Why does religion still exist today when most former religions died out?

[Druganator]

The Greek religions died out when the Romans converted to Christianity, as did most of paganism. Islam replaced many middle eastern belief systems.

 

Why can't rational thought now replace these old outdated ideas?

 

Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism, these and many others are already viewed as outdated.

 

Judaism is an exclusive club that tries to control it's people, not unlike the Freemasons who many view as a group of zealots.

 

why can't we stop using the horse drawn buggy and move on to at least the combustion engine?

[jrrtoken]

The Greek religions died out when the Romans converted to Christianity, as did most of paganism.

Er, no, but nice try.

Islam replaced many middle eastern belief systems.

Again, failure in logic.

Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism, these and many others are already viewed as outdated.

Yes, how thoughtful to ignore the 1 billion practicing Hindus in the world.

Judaism is an exclusive club that tries to control it's people, not unlike the Freemasons who many view as a group of zealots.

What a wonderful display of fallacious intolerance.

 

So what's the real religion then? Christianity, right?

 

Why don't you back with some tolerance and critical thinking skills, and then we'll talk.

[Darth_Yuthura]

Er, no, but nice try.Again, failure in logic.Yes, how thoughtful to ignore the 1 billion practicing Hindus in the world.What a wonderful display of fallacious intolerance.

 

Why don't you back with some tolerance and critical thinking skills, and then we'll talk.

 

Well if all he said were so riddled with flaws and mistruths, perhaps you would be so great as to demonstrate your diverse knowledge on the subject. No? Then perhaps you should keep your simplistic contradictions to yourself and actually apply something to the thread. Stop the insults. ~ mimartin

 

I have to agree with the title of the thread in general; why are so many beliefs still held to as they were hundreds of years ago?

 

One of the most significant things that differenciates Greece and Rome from the others is polytheism. Also note that Rome based its gods off of Greek gods. Mars is Ares, Pluto is Hades, Venus is Aphrodite.

 

The belief in one god, monotheism, has become what lead to the more 'everlasting' beliefs that we have today. Where older civilizations might just assume another's gods are more powerful than their own, most monotheism declares that there is only one god. And that God is supreme god of the universe while all the others are to be fought and destroyed.

 

However this does bring up a point: considering how we're reaching so many logical explanations about how the universe works that don't revolve around religion, why hold to it still? I can understand if it serves to unite people with moral and ethical codes, but religion tends to discriminate everyone outside that belief. Anyone who is part of a religion can consider themselves close friends, but those outside are not covered under the same standards. Ever hear the term 'holy war'?

[Druganator]

Er, no, but nice try.Again, failure in logic.Yes, how thoughtful to ignore the 1 billion practicing Hindus in the world.What a wonderful display of fallacious intolerance.

 

So what's the real religion then? Christianity, right?

 

Why don't you back with some tolerance and critical thinking skills, and then we'll talk.

 

i don't tolerate any religions. because they are all institutions that attempt to tell people how they should live their lives, what's right and what's wrong and i think people need to learn for themselves. i was raised as an episcopalian and i hate christianity the most out of all the religions.

 

And i'm speaking of all the zealots who believe god created man and everything else, and that the world can only be destroyed by god so we don't have to do anything about global warming, and that gay people are going to burn in hell because the bible says so.

 

all religions were created by man, in order to make himself feel like he matters when some people do not matter anywhere near as much as others, for instance, a seventeen year old boy living in the suburbs of DC (me) does not matter anywhere near as much as a Doctor in Prince George's county.

[Lord of Hunger]

@ Original Post: That assumes that the secular ideologies of today are more "rational" than the religious philosophies of yesterday.

 

I know of only one "rational" secular ideology and that would be humanitarianism. Even then there is what I like to call the Kreia's Evil of Charity, which holds that when you provide someone with something they have not earned you have only robed a chance for growth from them, thus increasing their misery.

 

To my knowledge more people have died in wars and atrocities done in the name of secular ideologies than religion.

