Is God a Delusion?

He was probably an atheist, but it would be a fair argument that he did that in the name of dementia and for absolute power rather to enforce an atheist agenda.

But the text has changed.

So we arbitrarily decide that we are valuable?  What defines forward progress?  And why do we like to see it?

now i havent read this whole thread, i dont feel like it, so ill step in here.

i am an atheist because i feel theres a better explanation. its obvious that all the texts, regardless of the religion all come back to the same thing, the sun and solar system, things that actually exist. regardless of that i frankly dont like the thought of anyone up there controlling what i do.
however i have no problem with religion, as long as people keep it to themselves. dont ram it down my throat. however people like the nutters in jesus camp or fundamentalist islam are rediculous.
which brings me to my biggest problem with religion, the unacceptance of others.
jews hate muslims.
muslims hate jews
christians hate all of them.
i feel they breed far to much hate

Society progresses, everybody enjoys easier lives and yeah, i could probably put a good Darwinian motive to it. Humans drive society because it (I know, arguably, but come on, life has gotten better for most people) makes us all happier individuals. Society has advantages over hunting and gathering, and it seems like we would optimize and progress our society so that these advantages increase.

Really? There have never been lives claimed out of sheer greed and egocentric aspirations? I'd like to point out that at the base of most conflict is a few people's interests, and if there's an easy way to justify that to the masses who need to get behind such a bloody, violent endeavor, then it will be used, regardless of whether it applies.

You'd be the first to say that the USA doesn't stand for the "freedom" that Bush has tried to spread to the rest of the world, even though true "freedom" is something you value highly. Likewise, I don't know anyone who's been ruthlessly murdered in concordance with Jesus' teachings.

Wouldn't that be arguing from your established conclusion? That doesn't sound right.

I view higher beings or gods as simply fairy tales. It takes a large imagination to believe in anything like that.

Until there is empirical evidence, proving the existence of a higher being/god-I am not willing to make that leap of faith. I prefer rational thought and progression through scientific methods, not sourcing outdated texts for 'answers' while emptying my pockets every Sunday.

Patty, you and I both have agreed that wars are fought more for greed than any other reason. I'm not going back on what I've agreed with you on. You're confusing greed and evil with atheism. My point is that religion has been a cause for rallying around and doing (from our modern perspective) horrible things. Atheism never began an inquisition. Atheism never made a crusade anywhere. Atheism never crashed planes into buildings.

Also, about Jesus's teachings - from what I'm getting in responses, few people take Christianity directly from the bible and instead take it from the teachings of this character, dubious as his origins may be. He may not have existed as the person who performed miracles, resurrection, but his message is good, right? Why not just concentrate on what is obviously a good message and leave all the crazy stuff out of it? Again, I fail to see why ou need religion to be a moral and happy person.

Yes, it would be... point?

Oh I dunno, I thought the main concern scientist have with creationists is that they fit the facts to their liking. So, if you can find a Darwinist reason for finding intrinsic value in human life (instead of a primal urge to further the species), that doesn't actually mean that's how it happened, because you'd simply be using your conclusion to shape your argument...which is meant to prove your conclusion...

Now, Rowen, bear with me. Humanistic self-centricity has, in fact, killed people. One of the tenants of atheism, beyond merely not believing in God, is that humans are their own masters, fit to find their own way in the world. So, with self-serving seemingly the only go to, one can argue that the faith in nothing other than the self has in fact caused much suffering in the world.

"Religion", as we supposedly "agreed", though you still argue the point, has been used by people to control the ignorant masses. Masses which, might I add, for the inquisition and crusades, were not allowed to HAVE a Bible even if they could read, lest people figure out that the Holy War wasn't exactly Holy...

You are associating the failings of men and their vile, violent abuses in the name of religion with the actual message of the religion in question. Bush went to war in the name of America, though I'm sure you'd agree that you, nor the true message of America, is what is being shown. Same here.

Now, why we need religion? Because science cannot explain the philosophical, imponderable reaches of the never to be known world of the question "why". Science helps with "how". It's very much the failure of science to relegate the emotional existence of humanity to the realm of a problem to solve. The reasoning behind the problem would still be lost. I don't know about you, but knowing how we evolved does little to reassure about why I am here and wondering why I am here.

Dude, Christianity is based on the teachings of Christ... Hence the name. The Bible is the basis of Christ's teaching, and the follow up, but at the core, is Christ. Can you point to the "crazy stuff" Christ has said, and we can have a discussion.

