GOD: How much do you believe in him?

[NMH]

Says who? If everyone felt that way we'd still be in the dark ages. We don't know which secrets we'll be able to uncover and which we won't, and the human spirit is to keep searching and find out what we can.

About?
About religion, and whether there's a God??

Religion is renowned for keeping most of Mankind firmly ensconced in a 'dark age' !

 

[Tricky Dicky]

No-one can be forced to believe in a religion anyway let's face that. No amount of cajoling or threatening is going to make anyone believe!

I would dispute that for many children brought up in a religious household, believing is not really a choice and tantamount to child abuse in my view.

 

[piersa]

I would dispute that for many children brought up in a religious household, believing is not really a choice and tantamount to child abuse in my view.

spot on

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

What you've described is ignorance? Many human beings strive to climb the highest mountains, dive the deepest oceans, look to the far reaches of the universe, because they are driven, curious and intelligent. Whether something can be known or achieved is irrelevant, the search for knowledge is what has defined humanity, and what religion in many ways has sought to hinder.

Yet it is interesting to consider that had there been no barriers to science in those formative years would science have actually been a benefit to people of those times?

The fact is that science has made it possible to wipe out a million peopple with the flick of a switch is a great concern. it can save a life, yet take away a million in the same time.

Had such technology existed at an earlier period in history would humanity be still around in such diverse state or would such technology coupled with ealier attitudes to conquering other lands have seen certain peoples wiped off the map?

Hypothetically speaking of course.

 

[NMH]

What you've described is ignorance? Many human beings strive to climb the highest mountains, dive the deepest oceans, look to the far reaches of the universe, because they are driven, curious and intelligent. Whether something can be known or achieved is irrelevant, the search for knowledge is what has defined humanity, and what religion in many ways has sought to hinder.

We might be at cross-purposes here, because that is what I'm suggesting.
Search for knowledge is wonderful, but the NEED to know religion is not necessary.
I agree that a focus on singular religious belief can hinder the mind from being open to learn.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

Religion is renowned for keeping most of Mankind firmly ensconced in a 'dark age' !

And science has put more people 6ft under than any other.

Every system has its good and bad points.

 

[Danny-Boy]

Christianity is a leap of faith. That's what Indy proved...

 

[DTES]

The fact is that science has made it possible to wipe out a million peopple with the flick of a switch is a great concern. it can save a life, yet take away a million in the same time.

Had such technology existed at an earlier period in history would humanity be still around in such diverse state or would such technology coupled with ealier attitudes to conquering other lands have seen certain peoples wiped off the map?

Hypothetically speaking of course.

Wow. "Earlier attitudes to conquering other lands" - you don't think those attitudes might have changed because of science & technology? Because of the new ways to improve your lot - for example the sudden ease and speed with which you can trade with countries all over the world? Serious question - do you genuinely believe merely it's a complete coincidence that attitudes have changed at the same time as science/technology improved?

You say "save a life". Life expectancy has doubled for those of us living the western world in just the last 100 years. Would you swap all of modern medicine just to get rid of nuclear weapons?

 

[Tricky Dicky]

And science has put more people 6ft under than any other.

I have absolutely no idea what you mean by that. Are you blaming science for wars, influenza epidemics, the black death ? Apart from a test tube blowing up in your face, how can science kill anyone exactly ?

 

[DTES]

And science has put more people 6ft under than any other.

Go on, humour me. Explain this sentence. I'm not sure that the theory of gravity has resulted in any deaths (unless somebody then decided to jump off a building, previously unaware that they'd fall to Earth).

 

[DerbyGull]

What you've described is ignorance? Many human beings strive to climb the highest mountains, dive the deepest oceans, look to the far reaches of the universe, because they are driven, curious and intelligent. Whether something can be known or achieved is irrelevant, the search for knowledge is what has defined humanity, and what religion in many ways has sought to hinder.

Indeed, and thank god that he made humans so complex and intelligent. No ape is going to come down from his tree and start thinking, ' I'm going to attempt everest today'.

 

[NMH]

I would dispute that for many children brought up in a religious household, believing is not really a choice and tantamount to child abuse in my view.

That what you are describing is indoctrination - a form of manipulation.
Any child can choose to believe or not - I don't think anyone can force a mind to believe, but they can be intent on getting them to accept.
The word *force* is questionable here.

Someone posted earlier that a tribe that would never have been exposed to religion could have basically similar spiritual beliefs to those that have been 'civilised'.
Of that I'm not too sure, though I believe a tribe surviving in natural surroundings will be in better touch with instinct, and in that the ability to have a better interaction with nature.
e.g. medical science has been perverted by money to the point that herbal remedies that will work better than engineered ones are ignored, or worse, refuted.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Yet it is interesting to consider that had there been no barriers to science in those formative years would science have actually been a benefit to people of those times?

