Are you an atheist? (14 Viewers)

[Pauldohert]

I am exposing them to different cultural concepts of religion. What was your question?

Do you expose them to the concept of God at home? Or just the tooth fairy?

 

[Mike375]

Alisa,

If you look at George's last reply you will see it matches what I posted yesterday and that is, people see something that is so clear as to be real.

 

[gmatriix]

Well since you claim to be for real, and not just making a joke here, I will respond. But really, you must be joking. Nothing happened that made me feel that way. There is just no evidence that there is or ever has been a god. As far as the scriptures, there is nothing to indicate which holy book is more true than any other holy book. Since they all contradict eachother and themselves, it is a futile endeavor to try to adhere to one or the other anyway.

There is still time for what?

There is still time to search for the truth..we are living the last days meaning that this wicked system that we live in today will be destroyed. I understand that It may be difficult in the world we live to find the truth. However, it is out there. Those who learn the truth are sharing it with those around the globe. (Matt 24:14) We were meant to live forever....not this short lived life filled with trouble. There is hope.

I hope you find it...

 

[Alisa]

There are well documented pros of being self-actualized (see Maslow's hierarchy). Religious people are more likely to be self-actualized than non-religious people, regardless of religious affiliation (again, see Maslow). Religious people are generally just happier deep down.

We can also assume that being religious means attending services on a regular basis (that doesn't mean you have to be "religious" to attend services). Before, during, and after these services, frequently relationships deepen between worshippers, just because they're near each other, have something in common, and may find they have more in common. We Christians call this behavior fellowshipping and it is an important part of being a Christian. These relationships can also help to satisfy lower level needs (again, see Maslow), increasing the overall level of happiness, fulfillment, etc. I would consider this a second, considerable pro, per your request.

This is simply not true. In fact, there is no research that shows that religious people are any happier or any more satistfied with their lives than non-religious people. Yes fellowship is important, but you don't need a church to find it.

Also, something that I wouldn't expect a non-believer to understand is the relationship with God that is in question here. To have a deep belief in a supreme being and a faith in said being requires a relationship of a type. I've found, in my personal life, that this is a relationship that is more enduring and satisfying that all the other relationships (which are also great). You may say (hopefully only in your mind) that it is all in my mind/the mind of the "believer". That is a fair thing for you to question (hopefully discretely). And your supposition may even be true, though I don't believe so. But if your supposition is true, it still doesn't impact the perceived happiness I am receiving from this (virtual?) relationship. Your lack of belief cannot take it away from me, and I still enjoy the pros. This enduring faith and relationship is a third pro, per your request.

You are trying to argue that there is some deeper level of satistfaction available only to those who believe in god. I just don't think that is true. Of course my lack of belief doesn't impact your perceived hapiness.

Also, living by a code of ethics, whether handed down by a God on a mountain to a bearded man, like the 10 commandments, or not, provides a more fulfilling life than having no moral or ethical compass. Again, I'm not saying that you have to be religious to have a moral code nor that all religious people follow their own code (yes, we are hypocrites too, in addition to our other sins), it just seems to go with the territory with religious people. Many people who are "religious" might not otherwise have a set of moral suggestions to guide their life. I'd say that the law and order in society and the order in our personal lives is another real pro, per your request.

As I have said before on this thread, moral behaviour is not cause by religion. It is human nature to have morals. There is also no research indicating that religious people are any more moral than non-religious people. In fact, aren't the majority of prisoners religious?

I have a real job and cannot spend the time to articulate the hundreds of other advantages. I'd love to discuss them with you in person, if you like.

Are there cons to religion? Yes. Seems everybody here is familiar with them and many are more than willing to comment on them, and I can't and don't want to refute them. It seems to me that many of those cons are the result of bad people, not a bad/non-existing God.

I haven't seen anyone make the argument that the cons are a result of a non-existant god. The cons are a result of the fact that religious conviction can be taken advantage of and used for evil.

