Religion v Atheism: The Good, The Bad, And the Ugly

[Toki]

I want to hear your opinions on what you think of religion/spirituality or lack thereof; without specifically targeting any one religion. What brought you to your current love/hate/neutral stance on religion? Can any 2000 year old religious volume still be valid in a world of contradicting science? Or should they be retired into fiction? Are all atheists bleeding hearts who have nothing of worth and complain constantly because they've rejected their spiritual selves? Are all religious folk superiority driven dimwits who are afraid of electricity, and fearful of some ZZ Top looking guy who hangs out on a cloud? Would the world be a better place with/without religion? Do atheists really belong in the great spiritual debate? Is there a common ground both can reach without ignoring the other side? As a religious person is there anything redeeming about atheists? As an atheist is there anything redeeming about the religious?

[OpenBook]

What brought you to your current love/hate/neutral stance on religion?

 

Three things --

 

#1 - Life experience. I've been saved from certain ruin too many times, and there is no other explanation for why or how it happened.

 

#2 - Hope. Following the teachings of Jesus and reading (REALLY reading) the Bible is my only hope of living a meaningful and happy life.

 

#3 - Scientists. I read that for many of them, the more they learn about the universe, the STRONGER their faith becomes. This is my ultimate hope for our species. I believe that science and religion can (and should) coexist and even be inextricably intertwined.

 

Can any 2000 year old religious volume still be valid in a world of contradicting science? Or should they be retired into fiction?

 

I've asked the same question, many times. And this question is always in the back of my mind as I read the Bible.

 

Are all atheists bleeding hearts who have nothing of worth and complain constantly because they've rejected their spiritual selves?

 

Certainly not! I firmly believe they (and their views) are just as valuable as those of religious folks.

 

Are all religious folk superiority driven dimwits who are afraid of electricity, and fearful of some ZZ Top looking guy who hangs out on a cloud?

 

Well, some of them certainly appear to be that way! But you'll have kooks in any group of people that forms. I am far more impressed by those who quietly demonstrate their faithful following by the way they live their lives, instead of always trying to shove their beliefs down everybody else's throats.

 

Would the world be a better place with/without religion?

 

That is certainly debatable, given human history which is filled with death and destruction in the name of religion... which I believe was directly caused in every case by people trying to shove their beliefs down everybody else's throats.

 

Do atheists really belong in the great spiritual debate?

 

A resounding YES on that one!!! Debate and close examination of beliefs are a necessary part of our evolution as a species.

 

Is there a common ground both can reach without ignoring the other side?

 

That is a very good question. I believe that common ground may prove to be ... science. A true scientist must concede all possibilities.

[shadowofman]

I became an atheist at the age of twelve when I heard the word "atheist", inquired the meaning, and realized that I didn't believe in spirits. Up until that point I just assumed the people I loved knew more than I did.

 

The ancient texts are increasingly viewed as metaphoric and parable because science proves particular stories invalid. The Gods described are considered "gods of the gaps" by atheists, because as we fill in our understanding of the world, supernatural things shrink and fill in the "I don't knows" or the gaps in our knowledge. Logic demands that you admit when you don't know the answer. Of course a minority of religious people believe in the literal stories like Noah's flood. There is no evidence which would sway these people.

 

I don't think the world would be free of war or that poverty would disappear if religion were to go away. But religion certainly hinders science. I also believe that for every one person religion helps, it hurts one in return through guilt or shame.

 

"Religious distress is at the same time the expression of real distress and the protest against real distress. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless situation. It is the opium of the people. The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." Marx

 

There is always common ground and people should be respected for having their own opinions. I however see no need to respect others beliefs. Some beliefs are obviously false, harmful, deserved of ridicule and intolerance.

[norajane]

Or should they be retired into fiction?

 

I've already retired them all into fiction...mythology. In my view, all religious stories are just that, stories. And are interesting to me only in the same way Egyptian, Norse, Greek and Roman mythology are.

 

I loathe religions because they separate people instead of bringing them together, and have been directly and indirectly responsible for the worst and most atrocities and deaths throughout time. Religions breed hate and murder.