CS Lewis had a line of reasoning that went like this: aut deus aut hominem malus. To horribly and simplistically paraphrase, Jesus was either God or a bad man. Jesus claimed to be God. This means he's not a buddha, a mere prophet or a guru. None of those claimed to be God. So Jesus was either God, or a liar, or insane. If he was insane, then he wouldn't have garnered much of a following, certainly not one that was ready to die for his insanity. An insane man would also not lay the foundation for universal equality as we know it without some massive holes and contradictions with 2000 years of historical text to be cross checked for errors.

So Jesus was either God, or a liar. That's where the debate starts.

wow I put 2 comments and my karma takes a beating..

but lets sum this up all nicely:

GOD DOES NOT EXIST

if you think otherwise.... PROVE IT biotch

BOB MARLEY HATES YOU. Think otherwise? Prove it.

well that doesnt solve anything... only shows your ineptitude in proving that god exists.

and he loves me... he even told me so that time we smoked a huge reefer together.


I'm serious though, someone prove to me god exists. if you can pull that off i'll give you my left nut

I just want to chime in because I love religion talk. But I'm not even going to bring that up. I'm just going to talk about people being closed minded, because I think that is more important. I'm not even going to bring up whether I believe in god or not or whatever, because it doesn't matter because I am open minded. It's close minded attitudes that get people hurt.

I'm not saying that the Darwinistic method I suppose is correct - I have no evidence to back that up whatsoever. But I claim it to be possible, based on what I've seen is true with other species and their relative behavior. Mutual-ism prevails in many species, from vampire bats, to prairie dogs to thrushes. I see no reason why it should not exist in humanity.

Next, Atheism is not selfish or self serving. Its merely an answer to why we seem to have a common sense of what is moral or not no matter what religion we ascribe to. Based on that, the atheist believes that these values are intrinsic to our species, rather than intrinsic to a certain religion or belief. It is NOT GREED. It is NOT SELFISHNESS. It is simply a way of coming to terms with the evidence we;ve been presented with that makes the most logical sense, at least in my eyes. 

Okay, so next, all I've agreed with you on that I can distincly remember is that wars are not from religion but from greed, a value which not only religion deems unfit for society, but also moral codes, which would then include us atheists. Plus, in this point you attempt to make, you bring in the fact that scripture has thoughout centuries been translated and doctrinated by religious figures for the masses, eg, clergy and the like. This fact I find to be appaling and symbolically unvirtuous, no matter if the text they preach upon is valid or not.

Finally, I'm NOT ascribing the bad values of mankid with religion, much as I'm sure you arent ascribing such values with atheism. What I believe is that there are going to be bad moral apples no matter what society you create. Religion simply provides a keen rallying point, much as nationalism did in the 1930's. Intrinsically, it may not be a bad thing, but give people motive and spur thier religion and you end up with Jihad. Its simply another touchy aspect that can be enraged in the name out outlandish hatred, given the right motivation. I completely agree that the main message may be distorted, but thats the problem - if we have a method that may be distorted, why do we maintain it? Isnt it easier to simply remove it than try to amend such conspicuous flashpoints?



You in turn ask why we need science. I'd say that the parallels you draw between the two are completely false. Science and religion are not at war with each other. Science is a way of logically explaining the world as it is around us. Religion seems to explain everything yet provide no proof - a scant few hundred years ago, the church endorsed the ridiculous idea that the Earth was the center of the universe. It endorsed slavery, and the oppression of women. Personally, I fail to see how we cannot rely on our scientific method to demonstrate the how. Darwinian principles and understanding of our behavior an emotions can indeed shed light on such "mysterious" topics.

What I find the most troublesome about religion is the awful null hypothesis it relys upon. If something cannot be proven by science, God must have done it. Bull. Shit. If science has to stand up to the exacting laying out of evidence and argument, so should God in the same way. If something cannot be proven by our current understanding, it seems most prudent that an intelligent and thoughfull person would instead go "Gee, that really is a puzzle. Lets get a grad student to research it and see what comes up" instead of "God did it, so dont ask more questions".

I dunno. Just me I guess. And for the dogmatic "Well if God doestn exist, why are we here?" question... It could be that we after all can only gain relevance and meaning from the life we currently live. Whats so terrible about that?

Exactly. From what I see, hes not the only liar to ever have existed either.

Well he was awfully convincing to the people around him at the time.  The apostles were certain enough that they had seen him die and certain enough that they saw him alive again 3 days later that all but one of them died horrific deaths for refusing to deny it.

That's pretty suspicious, I should think.