 

[ShaneMan]

It is human nature to have morals.

You really believe this statement? Think back to when you children were say are 2 to 4 years old. When they broke something and you asked them if they did it and they told you no. When you came home from a friends house and they had taken a toy home with them that belonged to your friends child. When they throw a fit cause they can't have there way or bite, scratch, punch a kid cause the kid did not give them what they wanted. If it was in their human nature to have morals then why do they lie, without being taught? Steal, without being taught to? Be selfish and even violent, without being taught to be? I think little kids exhibit what we as humans really are until be are taught to be civil, show respect, and have morals.

 

[georgedwilkinson]

This is simply not true. In fact, there is no research that shows that religious people are any happier or any more satistfied with their lives than non-religious people.

Ummm...yeah, I already knew your opinion. You asked for ours. Did you even look up Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs and related theories? The fifth level is self-actualization and most frequently is achieved through religious means. You're saying that the fifth level of Maslow's Hierarchy of needs is not true as a matter of fact (your words, not mine)? Where is the research that disproved Maslow? I guess I've been out of touch.

You are trying to argue that there is some deeper level of satistfaction available only to those who believe in god. I just don't think that is true.

I'm not trying to argue anything (which you are asserting), you asked and I told you. Also, as pointed out before, I already knew your opinion, you've made it abundantly clear in this thread...you asked for our opinion, and I provided mine.

Of course my lack of belief doesn't impact your perceived hapiness.

I think you're catching on.

It is human nature to have morals. There is also no research indicating that religious people are any more moral than non-religious people.

ROTFLOL.

In fact, aren't the majority of prisoners religious?

Evil people are religious when it is convenient. But I doubt that the majority of prisoners are religious, I could be wrong and don't really care one way or the other. I still have my opinion (which you asked for) and you have your opinion (which I already know). I just honestly don't think prisoners have anything to do with the pros you asked for, and thus, have nothing to do with my response to your query. Save it for when somebody asks you a question.

The cons are a result of the fact that religious conviction can be taken advantage of and used for evil.

I think I agree with you on this, religion is twisted by religious and non-religious people (lots of examples in this very thread)...but it isn't God's (isn't He more related to the topic of this thread than religion?) fault, it is man and religion's fault.

 

[Friday]

You really believe this statement? Think back to when you children were say are 2 to 4 years old. When they broke something and you asked them if they did it and they told you no. When you came home from a friends house and they had taken a toy home with them that belonged to your friends child. When they throw a fit cause they can't have there way or bite, scratch, punch a kid cause the kid did not give them what they wanted. If it was in their human nature to have morals then why do they lie, without being taught? Steal, without being taught to? Be selfish and even violent, without being taught to be? I think little kids exhibit what we as humans really are until be are taught to be civil, show respect, and have morals.

You are implying that all small children lie from the start to avoid punishment, are violent to meet their needs/wants. I have raised 4 children and know from experience that is totally false. Small children emulate their peers and their parents. If they lie to avoid punishment, then someone is meting out the wrong kind of punishment, or they have witnessed it in others. None of my 4 children were raised in "church". And mysteriously, they all know it is wrong to steal, lie, punch the neighbor's children, etc. If I had raised them in "church", what difference would it have made? Well, for one thing, we'd be many thousands of dollars poorer, since all churches insist you give them part of your income. Some more than others. Fellowship? Here's your fellowship:

"He came from a solid, loving home with encouraging Support , a moral upbringing and Christian teaching from the time he could walk. He was an obedient child, a dedicated student, and a team player on the Oak Harbor High School football team" - Serial Killer Robert L. Yates, Jr.

"Jeffery Dahmer was a son of a Fundamentalist-creationist-second wife-abuser."

"Hitler was a Roman Catholic alter Boy and wrote of wanting to be a Catholic priest."

"Stalin went to college to be a Protestant Christian minister."