[shadowofman]

I will stick up for religion on the topic of death and destruction. It is not an inherent evil in religion which causes war, but 99.9% of the time a resource or economic conflict with first creates the tension. Then it is typically the leaders of a religion which use the people's religious ideologies as fuel for the fire of intolerance. I agree that it can be a very decisive tool, one that can literally cause a population to view others as inhuman. But at the same time, it can be a tool to bring people together.

[bananalaffytaffy]

I believe in God, but I don't believe in organized religion. I believe that what is important is my relationship with God, not what someone else tells me it should be.

[wuggle]

I am an athiest.

 

I was born into a catholic family, raised at catholic schools to adulthood (sometimes by priests\monks, very scary). Throughout my formative years I began to question the validity of the catholic faith I was being taught by my parents & schools and found it severely wanting. The explanations given for the virgin birth, 3 parts to god, being a ghost, his dad and his son all at the same time, bread becoming the actual body of christ, the resurrection etc etc made no sense and were completely at odds with the rest of my school teachings, which taught me to question everything. Those that were giving me these answers were unable when questioned to make any more sense of it than myself and always reverted to the 'it's all about having faith' argument. And these were supposed to be the experts.

 

So around 15(ish) I started reading about other religions (I had already read the bible repeatedly) Judaism, Islam, Buddhism (especially Zen) , Hinduism etc. I sort of found small snippets of some essential truth in all of these religions, sadly along with a lot of nonsense.

 

I eventually came to the conclusion (mid 30s) that there probably is not a God and nothing I have learnt since has changed that opinion (still keep an open mind but refused to listen to people spouting doctrine and no 'proper' explanations), If asked which religions I still 'like' I would have to say hinduism (love the multiple 'god' aspect in everything, and probably closest to the truth is in my opinion is buddhism (though not a theistic religion), the idea of a collective sub-consciousness, and essential oneness of all things does sit well with me. The closest I have ever come to 'understanding' things has been when trying (poorly) to meditate.

 

If there is a god, maybe he\she is actually this collective, ie all of us and everything at the same time. Maybe we are all god & the devil at the same time. My experiences of humanity would certainly seem to bear this out, I have seen examples from both end of the spectrum.

 

Re organised religion, I believe in man's early days they were probably essential in helping formation of group structures, levels of belonging, conformity etc, though I believe the texts on which most organised religions are based are all so corrupted over time by humans, either errantly or malicously that they are no longer productive to mankind's development. I now believe that generally organised religion is holding mankind back and sadly will for many more generations.

 

I believe that we will eventually, through a hugely increased knowledge of all things around us come to realise the true nature of divinity and give up the clinging to unthought through , often contradictory and divisive doctrines. But I also believe that each person and generation must get there on their own understanding, You cannot force someone to abandon their belief in a god, for some that would not even be productive (I do recognise the comfort that such belief can give) I think of it as sort of a path that 7 billion people are walking down, we are all at different places on the same path, some have gone off down some side streets etc but ultimately we are all going the same way. It's not a race, I'm sure we'll all get where were supposed to be eventually.

Edited April 11, 2010 by wuggle

[sweetjasmine]

What brought you to your current love/hate/neutral stance on religion?

 

I don't mind religion in the sense that if it helps someone get through the day, then more power to them. If people can find comfort and happiness through religion, then good for them.

 

But I hate it when people use religion to justify murder, hatred, bigotry, abuse, and cruelty. I hate it when people hide behind religion. I hate it when people disrespect others yet demand respect for their religious beliefs. I hate it when people try to force their beliefs on others.

 

Can any 2000 year old religious volume still be valid in a world of contradicting science? Or should they be retired into fiction?

 

I view religious texts as literature. I don't like it when people try to apply it all literally. Almost everyone cherry picks the bits and pieces they like. Ordinary Christians might quote the Ten Commandments or the gospels, but no one pays attention to the restrictions in Leviticus which prohibit eating shellfish or wearing cloth made from more than one type of fabric. I wish people would admit that they're only accepting parts of religious texts and not applying them literally. And I wish there were people who didn't apply it all literally.

 

Are all atheists bleeding hearts who have nothing of worth and complain constantly because they've rejected their spiritual selves?

