What good is religion?

Lol...Yep! You know what they say about "paybacks"

 

We all are wired to find explanation why things happen and the religion is the simplest explanation. Almost all civilization have religion which explain rain, sunshine, storm, drought, reason for winning or losing war. Currently the science is the best explanation why thing happen, but science doesn't explain all and doesn't give hope. People who need hope stick to religion. Religion explain everything.

 

But notice the part of your flow chart that says...."DID IT WORK?"
Now look around you....
Humans continue to destroy all forms of life...on land and in the seas....
they continue to pollute the very air and water and food sources
that their own children need to survive.

Now refer back to your flow chart...."NO"....it did not work.
And all you can think to say is..."God works in mysterious ways"

Are you quite sure it is "God" that is responsible for human ignorance?

 

Outside of it????

Look at your bible again for the first time, stupid, before making such dumb statements, when the opposite is clearly mandated.

Regards
DL

 

Belief, unlike faith, is to have facts that force belief.

What fact makes you believe?

Give a real fact please.

Regards
DL

 

Yep. Inquisitions and jihads show how religious justice works and how we should all sharpen our swords.

Why do you support homophobic and misogynous fascists, --- over your government?

Regards
DL

 

I could be wrong....but IMO what the word "God" originally referred to
has been lost. You are talking about the "Christian" God....
that is the one he is criticizing.

 

American liberty, equality, and our system of justice is based upon and applied according to Judeo/Christian concepts. It works fairly well all day, every day. Or would you prefer to come upon a nation imbued and crippled with the canker of witchcraft, utterly void of science and bound up in the straight jacket of superstition. And what honor or service is it to womanhood to hold it in the same regard as sexual perversity as do you. Is greasing the skids to the corrupting of mankind a gift to one and all (LOL). Where too is the great and noble kindness in coercing one to either abandon ones religious beliefs and pay homage to perversion or risk financial ruination and prison. Who is your God who presumes to lay claim to mankind via deceit, sleight of hand, and outright blunt force. So how right can it be? You do realize that thievery is against the law.

 

Lies. View the first link below and see your lie.

Proof. American women and gays equal, Christian/Muslim and other bastards, women and gays not equal.

Judeo/Christian my ass.

Both Christianity and Islam, slave holding ideologies, have basically developed into intolerant, homophobic and misogynous religions. Both religions have grown themselves by the sword instead of good deeds and continue with their immoral ways in spite of secular law showing them the moral ways.

Jesus said we would know his people by their works and deeds. That means Jesus would not recognize Christians and Muslims as his people, and neither do I. Jesus would call Christianity and Islam abominations.

Gnostic Christians did in the past, and I am proudly continuing that tradition and honest irrefutable evaluation based on morality.

https://topdocumentaryfilms.com/theft-values/



Humanity centered religions, good? Yes. Esoteric ecumenist Gnostic Christianity being the best of these.

Supernaturally based religions, evil? Yes. Islam and Christianity being the worst of these.

Regards
DL

 

Exactly!

 

The question was if according to believers praying to God works.

 

Of course it was.....and the answer per your chart,
if it does not work....(according to believers) it must be God's fault

 

You had no new ideas just one sided hyperbolic accusations about all religions that don't hold water. I gave you a legitimate theory as to why humans have a propensity to form religions because it gives an evolutionary advantage. You ignored that new idea to continue a bigoted anti-religion rant, not willing to discuss, in a none emotional way, why man might "need" religion. So you failed the two signs of maturity you highlighted

I am willing to change my mind if there were any evidence given for man not needing religion. So far you got nothing. Your attempt to use me, someone who doesn't need religion, as an example of man not "needing" religion is just ignorant. Human behavior is a bell curve. On one end you have religious fanatics and on the other....me. Most live in the middle.

 

They may have at one time....now they are just outdated rituals.
"Religions" either have to keep up....or stop pretending...
just like you "pretending" to be "mature" while continuing to throw stones.

 

Lol...and you are saying that you passed?
Find a good mirror...check for logs in your eye
before you point to my sliver.

 

That my have been a "new idea" a million years ago...
now it's just you pretending you came up with something new.

 

Suggesting that humans move beyond "religions" to something that unites all
instead of creating separate tribes and perpetuating separation....
that is all I am pointing to. Call it an old idea if you wish...age doesn't matter.

