What do you believe?

[crispy]

So its not ok to think of religious people as deluded?

 

[Lamp]

Does God exist ? You can believe in what ever you like. Yes or no ? That person is entitle to believe in whatever they like. Whether its factually true or not is a different issue. It may be provable, it may not. But its not correct to think of it in terms of delusion alone.

 

[old.Tohtori]

if they are bothered that much then they have more issues than believing in a god.

Well you avoided the question really. Or rather, answered in a non-answering way.

Honest question with no "hidden agenda", do you think that it's helpful towards a world of "don't think what others think", if people openly judge other people?

Don't you think that it would be a nice step, to stop judging? Or atleast, do it in a less offensive manner?

 

[Gorbachioo]

All of these things have been answered several times already. But you people just keep talking the same crap.


There is no god, and we have to get rid of religion before things get tougher and it gets more support. At which point those of us who dont believe in the bullshit will be forced to.

And that is a real concern.


Btw liloe, im still waiting for you to explain why its a good idea to believe in god.

 

[crispy]

Does God exist ? You can believe in what ever you like. Yes or no ? That person is entitle to believe in whatever they like. Whether its factually true or not is a different issue. It may be provable, it may not. But its not correct to think of it in terms of delusion alone.

So you agree that its not wrong to think of people as delusional right? And what should you else think of them? I agree, delusion does not fully describe it.

 

[Lamp]

So you agree that its not wrong to think of people as delusional right? And what should you else think of them? I agree, delusion does not fully describe it.

Absolutely, its not wrong to think of them as delusional - on the basis that you are perfectly entitled to think that - just as much as they are entitled to be deluded if they so choose.

Whether I personally think all religious people are deluded or not is irrelevant. But you have the absolute right to think and say that.

 

[Iceforge]

All of these things have been answered several times already. But you people just keep talking the same crap.


There is no god, and we have to get rid of religion before things get tougher and it gets more support. At which point those of us who dont believe in the bullshit will be forced to.

And that is a real concern.


Btw liloe, im still waiting for you to explain why its a good idea to believe in god.

Alright! I am an Atheist and I don't believe we have to get red of all religion! We have to stop fanatics and fundamentalists and cure them from some of their delusion and never let their views on such things as gay marriage influence society; But that is as far as I am going to agree, and I got 1 good reason.

Often when I debate my Atheisme with people of faith, a popular question is "Where do your morals come from?" While it is obvious to me that you just don't hurt other people through violence and other means, and that you don't steal what belongs to others, several religious people does not seem to understand why I think it is wrong when I don't believe god has told me so.
Hence, I can only assume that if they did not believe in god and eternal punishment for sins, they would not have a problem with violence, murder and stealing from other people, which makes me quite happy that they are religious.
I wouldn't want a majority of people to be completely without morals and ethics, just because they saw no reason to do so out of their own free will.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Btw liloe, im still waiting for you to explain why its a good idea to believe in god.

This can't be answered like you'd like to.

Religion often helps people have guidelines, have some outsourced "fountain" of strength, have a community(much like freddyshouse) they can talk to and feel at home with, and many other such, enforcing and self-helpful things. You could say "you can find other sources for that", but, isn't it just another source? Just a more "fitting" for your taste?

Religion has shaped the world as we are in now too, so it's not particulary ideal to say the world would be better/worse with/without religion.

Heck, one could say, that if nazis had won and ruled the world, we might be better off. Who knows, it's speculation. I think there's a book about nazis winning too, can't remember the name, interesting read and some very interesting + sides in it. But that's off the point.

On a personal note, i'm "religious", in a sense. I'm a firm believer in viking ways, old gods of ancient finnish lore and such. I get as much slack about it from atheists, christians and everything in between. It's not about what you believe in it seems, it's how strongly you believe others are wrong, that causes most the problems and smacktalk.

Both sides in this have fanatics, don't think non-believers don't, and neither sides fanatics are good for the whole of human race. Personal opinion. All those non-fanatic people, those are the ones one could call "real" believers/non-believers and those people have never caused harm. Well, in such a way that one would say religion/non-religion has as a whole.

