New pope

[Revils]

if there is no religion and people doesnt believe in a supreme being, there will be chaos. People will no longer have fear to do evil stuff like killing, rape, stealing etc..

The bible advocates some pretty horrible things. To suggest that it is a moral standard and the reason that we don't kill each other is preposterous. "The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully." - Dawkins

Fear is not the reason people don't do things. Most people well faced with a "deterrent" figure they will not get caught and sentenced.

I also find this a kind of dangerous thought too, since you have demonstrated a low regard for your fellow species. As if a book written during the iron age by superstitious, unknown men could somehow have anything to say about how humans should govern their lives. It is illogical - no such document can exist. It is not consistent with human experience.

We don't need a book to tell us killing is wrong.

I respect everybody's opinion cause we are different people,maybe because I grew up in a catholic community, and what I said was a factor I think . And have you read the whole bible or just the bad parts that you stated? I think there's always a consequence and a warning before god does all the stuff that you stated. And if you and Dawkins have the same concept when it comes to your beliefs i respect that.

[Dudecore]

if there is no religion and people doesnt believe in a supreme being, there will be chaos. People will no longer have fear to do evil stuff like killing, rape, stealing etc..

The bible advocates some pretty horrible things. To suggest that it is a moral standard and the reason that we don't kill each other is preposterous. "The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully." - Dawkins

Fear is not the reason people don't do things. Most people well faced with a "deterrent" figure they will not get caught and sentenced.

I also find this a kind of dangerous thought too, since you have demonstrated a low regard for your fellow species. As if a book written during the iron age by superstitious, unknown men could somehow have anything to say about how humans should govern their lives. It is illogical - no such document can exist. It is not consistent with human experience.

We don't need a book to tell us killing is wrong.

I respect everybody's opinion cause we are different people,maybe because I grew up in a catholic community, and what I said was a factor I think . And have you read the whole bible or just the bad parts that you stated? I think there's always a consequence and a warning before god does all the stuff that you stated. And if you and Dawkins have the same concept when it comes to your beliefs i respect that.

I've read the whole bible, that is how I know that the bible is supposed to be the literal word of god. I quote one Dawkins thing out of convenience and now that sums up my whole argument? I feel like no one has even read what I've been saying and just go "oh, Dawkins" then scan to the file in your brain where all the "dismiss Dawkins" arguments are.

My problems with the bible are not "opinions". And opinion would mean that without research, sources, and conjecture, something I "value" without evidence. I have the bible as a resource to show how bad THE BIBLE is.

Moving the goal posts is a common occurrence in Internet arguments. I've been doing this too long to care at all. 

Edit: also, what Dawkins work has anyone ever read? What is out of context? I don't get it. I've seen Christian anti-Dawkins websites that say the same thing, and counter all of his arguments with "god is all powerful and works in mysterious ways" as a way to no answer the questions. Ad hominem attacks a fair bit of "na na na na, foo foo"

[Freerthanu]

Dudecore: Totally agree with you about Internet arguments. We lose so much when we print our thoughts, innuendo, sarcasm, humor, etc., these aspects of our conversation become lost. Arguing with someone over the web is like trying to grasp wind.

I have never read any of Dawkins writings, so I will not comment on what he has written. I will say from my personal experience that the Bible was and is a perpetual blessing in my life.

[Milo109]

No idea why religions get so much hate these days. I personally believe in religions (as in, they are generally a very good thing to have), not so much in God.

I utterly disagree. So many horrible things have been committed in the name of religion. In addition religion obscures truth IMHO. Where has religion been beneficial to humanity? If the church had their way, we would never have had any scientific advances..

Terrible things have been done in the name of many things. That has nothing to do with the religion itself, for instance. Do most Christians agree with things like the Crusades and what has been done in the name of Christianity? No. Lets me serious here. Humans are human. Just because people use something to further their OWN cause does not mean that whatever they are using to justify their cause was meant to be used that way.

Its like people saying that video games caused them to go kill people in real life. They can use that excuse, but is that the actual purpose of video games? Absolutely not. Just because you use something as an excuse doesnt make it valid.

Well said.

Religion is just a tool, like knife or aircraft carrier. Probably all tools can be used to do evil things. Religion is a nice tool to have, if only for the fact that it provides moral code enforced by ultimate power. It helped humanity to solve 'prisoner's dilemma', without religion it would be near to impossible to run societies when CSI technology wasn't invented yet.

Also, 'If the church had their way, we would never have had any scientific advances.' is a very obvious lie, so please be careful.

