|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
posted March 04, 2011 12:28 PM |
|
|
Well, the question of the topic is, what would have happened if religion had never existed.
That is, we are talking about ancient times.
Of course the forms of religion have always been somewhat linked to way of life, surroundings and experiences of a specific people.
For example, it is fairly impossible that a religion of about "suffering" God like the Christian could have developed with the Vikings.
Religion is always what it is, since it is basically an illusion (independent from the question whether it may in fact be true). All religion means that something is assumed as true that cannot be proven. This can work only, when there is no "maybe", and that means - even though some will contradict - that all religion is, negatively spoken - irrational.
This is true even now - belief in scientific progress could be called a religion as well, except that science isn't answering all questions, which needs a lot to be desired, and the question is whether a purely materialistic society can survive - I doubt that somehow. In any case lots of people are striving for "alternative worldviews".
The questions of where we come from and where we go, what reality is, why we are here and so on have been and are central for humans and their societies, and therefore religion always has been somewhat in the centre of societal life and a profound influence. That's the other side of the coin, as I said.
You cannot build a powerful illusion that somehow enables people to overcome the harsh realities of the here and now and then put it in the backseat.
Sure, the religions of old have lost a lot of ground; things develop; for many things we have found better explanations and solutions, and that makes it difficult. But there ARE modern religions as well - even in the strict sense. Jehova's Witnesses or Scientology. And they do HAVE believers.
People still want to get answers. For an atheist society to work it needs a convincing set of ethics, ideas and values (and here some people will contradict as well and point to the regulating value of self-interest) - but I think we are right now struggling as a species.
Anyway. The difficulty with religion has been to keep the balance between the unifying, constructive and reassuring effect of building a common illusion and the, umm, side-effects this may have when the illusion is driven too far, when peoples actually drown in it instead of just letting themselves carry by it.
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 04, 2011 04:45 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Religion has always been a way to EXPLAIN the whys and hows of existance, and whether you like it or not, answers to those questions are a prerequisite for building a civilization, a society that develops, because it gives people a perspective enabling them to not only think about the Here and Now and about immediate survival.
maybe, but why do we consider it necessary? other animals don't seem to have religions. you could say there are far more primitive than us, but do they create themselves as many problems as we do? I'm not very familiar with animals, except my cats, but they don't seem agitated about lots of problems like we are.
Quote:
The questions of where we come from and where we go, what reality is, why we are here and so on have been and are central for humans and their societies
then again, I don't why. especially when most people are struggling for survival. are you gonna feed them with ideas?
I can understand that people are curious about that, but not how it is necessary to build some kind of civilizations. we only need to know how to survive and live together, I don't see how metaphysics can help here.
Quote:
You cannot build a powerful illusion that somehow enables people to overcome the harsh realities of the here and now and then put it in the backseat.
maybe it is the illusion which creates the harsh reality. if we didn't always dream of something better, reality might not seem so harsh. maybe it is because we enslave ourselves for a better future that reality seems so painful.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted March 04, 2011 06:37 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Religion more or less promotes everything. At least for christianity.
Sorry, but that is untrue.
Anyone who says Jesus taught personal vengence would be what is known as a liar or else would be ignorant of what Jesus taught.
The Old Covenant phrase "eye for an eye" actually means the punishment should fit the crime.
Quote:
Quote:
See, if there is no God, there is nothing that is moral or immoral so it would be logical to oppress others and take by force what you want.
No it would not. Maybe for you though. So let me ask you of this. Before you even knew about the concept of God, did you oppress others and take what you wanted by force?
Anyways, studies show non-religious people are more mentally stable, less prone to suicide, and more giving to others.
My spiritual awakening began when I was quite young, too young to carry out such things.
Again, just look at officially atheist nations for what the world would be without religion.
Although atheists love to claim religious people have mental problems the studies show a quite different picture.
Clicky
Quote:
Another traditional bastion of atheism has been the belief that religion is a form of psychological pathology. This view was promoted by Freud, and more recently by R. Stark & W. S. Bainbridge in their work, Theory of Religion. The traditional argument was that religion was both the result of neurosis, and the cause of further deterioration into neurosis.