 

Have you given any thought as to why you claim not to "need" religion...
while insisting that "5 billion" do "need" it.
Will you at least try to make sense of your so called "new idea"....
Why is it that you believe others "need" something that you personally do not "need"....
how can you insist that others "need" something that you don't require at all.

 

How about man just being better and more moral without religions, just as stats are showing as true.

'Atheist' Nations Are More Peaceful - YouTube

We need and want religions, but you might have noted that the god religions offer a genocidal homophobic and misogynous god.

Is that really the type of (good) god we want?

Regards
DL

 

IMO, you are wasting your breath. Notice that, in 18 pages, the thread-creator has yet to cite a single source, or make one logical argument, in support of his contention that the people of the world would find giving up religion, no different than giving up television: after a while, they would notice nothing lacking. The entire argument is one of individual assertions-- one might say, statements of belief, taken on faith, without proof-- that this omnipresent feature of society, from time immemorial, has been nothing more than a duping of the masses, in order to control them. Any suggestions that this argument puts the cart before the horse, or attempts to consider anything behind this narrowly-stated creed, that religion is the CAUSE of all of humanity's misanthropic inclinations, are simply ignored.

There is no discussion going on, here-- only more of the demonizing of religions, which this thread postulates as an evil proclivity, attributable exclusively to religion.

 

Indeed, the two above have an irrational, emotional view of religion and they don't like to be called bigoted. It may put them even deeper in denial to save themselves a bruised ego....but the seed has been planted.

 

Sure...but who created the "bell curve" you are referring to??
Who created religions?? Same folks that created bell curves.
You claim that you don't "need" a religion....but others on the bell curve do.
So what makes you different than the rest?
How are you different than the rest?
Are you different than the rest?

 

Lol...so you're still throwing stones.
But all that does is prove you have a weak argument...
or in your case none at all.
Your only defense for religion so far is it's "persistence and popularity"...(like drug abuse).
The rest of your speech here has been nothing but personal criticism...
referring to those who don't agree with you as ignorant, emotional, irrational, bigoted, immature, etc,..
all of which fit yourself quite well but do nothing to support your opinions.
You say you don't "need" religion but "5 billion" others "need" religion.
You yourself don't "need" something....but you're positive others do...
simply because it is "popular and persistent"...(like drug abuse).

 

Lol....
And the rant goes....yeah the rant goes on...drums keep poundin-a-rhythm to the brain.
La-de-da-de-dee
La-de-da-de-da

Why don't you try respond to the OP...instead of just criticizing.
See if you can at least top Edna's argument of "persistence and popularity".

 

Is your memory going, gabmux? YOU made it very clear that: 1) you did not appreciate any of my responses, directly to your OP, and
2) you had no intention of answering any points which I raised to you.

You basically told me to leave you alone, & rudely pushed me out of your thread. I thought that Edna would at least reply with a sense of decorum, manners, politeness, maturity-- whatever you wish to call it-- rather than with the sort of expositional, so called, arguments you have been presenting me, as, for instance, the one beginning your most recent reply:

I have offered my thoughts on things that you have left out of your OP, which were indispensable to the argument you were trying to make (though even what that is, has not been eminently clear). You have pretended that my pointing out the apparent need many have for religion, has nothing to do with your posit: that it is time to, "bury," religions.

My thesis has, all along, been that, if we did not practice religion, the ugly, hateful, aggressive behavior you attribute to religion, as its source, would find its expression through other outlets. To paraphrase Shakespeare, the fault lies not in our Gods, but in ourselves.

I have also asked for clarification of your contradictory statements, such as that you believe that our thoughts are not part of who we are; that we have, instead some vaguely-described inner essence, which has all the answers, & which we need merely follow. Nevertheless, you have claimed a uniformity between Greatest i am's, & your own, philosophies, despite that G.I.A. has stated that this inner, purified self is nothing BUT an idea.

*Talk about, "debating (one's) own interpretations." That was a totally fabricated assumption, on your part. As with all your other assertions about either me, or my arguments, you provide none of my quotes to support your speculations or assertions.

On the other hand, I have explained my rationale for each of my own contentions, including quoting your supporting examples, when applicable. For my trouble, you have had the gaul to accuse ME of flinging meaningless criticisms

This was your response to my question. If one looks closely, one will discover there is something missing from it: namely, the any answer to my question. So, in reply to your question-- no, it apparently is NOT, "better," to ask you to clarify points, on which you have been ambiguous.