 

And furthermore Western society STILL refuses to acknowledge the benevolent impact of religious charities. I would know because last year during the summer I went down to Mexico with about thirty members of my Catholic Church and ten members of another Catholic Church to an orphanage for boys. There we accomplished so much for them: we cooked for them, played for them (this being the most important thing of all since it can get VERY lonely in a Mexican orphanage), fixed their bikes, made a garden for them, and rebuilt a roof on the center of an impoverished community living in a dump right next to a high security prison, all the while showing the people there ways to improve their condition by only using local resources (so we wouldn't entirely commit Kreia's Evil of Charity). And we didn't try converting them; we didn't need to because they were already Catholic but nor do I think we would have tried if they weren't. In our church we hold the view that it is best for us to just show the work of God (benevolence) and let people find inspiration in that rather than the words of a missionary or priest.

 

We have secular ideologies done to this world? We had Nazism, Communism, Social Darwinism, Utilitarianism, and worst of all...Nihilism. All of these secular ideologies lead only to atrocity and create the same sort of fervor found in religions without providing any spiritual growth. They starve the soul and make man a rabid animal because they possess the flaws of religions without the benefits. It is easier for a man to kill under a secular ideology than under a religious philosophy for one reason: In most religions you have to lie to yourself in order to kill for the religion you are about to disobey. Most religions such as Christianity have the whole thing of "do not kill" and "love your neighbor as yourself", and also "turn the other cheek". Secular ideologies don't have that (at least most don't). Nazism says it is okay to kill Jews and gays and the mental deficient and so on, Communism gives the people the right to "overthrow the capitalists and imperialists", Utilitarianism holds the greatest good for the greatest number so if a few people have to be killed, raped, or whatnot then it is no problem, and Nihilism holds no concrete morality at all (and is one of Hitler's inspirations for Nazism via the Ubermensch belief).

 

I'm not saying religion is perfect, it is but an attempt of man to vaguely understand the nature of the Divine both outside of us and within us. But I'll take my funky mixture of Buddhism and Catholicism over a secular ideology any day.[/RANT]

i don't tolerate any religions. because they are all institutions that attempt to tell people how they should live their lives, what's right and what's wrong and i think people need to learn for themselves. i was raised as an episcopalian and i hate christianity the most out of all the religions.

Um, secular ideologies also tell people how they should live their lives, what's right and what's wrong, and do not teach people how to think for themselves at all.

However this does bring up a point: considering how we're reaching so many logical explanations about how the universe works that don't revolve around religion, why hold to it still? I can understand if it serves to unite people with moral and ethical codes, but religion tends to discriminate everyone outside that belief. Anyone who is part of a religion can consider themselves close friends, but those outside are not covered under the same standards. Ever hear the term 'holy war'?

And in the case of secular ideologies have you ever heard the terms WWI and WWII? Especially the latter. And at least in the Crusades more people were dying on the battle field than in cities or death camps. There you had zealots killing each other for no good reason, but at least it was the zealots that were dying more so than in WWII where the zealots were killing civilians in death camps. Six million Jews whose crimes were that they held a specific religion, set of genes, and bodily characteristics, plus many more gays, mental deficient individuals, gypsies, slavs...you name it. The difference between a secular war and holy war is that in a holy war if your a zealot you kill another zealot but in a secular war you kill somebody completely innocent.

[Darth InSidious]

...And this thread wins the Reductionist Ahistorical Nonsense Award 2009.

[Druganator]

Nazism in WWII was based on Hitler's attacks on a religion (i know he also killed gays and gypsies and the handicapped which could also be perceived as his hate for non protestants) and his belief in Aryan Male Protestants. he was a religious zealot.

 

To my knowledge more people have died in wars and atrocities done in the name of secular ideologies than religion.

 

Um, secular ideologies also tell people how they should live their lives, what's right and what's wrong, and do not teach people how to think for themselves at all.

 

The jews wiped out a large amount of people in the early days of the bible, the spanish inquisition killed many people for not believing, the war we are in now started out as a christian nation attacking a muslim nation. (i do not think the sole purpose of whatever reason we went in their was religion at all but with that retard you never know) the crusades were fought against the Saracens and many many many people died in each one of those. muslims and jews are continuously fighting in israel and palestine.