Recently, however, these ideas have come under fire by medical and psychological research. The Mayo Clinic did an analysis of 850 mental health studies involving religious belief and involvement and found that mental health was positively affected by faith. [2]
Subsequently, 1,200 studies at research centers around the world have come to similar conclusions. For example, Psychologie Heute, a German journal, cites the marked improvement of multiple sclerosis patients in Germany's Ruhr District because of "spiritual resources." [3]
Professor Vitz did a study of the most prominent professed atheists in the last 400 years; it appears that those individuals neither were nor are paragons of mental health, and that a disproportionate number had strained relationships with their fathers. [4] [5]
Some challenge Prof. Vitz's argument that the temperament of an atheist arises from a strained relationship with his father, without addressing the possibility that both the atheism and the strained paternal relationship may have stemmed from the child's native cantankerous and rebellious temperament.
As a result of these facts, many have become convinced that religion is psychologically beneficial, and that it is atheism which is both a cause and a result of mental illness.
Quote:
In other words: IF you develop a common illusion on nothing but fantasy that enables you to overcome the harsh realities and rise from the mire of the fight for survival, not only that illusion has to be supported as if it was real, but everything that would threaten or endanger the cohesiveness of the illusion has to be "rooted out", "proven wrong" and generally fought.
Atheits certainly live under common illusions based on nothing but fantasy. Atheiss like Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao, ect certainly tried to root out all others who did not share their illusions with mass murders.
Quote:
And every human individual is driven by too many things to be fully restrained by the limiting prescriptions of just one system of beliefs - that's why it is nigh impossible to have a perfectly religious person who is not a hypocrite at the same time.
Christianity is not a limiting prescription but brings freedom.  And your charge that religious people are hypocrites is false. Or were you refering to followers of the religion of atheism?
Quote:
Religion is always what it is, since it is basically an illusion (independent from the question whether it may in fact be true). All religion means that something is assumed as true that cannot be proven. This can work only, when there is no "maybe", and that means - even though some will contradict - that all religion is, negatively spoken - irrational.
The religion of atheism is certainly irratinoal and based on illusion. Not one bit of evidence exists for their claims. There is evidence for the truth of Christianity though. That makes Chrisitainity far more rational than atheism.
____________
Revelation
|
|
Vlaad
Admirable
Legendary Hero
ghost of the past
|
|
posted March 04, 2011 06:59 PM |
|
|
|
Damned the day Pandora left this forum.
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 04, 2011 07:30 PM |
|
Edited by Fauch at 19:30, 04 Mar 2011.
|
Quote:
Anyways, studies show religious people are more mentally stable, less prone to suicide, and more giving to others.
Quote:
As a result of these facts, many have become convinced that religion is psychologically beneficial
Quote:
the religion of atheism
ah!! 
btw, what do you call mental illness?
|
|
Shyranis
Promising
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted March 04, 2011 07:57 PM |
|
|
The world would be more or less the same, the players change but the game is the same. People in power will find something else to abuse and people not in power will use something else to ease their hardships.
____________
Youtube has terminated my account without reason.
Please express why it should be reinstated on
Twitter.
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted March 04, 2011 08:19 PM |
|
Edited by Corribus at 20:22, 04 Mar 2011.
|
Quote:
Clicky
Seriously? You're quoting "Creation Wiki" as your authoritative source? Color me unimpressed.
Nevermind. Just because I'm in the mood for a good laugh, I went to your "source" and took a look at their cited "sources".
Quote:
Another traditional bastion of atheism has been the belief that religion is a form of psychological pathology. This view was promoted by Freud, and more recently by R. Stark & W. S. Bainbridge in their work, Theory of Religion. The traditional argument was that religion was both the result of neurosis, and the cause of further deterioration into neurosis.
Hmmm. No citation. Worthless. Moving on.
Quote:
Recently, however, these ideas have come under fire by medical and psychological research. The Mayo Clinic did an analysis of 850 mental health studies involving religious belief and involvement and found that mental health was positively affected by faith. [2]
Hmmm. Broken link. Worthless. Moving on.
Quote:
Subsequently, 1,200 studies at research centers around the world have come to similar conclusions. For example, Psychologie Heute, a German journal, cites the marked improvement of multiple sclerosis patients in Germany's Ruhr District because of "spiritual resources." [3]
From what I can tell, Psychologie Heute is a popular science magazine (Populärwissenschaftliche), not a peer-reviewed journal. That aside, the "CreationWiki" link doesn't take you to Psychologie Heute. It takes you to an opinion piece published in the Washington Times which is clearly biased and bases its ultimate argument on the opinions of theologists. Hardly a convincing source, and poorly referenced at that. Ergo, worthless. Moving on.