 

[Sharma]

Btw liloe, im still waiting for you to explain why its a good idea to believe in god.

Still waiting for a good reason for him to believe otherwise other than the hypocritical shit that you spout.

 

[tris-]

Well you avoided the question really. Or rather, answered in a non-answering way.

Honest question with no "hidden agenda", do you think that it's helpful towards a world of "don't think what others think", if people openly judge other people?

Don't you think that it would be a nice step, to stop judging? Or atleast, do it in a less offensive manner?

not really.
i believe the people giving honest opinions are fine.
i believe the people taking these opinions and making an issue of it are the tossers.

 

[Huntingtons]

Theres a HUGE difference!

A christian fundie would start foaming at the mouth with righteous fury the moment you say "Black guy" or "Homo" near them.

yes and my point is that christians mostly arent religious but believers whereas fanatics are religious because they believe their book to be correct all way through

 

[Iceforge]

yes and my point is that christians mostly arent religious but believers whereas fanatics are religious because they believe their book to be correct all way through

Excuse me? Please, spare us that.

There exist fanatic Christians as well as there exist fanatics in all other religions. I know what your point is, but your message also clearly has the implied sense that fanatics are only off other religions than Christianity, which is surely and evidently not true. Also it sort of implies that ALL but Christians are fanatics, which is also quite untrue.

Instead you should have replaced the initial "Christians" with "every-day believers" which would be true. Most believers of any religion, let it be Christianity, Islam, Jewish, Hindu or any of the other mayor religions, are every-day believers who does not believe that every single word in their "holy' myth book is correct. The problem is the fanatics as you say, but don't pretend there are no fantatic/fundamentalist Christians, as that is simply a false statement. And there are plenty of non-fanatic/fundamentalistic believers in all other religions as well.

 

[tierk]

........Btw liloe, im still waiting for you to explain why its a good idea to believe in god.

You answer that quite nicely yourself to be honest.......

All of these things have been answered several times already. But you people just keep talking the same crap..

if they are bothered that much then they have more issues than believing in a god.

That can be applied to you also really and what you are saying. If you are so bothered by what other peoples beliefs are then you have issues beyond the realm of this debate.

 

[Iceforge]

That can be applied to you also really and what you are saying. If you are so bothered by what other peoples beliefs are then you have issues beyond the realm of this debate.

Not excatly bothered about what other people believe, but when I sometimes can't do or have to do certain things because other peoples religous believes find it offensive if not, then it is really not me who has the problem.
Also, religion bugs me due to limitting the freedom of certain minorities and sometimes envoking racistic feelings in certain people. (but that might be those individuals fault much more than religion, but they often used religion as an excuse, which is sad)

 

[tierk]

Not excatly bothered about what other people believe, but when I sometimes can't do or have to do certain things because other peoples religous believes find it offensive if not, then it is really not me who has the problem.
Also, religion bugs me due to limitting the freedom of certain minorities and sometimes envoking racistic feelings in certain people. (but that might be those individuals fault much more than religion, but they often used religion as an excuse, which is sad)

Living in a country like Denmark i cant imagine there are many things that your obliged to do becuase of someones religion except have days off on Sundays

Your last comment.......

(but that might be those individuals fault much more than religion, but they often used religion as an excuse, which is sad)

Hit the nail right on the head the fault isnt with the religion but rather the individual.

 

[old.Tohtori]

not really.
i believe the people giving honest opinions are fine.
i believe the people taking these opinions and making an issue of it are the tossers.

Kinda what tierk said; if you take peoples opinion, say, "i believe in god", and make an "issue" about it, the issue being that he's a moron for believing, doesn't it, by your definition make you a similar "tosser"?

Or is your definition of an "issue", defending ones view, that you find stupid?

Just trying to understand a bit more as it's a very different view from mine.

 

[tris-]

sorry, but i cant be fucked to keep repeating my self. if you dont understand now then its tough shit.

 

[old.Tohtori]

sorry, but i cant be fucked to keep repeating my self. if you dont understand now then its tough shit.