I don't see how this affirms atheism.  A theist doesn't believe natural law is intrinsic to their theology, but to the species.  I see it as evidence that our morality isn't a mere product of society but the result of some external influence.  The commonality in our ideas of "what is moral or not" seems odd if they all evolved independently. 

Theres evidence for him actually being a person that lived and died, but many parts of his story do seem to be a conglomeration of tales going around at that time. Besides the validity of the apostles, we're also dealing with the simple fact that you have to believe that a person can die and then come back to life.

I really don't see how the abolition of religion would reduce conflict or violence.  You've already stated that terrible things have happened under atheist regimes (though you argue those aren't truly a product of atheism).  And obviously, terrible things have happened under various religious regimes (though I would argue those aren't truly a product of that religion).  So which is better?  If we're simply going by the numbers, atheist regimes (namely those of the communist and Nazi persuasion) took far more lives in the 20th century than anything else.  So if you're saying the world would be better off without religion for purely pragmatic reasons, I'd say the past century is evidence to exactly the opposite.

I'm not saying that's a rational argument - I don't think it is - I'm simply trying to illustrate why yours is equally so.

As I've discussed before, moral behavior tends to get our species to a better place, no? As in, you'd obviously like to live in a society that had morals versus one without. I see no reason why 'moral behavior' could not evolve, especially when we have so many other documented cases of mutualism in nature.

Well, only an absolute moron would try to argue that Jesus was never an actual person.  That's practically tantamount to the historical equivalent of "flat earth theory."

But I still don't see any explanation for why the apostles were so convinced.  These were men would KNOW whether or not Jesus was dead and KNOW whether or not he was alive.  If Jesus didn't come back to life, why would they change so radically from a group of scared, timid fishermen to a group that would travel around the world telling what they had seen and later be tortured and killed for refusing to deny it?

i think you and i have had our differences in the past.... but i agree with you here...


Cs Lewis, "liar, lunatic, lord"

Call me a moron then, because I think that theres a good chance Jesus was an actual person, but theres also a chance he never existed. There are tons of inaccuracies with the story, and the whole legend for that matter. If you want a short list, read this:

http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/marshall_gauvin/did_jesus_really_live.html

prove god doesnt exist.



PROVE IT BEOTCH

everyone knows you can't prove ANYTHING over teh intranets, n00b.

http://www.venganza.org/

Because, like you said, "there will always be a few bad apples". It doesn't invalidate the good that has been done.

By the way, you're STILL blaming the religious doctrine for wrongdoings that are vehemently OPPOSED by the teachings themselves. Pro-slavery? Anti-women's rights? If you'd read scripture, you'd see that the Bible is about as progressive as it gets in terms of equality amongst all men and women, especially 2000 years ago. The foundation of women's rights is very clearly seen in the Biblical text, and also many "socialist" notions, at least in this day and age.

Science are religion are not opposed, they serve different purposes. Like I said, science helps with the "how", not the "why" of religion. The mistake science makes is to think it is all encompassing in the human experience.

You're also being extremely unfair. I mean, really man: "Science and religion are not at war with each other. Science is a way of logically explaining the world as it is around us. Religion seems to explain everything yet provide no proof". Religion doesn't explain how DNA is transcribed, no, but it does attempt to understand how biological processes became conscious enough to ponder their own existence, yes. I am a scientist, and I want to study the world and see how it works just as much as you do. There are few people who actually think "Well, God did it, so don't ask questions". About as much as atheists who say "Fuck religion and the religious, they're all idiots and deserve to die". If anything, there is more of an impetus for religious people to study the world, because they believe in a reasoning behind its existence. The Scientific Journey of Discovery to ultimately prove that we're a cosmic accident just falls short to me.

You just proved that God DOES exist, and he's angry at the steadily diminishing number of pirates in the world.

i hate the idea of religon. and everytihng that it stands for.

religon, as it seems to me...is based to change our ideas, wants, desires, etc. by threatning us with the knowledge that we will go to hell when we die unless we are kind and good to our fellow man.

when the bible was written, people took it WAY to literally. i dont need to go and listen to some guy tell me what god wants me to do to know that i should treat others with respect and with the intent of well-being. i dont need to do what people tell me. out of RESPECT, however, i will listen to their advice and use it to my discretion, but ultimatley it is my life. so therefore i am drivin the bus, even if someone else is givin me directions. i might follow their path, but i can say fuck it im takin a short cut. haha

i will leave it at that cause if i go deeper into my thoughts on god i will type out something that is a whole NS page long that will only get read by 1 person if im lucky.

you just smacked your icon in the face.