 

i'm an athiest, i think religion should stay out of policies and lawmaking. so that they can't tell people what's right and wrong and how they should think, and you are right there are many secular ideoligies that tell people what to think. I don't follow any of them.

[jrrtoken]

Well if all he said were so riddled with flaws and mistruths, perhaps you would be so great as to demonstrate your diverse knowledge on the subject. No? Then perhaps you should keep your simplistic contradictions to yourself and actually apply something to the thread.

Thank you, moderator.

I have to agree with the title of the thread in general; why are so many beliefs still held to as they were hundreds of years ago?

Simple, they've been ingrained into a society's culture. With enough time and pressure, one can easily adopt any custom. It isn't hard to fathom, really.

However this does bring up a point: considering how we're reaching so many logical explanations about how the universe works that don't revolve around religion, why hold to it still?

See above.

I can understand if it serves to unite people with moral and ethical codes, but religion tends to discriminate everyone outside that belief.

Er, somewhat. It depends on the demeanor of the one preaching, but also on religious dogma. Strictly speaking, some religious standards are more tolerant than others.

Anyone who is part of a religion can consider themselves close friends, but those outside are not covered under the same standards. Ever hear the term 'holy war'?

Again, religion will always be perverted as an excuse for violence by fanatics. This doesn't exactly conclude a fault in religion, just simply a fault in human nature. There will always be radicalism in any organization of individuals, religion included.

i don't tolerate any religions. because they are all institutions that attempt to tell people how they should live their lives, what's right and what's wrong and i think people need to learn for themselves. i was raised as an episcopalian and i hate christianity the most out of all the religions.

I can see your reasoning, but it's still fallacious. There will always be corruption and abuse by individuals within religious institutions. Does this make the religion itself corrupt? While it might give the religion in question a bad name, almost all of the time it is simply religious authority, which is strictly human in nature, that practices the abuse. To blame the religion in question, as a whole, as a vector for corruption would be close-minded.

[Druganator]

Thank you, moderator. :dozey:Simple, they've been ingrained into a society's culture. With enough time and pressure, one can easily adopt any custom. It isn't hard to fathom, really.See above.Er, somewhat. It depends on the demeanor of the one preaching, but also on religious dogma. Strictly speaking, some religious standards are more tolerant than others.Again, religion will always be perverted as an excuse for violence by fanatics. This doesn't exactly conclude a fault in religion, just simply a fault in human nature. There will always be radicalism in any organization of individuals, religion included.I can see your reasoning, but it's still fallacious. There will always be corruption and abuse by individuals within religious institutions. Does this make religion itself corrupt? While it might give the religion in question a bad name, almost all of the time it is simply religious authority, which is strictly human in nature, that practices the abuse. To blame the religion in question, as a whole, as a vector for corruption would be close-minded.

 

i do not blame religion for all corruption, i just want to take it out of the equation to lessen what corruption there is and to attempt to fix that ******** that is congress. for whatever reason religion has also ingrained itself in there as well. Religion is ignorance of progress. some christians still think that evolution is a theory. Christianity itself is just a copy of other religions. look up the story of Horus. it mirrors the "life" of jesus in almost every way.

 

 

And in the case of secular ideologies have you ever heard the terms WWI and WWII? Especially the latter. And at least in the Crusades more people were dying on the battle field than in cities or death camps. There you had zealots killing each other for no good reason, but at least it was the zealots that were dying more so than in WWII where the zealots were killing civilians in death camps. Six million Jews whose crimes were that they held a specific religion, set of genes, and bodily characteristics, plus many more gays, mental deficient individuals, gypsies, slavs...you name it. The difference between a secular war and holy war is that in a holy war if your a zealot you kill another zealot but in a secular war you kill somebody completely innocent.

 

no in a secular war, the religious zealots kill people who are innocent in the name of religion.