 

Being spiritual and being religious are not mutually exclusive. And atheists don't "complain constantly" any more than religious people.

 

I've found that atheists like me value life greatly, especially since it's the only one we have.

 

Are all religious folk superiority driven dimwits who are afraid of electricity, and fearful of some ZZ Top looking guy who hangs out on a cloud?

 

No. It's hard to lump all religious folk into one category. For instance, the Amish really do avoid technology and restrict themselves to a simple life, but other religious people don't. Some religious doctrines are based on fear of the ZZ Top looking guy on a cloud, but others aren't.

 

Would the world be a better place with/without religion?

 

In some ways, the world would be a better place without religion. In other ways, I guess not.

 

The world would certainly be a better place without religiously motivated crime, murder, hatred, bigotry, abuse, etc.

 

Do atheists really belong in the great spiritual debate?

 

Yes.

 

Is there a common ground both can reach without ignoring the other side?

 

I really don't know. Many religious doctrines preach hatred and even murder of non-believers. I can't reason with someone who thinks I should be murdered because I don't believe in their religion.

 

As an atheist is there anything redeeming about the religious?

 

They're ordinary human beings. We all are. We have our good traits and bad traits.

[pureinheart]

I want to hear your opinions on what you think of religion/spirituality or lack thereof; without specifically targeting any one religion. What brought you to your current love/hate/neutral stance on religion? Can any 2000 year old religious volume still be valid in a world of contradicting science? Or should they be retired into fiction? Are all atheists bleeding hearts who have nothing of worth and complain constantly because they've rejected their spiritual selves? Are all religious folk superiority driven dimwits who are afraid of electricity, and fearful of some ZZ Top looking guy who hangs out on a cloud? Would the world be a better place with/without religion? Do atheists really belong in the great spiritual debate? Is there a common ground both can reach without ignoring the other side? As a religious person is there anything redeeming about atheists? As an atheist is there anything redeeming about the religious?

 

My faith has saved my life and have an incredible testamony. As most know the term Christianity, that is what I follow, Trinity, etc.

 

Unfortunately many in my faith have turned off a lot of people and for that I am sorry, although I am only responsible for me. Even the tv program that I frequent and church that I've attended off and on for the past 23 yrs is beginning to recognize this also...this makes me happy.

 

I love to hear about other faiths, as I don't feel "threatened" as it is not my problem and I don't expect people to feel the same as I do. Once facts are presented it is up to them to decide whether they want to make "my" facts theirs. People are people and for the most part I love people.

 

I am passionate concerning children and animals. I don't play with this area at all.

 

I read some of the replies in this forum from time to time and I find it interesting as to why would an "athiest" would post at all in a "Spirituality" forum...quite contradictory IMO, unless they simply like to argue or convert others to atheism.

Edited April 11, 2010 by pureinheart

[wuggle]

I read some of the replies in this forum from time to time and I find it interesting as to why would an "athiest" would post at all in a "Spirituality" forum...quite contradictory IMO, unless they simply like to argue or convert others to atheism.

 

As an athiest who has posted here, I can answer this. As an athiest I still consider myself a very moral and spiritual person (although the definition of spiritual is traditionally associated with religion, my personal athiest philosophy does not exclude a 'spiritual' or 'transcendant' aspect to humanity, just not as traditionally defined by theists) I personally consider athiesm to be a point on the road of self examination, and often one reached after studying various religions, not before. Most people (IMO) who are athiest have arrived at that point after at least looking at various other religions and deciding they are not right for them.

 

No contradiction, no attempts at conversion or even argument, simply discussion that might help all.

Edited April 11, 2010 by wuggle
I really need to learn how to spel !

[norajane]

I read some of the replies in this forum from time to time and I find it interesting as to why would an "athiest" would post at all in a "Spirituality" forum...quite contradictory IMO, unless they simply like to argue or convert others to atheism.

 

For the same reason people who aren't OW/OM post in that forum, or any other forum here. They have opinions or want to understand others regardless of their personal circumstances or beliefs.

 

And many of us never go into the specific forums, anyway. We use the new posts link, which brings up threads from all the forums, and view threads that way.

