Imagine A World With No Religion

[Binaural]

Cheers for that I was always told he was an Athiest, I always thought he was a bit crazy to be a non believer.

Hitler said it again at a Nazi Christmas celebration in 1926: "Christ was the greatest early fighter in the battle against the world enemy, the Jews . . . The work that Christ started but could not finish, I--Adolf Hitler--will conclude."

I honestly believe I was never taught that Adolf was religious, maybe teacher was religious and didn't want us to know.

And even if he was, the majority of the German population, military and SS at the time were staunch catholics.

 

[mty10@]

do you guys realise just HOW MUCH a world without Christianity?
Aproxx 65% of our Laws are based on the Ten Commandments.

Chances are, male female equality wouldnt exist if Jesus hadnt of treated the Girls and Ladys of his time with respect and equality.

It would not "Be Cool" to have a world with NO religon. It would be a world that was heading to Eternal Dammnation. ETERNAL. DAMMNATION. "With pain and Crying and Gnashing of theeth like Caged animals" (Revelation 4)

Makes you stop and think about your life.

 

[mty10@]

As for Hitler,

George Bush was an Athiest.

 

[zanus]

do you guys realise just HOW MUCH a world without Christianity?
Aproxx 65% of our Laws are based on the Ten Commandments.

Chances are, male female equality wouldnt exist if Jesus hadnt of treated the Girls and Ladys of his time with respect and equality.

It would not "Be Cool" to have a world with NO religon. It would be a world that was heading to Eternal Dammnation.

We have a smart person here
I agree

BUT, a world without religon would still have fights
ie, racial, black vs white, Jap vs Ching
The human race would just have something else to fight about
The world will always fight, but religon is good because the laws it gives us

 

[indica]

it would not "be cool" to have a world with no religon. It would be a world that was heading to eternal dammnation. Eternal. Dammnation. "with pain and crying and gnashing of theeth like caged animals" (revelation 4)

makes you stop and think about your life.

you. Cannot. Be. Serious.

 

[Davo94]

The So Called "Charities" aren't Charities they're sort of like banks that lose their money, The money they lose is the stuff sent in aid. About 10% of the money people put in actually does some good the rest is for administration fees. You would help aferica more by senting money straight to the people rather than charity organisations.

 

[hubbie]

The So Called "Charities" aren't Charities they're sort of like banks that lose their money, The money they lose is the stuff sent in aid. About 10% of the money people put in actually does some good the rest is for administration fees. You would help aferica more by senting money straight to the people rather than charity organisations.

so far off, sorry. there's plenty of charities who put all the donations towards the cause. these charities are run by unpaid volunteers. there are also charities like World Vision who, yes, don't direct the funds to the sufferers, but they employ people to go work in 3rd world countries to better the people. look into charities like International China Concern.

My church alone has funded an abandoned babies home in Zimbabwe, which is run by a member of our congregation who relocated there. He relies purely on donations and the right situations provided by God.

 

[merc-blue]

Its funny, that the world with no religion always ends up bassed back on christianity in its basic "how the world should be"

At the time of Jesus his concepts on morals, laws, treatment of woman, punishment for crime etc. were so far removed for what anyone else had offered the world.

Atheists are a funny bunch just as fundie/HC as the crazy fundie christians and muslims, happy to read darwkins but not happy to read other texts.

You can read both the dawkins and the anti-dawkins books and they both come up with good points.

Regardless. its a silly debate, look at how well communism works. thats essentially a world with no religion.. hell if we had no laws or morals bassed on christian teachings the world would hardly be better, people are always gonna want more money or power.
Even the "right" islam teachings are much nicer than without.. its just sad that the other half of islam is normally in the media spotlight which is the part that has been twisted into a extreamist context.

 

[Angry Atheist]

At the time of Jesus his concepts on morals, laws, treatment of woman, punishment for crime etc. were so far removed for what anyone else had offered the world.

I'd suggest you read the bible cover to cover.

Atheists are a funny bunch just as fundie/HC as the crazy fundie christians and muslims, happy to read darwkins but not happy to read other texts.

That would be like zealots reading the bible and proclaiming the truth when they have not even loked into alternatives? Well, I don't know which pseudo-atheists you have met, but as to me and others like, knowing both sides is what gives one an informed choice. I made my choice in Year10 (1990) once i learnt an alternative which made more (much much much more) sense... and the kicker was i could hold it in my hand!