[Lord of Hunger]

You say progress...progress of what? The material? Man is a spiritual creature, his primary nature is to seek what is beyond the material, which is the only thing that grants fulfillment. You can give him all the riches of the world and he will still be unhappy because there is a limit to the happiness of the material (though unlike most Catholics I still acknowledge that divorcing one's self from the material is equally unwise). If you look at most of the wealthy, you can tell that they are often miserable internally. The exceptions are those like Bill Gates who share their wealth to achieve some form of benevolence in the world and thus improve their own spiritual condition. When you find a secular ideology or a non-religious lifestyle that make man truly happy without changing his internal nature or deceiving him, let me know.

[Web Rider]

Because the big questions are still unanswered, and like a hundred, like a thousand years ago, people want to know these answers. Yes religion tries to tell people how to live their lives, just like you do. It's the nature of anyone who thinks they've got the right answers to tell other people how to live.

[CommanderQ]

Nazism in WWII was based on Hitler's attacks on a religion (i know he also killed gays and gypsies and the handicapped which could also be perceived as his hate for non protestants) and his belief in Aryan Male Protestants. he was a religious zealot.

 

I think we've discussed that somewhere else in Kavar's....

 

 

Hitler, in no way, was moved to wipe out the Jews due to his religous fervor.

 

We've got to remember that Germany, after the Treaty of Versailles, was economically ruined, and was going through a Great Depression of their own.

 

Hitler knew that if he wanted the power he needed for his plan of the Third Reich, then he needed to unite the people. He also knew that often the best way to unite a people was the hatred of a common enemy.

 

The Jews seemed the most obvious people to make into an enemy{from Hitler's point-of-view}

 

He then blamed the Jews for the suffering of the German people, and Deutschland came to Hitler, who promised vengeance against the Jews and a return to the prosperity of the Early German Empires.

 

Still, even after being elected Chancellor, Hitler didn't have all of Germany under his hand, not everyone agreed with him, namely the Christians and the Catholics. So, Hitler embarked on a campaign to win their allegiance, twisting the words of the Bible to his advantage{and also using texts written by religous leaders, like Martin Luther}. One of many falsehoods that he said was that Jesus, not being a Jew {he was a Jew}, needed to be avenged by getting the Jews out of Germany.

 

So, Hitler was a master deciever, using religon simply to gain more power{he used this tactic not only with the Christians, but with the Muslims as well}. His goal was not a Religous Aryan Germany, it was really just an Aryan Germany loyal to him. If he'd been victorious in his war, then he would've undoubtedly turned on the religous peoples of the Third Reich, 'purifying his Empire further,' so to say.

 

Hitler was not a Religous Zealot, he just appeared to be, in order to gain the support of the German people. He was just a power hungry freak, not a Crusader.

[Darth_Yuthura]

While it might give the religion in question a bad name, almost all of the time it is simply religious authority, which is strictly human in nature, that practices the abuse. To blame the religion in question, as a whole, as a vector for corruption would be close-minded.

 

Alright then, I do not blame religion. I do blame those who use religion as an excuse to commit deeds that infringe upon the rights of others.

 

Just as true do I not hate guns. If there is a mass murder done by an AK-47, I don't blame the gun, but the psycho who wielded the weapon. Does that mean that I support having assault rifles made legal in the US?

 

I'm against religion also because I believe there is a logical reason that everything in the universe works as it does. I also believe that religion will only hinder our hinder our progress by accepting ignorance over knowledge. Our greatness as the dominant species on the planet wasn't because of god, but our own intuition.

 

You say progress...progress of what? The material? Man is a spiritual creature, his primary nature is to seek what is beyond the material, which is the only thing that grants fulfillment. You can give him all the riches of the world and he will still be unhappy because there is a limit to the happiness of the material.

 

When you find a secular ideology or a non-religious lifestyle that make man truly happy without changing his internal nature or deceiving him, let me know.

 

I respectfully disagree. What if a person EARNED all the riches in the world? That at least goes to show a person went to lengths to obtain what s/he wanted. Giving something away is not the same as earning it. But that's beside the point.