"The 195 pound, 5-foot-11 college educated, family man in Park City, Kansas was president of the Lutheran church he attended for 30 years and a Boy Scout leader." BTK Killer Denis Rader

"He read the Bible at work and tried to save others by continually talking about church and the savior. He went door to door for a Pentecostal church and got angry when people closed their doors on him. According to his second wife, he "would sit at night watching TV with an open Bible in his lap (and) would frequently cry after, or during, the church service." Gary Leon Ridgway - the Green River Killer

What kind of fellowship is being taught at these churches?

 

[Rich]

We were meant to live forever....

Nothing lives "for ever", not even our planet

 

[Rich]

Who was that by the way?

The first god of course...................

 

[ShaneMan]

You are implying that all small children lie from the start to avoid punishment, are violent to meet their needs/wants. I have raised 4 children and know from experience that is totally false. Small children emulate their peers and their parents. If they lie to avoid punishment, then someone is meting out the wrong kind of punishment, or they have witnessed it in others. None of my 4 children were raised in "church". And mysteriously, they all know it is wrong to steal, lie, punch the neighbor's children, etc. If I had raised them in "church", what difference would it have made? Well, for one thing, we'd be many thousands of dollars poorer, since all churches insist you give them part of your income. Some more than others. Fellowship? Here's your fellowship:

"He came from a solid, loving home with encouraging Support , a moral upbringing and Christian teaching from the time he could walk. He was an obedient child, a dedicated student, and a team player on the Oak Harbor High School football team" - Serial Killer Robert L. Yates, Jr.

"Jeffery Dahmer was a son of a Fundamentalist-creationist-second wife-abuser."

"Hitler was a Roman Catholic alter Boy and wrote of wanting to be a Catholic priest."

"Stalin went to college to be a Protestant Christian minister."

"The 195 pound, 5-foot-11 college educated, family man in Park City, Kansas was president of the Lutheran church he attended for 30 years and a Boy Scout leader." BTK Killer Denis Rader

"He read the Bible at work and tried to save others by continually talking about church and the savior. He went door to door for a Pentecostal church and got angry when people closed their doors on him. According to his second wife, he "would sit at night watching TV with an open Bible in his lap (and) would frequently cry after, or during, the church service." Gary Leon Ridgway - the Green River Killer

What kind of fellowship is being taught at these churches?

Friday, your post applies to my post, in what way? Alisa made the statement that we are moral by nature. I was using the point that small children, left to themselves, do not exhibit being moral by nature. I never implied that whether someone goes to church makes them a good or evil person nor the other way around. I guess I could take your point a go with it a little bit. If we took the list of folks that you have presented us, then where is their "moral by nature" being exhibited? Even with a structure that teaches them the opposite of what they did and reading a book that never comes close to telling them to do what they did, they still did it. Why? My Dad, talking about folks going to church and calling themselves a Christian, use to say all the time, "just cause a cat's born in an oven doesn't make it a biscuit." A Christian is not defined by what church they attend. They are defined as a follow of Christ if they adhere and obey His teachings. Show me anywhere in Jesus Christ teaching, where these men followed what He said to do.

 

[Pauldohert]

You are implying that all small children lie from the start to avoid punishment, are violent to meet their needs/wants. I have raised 4 children and know from experience that is totally false. Small children emulate their peers and their parents. If they lie to avoid punishment, then someone is meting out the wrong kind of punishment, or they have witnessed it in others. None of my 4 children were raised in "church". And mysteriously, they all know it is wrong to steal, lie, punch the neighbor's children, etc. If I had raised them in "church", what difference would it have made? Well, for one thing, we'd be many thousands of dollars poorer, since all churches insist you give them part of your income. Some more than others. Fellowship? Here's your fellowship:

"He came from a solid, loving home with encouraging Support , a moral upbringing and Christian teaching from the time he could walk. He was an obedient child, a dedicated student, and a team player on the Oak Harbor High School football team" - Serial Killer Robert L. Yates, Jr.