You can read both the dawkins and the anti-dawkins books and they both come up with good points.

Most if not all anti-darwin books typically mention verses from the bible and that jeezus and god are all loving and all.... zzzzzzzzz

The anti books are trying to keep the wool pulled over their flock's eyes.

look at how well communism works.

You don't even know how communism works if you think it has something to do with religion. Please learn something before you open your mouth again.

...that essentially a world with no religion.. hell if we had no laws or morals bassed on christian teachings the world would hardly be better.

read this:

....but you must realise that you do not need to have some religious doctrine to do good. Good comes from within. If you have to hide behind a book to giude your way then 'good' come from what the book tells you and not from within yourself.
Commonly, its those very same people that claim without the bible (as example) people would have no morals.

ie: Don't to unto others what you don't want done to yourself.

Merc-Blue = fail.

 

[merc-blue]

i loled.
wouldnt call my self a christian just somebody with an open mind. which you clearly are not.

Any you proved mypoint.. atheists are just as aggressive ad fundies..

You need to do some history and look at what "tribal" life is i cant believe that you are not going to give any recognition to christianity for the comfortable safe life you have in western culture

Communism has very little to do with religion but its a situation of natural "fairness" and "equality" all the examples of attempted communism have never worked,

I have read alot of the bible, with a educated background with with other texts (non-christian and other) along side it with CONTEXT and it is actually quite interesting.

You need to read some non-christian history and read what the world was before jesus came. you cant say he didn't ever exist. but you can argue weather he was/wasnt the messiah.



Oh and at the age of 16ish in year 10 you are educated about the world and mature enough in thought to make a decision on your whole being which you will aggressively defend. it looks more like intentional naivety to avoid complexity in life.

 

[aceblueheeler1992]

hinduism is the oldest religion in the world.. to be honest i don't actually ilke chiristianity simply, because you worship a man who was beaten and killed. and you praise that?

and it seems that the catholics, christians and other realted religions aren't really just religions they are always trying to convert you, going door to door holding kids things..like places where people go to do normal things but has some realation to religion. youth groups?

its just stupid

 

[Arete]

Imagine a world where everyone can believe what they want and live how they choose to live without other people trying to force something else on them.

IF Darwin had of never existed, he wouldn't have beaten Wallace by a few months in publishing the theory of evolution. I may be biased by my line of work, but the weight of physical evidence both qualitative and quantiative behind the processes of evolution means it was only a matter of time before it was published. If you statisically weight all the experimentation done by all the scientists on earth that indicate the probablilty of evolutionary processes acting on the organisms on earth, the probaility of the theroy of evolution being incorrect is infinitely small.

Evolutionary theory does not necessarily mean that God does not exist, but it certainly puts the squeeze on the traditional explanations of how he operates. After almost a decade of working in the field, I'm yet to meet anyone wh has successfully reconciled evolutionary theory with traditional monotheistic religion.

Anyway, Dawkins is a smug wanker. Dawkins educated armchair experts have no authority to be smug wankers as well.

Also Socialism seems to work pretty well for the Scandanavian countries...

 

[thecat]

1.Religion doesn't start wars. Power/money hungry people start wars and then use religion to justifiy it and get the support and help of their sheep... I mean flock.

Who was it that said "Without religion you'd have good people doing mostly good things and bad people doing mostly bad things. Yet only when you have religion can so many good people be so easily convinced to do bad things in the name of their god."

2.Religion doesn't give us morals and laws. We had those well before Jebus had shat in his first nappy.

There is a type bat that share food amoung their colony. Sharing is good, if you fail to find something to eat today and your neighbor shares with you you don't starve. In these colonies it has been shown that individuals who repeatedly refuse to share get evicted and driven out the best hunting territories. That is a basic form of morals and laws that have nothing to do with religion.

Besides who is morally stronger. The non religious person who does the right thing just for the sake of doing the right thing or the religious person who does the right thing for the promise of a reward or out of fear of being punished in an afterlife?

3. Religion gives some people a nice safety blanket and sense of belonging. If that is your thing go for it. Just don't tell me I'm lacking because I don't agree with you.


As for why people pick on Christianity, it wasn't until people started believing in 1 true god above and beyond all others that intolerances of opposing religions began to creep into our society.