Quote:
Professor Vitz did a study of the most prominent professed atheists in the last 400 years; it appears that those individuals neither were nor are paragons of mental health, and that a disproportionate number had strained relationships with their fathers. [4] [5]
Who is professor Vitz? A little digging later (why am I doing the digging? Isn't that your job?) reveals that he is a professor of psychology at NYU who specializes in christianity and religion. Correction, he's a professor Emeritus - i.e., retired. Since the "CreationWiki" doesn't bother to cite a primary source, I can only surmise that the text quoted refers to a book Vitz published in 1999 called "Faith of the Fatherless". Not peer reviewed. Being unable to read it, I can't really comment, so all I have to go by are the two sentences quoted above. (1) We have no idea which atheists were looked at, or what kinds of records were used to make a determination of mental health, nor how mental health was quantified. Obviously, they weren't interviewed directly, so some criteria had to be used, but they aren't provided. There's no statistical information available. In any case, I bet I could find some Christian wackos over the last 400 years. What would that prove? Oh, right. Nothing. (2) They had strained relationships with their fathers? So what? First, it has nothing really to do with mental health in any direct sense and, second, given that most fathers probably wouldn't have appreciated their sons turning to atheism, particularly a few centuries ago, it is perfectly reasonable that relationships would have been strained. So even if we take it as true that atheists have on average poor mental stability because they tend to be estranged from their fathers, who is to say that that strain doesn't derive from the prejudices of the fathers, prejudices which are ultimately a ramification of Christian intollerance! If atheists are depressed and mentally ill, we have Christianity to thank for it!
Now we turn to the cited sources. The first links to an article published by "Probe Ministries". You guessed it: maybe an interesting read but, ultimately, worthless. The other links to a transcript of a talk given by the aforementioned Prof. Vitz. Talks aren't really much more useful than books, because a person can say anything they want. In any case, there isn't any sort of statistical analysis provided or easily followed deductive reasoning. It's just a bunch of isolated, cherry-picked case studies and some handwaving arguments. So basically about the level of rigor I'd expect from Elodin. I.e., useless.
Well, there you have it. Sorry Elodin, but you're going to have to do better that that. Next time, why don't you try finding a source that doesn't have a clear Christian agenda and actually references their work better than a fourth grader would, hmmm?
|
|
gnomes2169
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Duke of the Glade
|
|
posted March 04, 2011 08:59 PM |
|
|
@ All, sorry for the horribly conviluted OP....... I ned to work on sentence structure and organizing my thoughts.
Quote:
Damned the day Pandora left this forum.
?Why?
Quote:
The world would be more or less the same, the players change but the game is the same. People in power will find something else to abuse and people not in power will use something else to ease their hardships.
True enough, but the world would never have had the crussades, any religeous awakenings that would also have stimulated the economys of olden times, any kind of religious sacrifices and the modern worl would have more anarchist/ dictatorships since the weak wouldn't really feel a need to overthrow the strong.
@ Ohforf: Thank you for picking the good stuff out of the bad in my OP Though our viewpoints seem to be a bit different...
____________
Yeah in the 18th century, two inventions suggested a method of measurement. One won and the other stayed in America.
-Ghost destroying Fred
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted March 04, 2011 09:34 PM |
|
|
Quote:
True enough, but the world would never have had the crussades, any religeous awakenings that would also have stimulated the economys of olden times, any kind of religious sacrifices and the modern worl would have more anarchist/ dictatorships since the weak wouldn't really feel a need to overthrow the strong.
There is no way you can prove that. Most religions which are not too abstract teach how to create a status quo, not how to destroy it. And again you are thinking only about Christianity - this is not the only religion on this world, it's not even professed by the majority of the human population. The Confucianism for example is not interested in "the weak" at all and teaches disciplined social hierarchy - where is the need to overthrow anything here? And what about the Buddhism? It's mostly passive when it comes to the society and certainly doesn't teach economy progress and freedom fights. The Islam is pretty complicated as well - according to the Muslim philosophers the time in this world - in it's everyday sense - is not even real time. The only reality is Allah in his perfection and what happens on earth is irrelevant, like a dream, and can only become relevant if one follows the way of the Prophet with ultimate purpose of becoming close with God (all this is very roughly speaking, the Islam is much more sophisticated religion than most people in the West think) - so where is the strive for change? And why not even the Christianity - this is initially the religion of the oppressed people under Roman rule who try to comfort themselves that the suffering in this world will be rewarded with bliss in the afterlife. It doesn't try to change the world for the better as this world is not its purpose. When it becomes institutionalized however, the things change a lot. But don't mistake the religious institution with the religion itself - the former is an instrument of power unlike the latter. And this particular institution kept Europe in great stagnation for about 10 centuries, it didn't really contribute to the progress.
|
|
ohforfsake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted March 04, 2011 10:08 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Religion more or less promotes everything. At least for christianity.