"Jeffery Dahmer was a son of a Fundamentalist-creationist-second wife-abuser."

"Hitler was a Roman Catholic alter Boy and wrote of wanting to be a Catholic priest."

"Stalin went to college to be a Protestant Christian minister."

"The 195 pound, 5-foot-11 college educated, family man in Park City, Kansas was president of the Lutheran church he attended for 30 years and a Boy Scout leader." BTK Killer Denis Rader

"He read the Bible at work and tried to save others by continually talking about church and the savior. He went door to door for a Pentecostal church and got angry when people closed their doors on him. According to his second wife, he "would sit at night watching TV with an open Bible in his lap (and) would frequently cry after, or during, the church service." Gary Leon Ridgway - the Green River Killer

What kind of fellowship is being taught at these churches?

Perfect examples of what happens when you stop going to church and abandon the fellowship!

 

[Rabbie]

You really believe this statement? Think back to when you children were say are 2 to 4 years old. When they broke something and you asked them if they did it and they told you no. When you came home from a friends house and they had taken a toy home with them that belonged to your friends child. When they throw a fit cause they can't have there way or bite, scratch, punch a kid cause the kid did not give them what they wanted. If it was in their human nature to have morals then why do they lie, without being taught? Steal, without being taught to? Be selfish and even violent, without being taught to be? I think little kids exhibit what we as humans really are until be are taught to be civil, show respect, and have morals.

Shane, you surprise me! nearly all the young children I know - My children, grandchildren, friend's children etc have been honest to point of embarrasment - saying what they tink without worrying about upsetting someone and have had an innocence that made them admit what they had wrong. In my experience it is heavy handed punishment that teaches children to lie to avoid it.

 

[Rabbie]

There are well documented pros of being self-actualized (see Maslow's hierarchy). Religious people are more likely to be self-actualized than non-religious people, regardless of religious affiliation (again, see Maslow). Religious people are generally just happier deep down.

Begging the question. I think you need to provide more evidence for this assertion

We can also assume that being religious means attending services on a regular basis (that doesn't mean you have to be "religious" to attend services). Before, during, and after these services, frequently relationships deepen between worshippers, just because they're near each other, have something in common, and may find they have more in common. We Christians call this behavior fellowshipping and it is an important part of being a Christian. These relationships can also help to satisfy lower level needs (again, see Maslow), increasing the overall level of happiness, fulfillment, etc. I would consider this a second, considerable pro, per your request.

I agree with the benefits of socialising but this is not exclusive to Christians or to other religious groups.

Also, something that I wouldn't expect a non-believer to understand is the relationship with God that is in question here. To have a deep belief in a supreme being and a faith in said being requires a relationship of a type. I've found, in my personal life, that this is a relationship that is more enduring and satisfying that all the other relationships (which are also great). You may say (hopefully only in your mind) that it is all in my mind/the mind of the "believer". That is a fair thing for you to question (hopefully discretely). And your supposition may even be true, though I don't believe so. But if your supposition is true, it still doesn't impact the perceived happiness I am receiving from this (virtual?) relationship. Your lack of belief cannot take it away from me, and I still enjoy the pros. This enduring faith and relationship is a third pro, per your request.

I am afraid I can't have a meaningful relationship with something I regard as imaginary. I do not doubt the happiness you get from your belief but that does not work for me anymore than getting comfort from a whisky bottle would.

Also, living by a code of ethics, whether handed down by a God on a mountain to a bearded man, like the 10 commandments, or not, provides a more fulfilling life than having no moral or ethical compass. Again, I'm not saying that you have to be religious to have a moral code nor that all religious people follow their own code (yes, we are hypocrites too, in addition to our other sins), it just seems to go with the territory with religious people. Many people who are "religious" might not otherwise have a set of moral suggestions to guide their life. I'd say that the law and order in society and the order in our personal lives is another real pro, per your request.