The fact is that science has made it possible to wipe out a million peopple with the flick of a switch is a great concern. it can save a life, yet take away a million in the same time.

Had such technology existed at an earlier period in history would humanity be still around in such diverse state or would such technology coupled with ealier attitudes to conquering other lands have seen certain peoples wiped off the map?

Hypothetically speaking of course.

And science has put more people 6ft under than any other.

Every system has its good and bad points.

Science has put more people 6ft under than religion? Are you sure about that? Have a think about how many lives science has saved, then how many religious wars and conflicts there has been and continues to be on this planet. If it wasn't for religion right now, we would probably be living on a peaceful Earth by comparison. Science may have given tools to man to cause destruction, but more often then not, religion gave them the motivation.

 

[NMH]

And science has put more people 6ft under than any other.

Every system has its good and bad points.

If you mean the advancement of science to construct technologically superior weaponry and kill people, maybe.
But often religion is the motivation that enacted the conflict in the first place.

The atomic bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima were dropped in the cause of ending the war. To which end, they succeeded.

 

[Tricky Dicky]

e.g. medical science has been perverted by money to the point that herbal remedies that will work better than engineered ones are ignored, or worse, refuted.

I would refer you back to Dara O'Briains act where he says "ancient herbal medecines were all tested and the ones that worked are what we call 'medicine', the rest are basically water". Made in jest, no dobut, but still pretty accurate.

 

[thejackal]

I know God doesn't exist because he came to me in a vision and told me not to believe such primitive rubbish.

Ooooh the irony of it all.......

 

[DTES]

That what you are describing is indoctrination - a form of manipulation.
Any child can choose to believe or not - I don't think anyone can force a mind to believe, but they can be intent on getting them to accept.
The word *force* is questionable here.

From what age? I'm pretty sure young children will believe what their parents tell them, and if they aren't even presented with the alternative viewpoint it's pretty unlikely it would even occur to them that their parents are wrong about how they, the world & the universe were created.

e.g. medical science has been perverted by money to the point that herbal remedies that will work better than engineered ones are ignored, or worse, refuted.

Er, what?

Herbal/natural remedies that do work, are treated as normal medicine. For example - aspirin. It's a 'natural' remedy, derived from the willow tree. No-one makes a profit out of it - it sells because it works.

Herbal remedies that don't work, are called "alternative" because it would be an offence to market them as being proven to work.

There are plenty of quacks out there who would have you believe that "big pharma" exists solely to make money, but they not only ignore examples like aspirin, but they also ignore examples like Boiron. Boiron are an "alternative medicine" company who's financial figures dwarf those of 'big pharma' - they spend ~€50m a year just on marketing! Their turnover & profit is enormous. Your arguments here are a mere straw man - and this is before we factor in the doubling of life expectancy since we relied on herbal "medicines".

 

[ArcticBlue]

God is a play on words....
God reversed is Dog.
Dogs herd sheep!

Simple.

don't think it works for other languages though.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

Wow. "Earlier attitudes to conquering other lands" - you don't think those attitudes might have changed because of science & technology? Because of the new ways to improve your lot - for example the sudden ease and speed with which you can trade with countries all over the world? Serious question - do you genuinely believe merely it's a complete coincidence that attitudes have changed at the same time as science/technology improved?

No I don't believe those attitudes changed because of technology and science, they just made those attitudes less required.

Its not like is stopped the Jews being butchered in their millions or the planet coming close to mass destruction because of a cold war arms race.

When you speak of attitudes changing because of technology perhaps you are right, but it's not exactly a positive thing in a lot of ways.

Look at the society you live in, do you think the sense of community is anything like it used to be when people would socialise on a far greater scale with their neighbours etc. There's less respect for the elderly these days than any time in the last 100 years.

Obesity has been on the rise for many years now, any coincidence that the trend it follows is that of technology gearing life to be convinient and fast.

You say "save a life". Life expectancy has doubled for those of us living the western world in just the last 100 years. Would you swap all of modern medicine just to get rid of nuclear weapons?

I'd swap modern day medicines to rid the world of all weapons.

It's not all about me the individual is it?

That kind of question all depends on who's willing to make the sacrifice at the expense of others or for the greater good of others.

 

[DerbyGull]

....But often religion is the motivation that enacted the conflict in the first place...

Don't be silly, it's lust for power, desire for expanded borders. Desire for oil, mineral extraction (Libya, Iraq).