The Jews got the idea of Egyptians like Akhenaten (you know the son of a pharaoh who lead his people out into the desert to the promised land to worship the one true god, The Sun god Arten and then had his name eraised from all monuments....)

The jews passed the idea to the Christians and later the Islamics both of whom took the idea to fanatical new levels and set about using regiems of fear, hatered and torture to convert the non beleivers, pagans and heathans.

That and the fact we live in a majority Christian country and that is what we are most familiar with

 

[axertes]

Cheers I'm an apatheist, and for all religions goods/bads that I don't care for, there's one thing I hate more - being told what to think.
People are what's messed up, religion is just another avenue for it. But to think that atheism makes you superior enough to preach to others about your rights is just as bad as anyone else telling you what to think.

Also, if you're an Australian Atheist, whether you like to admit it or not, most of your moral code is derived from Christianity anyway (excepting the few controversial things like abortion, homosexuality etc.), so you're pretty big hypocrite to poo-poo religion so generally.

Edit: ...although it could be argued that most Christian moral values are fairly universal.

Also Socialism seems to work pretty well for the Scandanavian countries...

'Social Democracy'? It's not really socialism, but I agree with you that it works pretty well, from what I have seen (i.e. not much: I visited Stockholm and Koebenhavn for a few days). Scandi countries seem to be drifting further away from it unfortunately, especially Denmark.

 

[indica]

Also, if you're an Australian Atheist, whether you like to admit it or not, most of your moral code is derived from Christianity anyway (excepting the few controversial things like abortion, homosexuality etc.), so you're pretty big hypocrite to poo-poo religion so generally.

Sorry NO. My "moral code" is based on right and wrong, not what some kiddy fiddler has told me.

Religion and spirituality are okay, mass organised money grabbing fundamentalist religion is shit.

 

[Angry Atheist]

Oh and at the age of 16ish in year 10 you are educated about the world and mature enough in thought to make a decision on your whole being which you will aggressively defend.

Yes.

10char

 

[slip]

Not a big fan of the whole religion thing, but seems pretty solid to me!

Emailed this to a few of my full on Christian clients. heh.

http://www.churchofsatan.com/Pages/Eleven.html

Edit - interview with head of the Church. Satanists of this type don't worship Satan - because that would mean believing in God.

DS: What is the Church of Satan?
PG: Satanism begins with atheism. We begin with the universe and say, “It’s indifferent. There’s no God, there’s no Devil. No one cares!” So you then have to make a decision that places yourself at the center of your own subjective universe, because of course we can’t have any kind of objective contact with everything that exists. That’s rather arrogant and delusional, people who try to put things that way. So by making yourself the primary value in your life, you’re your own God. By being your own God, you are comfortable about making your own decisions about what to value. What’s positive to you, is good. What harms you, is evil. You extend it to things that you cherish and the people that you cherish. So it’s actually very easy to see that it’s a self-centered philosophy.
But it also requires responsibility, since you are taking on for yourself the complete onus for your personal success or failure. You can’t be praying to a God or blaming a devil, or anyone else, for that matter, for what happens to you. It’s on your own head. That’s a challenge for most people. Most people tend to really feel that they want some kind of external support, that they are outward looking and might want some sort of supernatural parental figure, or even some sort of existing governmental authority, existing in their life.

 

[Regan of Gong]

hinduism is the oldest religion in the world.. to be honest i don't actually ilke chiristianity simply, because you worship a man who was beaten and killed. and you praise that?

Psst, Christains worship Jesus because they believe he rose again from the dead, not because he was beaten and killed. As an aside, a friend noted recently how the ANZAC tradition was becoming a religion substitute- Anzac cove is becoming a kind of Mecca for young people. Interesting because they were terribly beaten by the Turks. (No, I'm not an ANZAC hater, there were many admirable qualities and identities formed from that)

1.Religion doesn't start wars. Power/money hungry people start wars and then use religion to justifiy it and get the support and help of their sheep... I mean flock.

Who was it that said "Without religion you'd have good people doing mostly good things and bad people doing mostly bad things. Yet only when you have religion can so many good people be so easily convinced to do bad things in the name of their god."

2.Religion doesn't give us morals and laws. We had those well before Jebus had shat in his first nappy.

