The God or Not God Discussion

[Robert Z]

Religion and God are different don't you think?

 

 

I think the concepts are different, yes. But I was talking about faith. And most people of faith have a problem not imposing their faith on others.

 

When a person goes into the voting booth, should they vote according to their faith, or their logic? Should I vote according to what my concept of God tells me, or my understanding of the Constitution and the pursuit of liberty?

 

 

What happens when you install democracy in a theocracy? They vote it away!

[Brigit]

I think the concepts are different, yes. But I was talking about faith. And most people of faith have a problem not imposing their faith on others.

 

When a person goes into the voting booth, should they vote according to their faith, or their logic? Should I vote according to what my concept of God tells me, or my understanding of the Constitution and the pursuit of liberty?

 

When people are alone in the voting booth I think they vote for the candidate they perceive will benefit them the most. But people don't want to think of themselves as selfish so they'll convince themselves that the candidate is good for everybody.

 

I don't vote.

[Robert Z]

When people are alone in the voting booth I think they vote for the candidate they perceive will benefit them the most. But people don't want to think of themselves as selfish so they'll convince themselves that the candidate is good for everybody.

 

I don't vote.

 

What I see is that people faith resist allowing me the right to liberty. Hell, they would rather see a person suffer a long, slow, miserable death rather than having the right to die with dignity, because according to them, the government should have control of not only my life, but my death.

[GorillaTheater]

I think the concepts are different, yes. But I was talking about faith. And most people of faith have a problem not imposing their faith on others.

 

When a person goes into the voting booth, should they vote according to their faith, or their logic? Should I vote according to what my concept of God tells me, or my understanding of the Constitution and the pursuit of liberty?

 

 

What happens when you install democracy in a theocracy? They vote it away!

 

I just can't see blaming religion, per se, for much of the world's problems. The conflicts between Armenians and Azeris, Serbs and Croats, Thais and Malays, etc. COULD be blamed on religious differences, but more to heart of the matter I think is the issue of tribalism, where religion is just one of many ways a group of people define both themselves and their "enemies".

 

As far as voting, as far as I can tell people vote for worse reasons than those having to do with faith. Are they the best reasons? Of course not, but it beats voting for someone based on how photogenic they are.

[Robert Z]

I just can't see blaming religion, per se, for much of the world's problems. The conflicts between Armenians and Azeris, Serbs and Croats, Thais and Malays, etc. COULD be blamed on religious differences, but more to heart of the matter I think is the issue of tribalism, where religion is just one of many ways a group of people define both themselves and their "enemies".

 

 

But what is used as the motivation? The control of the masses occurs through the exploitation of faith. God only knows how many "holy wars" have been declared in my lifetime. What, maybe thousands?

 

As far as voting, as far as I can tell people vote for worse reasons than those having to do with faith. Are they the best reasons? Of course not, but it beats voting for someone based on how photogenic they are.

 

I don't know that we can conclude that. A photogenic idiot is probably a better option than a dangerous religious zealot.

Edited June 10, 2015 by Robert Z

[GorillaTheater]

But what is used as the motivation? The control of the masses occurs through the exploitation of faith.

 

The motivation for what? The violence? Like I said, it's an issue of tribalism more than religion. The Tutsis and Hutus were both largely Roman Catholic and even spoke the same language. How they defined "us" and "them" just relied on other criteria.

 

 

 

I don't know that we can conclude that. A photogenic idiot is probably a better option than a dangerous religious zealot.

 

I don't necessarily disagree, but the odds of a photogenic idiot getting elected are much higher than the religious zealot, at least in the West.

 

Bush wasn't dangerous because he was a religious zealot, he was dangerous because he was a moron.

[GorillaTheater]

The motivation for what? The violence? Like I said, it's an issue of tribalism more than religion. The Tutsis and Hutus were both largely Roman Catholic and even spoke the same language. How they defined "us" and "them" just relied on other criteria.

 

Let me expand on that a bit. In all of the conflicts I've mentioned, the heart of the matter was control of land and the attendant resources, and kicking the other tribe out so that their tribe could have it. Same as just about every other war ever fought.

[Brigit]

God only knows how many "holy wars" have been declared in my lifetime. What, maybe thousands?

 

Does he?

 

Do you believe in a creative designer?

[autumnnight]

And most people of faith have a problem not imposing their faith on others.

 

Stats please? I don't do this. Only one of my Christian friends do this, and I call her on it and make her mad.

 

I would say the vast majority of Christians just want to be able to be Christians without being made fun of, derided, or blamed for what the small percentage of idiots do.

 

Just because some atheists on this thread have made sarcastic, condescending, tactless posts does not mean I can generalize that all atheists are sarcastic, condescending, tactless jerks, correct? Because all the agnostics/atheists I know in real life are emotionally intelligent and tolerant.

[autumnnight]

What I see is that people faith resist allowing me the right to liberty. Hell, they would rather see a person suffer a long, slow, miserable death rather than having the right to die with dignity, because according to them, the government should have control of not only my life, but my death.