Anyone who says Jesus taught personal vengence would be what is known as a liar or else would be ignorant of what Jesus taught.
The Old Covenant phrase "eye for an eye" actually means the punishment should fit the crime.
Jesus is a subset of christianity, not vice versa.
In any regard, the point was merely that whoever is in sufficient power, decides. The only reason someone would abide to christianity, if they'd not in any way been brain washed to do so, I believe, is because it'd aid them in their conquest.
Now brain washed may be a harsh term to use and I use it rather losely.
Finally. In my opinion. You don't speak for your case, when you try to refer to the present time, as you use an example, which is a trait I find utterly barbaric.
PUNISHMENTS are utterly disgusting and unnecessary! People don't need any emotional pressure to behave properly. The need good lifes. Some may need a time by themselves, but it should in no way be regarded as a PUNISHMENT!
Filling prisons with criminals, only to make them even worse criminals when they come out, needing a place to herd these people, it's disgusting.
As such. I find the entire justice system, a joke. It may be for the better society, but it's no different than the single criminal in its actions.
Quote:
My spiritual awakening began when I was quite young, too young to carry out such things.
Oh. You were a naughty boy eh?  A little devil may be hidden inside you and who knows? Maybe we can still get it to mature a little!
|
|
SkrentyzMienty
Famous Hero
|
|
posted March 04, 2011 10:53 PM |
|
|
If religion AND it's twin, political exploition didn't exist, the world would undoubtedly have been a better place to live, more organised, less suffering, more equality between people, and of course disbelief in the sheer fantasy religious teachings are.
Quote:
The question is fine, because without religion we just wouldn't exist - or if we would, we wouldn't have come far in terms of development, culture, civilization and so on.
We would exist (obviously, we existed before religion was made up) and we would be just as advanced in various aspects as we are at the present moment, if not more.
Without religion, people wouldn't let some idiotic dictators command them what to do (e.g. The Pharaoh forcing slaves to build Pyramids, the slaves would simply riot and destroy the ones proclaiming themselves god-like, another example is the Native Americans and human sacrifices, none of that would happen if the brainless massess wouldn't believe in religion and other crap).
Religion = dictatorship, exploition and war
No religion = democracy, peace and science.
Quote:
"Religion" is just a word that describes a need to find answers for questions that arise when consciousness develops. Some of these answers seem to have been necessary to build a civilization.
But in reality it is completely adverse to what you said. Religion is satisfying doubts with improvised nonsense, hence resulting in TRUE answers not even being searched for, it rather retards development not accelerates it.
Quote:
See, if there is no God, there is nothing that is moral or immoral so it would be logical to oppress others and take by force what you want.
Erm, there is no god, and I still have my morals.
Quote:
But seriously, we can take a close look at what officially atheist nations have been like and draw a reasonable conclusion from that. USSR, China, Cuba, ect. Oppression, mass murder, ect.
First, China isn't an atheist country.
Second, humans mass murder REGARDLESS of theism or atheism.
Third, if you consider that an argument, what do you say about mass murders on Africans and enslaving them by the British, Spanish, and French, ALL very Catholic societies? What about the British and Spanish sailing to America and MASS SLAUGHTERING the natives, then building their pathetic churches on the "new territory"? Elodin, look "hypocrisy" up in the dictionary.
Quote:
Anyways, studies show religious people are more mentally stable, less prone to suicide, and more giving to others. So the world would be much worse off without non-atheistic religions.
Mentally stable? Sure, all their mentality is required to do is memorise the Bible. Less prone to suicide? Sure, if they believe they'll burn in hell for eternity for committing it it's quite logical. More giving to others? Sure, they are required to attend church every Sunday and pay they obligatory money to the priests for their beautiful dresses.
Oh and btw, comparing atheism with religion, is like saying democracy is dictatorship.
@JoonasTo That was a greatly accurate diagram you posted, especially about theists following laws only out of fear.  
Quote:
The religion of atheism is certainly irratinoal and based on illusion. Not one bit of evidence exists for their claims. There is evidence for the truth of Christianity though. That makes Chrisitainity far more rational than atheism.
Atheism is ONLY logical and rational, and not a religion for the nth time. There is NO evidence for the truth of Christian teachings, and if you think there is, give some enlightenment Elodin. No? Didn't think so.
|
|
ohforfsake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted March 04, 2011 11:04 PM |
|
|
I wouldn't dwell too much on the atheist mass murdering countries thing.
