RELIGION

[Alastair70]

If praying could heal amputees, I’d be impressed. But this is just coincidence.

That‘s his point. Did you watch to the end? He lists a number of more plausible alternatives.

 

[Bosch]

It is total nonsense I fact checked it before posting it but it’s an interesting concept

There is quite an old anti-catholic sentiment that is still alive in parts of the US (The US was a mainly protestant country until mass-immigration of Irish and German catholics in the mid 19th century).

I reckon the guy in the video is just a class Southern baptist preacher who isn't a huge fan of Catholics or Muslims.

If you have an interest in the foundation of Islam, Judaism & early Christianity, Tom Holland has a great history book covering the period (collapse of Easter Roman empire & Sassanian empires).

'In the Shadow of the Sword'

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/12376830-in-the-shadow-of-the-sword

 

[TonyT]

That‘s his point. Did you watch to the end? He lists a number of more plausible

Hands up, I didn’t. I heard the start of the song and didn’t want to go any further. Lesson learned.

 

[pilgrimhudd]

 

[Frisp]

Organised religion for me = a load of power hungry folk fighting and killing over who's imaginary friend is best. All the while pretending that they do so in the name of love and world peace..

 

[Graz]

I could probably write a long essay about my thoughts on this topic but I won't. Whilst my parents weren't fanatical Christians I was christened and got sent to Sunday school. Think my Dad struggled a bit with the idea that if you're a regular church goer there is an expectation that you donate ~10% of your salary to the church, he wasn't having that as he worked hard for his money.

Anyway I studied science and engineering whilst growing up which raised so many questions about faith. Forget all that old testament stuff about God creating earth is 7 days, Adam and Eve, etc. The big bang, evolution, dinosaurs etc. put paid to most of that. Also if Jesus was around in 0 AD in the middle east he'd likely be black, hardly ever see that anywhere do you? Confirmed atheist by the time I left Uni.

So pretty much all of it is about controlling the masses. I mean clever stuff for back then, we've got this group of unruly humans what are we going to do about it? I know, create this scary mythical God thing, come up with some rules, and if you break them you burn for ever in the afterlife. Yes, that should put the fear into them, make them behave.

I'm not saying the ideals are wrong, it's good not to go around killing people, stealing, committing adultery etc. more the way it was enforced.

So without religion but with some rules?

N. Ireland?
Middle Eastern conflicts (Jews / Muslims)?
Mess that Africa is in - Catholic missionaries played a large part in helping AIDS to be rife there?
911?

Just the tip of the iceberg. But then maybe it would have all happened anyway just under some different guise.

 

[Bosch]

I could probably write a long essay about my thoughts on this topic but I won't. Whilst my parents weren't fanatical Christians I was christened and got sent to Sunday school. Think my Dad struggled a bit with the idea that if you're a regular church goer there is an expectation that you donate ~10% of your salary to the church, he wasn't having that as he worked hard for his money.

Anyway I studied science and engineering whilst growing up which raised so many questions about faith. Forget all that old testament stuff about God creating earth is 7 days, Adam and Eve, etc. The big bang, evolution, dinosaurs etc. put paid to most of that. Also if Jesus was around in 0 AD in the middle east he'd likely be black, hardly ever see that anywhere do you? Confirmed atheist by the time I left Uni.

So pretty much all of it is about controlling the masses. I mean clever stuff for back then, we've got this group of unruly humans what are we going to do about it? I know, create this scary mythical God thing, come up with some rules, and if you break them you burn for ever in the afterlife. Yes, that should put the fear into them, make them behave.

I'm not saying the ideals are wrong, it's good not to go around killing people, stealing, committing adultery etc. more the way it was enforced.

So without religion but with some rules?

N. Ireland?
Middle Eastern conflicts (Jews / Muslims)?
Mess that Africa is in - Catholic missionaries played a large part in helping AIDS to be rife there?
911?

Just the tip of the iceberg. But then maybe it would have all happened anyway just under some different guise.

So very good points you made.

However I would not agree that religion is a sole cause of conflict, it can accerbate existing tensions.