 

What the heck are you even talking about? You talking about that whacko doctor and his death injection machine? You don't get arrested for committing suicide or refusing treatment.

 

This is the double standard that bugs me. Most of these kinds of posts are emotion-based and rooted in some personal experience that a person can't let go of.

 

As far as voting, I always vote for a candidate who will uphold the Constitution. I just happen to believe that the "life" part of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness means everyone, and that the people entitled to the Constitution's protection should actually be citizens of the country for which that constitution was written.

 

Silly me

[serial muse]

Exactly how does a statue of a football player with a verse about doing your best under it that has been there for decades "marginalize" a non-Christian?

 

That is just BS

 

Are we talking about the one at the Georgia high school? In fairness that was there about a month before the formal protest was submitted, in Sept 2014 - not decades. It was hardly a big piece of their history. And it was a strange thing to install at a public high school in the year 2014.

 

But maybe there's another religious inscription/football statue kerfuffle I don't know about...

[autumnnight]

Are we talking about the one at the Georgia high school? In fairness that was there about a month before the formal protest was submitted, in Sept 2014 - not decades. It was hardly a big piece of their history. And it was a strange thing to install at a public high school in the year 2014.

 

But maybe there's another religious inscription/football statue kerfuffle I don't know about...

 

I just kind of threw together random details of various things. It was more hypothetical than anything else.

 

Yeah, sometimes Christians (or people of other faiths) seem to stir the pot and THEN cry persecution. Like those students who knew they weren't supposed to give out plastic aborted baby dolls and they did it anyway. Or the boy who said he wasn't permitted to read his Bible, but it was math class and he was supposed to be doing work.

 

THOSE kinds of stories make me mad, just like when a gay couple keeps calling caterers until they find one that says no so they can make a stink. Stuff like that is infantile and misleading.

[Timshel]

I just kind of threw together random details of various things. It was more hypothetical than anything else.

 

Yeah, sometimes Christians (or people of other faiths) seem to stir the pot and THEN cry persecution. Like those students who knew they weren't supposed to give out plastic aborted baby dolls and they did it anyway. Or the boy who said he wasn't permitted to read his Bible, but it was math class and he was supposed to be doing work.

 

THOSE kinds of stories make me mad, just like when a gay couple keeps calling caterers until they find one that says no so they can make a stink. Stuff like that is infantile and misleading.

 

Yep. Any time a person or group of people antagonizes another is stink. No matter the cause.

[autumnnight]

Yep. Any time a person or group of people antagonizes another is stink. No matter the cause.

 

AND it's unnecessary and actually reduces a group's credibility. There ARE legitimate cases of religious discrimination. Why make one up? There are homophobic people who discriminate. Why create an artificial scenario? There are police who do things wrong. Why conflate an incident where they didn't. And on and on and on

[Timshel]

I have been through the "long dark night" and never once did I question God, or rather, Truth. For me it was always more a question of men, people and the shenanigans than God.

 

People lie and twist the truth for their own agenda. From a young age, though raised in the church, I always understood this.

 

My question will never be to God (Creation) that we are so stupid and violent about.

 

It will always be to evolution and our apparent arrogance and stupidity. When will we acknowledge and accept that we are a work in progress.

 

Embracing what we do not know...accepting that there is more to learn than we can wrap our silly mind's around.

 

There is God, for me but human's complicate the Truth with ego and arrogance.

 

What is, was and always will be. Let it be.

[LookAtThisPOst]

Yes. I know of one atheist who went to a fire and brimestone church and was made so fearful of hell by his pastor that he left the church and became an atheist . Thankfully he is now an agnostic with a Christian girlfriend

 

I know of another atheist whose dad was too strict in his religious upbringing .

 

Notice that those that became atheist went from one extreme to the next. This is the same story. I knew of a woman that grew up in all 12 grades having to be made to attend Christian schools instead of regular public schools.

 

This resulted her in rebelling and becoming atheist.

 

The ol, "I had religion shoved down my throat all my life, and it's about time I become an atheist now!!"

[Weezy1973]

This just gets on my nerves. This is getting to the point of people bringing Hitler into a debate. 99% of people who have faith would never fly a plane into a building. This is at the very least a red herring and at the most just plain offensive.

 

It was neither a red herring nor meant to be offensive (of course if you took offense to it, that's on you).

 

This is what I said:

 

I

And faith is also what causes people to fly airplanes into buildings. And if those people are right, then they are certainly justified in their actions. But, if all you are using is faith (i.e. rather than reason, logic, and evidence) then who are we to judge? What one person believes can't be any more right or wrong than anybody else. Flying airplanes into buildings is perfectly justified if it's based on faith. Right? Or is faith only okay if it's the same thing you believe?

 

The example was in no way used to suggest that people of faith are more violent than those without. The example, as suggested by the questions I asked in the quote above, was used to illustrate that faith is not a good way to form one's beliefs.

 

Said more simply, if two people claim absolute certainty about the "truth" based on faith, yet both those "truths" are different, how are we supposed to decide which is actually true? And if faith is a legitimate ways of knowing the truth, than one person's truth based on faith, is no more true than anothers. Right?

