Religion, Science, Scepticism, Philosophy and things metaphysical

[Value Collector]

Be that as it may religion spread the "rules" through more cultures than otherwise would have happened..

Nope, pretty much all cultures had a handle on the basic rules before the major religions took root.

You can't really have a civilization if you believe killing each other and stealing is ok,

It also inspired music, art and architecture more so than any other influence through the ages.

Well art and architecture yes, Because those things take money, and when you have large amounts of unearned income flowing in, like the Catholic church for example, you can spend freely on such luxuries.

Many of the big religious projects were nothing more than monuments to them selves, the resources they tied up no doubt could probably have been used for better things at the time also.

If you look at essentially pagan cultures like Rome, we have tyrants like Caligula and Nero, and the Egyptians you exult also believed in an afterlife.

Lots of Christian tyrants also, What's your point? If your trying to say that Christianity ended an era of tyrants, that's just false.

Who cares if the Egyptians believed in an after life, could they prove it. They also believed that the world was flat.

I didn't mention the Egyptians because I think they had special knowledge, I mentioned them because they had moral concepts that predate the religions.

Like it or not, the religious influence is there in our history

Yes, so what. It doesn't mean we have to keep it, or that it's a good idea, or that there is any truth to it.

 

[SirRumpole]

Lots of Christian tyrants also, What's your point? If your trying to say that Christianity ended an era of tyrants, that's just false.

The Roman Republic of tyrants like Caligula turned into the Holy Roman empire. Nothing false about that, it happened.

 

[Julia]

As other atheists have said, they don't believe in a religion, but they do acknowledge that -

'Christianity has served THIS COUNTRY well'.

Really? I haven't seen any atheists saying any such thing.

Many of the fundamental rules have come from religion though, so even if people don't believe in religion it has had an effect on them via the long influence (good and bad) of religion in society.

Here you go again, Rumpole, believing something because it suits your personal narrative of seeing religion as necessary and good.

VC has addressed this, especially via the comment

You can't really have a civilization if you believe killing each other and stealing is ok,

Why on earth would people need to believe in a god to understand that, unless they lay down rules for what is OK and not, there will be chaos? (It's a rhetorical question, btw, I don't expect an answer.)

Maybe we could say "we don't need religion any more", there may be a valid argument for that in the minds of some people, but it's such a powerful force to believe in eternal life that I doubt if people will want to accept that a single life on earth is all there is for us as individuals.

Again, you are extrapolating your own belief in 'eternal life' as applying to others. There is absolutely no evidence that any sort of post-death life exists.
You're so keen on the idea, however, that you accept anecdotes of unexplained claims by individuals as evidence.

 

[Tink]

VC, regarding art and architecture, they had pride in how their buildings looked, just look around the city now.

Julia, I have a conservative view, Calliope was one in here, though I have heard it away from this forum.

 

[bellenuit]

It also inspired music, art and architecture more so than any other influence through the ages.

In relation to music and art, I would think "Love" has been a far bigger influence than religion. Perhaps it is true for architecture, but many religious buildings were commissioned rather than inspired.

One should not forget either that artists of every sort have to live and throughout the ages the main source of wealth has been the various churches. So undoubtedly that is also a strong influence on what artists produce. Additionally, not denying that some great art has been inspired by the artists' belief systems, it does not mean that they would not have produced great works if they were non believers, just the topics may be different. One should not forget that religion was very much a part of the culture of most civilisations until perhaps the middle of the twentieth century when its influence started to wane, so art will have reflected that culture. It doesn't mean that if those societies were more like today, where religion has taken a back seat, great and inspiring works would not have been produced. The topics might be different, but there will always be great artists.

 

[Value Collector]

VC, regarding art and architecture, they had pride in how their buildings looked, just look around the city now.

.

Yes, while people starved or died of poor sanitation, but we all have different priorities I guess.

There would have been plenty of other infrastructure that could have absorbed excess capital, but yes, I understand they liked to live and work in fancy buildings, surrounded by fancy art.

 

[Value Collector]

The Roman Republic of tyrants like Caligula turned into the Holy Roman empire. Nothing false about that, it happened.

and then the crusades, inquisitions etc.

Yes, Christianity ended the tyranny,

 

[SirRumpole]

Really? I haven't seen any atheists saying any such thing.


Here you go again, Rumpole, believing something because it suits your personal narrative of seeing religion as necessary and good.

Don't put words into my mouth please, I never said religion was necessary and good, just that it exists and has contributed to the development of society

I have repeatedly said that I don't need religion and that it has done both good and bad things, but if you choose to cherry pick my posts to suit yourself, there is really no point continuing a discussion with you as you seem to be as one eyed as you think I am.
.

Again, you are extrapolating your own belief in 'eternal life' as applying to others. There is absolutely no evidence that any sort of post-death life exists.
You're so keen on the idea, however, that you accept anecdotes of unexplained claims by individuals as evidence.

Another misconstruction of my views. I say anecdotal evidence should not be dismissed not that it should be accepted without question. Please try reading and comprehending what I say before writing such rubbish. I'm sure that is not beyond you.

 

[Tink]

and then the crusades, inquisitions etc.

Yes, Christianity ended the tyranny,

Is that all you ever bring up?

You know that is what communists do, just keep putting down religion.

 

[Value Collector]

Is that all you ever bring up?

You know that is what communists do, just keep putting down religion.

I don't like in communism either, start a thread about that and I will denounce that to, But I see less need, communism is dying/ dead. except in North Korea.

And the killing side of what it did isn't really communism, that's just leaders fighting to maintain power and suppress the population.

There are no communist texts that say you need to kill people, there are religious texts that say that though.