 

You are right that it is important for humans to strive for self-actualization, but that is not always found within religion. My father is an atheist... appreciates religion, but isn't religious... he is an ideal model for all humans to follow, I would say. He seeks knowledge and is very well-informed of the way the world works. He goes out each day with the intent to be better then than when he woke up. I have the tendency to waste time playing computer games or just letting things slide for a while. Although it makes me satisfied for a while, I eventually look back and realize that I could have become so much more if I dedicated myself when it was and wasn't critical for me to do so. I am seeking to change that, but have a long way to go. I am also acceptant of the fact real change isn't going to be easy, or quick.

 

My point is that the measure of how happy someone is goes towards self-actualization. When you have religion, you essentially offer a simple solution to explain something that otherwise would peak our curiosity and drive us to find the answer.

[mimartin]

Because the big questions are still unanswered, and like a hundred, like a thousand years ago, people want to know these answers. Yes religion tries to tell people how to live their lives, just like you do. It's the nature of anyone who thinks they've got the right answers to tell other people how to live.

 

QFT

 

Below has nothing to do with the quote above or the person quoted.

******************

The moderators are watching this thread extra closely, so please stay within the rules of Kavar. You can make your point in a calm rational way. Please also stop the backseat moderating, if you have a problem with a post use the report feature.

[Trench]

I don't know why your complaining. Some of us (me included) are perfectly content living out in the boonies "clinging to our guns and religion". You won't be able to stop us as long as we abide by the law (we have our rights), and if someone did manage to stop us, we would still do it behind your backs.

And the extremists who twists things around and lie so that they can get people to join them in killing innocents and waging war deserve to be locked up until they rot.

[Darth_Yuthura]

I guess that the title of the thread is quite simple. States and languages form, change, evolve, and dissolve... that's no surprise. Why not expect religion to have a similar cycle as well? Older religions died out. Newer religions took over either as an evolution from older ones, or just formed from scratch.

[Druganator]

i'm not trying to tell people how to live, i'm simply trying to show people facts the same way a math teacher explains the answer to a math problem. i want people to at least think about the possibility that they've been lied to, all i can do is show them what i know, not what i believe. And i should not have said that Hitler's reasoning for killing all of those people was purely religious. the germans yearned for reasons for what happened in WWI the same way people yearn for a reason for their existence. Hitler, like many religious leaders, gave the german's an answer. An answer he, like the religious founders, made up.

 

I don't know why your complaining. Some of us (me included) are perfectly content living out in the boonies "clinging to our guns and religion". You won't be able to stop us as long as we abide by the law (we have our rights), and if someone did manage to stop us, we would still do it behind your backs.

And the extremists who twists things around and lie so that they can get people to join them in killing innocents and waging war deserve to be locked up until they rot.

the only problem i have with people being religious is that some very misguided people vote purely on that basis, then in turn those people that get elected use religion in their policies. I.E. the congressman who claimed that we do not need to do anything about global warming because the bible says that only god can end the earth.

[Darth_Yuthura]

i'm not trying to tell people how to live, i'm simply trying to show people facts the same way a math teacher explains the answer to a math problem.

 

Noble gesture, but really a futile one. It often takes more than good argument over an internet forum to convince people to change their beliefs.

 

Almost everything that we state is already known to people on the other side, so it's not like we explain something that people haven't already considered. Odds are that they are already aware of what the opposition presents, but that they've already made their judgment one way or another.

 

That's not to criticize people who believe in God; having strong values is a good thing. That's one thing that we have which animals do not. The question is whether you know exactly what values you are holding to and if we find that they are not valuable or valid enough, there is no point in holding on to them.

[Gob]

Druganator, you can dislike religion. You can criticize it, point out all of its flaws... But that's not all you're doing. You're being downright intolerant of it. And intolerance is one of the most common flaws displayed by some religious people.

 

I'm not religious. I will probably never be religious. But you're acting as if religion is forced upon you. You're not living in the Dark Ages. Wherever you live, you're obviously free to practice whatever you want, including nothing.