[Trojan John]

I want to hear your opinions on what you think of religion/spirituality or lack thereof; without specifically targeting any one religion. What brought you to your current love/hate/neutral stance on religion? Can any 2000 year old religious volume still be valid in a world of contradicting science? Or should they be retired into fiction? Are all atheists bleeding hearts who have nothing of worth and complain constantly because they've rejected their spiritual selves? Are all religious folk superiority driven dimwits who are afraid of electricity, and fearful of some ZZ Top looking guy who hangs out on a cloud? Would the world be a better place with/without religion? Do atheists really belong in the great spiritual debate? Is there a common ground both can reach without ignoring the other side? As a religious person is there anything redeeming about atheists? As an atheist is there anything redeeming about the religious?

 

I turned away from my childhood religion some time in high school, and became agnostic then atheist at university. I like to joke by saying that it is to avoid the religion tax each year. The reason for my rejection was manifold, but came primarily during my studies of religion, antiquity, art and anthropology of lost cultures at uni.

 

There is a great pantheon of gods, the belief in each as varied and astonishing as the works attributed to those gods. The various creation and resurrection myths, the magical abilities, the end-time prophecies, and stories of afterlife or reincarnation -- all strain credulity to the limit.

 

The teachings of the current popular religions are no more valid nor correct than those of any of our ancient civilizations, but they are just as odd in some cases. Who here would whole-heartedly attempt to make a sacrifice of their son or pet because their god told them to? That you will get virgins in heaven when you die for your religion? That menstruation is a punishment? That you can be cursed or curse others in return, and ward them off with an evil eye pendant?

 

Despite the numerous redeeming values, the bad part of religion is the indoctrination of children, the inherent fanaticism (whether good or bad), the sheltering of abusers, the influence in political policy, and the absolutely absurd pressures and stigma that it puts on its followers in terms of their natural urges.

 

An atheist can be spiritual and generous, and conversely a religious person can be the personification of "evil", and vice versa. We're all human and we have the capacity to do both, and everything in between regardless of our personal beliefs. It is our own wills and imaginations that make our lives how they are. Spirituality does not have to be forced upon you from some ancient text. It can come naturally by just sitting in the wilderness, or climbing a mountain or by exploring a sea. We can all live without religion, but it's not very likely that we ever will.

[quankanne]

I guess you could say I'm a believer (of the Roman Catholic persuasion, lol) simply because my faith was God's gift to me. I've never not believed, though I have questioned and looked for answers, a process that has reaffirmed my faith every time during the 40 years I've been aware of my faith.

 

the 2000-year-old volume: Drives me nuts when people say that it cannot have truths in it because it doesn't mesh up with science, reason, history, etc. They fail to recognize it as a tome that follows mankind's spiritual journey, with some geographical/practical information included so that the reader understands the era the writer was living in.

 

:D:D God as a ZZ Top clone? That's too funny I've always viewed him as a spiritual force, rather than a physical body, unless it's Jesus we're particularly talking about ...

 

the role of atheists in my life as a believer: Without intending to offend those who embrace atheism, I see these folks as instruments of God to help me deepen my faith. Not because of adamant opposition, but because they force me to really think about what I believe in and why. The folks I've encountered here have been teachers, mostly, who've given true insight into spirituality through their practical, rational approach to the topic. Can there be common ground between these two extremely different camps? Of course, if you're willing to have an open mind about the information shared and willing to dialogue in the truest sense of the word, not flame each other ...

[Star Gazer]

I was born, baptised, and raised Catholic, but I also have some family members who are Jewish. I had my First Communion, but refused to be Confirmed Catholic. My mother completely understood why. For me, asking a 13 year old to declare myself permanently as a Christian, and more so a Catholic, just didn't work for me. I had too many questions, too many doubts.

 

Since then, I could describe my beliefs, but it wasn't until recently that I had a name for it: I am a diest. End of story.

 

Deism (\ˈdi:iz(ə)m\[1] or \ˈdē-ˌi-zəm\)[2] is a religious and philosophical belief that a supreme being created the universe, and that this (and religious truth in general) can be determined using reason and observation of the natural world alone, without the need for either faith or organized religion. Deists tend to, but do not necessarily, reject the notion that God intervenes in human affairs, for example through miracles and revelations. These views contrast with the dependence on revelations, miracles, and faith found in many Jewish, Christian, Islamic and other theistic teachings.