 

I noticed you didn't actually answer any of the questions in my quote - nor did anybody of faith. That, I think is more telling than anything else...

[Weezy1973]

What is evidence? Do you mean scientific evidence, anecdotal evidence, physical evidence, statistical evidence, analogical evidence, testimonial evidence...?

 

Yes, all those can be considered evidence, and some are better than others. Anecdotal evidence and testimonial evidence, for example, would not be considered very good evidence as people are very fallible. Even though they claim certainty. Which is a ludicrous concept when you think about it. Yet of course, people continue to claim certainty despite the blatant absurdity of the claim...

 

Unless the clouds part and he lands in all of his glory at a lab at MIT, there will never be scientific evidence for a god. This gets back to a common problem that I have noted with engineers and scientists, and men in general: They are looking for a logical means of making a faith decision, where none exists. I have seen this paradox send men right down the rabbit hole. And I understand the paradox because I went through it as well.

 

Agreed. There is no evidence to suggest any gods exist. That doesn't mean any gods don't exist. But there's certainly no reason, at least if one is seeking the truth, to suspect that any gods do exist.

 

 

This also gets back to one of the most annoying aspect of religion: The need to disprove what is well-established science. Everyone is trying to prove or justify faith, which is a logical absurdity.

 

Again, I agree.

[pureinheart]

Alright, fair point, most people of faith would not commit mass murder. But I can point to other evils faith imposes on society.

 

More to the point, how many wars have been fought in the name of god? How can anyone look at the ME and not recognize the devastating effects of faith? This is what happens when people listen to the voice in their head and believe it's real.

 

And not just the ME, George W invaded Iraq, he said, because God told him to.

 

...and what about the mass murders done in the name of Atheism? It goes both ways.

[Weezy1973]

...and what about the mass murders done in the name of Atheism? It goes both ways.

 

Nothing is done in the name of atheism. I have no idea why religious folks have troubles comprehending this. Atheism is a lack of belief. They don't believe that any gods exist. Like they don't believe the tooth fairy exists. There certainly have been atheist dictators who have done terrible things, but not in the name of atheism. Because that quite literally makes no sense.

[autumnnight]

Here is the bottom line:

 

To a tolerant, tactful, emotionally intelligent person, this would not be a battle of the snarks and logical fallacies. Because said person who has faith would be fine with others not believing, and said person who is an atheist would not have a problem with someone else believing.

 

I will never convince a snarky atheist that I am not stupid and irrational. And a snarky, condescending atheist will never convince me they are more intelligent.

 

We disagree. People disagree every day. I have no plans to fly an airplane into a building or resurrect the inquisition or beat up a gay person. I assume no atheists have plans to take my Bible away or force me to recant under threat of beheading.

 

In real life, most people of varying beliefs or lack thereof live side by side pretty well. Only on the internet does our....choice not to do that become so heated.

[UpwardForward]

What about the in between person.

 

The one who claims Christianity. Uses the Bible and interprets the way they 'see fit', and will not even be challenged regarding the meaning of scripture. Then boast they 'teach it'.

 

Using the Bible and 'teaching it', to further their agenda?

Edited June 13, 2015 by UpwardForward

[autumnnight]

What about the in between person.

 

The one who claims Christianity. Uses the Bible and interprets the way they 'see fit', and will not even be challenged regarding the meaning of scripture. Then boast they 'teach it'.

 

Using the Bible and 'teaching it', to further their agenda?

 

Oh boy....I have encountered more of those than I'd like to remember. As a young person and then later as a middle adult.

 

I used to try to spend time trying to get them to see the balance of the WHOLE of Scripture. Waste of time. It threatens their kool aid.

[TheFinalWord]

Nothing is done in the name of atheism. I have no idea why religious folks have troubles comprehending this. Atheism is a lack of belief. They don't believe that any gods exist. Like they don't believe the tooth fairy exists. There certainly have been atheist dictators who have done terrible things, but not in the name of atheism. Because that quite literally makes no sense.

 

One possible reason is the need to compare belief in Christ to a belief in the tooth fairy (I have seen it a number of times in this forum). The inability to comprehend the difference is equally frustrating to the theist. It comes across a bit underhanded and quite frankly, silly. Belief in Christ is not anything like a belief in a tooth fairy. There is historical evidence Jesus, the central figure of Christianity, existed. There is no historical evidence the tooth fairy existed.

[Weezy1973]

One possible reason is the need to compare belief in Christ to a belief in the tooth fairy (I have seen it a number of times in this forum). The inability to comprehend the difference is equally frustrating to the theist. It comes across a bit underhanded and quite frankly, silly. Belief in Christ is not anything like a belief in a tooth fairy. There is historical evidence Jesus, the central figure of Christianity, existed. There is no historical evidence the tooth fairy existed.

 

There is historical evidence of plenty of prophets like how Jesus is described in the bible. The comparison to the tooth fairy isn't to Jesus. It's to a god.