It's not a problem of understanding your point, it's a problem in understanding that it seems a bit double-standarded.

Because by your definition, you're calling yourself a "tosser".

 

[tris-]

no the problem is your taking words and giving them another meaning like you always do.

your idea of creating an issue is someone saying what they think.

 

[old.Tohtori]

no the problem is your taking words and giving them another meaning like you always do.

your idea of creating an issue is someone saying what they think.

Oh right, now it's the "usual tohtori problem". It's not. I said already, not trying to trap or trying to call you anything. But if you want to get "personal", then go ahead. There may be a "understanding" problem as you're not too keen on explaining more then in five words, which is why i'm asking for a definition for your opinion.

My idea of making an "issue", is calling someone elses opinion stupid. As in;

"I have religion."
"That is stupid."

You're saying that it's ok, right?

And you're also saying that people who make an issue of someone elses opinion, are tossers, yet if you do so, you're not.

What am i getting wrong?

 

[Gorbachioo]

Still waiting for a good reason for him to believe otherwise other than the hypocritical shit that you spout.

I shall give those reasons once more then.


No evidence. You wouldnt believe in Santa Claus without evidence, so why would you believe in god without evidence? You wouldnt respect someone who believed in Santa Claus without evidence, so why would you respect someone who believes in god without evidence? Both are stories made up by man to make certain people behave like they want to.

And why do i hate religion so much? First of all, it kills millions of people a year by banning condoms. Second of all, if we dont get rid of religion now, there will be a time when you and i wont be asked whether we want to believe in it.


And for iceforge: The bible tells you to kill everyone who work on sundays. Do you REALLY want to take your morals from there? And yea yea i know.... its fundamentalism to take THAT part literally. Ive heard that before, but who decides what to take literally? Taking your moral values from a 2000 year old book is just retarded.

 

[cHodAX]

I believe in a thing called love
Just listen to the rhythm of my heart
There's a chance we could make it now
We'll be rocking 'til the sun goes down
I believe in a thing called love
Oooooooooooooooooh

 

[old.Tohtori]

Taking your moral values from a 2000 year old book is just retarded.

You know, since you completely ignored my previous post about the good of religion, i can answer this too:

All those morals; don't harm fellow man, turn the other cheek, respect mother and father etc etc, those have come from religious morals. It's changed from book to ears, to parents teaching them, or community teaching them, but in basis of it all, it's where they came from. Without religion, one might even assume that we wouldn't have morals.

Sure, these days "everyone knows" what morals are and so forth, but without the original religion based morals, you wouldn't have yours, as they are, either.

So don't act like your morals aren't based on religion, as the whole of mankind is based on religions and its morals are very much affected by religion.

 

[Gorbachioo]

You know, since you completely ignored my previous post about the good of religion, i can answer this too:

All those morals; don't harm fellow man, turn the other cheek, respect mother and father etc etc, those have come from religious morals. It's changed from book to ears, to parents teaching them, or community teaching them, but in basis of it all, it's where they came from. Without religion, one might even assume that we wouldn't have morals.

Sure, these days "everyone knows" what morals are and so forth, but without the original religion based morals, you wouldn't have yours, as they are, either.

So don't act like your morals aren't based on religion, as the whole of mankind is based on religions and its morals are very much affected by religion.

Bullshit. Are you telling me that there were no similar moral values before christianity? And yeah, we would probably have different kind of values if there had never been any religion, but why are you saying that they would be bad? No one can know that. And are you telling me that killing people who dont want to believe in your religion is good values? Or banning condoms which results in millions of deaths a year?

That was a really crappy point.

 

[Huntingtons]

Excuse me? Please, spare us that.

There exist fanatic Christians as well as there exist fanatics in all other religions. I know what your point is, but your message also clearly has the implied sense that fanatics are only off other religions than Christianity, which is surely and evidently not true. Also it sort of implies that ALL but Christians are fanatics, which is also quite untrue.