 

Deists typically reject most supernatural events (prophecy, miracles) and tend to assert that God (or "The Supreme Architect") has a plan for the universe that is not altered either by God intervening in the affairs of human life or by suspending the natural laws of the universe. What organized religions see as divine revelation and holy books, most deists see as interpretations made by other humans, rather than as authoritative sources.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism

 

In all honesty, I think most people who believe in a higher power but reject organized religion would probably fall under the banner of deism. Here's another link: http://www.positivedeism.com/deistprimer.html

 

That said, when I enter certain Catholic churches - St. Peters at the Vatican, for example - I have an overwhelming feeling of being close to that "higher power." I'm not sure if it's something connected Catholicism, or just that it's a "holy" place...

[sally4sara]

I think war is a human urge and religion is the glue used to build their army. The christian bible was made specifically to unit the different spiritual groups in Constantine I empire so he could amass a huge army.

 

If there were no religion, we would still have people pushing for war. Having a religion to justify the act just makes it easier to accomplish the body count.

 

I use to believe completely. I took notice of how the wants of their god of choice always seemed petty and hollow - like the excuses of a human. The bible is a human creation. Science has mapped out the miracle of life. People will never cease to point to events that sooth them when needing to feel like they are part of something larger than their little life. Events that of themselves are not impossible miracles.

 

What is left over after that? I don't see god in it at all. At least not any god that would care about the petty things we get our feathers ruffled over. These human made creations are used to shut people up and make them go along with the rituals. Like Carousel in Logan's Run.

[Toki]

Good Answers all.

 

I suppose I should answer my own queries.

 

I was raised Catholic, and after about ten-eleven years, I just didn't get it. The entire foundation of the church made absolutely no sense to me. And while, I respected the traditions of the church, the history of brutal suppression, and paranoid fervor and the continuation in some form or another disenchanted me from the spiritual block. As a younger kid, I still believed in a human personification of god, but as I got older and learned more about sciences, I realized how utterly daft this idea seemed to me. It wasn't Charles Darwin the killed religion for me, it was the absolutism of the bible.

 

So, I hung out in Agnostic land for quite awhile. Not really knowing, or caring about spirituality. I guess, as time went on, and through hardship I found myself pondering the plausibility of god, to which I still have no answers. So I've entrenched myself more in the atheist/pro-science/reason camp, I guess I just don't care that much if god exists or not, and I suppose for all sakes and purposes that puts me with the atheists. However, I still believe that no matter how much science disproves the existence of a "god" that it still doesn't quite address, or relate to the immense power a god could hold, which if it can exist will never be understood, thus negating Dawkin's "God of the Gaps".

 

I believe the bible should be appreciated from the eyes of ancient peoples, but that in an age of equal values, and liberty for all, must be put into classic fiction, or mythology. It is important for us to understand religious tomes, but not in any literal sense.

 

I believe many Atheists, and religious folk alike suffer from Superiority Complexes. They are so absolute in their beliefs it makes their structured thought processes rigid, and unoriginal, and actually does more to harm science and reason than it does to help. Viewing all things plausible, until proven otherwise should remain the cornerstone of western thought, a Religious person says god exists, and an Atheist should say "Give me evidence." Not "I think you're daft, crazy, and unreasonable." It is always good to question institutions based on the creative ventures of a few monks living in an age of turmoil and despair, but atheists should object to religious motives and absolutism, but at the same time nurture free thought.

 

I don't know if the world would be a better a place without religion, some of the worst crimes against humanity have been done in the name of a god. Religion does often times seems to give a free pass for irresponsible behavior. However, at the same time some of the worst crimes in the modern era have been perpetrated by Atheist Regimes. It's not really, a religious or non religious issue, the issue is humanity and how we can convince ourselves that we're right and everyone else is wrong.

 

Atheists belong in the spiritual debate, but I think more as critics, and not as missionaries.

 

I think a good common ground to that both can reach, is allowing scientists to continue being scientists, and for priests/priestesses to continue being priests. Scientists can be either theists or atheists but in the end, it's the pursuit of knowledge, and when it disproves the other, I think it should be said. However, in the matter of "god" finding a grain of sand does not prove you're in a desert.