 

The point of religion is to give you a path to find what you're looking for in life. Religion is saying, "If you do this, you just might be happy. If you want it." Nonreligious people are usually interested in finding their own path, or just don't care. Some people are just happy with life. That's OK, too. It's just whatever gets you through your life.

 

Most religious people aren't extremist, so it's unfair to criticize the mass of people that aren't for the select few that are. If people actually followed most of their religions the way they were supposed to be followed, then those extremists wouldn't be around, and neither would this discussion. And if you acknowledge that fact, then the discussion shouldn't be around anyway.

[Druganator]

Noble gesture, but really a futile one. It often takes more than good argument over an internet forum to convince people to change their beliefs.

 

Almost everything that we state is already known to people on the other side, so it's not like we explain something that people haven't already considered. Odds are that they are already aware of what the opposition presents, but that they've already made their judgment one way or another.

 

That's not to criticize people who believe in God; having strong values is a good thing. That's what we have and animals do not. The question is whether you know exactly what values you are holding on to and if they are not valuable or valid enough, there is no point in holding on to them.

 

unfortunately i know how right you are, even in person many people fail to see the truth that stares them in the face. such as christians who have heard the story of Horus and know how long before jesus existed it took place. I would explain it but there is no point as it will either be ignored, or simply put off as a farce or something of that nature.

 

Druganator, you can dislike religion. You can criticize it, point out all of its flaws... But that's not all you're doing. You're being downright intolerant of it. And intolerance is one of the most common flaws displayed by some religious people.

 

I'm not religious. I will probably never be religious. But you're acting as if religion is forced upon you. You're not living in the Dark Ages. Wherever you live, you're obviously free to practice whatever you want, including nothing.

 

The point of religion is to give you a path to find what you're looking for in life. Religion is saying, "If you do this, you just might be happy. If you want it." Nonreligious people are usually interested in finding their own path, or just don't care. Some people are just happy with life. That's OK, too. It's just whatever gets you through your life.

 

Most religious people aren't extremist, so it's unfair to criticize the mass of people that aren't for the select few that are. If people actually followed their religions the way they were supposed to be followed, then those extremists wouldn't be around, and neither would this discussion. And if you acknowledge that fact, then the discussion shouldn't be around anyway.

 

 

i'm intolerant of it because it only serves to weaken the human population through promises of eternal life if they do what their religious leaders say. Catholics who (not anytime recently) made up all these laws never mentioned by jesus or even found in the bible. Muslim extremists who fabricated jihad to trick impressionable young muslim men into giving their lives for a cause they are told is theirs. the belief in deities is what i am most intolerant of. Toaism is an ideology devoid of these fabrications that tells people to enjoy their life while they have it, there is nothing wrong with that (in my opinion). Telling someone that if they are attracted to the same sex they will go to hell unless they pretend not to be, that's wrong (in my opinion).

[Web Rider]

i'm not trying to tell people how to live, i'm simply trying to show people facts the same way a math teacher explains the answer to a math problem.

Now, if only you actually had an answer besides "you're wrong."

 

 

i want people to at least think about the possibility that they've been lied to, all i can do is show them what i know, not what i believe. And i should not have said that Hitler's reasoning for killing all of those people was purely religious. the germans yearned for reasons for what happened in WWI the same way people yearn for a reason for their existence. Hitler, like many religious leaders, gave the german's an answer. An answer he, like the religious founders, made up.

Some do, some don't. Point is, you are telling them the way they live their lives is incorrect(by not questioning), and that they should do it. You are TELLING people how to run their lives. Yes, people lied to the Germans, the British and French subjected them to horrible poverty and they're STILL paying off war debts.(2020 projected). Anyone could have done that, religious or not.

 

 

the only problem i have with people being religious is that some very misguided people vote purely on that basis, then in turn those people that get elected use religion in their policies.

OMG, some people vote entirely on their own personal opinion! Some people vote on opinions given to them by others! shocking! It's their life, let them live it. I'm sure few of us here really know enough about global warming to vote on the basis that we know what we're talking about. Everyone to some degree votes based on what they think they know, what they're told and what they believe.