Northern Ireland was broken across sectarian divides, but you could argue that was a result of English imperialism

 

[JockyBrewer]

For most of human history religion has provided a useful function of bringing communities together (communion, marriage), providing a framework for mostly happy coexistence within others (e.g. ten commandments), provided assistance to those in need through charity, and even provided education and trade opportunities.

It was so useful to human survival that it's quite possible that it provided an evolutionary advantage to those that were part of religious communities (yes, I'm theorising that evolution was the cause of religion). So useful that it continues to this day despite 300 years of enlightenment.

Or in the words of the genius Dr. Ian Malcolm:
"God creates dinosaurs. God destroys dinosaurs. God creates man. Man destroys God. Man creates dinosaurs."

 

[Chippy_Tea]

Or in the words of the genius Dr. Ian Malcolm:
"God creates dinosaurs. God destroys dinosaurs. God creates man. Man destroys God. Man creates dinosaurs."

 

[hoppyscotty]

Richard Dawkins is a complete knob: he rants and raves about religion being "the root of all evil" with the rabid zeal of the Inquisition on steriods. His God (delusion) - given mission is to proseltise the world and convert mankind to his new religion Atheism.
Look at Dawkins if you want t know what;s wrong with religion. it's not the belief system per se, rather it's the loonies who think they, and only they, are right. Congratulations to Richard on turning atheism into a classic religion.

Well to be fair religion is the root of all evil. There is centruies of evidence and millions of dead bodies to prove that so should be absolutely no controversy there.

All Dawkins is doing is what scientist's do...ask for evidence and if there is no evidence then there are nothing to support the hypothesis that there is a 'higher supernatural power'. And to be fair he's not going after religious people just for the fun of it, he's going after them because they believe the earth is only 6000 years old and we were created and people are being taught this in schools and we have people in positions of influence and power who believe this which is scary, when he's spent a lifetime of study to prove evolution so he's primarily protecting the scientific facts and trying to make sure people are educated properly.

Not sure how he's turned atheism into a classic religion? at the root of any relation is faith...believing in something with no evidence but just faith that it exists...Dawkins is all about 'show me the evidence' which is the complete opposite of what religion is. He just uses basic logic to highlight the nonsense of religion...if questioning dogma and promoting truth and facts makes him a knob then fair enough....he's a knob and more of us should be knobs.

 

[Alastair70]

For most of human history religion has provided a useful function of bringing communities together (communion, marriage), providing a framework for mostly happy coexistence within others (e.g. ten commandments), provided assistance to those in need through charity, and even provided education and trade opportunities.

It was so useful to human survival that it's quite possible that it provided an evolutionary advantage to those that were part of religious communities (yes, I'm theorising that evolution was the cause of religion). So useful that it continues to this day despite 300 years of enlightenment.

Or in the words of the genius Dr. Ian Malcolm:
"God creates dinosaurs. God destroys dinosaurs. God creates man. Man destroys God. Man creates dinosaurs."

Community, trade, education and charity all happen in the absence of religion. We are a successful gregarious species with a vested interest in self-survival and procreation. Religion may benefit the ‘in crowd’ but I would argue that its overall effect on a wider population is detrimental.
I think it’s a stretch to credit religion with an evolutionary advantage, how do you begin to separate out the confounding variables if you want to pursue that argument and you have an awful lot of premature deaths to special-plead away.
Homeopathy also persists despite 300 years of enlightenment. To say those 300 years makes it more valid is the ‘appeal to popularity’ fallacy. Of course, that doesn’t automatically mean that religion is also made up nonsense (that’s a different error of reasoning).

To paraphrase another genius, Prof Neil deGrasse Tyson
If all mankind forgot everything it knows in 2000 years time we would still have science and religion. The science will have been worked out and it’ll be exactly the same but religion will take many different forms.

 

[Clint]

But will science be the same as I think that science only exist currently in the capacity we understand it?
Take those elements that either exist on the periodic table that they can't find or maybe it's the other way round (!),for example.
There's lots of stuff that only used to be in science fiction films.
Robots,lasers,mobile communications, body scanners,3d printers...

 

[Clint]

Artificial intelligence making deadly decisions, space travel,no cash,population divide/decimation....its all coming. Religion won't mean fuzzall.