 

In the end, the advancement of the human race should remain both's priorities. It's the redeeming quality of both, it's when stubborn thoughts, and rigid codes of conduct come into play that hamper both sides, and fuel fiery debates that really get no one, anywhere.

Edited April 13, 2010 by Toki

[quankanne]

I believe many Atheists, and religious folk alike suffer from Superiority Complexes. They are so absolute in their beliefs it makes their structured thought processes rigid, and unoriginal, and actually does more to harm science and reason than it does to help.

 

so true – if every person in every age kept their minds small, there'd be no advancement in science. Or in personal spiritual journeys. Query is good, because it's a tool that brings you to further understanding, not pull you away from something. At least in my experience, that's the role it's played ...

[Trojan John]

However, at the same time some of the worst crimes in the modern era have been perpetrated by Atheist Regimes.

 

I agree with almost everything you wrote except the above quote. I'm going to hazard a guess that you are referring to the likes of Hitler, Pol Pot, Stalin and Kim Jong Il. These men were/are driven by ideology and demagoguery, not atheism.

 

There is no atheist book nor banner under which people rally to fight against religious nations. There has never been a conflict fought in the name of atheism.

 

Other than that, great post and topic.

[Toki]

This is true, they were motivated more or less by ideology than atheism, which I failed to mention. The Soviet NKVD were probably equal parts religious/non religious/atheist, even if the Soviet government banned most religious institutions in the country.

Edited April 14, 2010 by Toki

[sweetjasmine]

I agree with almost everything you wrote except the above quote. I'm going to hazard a guess that you are referring to the likes of Hitler, Pol Pot, Stalin and Kim Jong Il. These men were/are driven by ideology and demagoguery, not atheism.

 

There is no atheist book nor banner under which people rally to fight against religious nations. There has never been a conflict fought in the name of atheism.

 

Other than that, great post and topic.

 

Yup, absolutely.

 

Hitler actually considered himself a Christian, privately, and was opposed to state atheism. I mean, think about it. Communist USSR was a threat to his Germany, and he tied state atheism to the communist system. In 1933, he said:

"Today they say that Christianity is in danger, that the Catholic faith is threatened. My reply to them is: for the time being, Christians and not international atheists are now standing at Germany’s fore. I am not merely talking about Christianity; I confess that I will never ally myself with the parties which aim to destroy Christianity. Fourteen years they have gone arm in arm with atheism. At no time was greater damage ever done to Christianity than in those years when the Christian parties ruled side by side with those who denied the very existence of God. Germany's entire cultural life was shattered and contaminated in this period. It shall be our task to burn out these manifestations of degeneracy in literature, theater, schools, and the press—that is, in our entire culture—and to eliminate the poison which has been permeating every facet of our lives for these past fourteen years."

 

He also used religious language and imagery to manipulate public opinion.

 

And in the case of the USSR, Russian Orthodoxy was replaced by statism. People were forced to "worship" the state. If you take a look at the imagery and language the Soviet government used, you'll see it closely parallels Orthodox traditions. They tried to displace the dominant religion with ideology by co-opting important religious/cultural symbols.

 

There's really no such thing as an Atheist Regime but there are atheist regimes. You can't exactly rally around the fact that you don't believe there's a god without an additional set of beliefs and ethics, which is something that atheism itself doesn't provide and people need to add on their own. Anything else attached to that lack of belief in god is additional ideology.

 

I've met atheists who are anarchists/leftists and right-wing libertarians and everything in between. So I have no idea what an Atheist Regime would look like.

[Toki]

Just goes to show you how far American schools have gone to tie non Christianity into oppressive regimes. I admit, even I didn't think of it this way, thanks Jasmine for clarifying.

[sweetjasmine]

Just goes to show you how far American schools have gone to tie non Christianity into oppressive regimes. I admit, even I didn't think of it this way, thanks Jasmine for clarifying.

 

Sure thing. They're interesting topics and worth reading up on.