 

i'm intolerant of it because it only serves to weaken the human population through promises of eternal life if they do what their religious leaders say. Catholics who (not anytime recently) made up all these laws never mentioned by jesus or even found in the bible. Muslim extremists who fabricated jihad to trick impressionable young muslim men into giving their lives for a cause they are told is theirs. the belief in deities is what i am most intolerant of. Toaism is an ideology devoid of these fabrications that tells people to enjoy their life while they have it, there is nothing wrong with that (in my opinion). Telling someone that if they are attracted to the same sex they will go to hell unless they pretend not to be, that's wrong (in my opinion).

I can't believe I'm reading this. Religion did NONE of that. You even wrote so! People did all of that. They used religion as their tool to accomplish it, the same way people use nationalism, patriotism, race, gender, economic problems and a hundred other things! And really, Taoism does not say that, and it has deities, please read up on it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taoism#Beliefs

[Druganator]

"Religious Taoism is generally considered to be polytheistic."

 

it also says on there that there are many different branches with different beliefs. i have met a few Taoists in my life, none of whom worshiped or believed in any deities, they simply followed the path

 

Now, if only you actually had an answer besides "you're wrong."

 

i prefer to say that they've been mislead as with MOST people who believe in a religion they were raised as such. ill say it again for emphasis, MOST, not all.

[JediAthos]

I was raised Roman Catholic, I have an aunt who is a Sister of Notre Dame(a nun), and my parents, grandparents, aunts and uncles are very devout to their religion. I am not as I once was as I have come to disagree with the Catholic Church on various subjects. I do still believe the basic tenets of the faith, but it is the Church itself(the Vatican if you will) that I have issues with.

 

I wanted to provide a bit of background on me before I offered a response to the thread.

 

I think, as has already been said, that religion has endured as a part of humanity because humans do seek to explain the things which have eluded them for thousands of years. Religions will continue to exist I think as long as humanity exists because of that very reason and really there is nothing that will likely to be done to change that.

 

I think what the OP fails to realize here is that for every "truth" you present a follower of any religion will offer their explanation for that same thing as they have come to believe it. It's not an argument you will win nor will you ever change their mind. You think and believe as you do, and they think and feel as they do. That's really the end of it right there.

 

I don't really see how it weakens the human population to be honest. I'd love to hear you present some sort of evidence for that statement. Yes, tragedies have been committed using religion as justification, but those tragedies would likely have been committed anyway. The perpetrators would have simply found another tool to commit them.

 

Religious zealots do not make up the majority of religious followers. Congress is not what it is due to religion...not even close. Congress is what it is more due to grandiose political motivations, posturing, endless debate, and politicians who are more concerned about the party line and their political careers than anything else.

 

You say you are intolerant of all religions...frankly that's about as ridiculous as being intolerant of anything else. It is especially so given that you are living in the United States which is a country that has the freedom of religion in its most basic foundations. Many of the people that settled in the U.S. were seeking freedom from persecution because of their religion!

[Druganator]

I was raised Roman Catholic, I have an aunt who is a Sister of Notre Dame(a nun), and my parents, grandparents, aunts and uncles are very devout to their religion. I am not as I once was as I have come to disagree with the Catholic Church on various subjects. I do still believe the basic tenets of the faith, but it is the Church itself(the Vatican if you will) that I have issues with.

 

I wanted to provide a bit of background on me before I offered a response to the thread.

 

I think, as has already been said, that religion has endured as a part of humanity because humans do seek to explain the things which have eluded them for thousands of years. Religions will continue to exist I think as long as humanity exists because of that very reason and really there is nothing that will likely to be done to change that.

 

I think what the OP fails to realize here is that for every "truth" you present a follower of any religion will offer their explanation for that same thing as they have come to believe it. It's not an argument you will win nor will you ever change their mind. You think and believe as you do, and they think and feel as they do. That's really the end of it right there.

 

I don't really see how it weakens the human population to be honest. I'd love to hear you present some sort of evidence for that statement. Yes, tragedies have been committed using religion as justification, but those tragedies would likely have been committed anyway. The perpetrators would have simply found another tool to commit them.