 

[Alastair70]

But will science be the same as I think that science only exist currently in the capacity we understand it?
Take those elements that either exist on the periodic table that they can't find or maybe it's the other way round (!),for example.
There's lots of stuff that only used to be in science fiction films.
Robots,lasers,mobile communications, body scanners,3d printers...

Yes it will. Science offers testable explanations of the world around us. It’s given us the pin hole camera, the iPhone and everything else in between. The scientific method involves trying to prove yourself wrong through repeated testing of your hypothesis. The end results are determined by the fabric of nature which is why it‘s riddled with constants.
That’s the point NdG was making

 

[Clint]

Hmmm...that confuses me especially having encountered "educated" persons who continually do the same thing that doesn't work as a solution to a problem they can't solve,along the way constantly dismissing the suggestions of others.

 

[Alastair70]

We all know people like that.
The speed of light has been known for 200 years (to pick a random example). If we all forget everything, the speed of light will worked out by our successors in 2000 years time, and the answer will still be the same. Extrapolate that to Pi, the periodic table, the origin of whatever species are around at the time and so on.
Meanwhile, history’s endless parade of gods (apologies to Tim Michin for that) will continue and there’ll be a whole different set of dieties competing for dominance.

 

[Clint]

What about apparent "gaps" in technology?
We can't build the pyramids,a so called less sophisticated race of persons did and their knowledge of astronomy and other things doesn't seem to "fit" into the time scale if you like.
If their civilisations hadn't "disappeared " would we be in a more advanced state of progression? Or would it have been like Stargate and Star Wars...

 

[An Ankoù]

Well to be fair religion is the root of all evil. There is centruies of evidence and millions of dead bodies to prove that so should be absolutely no controversy there.

All Dawkins is doing is what scientist's do...ask for evidence and if there is no evidence then there are nothing to support the hypothesis that there is a 'higher supernatural power'. And to be fair he's not going after religious people just for the fun of it, he's going after them because they believe the earth is only 6000 years old and we were created and people are being taught this in schools and we have people in positions of influence and power who believe this which is scary, when he's spent a lifetime of study to prove evolution so he's primarily protecting the scientific facts and trying to make sure people are educated properly.

Not sure how he's turned atheism into a classic religion? at the root of any relation is faith...believing in something with no evidence but just faith that it exists...Dawkins is all about 'show me the evidence' which is the complete opposite of what religion is. He just uses basic logic to highlight the nonsense of religion...if questioning dogma and promoting truth and facts makes him a knob then fair enough....he's a knob and more of us should be knobs.

Ah, you miss my point It's not what he says that I have difficulty with; I have the greatest respect for atheistic views. It's the way he says it with all the zeal of a religious fanatic. Hence my joke about his making atheism a religion.
When you say "All Dawkins is doing is what scientist's do...ask for evidence" that's not so, he's proselytising. That;s why I call him a knob.
Yes, I agree. God gave us reason to set us above the animals and reason tells us there is no God and that animals indeed have reason to a greater or lesser degree. Ah, but what about faith? Whose faith? Faith in Allah, in Yahweh, in the God of the Christians, in Brahman, in the Monkey Spirit, in human goodness, in ultimate justice, etc?? Human reason is universal (if not equal) but faith is irrational and causes conflict and, to answer the OP, causes all sorts of nasty disagreements in the name of religion (or faith). As for the infinite, the only thing that is infinite is human stupidity.

 

[Alastair70]

What about apparent "gaps" in technology?
We can't build the pyramids,a so called less sophisticated race of persons did and their knowledge of astronomy and other things doesn't seem to "fit" into the time scale if you like.
If their civilisations hadn't "disappeared " would we be in a more advanced state of progression? Or would it have been like Stargate and Star Wars...

That wasn’t my point. And of course we can build pyramids, and I don’t mean like the one in Las Vegas. We could even do it with slave labour and without modern construction techniques if we wanted. We also know a lot more about astronomy than our predecessors.
There aren’t any gaps in technology or understanding but there is limits. And those limits are getting pushed back all the time.

 

[Donegal john]

God built the pyramids. Everyone knows that. He did it from Monday to Saturday cause Sunday was his day off.