 

Just to be clear, statism makes me sick to my stomach and so does "evangelical" atheism. I don't like state atheism any more than I like state Christianity, Judaism, Islam, etc. The state shouldn't endorse theism or non-theism, and of course there are theists and atheists who disagree with me on that.

[Lovelybird]

I trust God, don't trust people unless they prove they are trustworthy no matter what they claim they are.

 

As for Hilter, he didn't believe in God, or if he did, he didn't really know God. He is his own god.

 

And what do atheist believe? pure science? the strong survive principle? or do you believe some nonmaterial things such as love and kindness should rein human lives? Do you believe that science can bring human race to a better place, not only materially, but also emotionally and spiritually?

[Eve]

I want to hear your opinions on what you think of religion/spirituality or lack thereof; without specifically targeting any one religion. What brought you to your current love/hate/neutral stance on religion? Can any 2000 year old religious volume still be valid in a world of contradicting science? Or should they be retired into fiction? Are all atheists bleeding hearts who have nothing of worth and complain constantly because they've rejected their spiritual selves? Are all religious folk superiority driven dimwits who are afraid of electricity, and fearful of some ZZ Top looking guy who hangs out on a cloud? Would the world be a better place with/without religion? Do atheists really belong in the great spiritual debate? Is there a common ground both can reach without ignoring the other side? As a religious person is there anything redeeming about atheists? As an atheist is there anything redeeming about the religious?

 

In real life terms I just look at who the person is. I dont believe in the image created here of what I now regard as 'the internet athiest'. People get on or dont get on... simple as that. At no point have I ever come across anyone not willing to speak to me becaue of my faith. Nor have I ever not spoken to someone because they do not know the Lord.

 

Of course in real life, some take either a scientific or religious view on topics .. but realisticaly I think it is hard to define even these moments because even in work related issues the emphasis is usually upon jointly formulating a system of language to describe/assess something. To me its about how whatever system of belief is expressed individually and as part of a group rather than a wholey personal preference existing on its own. That could come across as quite ignorant.. as it does on the internet.

 

Yes, how people express themselves can in my mind bring about an idea of whether they have a spiritual life or not. Dont know, people gravitate to whatever interests them. If you want to read the Bible, read it. If you dont, dont... but there is so much more to faith!

 

Its who you are that matters and how this is expressed, which is the core message of all religions and the aim of science to observe, monitor and maybe even address in yet more elaborate ways.

 

But a twat is a twat no matter what guise he or she takes momentarily or even if he or she chooses a belief to follow ...

 

In real life it is usually evident why a person has given up their faith as also why a person chooses to follow. I find this fascinating in some respects but dont pay it all my attention because life expands and grows and there are so many off shoots and interests. Faith is not static and for me involves finding reasons not to hate.

 

To me Jesus met people as they were and they recognised Him and then change came about that is/was significant to them. People are saying that this is still something which is ongoing and has touched them. To me this can happen in so many different ways that it remains interesting. Those without faith (I think) get caught up in not being able to directly participate in the language and actions because that is their choice for whatever reason.

 

Fine.

 

.. In this regard I dont think there is much room for discussion unless genuine friendship is there. Without this it is just about who is the most popular or whatever..

 

I have to add this in also. In an episode of Star Trek Voyager - 'In a blink of an Eye' the evolution of a planet was conveyed as Voyager tried to free itself from its atmosphere. Every second on Voyager was the equivalent of a day on the planet, so they got to see the planet evolve from the inhabitants living in caves to the eventual attempt to blow Voyager out of the sky!

 

Voyager basically became embedded in the belief system of the planet. They watched as the inhabitants tried various means to uncover what their ship was and this belief inspired centuries of discussion, art and advancement.

 

This is the sort of overview I carry of the tension that can exist between belief and non belief.. in one way or another its all about advancement .. except of course I know that God is real..

 

Take care,

Eve xx

[Rooster_DAR]

And what do atheist believe? Do you believe that science can bring human race to a better place, not only materially, but also emotionally and spiritually?

 

True unbiased science would probably take us to a better place if everyone believed and honored it's principles. In fact, if not for science our civilization would still be living in the dark ages.

 

Religion on the other hand is equal to leading the sheep with a blind herder into the unknown.

 

Just my opinion you see....