Off of the main topic, but somewhat related. I would like to see some proof against evolution from some creationists on here. Why do you not think it is real?

damn, i am very sorry for my triple post but i meant to say " why do you think it is NOT real?"
i suck at the internet

"By the way, you're STILL blaming the religious doctrine for wrongdoings that are vehemently OPPOSED by the teachings themselves. Pro-slavery? Anti-women's rights? If you'd read scripture, you'd see that the Bible is about as progressive as it gets in terms of equality amongst all men and women, especially 2000 years ago. The foundation of women's rights is very clearly seen in the Biblical text, and also many "socialist" notions, at least in this day and age."

Religion has good underlying messages, that I agree. It wouldnt have propagated throughout society for so long if it wasnt helpful. However, the messages (taking one that was already presented) of love, compassion for all and moral behavior - yes, you can get these through faith, but they are values not exclusive to people with faith. You dont need religion in order to live by these values.

It would be fine if it were simply that - both sides of the coin, non-religion and religion, had the same benefits. But its unfortunately not. Religion comes with baggage - it spawns undying faith and blind believers that rely on the hard scripture rather than the teachings it should inspire.

Ann Coulter:
"We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war."

"Not all Muslims may be terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims."

"Being nice to people is, in fact, one of the incidental tenets of Christianity, as opposed to other religions whose tenets are more along the lines of 'kill everyone who doesn't smell bad and doesn't answer to the name Mohammed'"
"The mistake science makes is to think it is all encompassing in the human experience."



Well, why cant it? Addressing your later post, it seems that the automatic subscription religion people take on the unknown is that God must have done it. We dont know how conciousness works, but I think its rediculous to say "Better leave that alone, we'll never understand it so just leave it in the 'God did it' box." As a scientist, I'm liable to say that its instead something we dont have an answer yet for, and that its worthy pursuing.

And I really have a hard time believing you on that religious people are more inclined to study the world.

I've read every single post in here. Interesting perspective!

to answer the main question, i do think God is a delusion. it's  just something that gives people a little hope. People are genuinely afraid of death so they just run to religions because it promises something, anything after death. 

my main issues with religion:
-they don't answer why? it's simply just because "god" said so
-it forces people who follow to live in fear
-religious people are unwilling to accept any different people
-why are people so stupid they need to read a book to tell them how to live their life?
-religions play all these scientifically explainable things off as "Miracles"
-religions are very once sided and tell you what's right and what's wrong, when it's impossible to conjure up right and wrong for every person, it's completely rediclous.
-the creation of the universe wasn't performed by a god
-natural disasters
-people born with fatal complications
-genocides

Well I"m going to open up a crazy idea here that I recently read about some of the Templar beliefs on Jesus.  Some of them going as far to suggest that Jesus was a disciple of John the Baptist (a Roman), and that John’s religious teachings were essentially that of the Egyptian mystery religion of Isis-Osiris-Horus.  Jesus was initiated into the inner circle of John the Baptist, but was not selected to succeed him. Rather it was Simon Magus who was selected as John the Baptist’s successor. Politics and religion were synonymous in ancient Palestine and Jesus was an astute and aggressive political competitor against John.  John the Baptist may however, have gotten to Jesus before Jesus did to him, playing him as a religious zealot to be tortured by the Romans, as many were in the day, by crussification.  John the Baptist later used many of the ideas of Jesus and his followers and essentially "sold" and twisted the story of "Jesus" then gave them to the Roman legion who could then manipulate them to allow for tighter controll over their citizens, as Constantine demonstrated. 

dude i totally believe in God, how else would the world have been created with the perfect amount of air and shit. but if you think about it there isnt much of a other way that the world was created the bible is the first recorded history

I cant tell if you're serious or sarcastic or just unwilling to present an argument.

im serious im just saying my beliefs

Consider the anthropic principle then?

yeah man, i wanna see another planet with aliens and shit but it hasnt happened yet

Its extremely unlikely we'll ever make contact. That doesnt mean we are the only place life has arisen in the universe. There are a hundred billion galaxies and the count of extrasolar planets rises every year. I see no reason why more life couldnt be out there, its just that we dont have the means to find it yet.

Okay this thead is long enough already so I didn't quote Rowen, but this post is in response to his long one several posts up containing all the quotes.