 

Religious zealots do not make up the majority of religious followers. Congress is not what it is due to religion...not even close. Congress is what it is more due to grandiose political motivations, posturing, endless debate, and politicians who are more concerned about the party line and their political careers than anything else.

 

You say you are intolerant of all religions...frankly that's about as ridiculous as being intolerant of anything else. It is especially so given that you are living in the United States which is a country that has the freedom of religion in its most basic foundations. Many of the people that settled in the U.S. were seeking freedom from persecution because of their religion!

 

i never said zealots were the majority, they are usually the one's with the power though, correct?

 

I don't understand why everyone thinks i am trying to force anyone to do anything, i think that people should think for themselves, i can't make anyone do that because in doing so i would cause them not to think for themselves. This isn't an "argument" i hope to win. It's like trying to solve world hunger. people could try to figure some of these things out through science, but instead they take the cop out and just say god did everything. God made us, the world and everything else. he has a plan for all of us (so if he already has a plan why do people pray? if it's not part of his plan then you aren't going to get what you prayed for). Religion takes meaning away when it makes people believe (like someone said on here earlier) that their earned achievements are thanks to god and not their hard work. It puts meaning where it doesn't belong i.e. god created each and every person individually and he has a specific plan for everyone. it weakens the human population because it frowns upon pride, if people aren't proud of themselves and just chalk up their achievements to god then there isn't much reason to make a name for yourself. It makes people feel like they aren't good enough because every little thing they do is a sin.

 

Religion is also very inconsistent. Before the Nicene creed was written, many different sects believed that Jesus was simply a man, some believed that jesus and Mary Magdalene were married. Other inconsistencies include the fact that only two gospels mention the fact that jesus' mother was a virgin. oh and none of the gospel writers met jesus.

[Gob]

i never said zealots were the majority, they are usually the one's with the power though, correct?

 

No. I don't seem to recall when the governments of about 98-99% of the world became zealots.

 

I don't understand why everyone thinks i am trying to force anyone to do anything, i think that people should think for themselves, i can't make anyone do that because in doing so i would cause them not to think for themselves.

 

You're not forcing anything on anyone, because you don't have the power to do that to anyone but your kids. You are, however, intolerant, and no root level of intolerance is good.

 

people could try to figure some of these things out through science, but instead they take the cop out and just say god did everything.

 

The people who are in the position to solve world hunger aren't going to say, "Screw it. God did everything."

 

so if he already has a plan why do people pray? if it's not part of his plan then you aren't going to get what you prayed for

 

This, I agree with. I don't believe in praying. I don't mind people praying, but I think it's a silly thing to do, even if praying does somehow do something.

 

Religion takes meaning away when it makes people believe (like someone said on here earlier) that their earned achievements are thanks to god and not their hard work.

 

So? Let them believe what they want to. They're happy, and they did something good. Doesn't matter what their reasons are. And a lot of religious people don't think that way. They might believe that God gave them strength or whatever, but they're not going to dismiss their own hard work.

 

It puts meaning where it doesn't belong i.e. god created each and every person individually and he has a specific plan for everyone. it weakens the human population because it frowns upon pride, if people aren't proud of themselves and just chalk up their achievements to god then there isn't much reason to make a name for yourself. It makes people feel like they aren't good enough because every little thing they do is a sin.

 

I get the impression that you're talking about certain branches of Christianity, and not just religion in general. Like I said above, most religion places value on hard work, and doesn't say, "Whatever you do, God did it. So don't get so happy."

 

Religion is also very inconsistent. Before the Nicene creed was written, many different sects believed that Jesus was simply a man, some believed that jesus and Mary Magdalene were married. Other inconsistencies include the fact that only two gospels mention the fact that jesus' mother was a virgin.

 

Religion changes. There are many different sects of different religions. There are many different perspectives. What are you going to do?

 

oh and none of the gospel writers met jesus.

 

You do realize that the Gospel writers were Jesus' direct disciples, right?