Instead you should have replaced the initial "Christians" with "every-day believers" which would be true. Most believers of any religion, let it be Christianity, Islam, Jewish, Hindu or any of the other mayor religions, are every-day believers who does not believe that every single word in their "holy' myth book is correct. The problem is the fanatics as you say, but don't pretend there are no fantatic/fundamentalist Christians, as that is simply a false statement. And there are plenty of non-fanatic/fundamentalistic believers in all other religions as well.

where in the 3 worlds have i said that i only believe that christianity does not include fanatics? my point was exactly that - you believe that the bible cannot be read word exact which it surely can.
dont go assume something like this without a very good reason.
now if you ask a protestant priest if he/she believes the holy book is truth with no lies and stories in all its words and ways they will say no - i've even heard some protestant priests say they didnt believe in god but in the word of the book instead. ask some religious christian way the same question and you'll have a very different answer... that my blind friend, was my point

next time, read what i qoute as well.

 

[Jeremiah]

I shall give those reasons once more then.


No evidence. You wouldnt believe in Santa Claus without evidence, so why would you believe in god without evidence? You wouldnt respect someone who believed in Santa Claus without evidence, so why would you respect someone who believes in god without evidence? Both are stories made up by man to make certain people behave like they want to.

Erm.. It seems you are mixing up knowledge and belief. Knowledge is based entirely upon fact and evidence. Belief does not require to be - there can be rational thought behind belief based upon facts or evidence, but belief does not require everything to have been quantified. (Hence its called belief).

For example - we do not know evolution is how we came to be, but many believe it to be, because there is some evidence or facts which show it to be a possibility.

I think you'll find many people believe in "a" God because of some evidence or facts which are enough for them. Yes, they dont have 100% proof in the existance of anything supernatural, but thats ok because they "believe" it, they dont "know" it. And we all use this faith throughout our lives. Afterall, how many people do you know wont drive a car or use a mobile phone before they know every little detail of how it works? We just use them and trust them to do what they are meant to do.

At this point you could say "I don't need to know everything, because I trust that the "proof" that it all works is quantifiable somewhere, by someone else, and could be explained to me so that I know exactly how it works".

Guess what, people who have faith in God feel the exact same thing, that at some point it will all make sense, that it will be crystal clear - that its possible to know theres a God. This may be at the end of their lives or time or whatever, but they believe that one day they will know.

I dont think there will ever be irrefutable proof that a God exists, because we'll be using methods from our sphere of physics and science to test for something which is outside our boundaries. So we are mainly left with other reasons for believing, many which are philosophical and subjective - and therefore unable to be universally quantifiable.

So leave people to their reasons for believing in a God - just because you dont understand them or agree with them doesnt make them any less valid to them. If you want people to "scientifically prove" their reasons, then give them a tool capable of testing for supernatural entities. Otherwise give your "crusade" a rest.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Bullshit. Are you telling me that there were no similar moral values before christianity? And yeah, we would probably have different kind of values if there had never been any religion, but why are you saying that they would be bad? No one can know that. And are you telling me that killing people who dont want to believe in your religion is good values? Or banning condoms which results in millions of deaths a year?

That was a really crappy point.

Not really, just you read it in your usual way.

You say: "No one can know that." and yet, you claim that if we rid the world or if there was no religion, we'd be better off.

Contradiction? I'd like to think so.

I never said killing people for religion, or banning condoms is a good thing. But those values could've as easily come from any place. Are you saying people weren't killed for silly reasons pre-christianity? Didn't think so. Are you saying that condoms might not be banned without christianity? Refer to earlier.

The point was, that you yourself have been raised, as much as any person of society, to those same moral values, that, as it IS, have spawned from religion.

 

[dub]

Erm.. It seems you are mixing up knowledge and belief. Knowledge is based entirely upon fact and evidence. Belief does not require to be - there can be rational thought behind belief based upon facts or evidence, but belief does not require everything to have been quantified. (Hence its called belief).

For example - we do not know evolution is how we came to be, but many believe it to be, because there is some evidence or facts which show it to be a possibility.

in science you dont " believe" in theories , this in itself is mixing up empiri and faith

 

[Rookiescot]

Think we all have to agree to disagree on this one guys ?

 

[Huntingtons]

im not giving up till everybody disagrees with me!