That's true but western organized religion as a whole as an entity has and continues to commit atrocities. You are right that religion is a tool, but it is being misused. In addition religion is the antithesis of logic. Religion asks you to put faith in something without any logic behind it. And Piotr, I'm going to have to disagree with you. While my sentence was hyperbolic, the premise is true. Organized religion on a whole has tried to suppress things that disagreed with it. That included many scientific advances. The fact that belief in the bible and science can co exist at all is amazing. While this post is also hyperbolic, I belief it to be true.

[Freerthanu]

No idea why religions get so much hate these days. I personally believe in religions (as in, they are generally a very good thing to have), not so much in God.

I utterly disagree. So many horrible things have been committed in the name of religion. In addition religion obscures truth IMHO. Where has religion been beneficial to humanity? If the church had their way, we would never have had any scientific advances..

Terrible things have been done in the name of many things. That has nothing to do with the religion itself, for instance. Do most Christians agree with things like the Crusades and what has been done in the name of Christianity? No. Lets me serious here. Humans are human. Just because people use something to further their OWN cause does not mean that whatever they are using to justify their cause was meant to be used that way.

Its like people saying that video games caused them to go kill people in real life. They can use that excuse, but is that the actual purpose of video games? Absolutely not. Just because you use something as an excuse doesnt make it valid.

Well said.

Religion is just a tool, like knife or aircraft carrier. Probably all tools can be used to do evil things. Religion is a nice tool to have, if only for the fact that it provides moral code enforced by ultimate power. It helped humanity to solve 'prisoner's dilemma', without religion it would be near to impossible to run societies when CSI technology wasn't invented yet.

Also, 'If the church had their way, we would never have had any scientific advances.' is a very obvious lie, so please be careful.

That's true but western organized religion as a whole as an entity has and continues to commit atrocities. You are right that religion is a tool, but it is being misused. In addition religion is the antithesis of logic. Religion asks you to put faith in something without any logic behind it. And Piotr, I'm going to have to disagree with you. While my sentence was hyperbolic, the premise is true. Organized religion on a whole has tried to suppress things that disagreed with it. That included many scientific advances. The fact that belief in the bible and science can co exist at all is amazing. While this post is also hyperbolic, I belief it to be true.

1. What "atrocities" does Western Religion as a whole commit today?

2. Many of our most beloved scientists were Christian. Ever hear of Sir Isaac Newton?

3. Has the secular government ever tried to "suppress" anything or any "scientific advances"?

4. Have you ever tried and listened to a modern day Christian Scientist? Try Dr. Ken Haam.

Its very easy for non- christians to knock religion, but I doubt most of them have ever tried to look at both sides of the issue and research Creationism or Intelligent Design, which there are thousands of scientists who believe in them.

[Malachiracer]

I'm catholic bro!
It's all cool.

[Dudecore]

1. What "atrocities" does Western Religion as a whole commit today?

- The new pope, "Francis," cooperated with the bloody Argentine military dictatorship from 1975-1983. He is a fascist, human rights abuser and enabler. He is also a homophobe, against same-sex marriage, against abortion, as well as being on the wrong side of history regarding many critical issues. A relic of a time well past.
- Denial of condom use in africa, contributing to the spread of AIDs.
- The large scale matter of child rape, which was actively and knowingly covered up by the former pope. It was one of the largest obstruction of justice cases in the history of the world - and no one was arrested or prosecuted.
- Continued denial of atrocities that are meet only with silence by the Catholic Church. Their sins absolved, and in some cases - people are given asylum.

2. Many of our most beloved scientists were Christian. Ever hear of Sir Isaac Newton?

Just because a scientist believes in god is not evidence for its existence. It makes no claims that it is an even worthy idea. People can be scientists and have other faulty ideas. Sir Isaac Newton is not the Übermensch.

3. Has the secular government ever tried to "suppress" anything or any "scientific advances"?

To this, I'll half heartily agree. The Catholic Church has been particularly good at adopting new medicine and condoning its use (with the exception of the condom thinf). They don't offer that you "pray" as an alternative for cancer treatment. That being said - the church's official stance is that evolution isn't real, the earth is only 5,000 years old and Jesus was a real person.

As with most religions. People believe what they want. To some the idea of a "kill your neighbor for working on the sabbath" is silly, to others - it's in the bible, the literal word of god

.The thing is secular governments are awful, terrible things that have to go. Every government has to go. That is a seperate argument. The thing is that a "secular" government includes religious people - which is why stem cell research was stifled. Also, a "secular" government (which does not exist) does things because that's what the people want, not because they're "secular".

4. Have you ever tried and listened to a modern day Christian Scientist? Try Dr. Ken Haam.

What realm of science does Christian Science occupy? Sounds not like science to me...

Its very easy for non- christians to knock religion, but I doubt most of them have ever tried to look at both sides of the issue and research Creationism or Intelligent Design, which there are thousands of scientists who believe in them.

