they want to. Stop trying to impose your values on others. You lil b****.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Butternuts96)
    Saying life is all about experiences is SUBJECTIVE in all circumstances; that's a fact.

    You saying people following religion limits their experience is you being CLOSE MINDED.

    In fact, why are YOU judging them on how they live their life? You're actually doing the opposite of what you're speaking about; that's called HYPOCRISY.

    Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Christians, Sikhs and others have FREE WILL to live how they want to. Stop trying to impose your values on others. You lil b****.
    Life IS all about experiences, some are hedonists, some are interested in studying, some are murderers, some are unsure about what they want, but at the end of the day when you're laying on your deathbed and you look back at all of these activities, it is all experience.

    I can see why you're saying I'm close minded, however it's more of the opposite. It is a fact, Theists have no evidence to suggest what they believe in is the truth, yet they blindly follow their belief and often push it onto others. While it is more rational to be an Athiest, similar to thiests there is still no definitive evidence to suggest that there isn't a God. However the difference is that I'm coming from a point of skepticism and rationality, I'm saying you shouldn't live your life by a religious doctrine until you can prove it's true, and until that point Islam, Christianity, Judaism and ****ing Jediism could be the true religion, after all we can't disprove it, that isn't being close minded, it's trying to possibly save a Christian that maybe should be believing in Islam if Islam turns out to be true. Theists will live their life by a moral code of their religion based on blind faith, you don't need a moral code to tell you how to be moral, morality isn't even an objective concept so living by a doctrine that tries to define it is being CLOSE MINDED.

    Without getting in a philosophical discussion and for the sake of the argument let's say free will definitely exists. Yes Theists have free will, we all do, if we want to commit murder, or have sex we can, but a Theist having the ability to choose out of two options is biased. At least a small amount of hardcore Theists would rather be murdered than kill their murderer based purely on the religious indoctrination that murder is wrong thinking they have an afterlife when actually they're more likely to have missed out on the last 60 years they will ever be conscious. Their own biased free will has ironically prevented their future free will. A lot of believers would say no to masturbation or sex, sexual desire is 100% natural, for religion to punish or look down upon sexual experience before marriage is utterly disgraceful,

    I'm not saying it's a bad thing, if you don't have any urges nor do you want to that's fine, but for a religious institution to indoctrinate you on how to think and feel about how your body naturally functions, that is anything but fine.

    not only is it trying to force humans against their natural urges it would start to damage them psychologically, forcing a form of schizophrenic thought with their bodies demanding a sexual release and their minds telling them that they shouldn't be feeling that way. So yes, they have free will to make decisions, but their decisions are biased from a young age, and very damaging.

    I don't see how I'm being a hypocrite, and I'm judging them because someone made a post about how they 'cant stand religion bashers', so I was explaining why I abhor religion 'You lil *****'.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JW22)
    Life IS all about experiences, some are hedonists, some are interested in studying, some are murderers, some are unsure about what they want, but at the end of the day when you're laying on your deathbed and you look back at all of these activities, it is all experience.

    I can see why you're saying I'm close minded, however it's more of the opposite. It is a fact, Theists have no evidence to suggest what they believe in is the truth, yet they blindly follow their belief and often push it onto others. While it is more rational to be an Athiest, similar to thiests there is still no definitive evidence to suggest that there isn't a God. However the difference is that I'm coming from a point of skepticism and rationality, I'm saying you shouldn't live your life by a religious doctrine until you can prove it's true, and until that point Islam, Christianity, Judaism and ****ing Jediism could be the true religion, after all we can't disprove it, that isn't being close minded, it's trying to possibly save a Christian that maybe should be believing in Islam if Islam turns out to be true. Theists will live their life by a moral code of their religion based on blind faith, you don't need a moral code to tell you how to be moral, morality isn't even an objective concept so living by a doctrine that tries to define it is being CLOSE MINDED.

    Without getting in a philosophical discussion and for the sake of the argument let's say free will definitely exists. Yes Theists have free will, we all do, if we want to commit murder, or have sex we can, but a Theist having the ability to choose out of two options is biased. At least a small amount of hardcore Theists would rather be murdered than kill their murderer based purely on the religious indoctrination that murder is wrong thinking they have an afterlife when actually they're more likely to have missed out on the last 60 years they will ever be conscious. Their own biased free will has ironically prevented their future free will. A lot of believers would say no to masturbation or sex, sexual desire is 100% natural, for religion to punish or look down upon sexual experience before marriage is utterly disgraceful,

    I'm not saying it's a bad thing, if you don't have any urges nor do you want to that's fine, but for a religious institution to indoctrinate you on how to think and feel about how your body naturally functions, that is anything but fine.

    not only is it trying to force humans against their natural urges it would start to damage them psychologically, forcing a form of schizophrenic thought with their bodies demanding a sexual release and their minds telling them that they shouldn't be feeling that way. So yes, they have free will to make decisions, but their decisions are biased from a young age, and very damaging.

    I don't see how I'm being a hypocrite, and I'm judging them because someone made a post about how they 'cant stand religion bashers', so I was explaining why I abhor religion 'You lil *****'.
    Hope you're not expectical a logical, insult free reply.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by StudentInSociety)
    you cannot judge someone for believing in something you do not.
    Of course you can! I will make a different judgement of you if, despite copious well-attested evidence to the contrary, you choose to believe that the story of Noah's Ark is literally true and that there really was a worldwide flood, than if you don't.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Mighty_Bush)
    You could send people to gulags or deliberately starve millions to death or rape some nuns with bayonets. That's more like what atheists do/have done in history.

    You are Hungarian right? Strange that your people lived under the brutal, atheistic system of communism yet you don't seem to be too against it. At least most young Hungarians have some sense which is why Jobbik are the most popular party among the youth of Hungary.
    Remember, before you go calling people brain dead, that your claim that communists acted in the name of atheism is a lie, and that the communists were not ideologically also atheist. In fact, Stalin had been a Russian Orthodox priest.

    They certainly tried to ban the church but this was not to further atheism; it was purely an attempt to remove the threat that the church posed to the communist party's authority over the people. Nothing more, nothing less.

    Stalin's crimes were certainly not motivated by a desire to spread atheists - what nonsense!
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Emilia1320)
    If we for discussion for a second assume that god is real (I DONT believe that!) and it created the universe, what does that solve? If we put aside that you can eat chips in heaven and watch me suffer eternal torment, what does that help? When trying to find out origins of the universe, if we would find out god created it we would still need to know where god came from to answer the very question. Explaining birth of universe with god when there most likely is no god is like paying MasterCard bill with Visa. We cant go ahead of what we know, there could or could not be god, but if there is not we would be highly mislead if we just assumed there is.
    What does it solve? It solves an awful lot, actually. It explains not only the reason for our existence, but also happenings in our day-to-day lives; it explains the justices and injustices in this world; it explains how we have a purpose; it explains the answer to the question of what is or isn't ethical - a question that science can't answer.
    Also, before anyone else starts saying that it's all v well and good, but isn't it obvious that man would want to create a god to give them a purpose, and to make themselves feel loved... just ask yourselves why we feel a need for this. Where does this need originate from?
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: December 1, 2015
Poll
Are you going to a festival?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.