First off, thank you for being intelligent enough to realize that the underlying message behind Christianity is a good one. (I know this thread is kind of about all religion, but it seems to be focusing on American Christianity so we'll stick with that.) It is extremely frustrating listening to people make broad generalizations that are utterly false, such as religion makes people live in fear, religion causes war(been discussed). Don't be ignorant and close-minded, no matter what side you are arguing.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems two very good and intelligent question Rowen has been asking and hasn't really gotten an answer for are 1.Why do we need religion? and 2. The title of the thread, Is God a Delusion? I find those questions very different, although some might not.
To answer the first question, I would define religion (in this case, not always) as the earthly, human created institutions spanning different beliefs and denominations. Physical churches and places of worship, pastors and priests, and hierarchy fall under this category. If this is how we define religion, my personal belief is that we don't really need it. At least I don't think I do, some people might though. I'm going to answer the second question know and then I'll come back to the first. As to whether I think God is a delusion, obviously my personal belief is negative. I strongly believe there is some transcendental being that created us and deeply cares about us, but I make no claims to knowing hardly anything about the nature of this being. Now I am not saying that I know for sure there is a God, and anyone who claims absolutely either way is absurd.

I have many reasons for my belief, I guess I'll try to sum them up. To start off, and this kind of goes back to the first question, I would disagree with the quote you gave. I really believe that the human experience goes beyond scientific understanding and always will, no matter how advanced we become. Now I am not opposed at all to pursuing science as far as possible, wherever it may take us. I love reading stuff about string theory and such that some people think may sum up all the action of the universe in a single law. But I see life as more than just an attempt to survive by eating, drinking, reproducing, and enjoying ourselves. I like these things as much as anyone, but I believe humanity is here for a greater, more meaningful purpose. That is partly why I participate in the idea of a God and a religion, to further try and understand our meaning. More thoughts as to whether God is a delusion are related to more scientific stuff actually. The way I understand it, if we ever do scientifically understand everything, looking back beyond the Big Bang causes laws to break down. I read it in A Brief History of Time and I can't remember the exact details, but no matter advanced we get there is still the question of before the Big Bang. There's a couple other scientific things that seem impossible to be chance. All the unique properties of water and its prevalence to allow life are simply amazing. The complexity of humans, the fact that our universe didn't just end up as a bunch of black hoes, looking at stuff about quantum physics, and the amazing codependency of life on each other in systems are some others.

To switch gears, I think it is unfair for you to quote examples of extremism and fundamentalism as representative of a whole. Yes, there is some incredibly fucked up shit done in the name of Christianity and God and there are some absolutely batshit insane so-called Christians, but there is also an amazing amount of good done in the name of Christianity and incredible people inspired by Christ. Catholic Relief Services, World Vision, Catholic Workers Movement, are a couple examples. Mother Teresa, St. Francis, Maximilian Kolbe are examples of people. Look 'em up, I think you will be surprised.

Mother Teresa
"If you judge people, you have no time to love them."
"I was once asked why I don't participate in anti-war demonstrations. I said I will never do that, but as soon as you have a pro-peace rally, I'll be there."
"We can do no great things, only small things with great love."



Look up the prayer of St.Francis too.

I think using Ann Coulter, Pat Robertson, and George Bush as representative of Christianity is equivalent to using Adolf Hitler and Josef Stalin as representative of atheism.

Except Hitler wasnt an atheist. Funny the things downplayed by some.

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler%27s_religious_beliefs)

And Stalin wasnt 'atheistically' motivated. He was a terrible person, but show me the link between his atheism and his motivation to do the horrible things he did. Nobody has waged a war in the name of Atheism, and I really just think its part of the automatic and unfair reaction that most religious people get when they realize someone is without god. We simply must all be immoral and evil people.

Alright, now on to the other parts. Not all I drew upon for my examples were from fundamentalists. They are the leaders of our country. Pat Robertson has a huge following. They may preach good, but they also preach this sort of stuff.

Regardless, fundamentalism is still given a precedent by the existence of moderate religion. The only difference between a 'fundamentalist' like a Westboro Baptist Church member and a lightly devout Christian is how literally they take their common text. Its true in Christianity and across all religions - the Koran, for example, has peaceful messages, but you can pick and choose what to follow and end up with a waistband of C-4 around you, fully believing that you're going to fulfill your mission on earth and get lavish extravagances in the afterlife. Fundamentalism will always exist so long as we have religion. Some people just believe fully what they are told.

^That was well done John. I agree and I like the view point you took.

And I love this quote, "I was once asked why I don't participate in anti-war demonstrations. I said I will never do that, but as soon as you have a pro-peace rally, I'll be there."

Who said this? If you dont mind I totally want to use that as my post signature

Mother Teresa.

Oh haha yeah I missed the top part