First of all. There's isn't provided any kind of interlinking between the two statements, atheism and mass murdering. As such, I think it's at most a matter of correlation, not causation.
Secondly, I don't think there's even any correlation. Not even are they unique examples, selectively choosen. Okay, they're probably rather selectively choosen, but my point is that I think it's a mix up between cause and effect.
Finally. It seems completely absurd to even talk about that a country can be atheist, christian, etc.
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 04, 2011 11:04 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Filling prisons with criminals, only to make them even worse criminals when they come out, needing a place to herd these people, it's disgusting.
one reason why many people seem to want the return of the death penalty in France. they don't think that criminals may change.
|
|
Jabanoss
Promising
Legendary Hero
Property of Nightterror™
|
|
posted March 04, 2011 11:08 PM |
|
Edited by Jabanoss at 23:10, 04 Mar 2011.
|
But the criminals do change.
Hmm will I manage to muster my strength to teach Skrentyz some facts(theories) on why religion through history ACTUALLY have done good?
____________
"You turn me on Jaba"
- Meroe
|
|
ohforfsake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted March 04, 2011 11:08 PM |
|
|
|
I think it's somewhat tragically hillarius how people can support death penalty of murderes. Thereby supporting murder, as I see it!
|
|
Warlord
Famous Hero
Lord of Image Spam
|
|
posted March 04, 2011 11:18 PM |
|
Edited by Warlord at 23:19, 04 Mar 2011.
|
Quote:
Without religion, people wouldn't let some idiotic dictators command them what to do (e.g. The Pharaoh forcing slaves to build Pyramids, the slaves would simply riot and destroy the ones proclaiming themselves god-like, another example is the Native Americans and human sacrifices, none of that would happen if the brainless massess wouldn't believe in religion and other crap).
I disagree. If the slaves wanted to rebel so much, they would do it. They wouldn't be going "no, he's a god, he's gonna throw fireballs at me" they'd go "no, he's got a army that can slaughter me". Besides, it's not like atheists were never dictators, and they weren't immediately overthrown.
____________
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 05, 2011 01:20 AM |
|
|
Good Lord...
Corribus, I feel... tired.
This is a waste of time.
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 05, 2011 01:39 AM |
|
|
|
they are actually rebelling in lybia, and dying. I wonder if it is a good idea. and it will probably end up with another group taking the power over the rest (maybe not immediately, people will feel like they are free, and it will last several years at the best?)
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 05, 2011 09:52 AM |
|
|
On this fine early March morning this thread still looks as murdered as 8 hours ago in the dead of night.
It doesn't seem to be possible to discuss religion - not even as a general phenomenon - without some fanatics trying to yell their personal truths into each other's face, trying to back them up with nothing else than volume and repetitiveness.
Just as a reminder: this thread is NOT about Christianity - it's about religion and the question where humanity would be, if there hadn't been any (or something like that). When the Christian religion was founded, it wasn't the first religion ever, nor the tenth or the last or the only one left. In fact - and as it seems, not accidentally - when Christianity arouse (and later the Islam), peoples all over the world had been following other religions for as long as we know of them and would follow other religions later on as well.
Just as a ssecond reminder, this thread is not about painting posters with paroles about religion or that there is no god either. This is NOT about inspecting any or all religions to answer the questions whether they might be true, could be true, cannot be true, or must be true.
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted March 05, 2011 10:14 AM |
|
Edited by Zenofex at 10:16, 05 Mar 2011.
|
Quote:
this thread is NOT about Christianity - it's about religion and the question where humanity would be, if there hadn't been any (or something like that). When the Christian religion was founded, it wasn't the first religion ever, nor the tenth or the last or the only one left. In fact - and as it seems, not accidentally - when Christianity arouse (and later the Islam), peoples all over the world had been following other religions for as long as we know of them and would follow other religions later on as well.
Not to mention that Christianity is actually a product of the social development like every other system of beliefs, it didn't come out of nowhere. Many of the Old Testament myths can be found all around the ancient Middle East long before the Jews recorded them for themselves. As for the main Christian ideas about "Kingdom come", the salvation of the righteous, the damnation of the sinners, the coming of the Messiah... pretty much the entire eschatology and much of the morality are taken from the Zoroastrianism, these ideas were alien to the old Jewish religion praising Yahveh. And the Zoroastrianism didn't develop them out of a sudden either. These are long and complex processes which are usually vastly underestimated by most people who think that some prophet just falls from the sky and starts teaching nice things. Quote:
they are actually rebelling in lybia, and dying.
They are, but hardly because of the religion.
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