I do not regard myself as being amoral and I certainly know the difference between right and wrong. I believe that any stable society has to have its own moral code or it will not be stable.

I have a real job and cannot spend the time to articulate the hundreds of other advantages. I'd love to discuss them with you in person, if you like.

Unfortunately not possible unless you come to the UK

Are there cons to religion? Yes. Seems everybody here is familiar with them and many are more than willing to comment on them, and I can't and don't want to refute them. It seems to me that many of those cons are the result of bad people, not a bad/non-existing God.

I have to agree with you on this. I would say that all the cons are the result of bad people believing thay have some sort of moral authority to push their views and practices on other people.

 

[ShaneMan]

Shane, you surprise me! nearly all the young children I know - My children, grandchildren, friend's children etc have been honest to point of embarrasment - saying what they tink without worrying about upsetting someone and have had an innocence that made them admit what they had wrong. In my experience it is heavy handed punishment that teaches children to lie to avoid it.

Why would I surprise you? Have you ever watched Super Nanny? If you watch this show you will see how children come out when they are left to decide what is right or moral.

 

[Rich]

Perfect examples of what happens when you stop going to church and abandon the fellowship!

Yes let's go back to the good old days and re-invoke the senseless slaughter of the first, second world wars eh, much better respect for everybody then eh

 

[Rabbie]

Why would I surprise you? Have you ever watched Super Nanny? If you watch this show you will see how children come out when they are left to decide what is right or moral.

For the reasons I gave in my post. In case you missed it, in my experience children don't lie until they learn there is an advantage in doing so. Can you deny that children don't have a sense of justice. Think how often you hear cries of "Thats not fair". Of course I can't speak for your kids - I have never met them but I am sure they arent as bad as you imply.

From my memories of bible classes I am sure that Jesus said that people needed a childlike attitude to enter the kingdom of Heaven. So are you disagreeing with his teaching. After all it is you that believe in him not me

As to your final point there wouldn't be any point in putting well behaved nice children on Super Nanny would there?

 

[dan-cat]

For the reasons I gave in my post. In case you missed it, in my experience children don't lie until they learn there is an advantage in doing so.

Yes. Like, for instance, escaping the consequences of their actions. A punishment doesn't necessarily have to be 'heavy-handed' in order for a child to try and side-step it. It's part of what makes them a self-conscious individual.

Can you deny that children don't have a sense of justice.

No. But they don't have it down pat a priori do they? How many times have we heard a child say 'it's not fair' when really it is?

 

[Rabbie]

Yes. Like, for instance, escaping the consequences of their actions. A punishment doesn't necessarily have to be 'heavy-handed' in order for a child to try and side-step it. It's part of what makes them a self-conscious individual.

I was replying to a post which suggested that children were born liars. I would dispute that. I think they need to learn the advantages of lying before they do it.

No. But they don't have it down pat a priori do they? How many times have we heard a child say 'it's not fair' when really it is?

Paradoxically a situation may be both fair and unfair depending on your viewpoint. The adult/parental view may well be reasonable but unfair.

 

[dan-cat]

I was replying to a post which suggested that children were born liars. I would dispute that. I think they need to learn the advantages of lying before they do it.

I thought you were arguing 'heavy-handedness' as a pre-requisite. I really don't see that as being the case.

Paradoxically a situation may be both fair and unfair depending on your viewpoint. The adult/parental view may well be reasonable but unfair.

Backing up my previous point. A child's version of heavy handedness could be no ice-cream not a tanned behind because of its smaller frame of reference. It doesn't take much for a child to work out how to ensure ice cream when it could be in jeopardy. I don't think heavy handedness has much to do with it.

 

[Rabbie]

I thought you were arguing 'heavy-handedness' as a pre-requisite. I really don't see that as being the case.

My basic case was that I don't believe children are born immoral (in terms of lying, stealing as Shane seemed to be suggesting). I was making the point thay I consider these are learnt behaviours in an attempt to avoid punishment.