Thousands of people supported slavery, genocide, imperialism and worse. We cannot form a proper basis of opinion of anything based on what the popular opinion is. Creationism and Intelligent Design is not science.

I think there is a fundamental problem with respect for evidence. If we have to form a basis for belief, we can say what you would about science - you can move the goal posts so that you can say "what is proof?" - you can say "I believe it and no one can say I'm wrong" - but at the end of the day: what couldn't you do that with? If you exhibit a lack of respect for evidence in the face of god, I can just change the name and do it myself.

The simple fact that you can prove something without evidence, allows me to disprove it without evidence. And visa versa. So without a respect for evidence, we wouldn't have anything but "gut" instincts, which are not quantifiable.

[Piotr]

As with most religions. People believe what they want. To some the idea of a "kill your neighbor for working on the sabbath" is silly, to others - it's in the bible, the literal word of god

There a lot of highly questionable statements in your post, can you provide proof for that one for a start, please?

[Dudecore]

As with most religions. People believe what they want. To some the idea of a "kill your neighbor for working on the sabbath" is silly, to others - it's in the bible, the literal word of god

There a lot of highly questionable statements in your post, can you provide proof for that one for a start, please?

Exodus 31:15 "For six days work is to be done, but the seventh day is a day of sabbath rest, holy to the Lord. Whoever does any work on the Sabbath day is to be put to death."

Exodus 35:2  "Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you an holy day, a Sabbath of rest to the Lord; whosoever doeth work therein shall be put to death."

[Freerthanu]

Dudecore: Thanks for replying. I am in church right now, so please be patient with my response time.

[Birdbrain]

Personaly, I find it doubtful that evelution is real

Take for instance, the humble strawberry plant. It does not reproduce with seeds. It reproduces with shoots. So that brings the questions up...where did the first strawberry come from?

Also, lets say strings do exist, what is the energy there made of made of? With that, any awnser the scientists come up with another question can be asked and so its basically an endless rabbit hole were they will always have to come up with more hypotheses.

And dudecore. First of all, I agree with you that that commandment is very messed up, but lets look at the context The old testimant was written to a stubborn people. At least that's what Jesus said about the marriage issue when it was brought to him. To a people that disobeyed God on the foot of mount Zion or wherever they were. Moses needed to help them not stray from God, or something like that

[Dudecore]

Personaly, I find it doubtful that evelution is real

Take for instance, the humble strawberry plant. It does not reproduce with seeds. It reproduces with shoots. So that brings the questions up...where did the first strawberry come from?

Also, lets say strings do exist, what is the energy there made of made of? With that, any awnser the scientists come up with another question can be asked and so its basically an endless rabbit hole were they will always have to come up with more hypotheses.

And dudecore. First of all, I agree with you that that commandment is very messed up, but lets look at the context The old testimant was written to a stubborn people. At least that's what Jesus said about the marriage issue when it was brought to him. To a people that disobeyed God on the foot of mount Zion or wherever they were. Moses needed to help them not stray from God, or something like that

I think that one single instance that you are misinformed about (where strawberrys come from) shouldn't lead you to throwing away the mountains and mountains of evidence confirming observable evolution and the buildings full of fossil records we have.

Also, what is more infinitely reduction then "god"? If he created everything, who created him? Then who created that thing? The most common answer I hear is "well he was always there". Then I'm asked about the Big Bang "who put the energy there?" I respond "it was always there" then, without fail "no, that's crazy." --- it's the exact same thing!!

[Hays413]

[Piotr]

Personaly, I find it doubtful that evelution is real

Take for instance, the humble strawberry plant. It does not reproduce with seeds.

Lie: https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=strawberry+seeds&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

[Dudecore]

Humanity's quest for knowledge must be built on our ability to identify "what are the things we don't understand?", and searching for those answers. We can do that by finding, analyzing and observing real life events and evidence. We shouldn't have the luxury that religious people do: invent the answers and claim they're unquestionably true. We would still be praying for the plague to stop if not for certain observable principles about the way disease is spread.

Disproving or casting doubt on one theory does nothing to establish the truth of another - EVEN IF you can prove to me that evolution does not exist, you're not one micron closer to convincing me that "god did it". Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. As I stated before; if you can prove something without evidence, I can disprove it without evidence.

If I started making outlandish claims about the origins of the universe and insist that my theory be taken seriously by scientists, they'll require me to support my assertions and offer physical and mathematical proof. Because to do otherwise would mean that every such claim be taken on the same merit. What about Intelligent Design/Creationism doesn't make those same unfounded claims? Until such proofs exist, we must keep searching, and we'll be more than happy to utter the three words that keep scientific progress (and all human progress) moving forward: "I don't know".