 

[Tink]

The largest amount of people killed were by atheists.

We have been through this already.

 

[Julia]

Don't put words into my mouth please, I never said religion was necessary and good, just that it exists and has contributed to the development of society

You're right. You didn't actually say that. I was wrong.

But you repeatedly say stuff like

Many of the fundamental rules have come from religion though, so even if people don't believe in religion it has had an effect on them via the long influence (good and bad) of religion in society. It's an invalid argument to say "society would be better off if religion had never occurred", we simply don't know as it's impossible to erase religion from history.

Similarly if we say "I'm a moral person but I don't believe in religion therefore religion has had no effect on me", again ignores the impact of religious teachings through the ages that have affected society to date.

which suggests that there would be no proper moral compass for anyone were it not for the teachings of religion.

That is what I dispute so strongly, as do others.

When you continually make such suggestions, people will likely assume you regard religion as a positive thing.

 

[Value Collector]

The largest amount of people killed were by atheists.

We have been through this already.

lol, not that old red herring again.

Atheism has no tenants, no one has ever killed for atheism, there is no reason too.

I am an atheist, now if I go and kill my neighbour for sleeping with my wife, the fact that I am an atheist is not the cause of the murder, there are no atheist teachings that say, "Thy shalt kill the adulterer that sleeps with your wife." I didn't do it because I was an atheist, I did it because I was angry.

The communists killed because they wanted to spread communism, not because they were atheists, I don't even believe they all were, you can't say all communists were nonbelievers.

However, If a Muslim, or a Christian goes out and starts killing non believers because that's what their faith lead them to do, there is a direct line to that from their religion.

please name one atheist that has killed for the strict reason he was promoting atheism, (and please don't confuse antitheists with atheists, they are two different things)

 

[SirRumpole]

You're right. You didn't actually say that. I was wrong.

Thanks for that

But you repeatedly say stuff like [my words in bold]

Many of the fundamental rules have come from religion though, so even if people don't believe in religion it has had an effect on them via the long influence (good and bad) of religion in society. It's an invalid argument to say "society would be better off if religion had never occurred", we simply don't know as it's impossible to erase religion from history."


Similarly if we say "I'm a moral person but I don't believe in religion therefore religion has had no effect on me", again ignores the impact of religious teachings through the ages that have affected society to date.


Your inference:-

which suggests that there would be no proper moral compass for anyone were it not for the teachings of religion.

I didn't say that either. WE DON'T KNOW if there would be a moral compass without religion because it's part of our history. You might as well say "what would the world have been like without WWII ?". We could make a few guesses, but we have no way of saying if they are correct.

That is what I dispute so strongly, as do others.

When you continually make such suggestions, people will likely assume you regard religion as a positive thing.

I think it has both positive and negative impacts. (Did you notice the increased size of a part of a post of mine above that you quoted ?). I've said that throughout all the discussions on religion that I've been involved in on this forum and others.

I don't know how I can state it more clearly. I could write it out a hundred times if you like.

Religion is good and bad
.
.
.
100 times

 

[Ruby]

VC, regarding art and architecture, they had pride in how their buildings looked, just look around the city now.

Tink, you really ought to read a bit of history and take off those rosy glasses! The people who built the magnificent cathedrals of Europe (for example) were not inspired by their religious beliefs but by the opportunity to work and feed hungry families! It was as fundamental as that! The building of a cathedral would provide work for a lifetime (sometimes more than one generation) to hundreds of people. I'm sure they had pride in their work, fed by a lot of fear, because if their work was not up to scratch they were dispensable. The church always had plenty of money so they were limited only by what was possible at the time.

 

[Ruby]

The largest amount of people killed were by atheists.

We have been through this already.

Tink, you do make some astoundingly thoughtless comments, with not a scrap of fact to back them up!

 

[Julia]

Tink, you really ought to read a bit of history and take off those rosy glasses! The people who built the magnificent cathedrals of Europe (for example) were not inspired by their religious beliefs but by the opportunity to work and feed hungry families! It was as fundamental as that! The building of a cathedral would provide work for a lifetime (sometimes more than one generation) to hundreds of people. I'm sure they had pride in their work, fed by a lot of fear, because if their work was not up to scratch they were dispensable. The church always had plenty of money so they were limited only by what was possible at the time.

Ah, Ruby, would that your common sense. logical remarks more frequently brought some logic to these discussions.

 

[pixel]

Apologies if someone has posted this link before in one of the many threads; I just stumbled upon it and think it's worth watching.
Why Christianity is Impossible to Believe (Christopher Hitchens)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbOUBUVLvKw

And the irony should not be lost: Christopher is Greek, meaning "Carrier of Christ"

 

[Julia]

Most ghosts appear to people very soon after their death. On their way to the next dimension.

So clearly you believe in life after death, a religious conviction.

SirRumpole, great posts

When Tink thinks you're on the right track, that says plenty.

It's all the same to me, Rumpole. I don't mind when people find comfort in religion or life after death.
Just doesn't make any rational sense to me. Each to their own and all the other cliches.

 

[SirRumpole]

So clearly you believe in life after death, a religious conviction.

Again, it irks me that people think belief in life after death needs to be a "religious" conviction.

Religions don't own that concept. They have their idea of what an afterlife means, Hell and Damnation or sitting around on clouds playing harps depending on whether you believe in "their' God or not. I don't agree with those silly ideas. A continual progression through many lives learning as we go seems more sensible to me. More of a Buddhist approach.

And before you say Buddhism is a religion, it's not, it's a philosophy. There is no enforced Deity in Buddhism, but one seems to be an optional extra if people want it. I'm not a card carrying Buddhist, but their ideas just seem to make more sense to me.