There is a type bat that share food amoung their colony. Sharing is good, if you fail to find something to eat today and your neighbor shares with you you don't starve. In these colonies it has been shown that individuals who repeatedly refuse to share get evicted and driven out the best hunting territories. That is a basic form of morals and laws that have nothing to do with religion.

Besides who is morally stronger. The non religious person who does the right thing just for the sake of doing the right thing or the religious person who does the right thing for the promise of a reward or out of fear of being punished in an afterlife?

3. Religion gives some people a nice safety blanket and sense of belonging. If that is your thing go for it. Just don't tell me I'm lacking because I don't agree with you.


As for why people pick on Christianity, it wasn't until people started believing in 1 true god above and beyond all others that intolerances of opposing religions began to creep into our society.

The Jews got the idea of Egyptians like Akhenaten (you know the son of a pharaoh who lead his people out into the desert to the promised land to worship the one true god, The Sun god Arten and then had his name eraised from all monuments....)

The jews passed the idea to the Christians and later the Islamics both of whom took the idea to fanatical new levels and set about using regiems of fear, hatered and torture to convert the non beleivers, pagans and heathans.

That and the fact we live in a majority Christian country and that is what we are most familiar with

I can agree with most of this. Point two though, many atheists/agnostics/whatever will arge that all actions are motivated by selfish desires- Slip made a post on it which messed me up for a while in a similar thread. I also don't agree with the explanation of the Christian religion.

Sorry NO. My "moral code" is based on right and wrong, not what some kiddy fiddler has told me.

Religion and spirituality are okay, mass organised money grabbing fundamentalist religion is shit.

Get your religious profiling on. This is quite offensive, especially considering that (surprisingly) not everyone on Farkin is as "enlightened" as you are. And to further the discussion- where do you define your right and wrong from- you talk about it as if it is an intrinsic value?

 

[S.]

Yeah but he can't be higher than himself. So hes an atheist.



Yeah but like I said, hes not supreme to himself is he?

Supreme means THE top of the chain. Note my use of "the" as a definite article there - this is not "A superior" being, it is "THE supreme" being. Supreme is not relative to oneself, it is absolute.

do you guys realise just HOW MUCH a world without Christianity?
Aproxx 65% of our Laws are based on the Ten Commandments.

Chances are, male female equality wouldnt exist if Jesus hadnt of treated the Girls and Ladys of his time with respect and equality.

It would not "Be Cool" to have a world with NO religon. It would be a world that was heading to Eternal Dammnation. ETERNAL. DAMMNATION. "With pain and Crying and Gnashing of theeth like Caged animals" (Revelation 4)

Makes you stop and think about your life.

Male/female equality still doesn't truly exist, and it sure as hell was a lot worse even 1900 years after the birth of Christ (that's roughly 108 years prior to right now, in case you're confused), so I think you might just be inventing whatever spin you'd like to put on this story.

And if there was no religion - by implication also no God - then we wouldn't have a damn thing to worry about hell.

Its funny, that the world with no religion always ends up bassed back on christianity in its basic "how the world should be"

At the time of Jesus his concepts on morals, laws, treatment of woman, punishment for crime etc. were so far removed for what anyone else had offered the world.

Is this the same J Christ who wasn't anti-slavery? The same one who washed his apostles' feet to demonstrate his humanity and equality, then declared "I am the way, the truth and the light. Nobody shall reach the Father except through me" thus denoting his supremity? (paraphrased, not word for word but close to)

I'm going to put forward a suggestion here: let's assume for a minute, hypothetically, that there is no God. If that's the case, all our "religious" values have at some point been developed by MAN. Therefore, a world with no God/no religion actually ends up based upon the moral code that IT DEVELOPED ITSELF. That bloke God would be pretty much just a celebrity endorsement of this moral code - a puppet whose strings were pulled by men anyway.


To all the atheists: if there is no God, then man invented religion. If you're blaming religion for all these problems, go one step further back along the causality chain, and what do you find? Oh yeah, that same common denominator that would be there regardless of whether religion existed - man.


To sum up: everyone in this thread is the cause of all the world's problems.

 

[axertes]

And to further the discussion- where do you define your right and wrong from- you talk about it as if it is an intrinsic value?

Exactly. You talk about it as if it's a universal absolute. But what we're trying to ask is "where did that come from?" As much as you decry Christianity (and I did too!) we live in Australia... we had Christian friends, Christian MPs, even Christian parents.