Thread: The Need of Religion in Living Culture

My arguments and preparation is to ask a question to all parties.

Religions affect on society has created many cultures and feelings. As an example, is that faith leads to a thoughts of a possibility to something being achieved (AKA Hope). May I say that religion was and is the source of inspiration to many fantastical arts and the way it has had a part in the building of our country. The many pilgrims and persecuted travelers came to America to find a new life. This would mean that one of the foundations of American is in religion. The possibility for being a peaceful intertwined culture is still a greater goal.

On the other hand, some may say that some of the greatest conflicts of the world have been caused by the controversy of religious factors; many have died in these wars. Another argument for the Atheists is that the great number of people that are greatly disillusioned is too disturbing for the existence science and the advancement of it because these disillusioned peoples are too concerned about the others who are much too far away that they are wasting a great number of resources.

My question for the public is this.
What would be the consequences to culture if the religion was suddenly “thrown out the window” and every person suddenly turned to Atheism?

Education would sky rocket. People would be willing to learn things that may go against their belief system. Technology would also sky rocket. We would have more scientists. People wouldn't be fighting for creationism in our schools.

We wouldn't have Fred Phelps picketting funerals.
We wouldn't have a ban on same sex marriages.
We wouldn't discriminate against Atheists being in office.
An Atheist would be able to become president...
I really do not see the bad side...

You would need some extremely traumatic event to make the billions of people worldwide convert to atheism, one that would be incredibly terrifying or extreme. As far as education sky rocketing, im pretty sure it would stay exactly the same, or even drop a bit. Most people dont advance their education because it goes against their belief system. When it comes to education, it boils down to money and apathy. Colleges in the United States, not sure about elsewhere, require quite a bit of money to attend unless scholarships or grants are acquired. I myself know i wouldnt be going to college if I didnt have my scholarships. Most people are unable to advance their education because they cant afford it.

Apathy is another reason people just decide to turn off education. From personal experience, ever since my first years in Catholic school fellow students would be lax in their studies in the pursuit of more important things, namely sports, vidya games, and later in high school, drugs, booze, and women. Of course there are religious people who dont advance themselves in knowledge based on their religion.

Why exactly would technology sky rocket? Perhaps embryonic stem cell research would be more openly pursued, but how many people would maintain their stance against even if they were atheist? Even though their belief in God might disappear, why would they suddenly switch to your kind of thinking Verzen?

Now, lets say that after this mass conversion to non-belief occurs a new generation either adopts a religion of the past or a new one. Would the world majority of atheists discriminated against eh religious?

Originally Posted by AsterialStarGazer

My question for the public is this.
What would be the consequences to culture if the religion was suddenly “thrown out the window” and every person suddenly turned to Atheism?

Obviously not much.

Atheistm is just the lack of belief in a god or gods. In itself it doesn't accomplish much.

My question for the public is this.
What would be the consequences to culture if the religion was suddenly “thrown out the window” and every person suddenly turned to Atheism?

I think it's an odd question. Being an Atheist doesn't rule out religion. In fact one of the greatest and oldest religions on earth doesn't depend on a deity at all: Buddhism. Many of the new age religions do have deities, but aren't of the personal kind "speaking in your head" and are probably attractive because they are sometimes more flexible and not moribund in myths that we're certain didn't happen or at best are greatly exaggerated events such as: the Noah flood which could have been a local event which happened to be the entire world in the mind's eye of an Iron-age man; or a virgin birth which is far more likely to be the result of rape, pre-martial sex, or confounding ignorance about how babies are made...etc.

I also wonder if religion, or in a broader sense spirituality, is just part of human species and inherent in our nature--it provides comfort, a connection to community and the planet and even hope which helps us get through illness due to placebo effect if nothing else. If true, it wouldn't be best for us to be completely get rid of religion, and it might not be good to even try. Best for many of the reasons you mentioned is we'll end up with just another form, perhaps less based in myths to fill the purpose. I make these point because I've run into and read several books where the authors are highly spiritual yet an atheist (e.g. Ursula Goodenough, though some would consider her a pantheist). I put myself in this category as well.

Originally Posted by KomradRed

You would need some extremely traumatic event to make the billions of people worldwide convert to atheism, one that would be incredibly terrifying or extreme. As far as education sky rocketing, im pretty sure it would stay exactly the same, or even drop a bit. Most people dont advance their education because it goes against their belief system. When it comes to education, it boils down to money and apathy. Colleges in the United States, not sure about elsewhere, require quite a bit of money to attend unless scholarships or grants are acquired. I myself know i wouldnt be going to college if I didnt have my scholarships. Most people are unable to advance their education because they cant afford it.

Apathy is another reason people just decide to turn off education. From personal experience, ever since my first years in Catholic school fellow students would be lax in their studies in the pursuit of more important things, namely sports, vidya games, and later in high school, drugs, booze, and women. Of course there are religious people who dont advance themselves in knowledge based on their religion.

Why exactly would technology sky rocket? Perhaps embryonic stem cell research would be more openly pursued, but how many people would maintain their stance against even if they were atheist? Even though their belief in God might disappear, why would they suddenly switch to your kind of thinking Verzen?

Now, lets say that after this mass conversion to non-belief occurs a new generation either adopts a religion of the past or a new one. Would the world majority of atheists discriminated against eh religious?

Archaeologist is a good example of a Christian who refuses to educate himself simply because something is of a different belief system then what his religion teaches. If everyone in the world was an Atheist then they would not deny scientific understanding and evidence in favor of their personal belief system. Thus, Atheism would prevent this form of ignorance. Archaeologist even stated that he will NOT look for evidence since he "knows" he has it right.

On the education basis, I can help out a little.

I go to a Grammar school, which means almost all the students are in the top 10-20% of the country, academically speaking. I know of 1 person, in the whole of the school of 900, who is deeply religious, and he intends to become a doctor.

Thus it is my belief that the sort of people who become religious to the extent of ignorance are unlikely to become scientists to start with, as the sort of people who are likely to look for jobs in science are generally much more open minded to science to start with.

Even if atheist, closed-minded people are unlikely to accept ideas they do not agree with. They just lose their excuse for not agreeing.

Originally Posted by drowsy turtle

closed-minded people are unlikely to accept ideas they do not agree with. They just lose their excuse for not agreeing.

This might sound bad, but I'm 46 and can't remember meeting a close-minded person who wasn't also highly theistic--probably just a mater of the high number of people who are both, especially in the US.

Originally Posted by KomradRed

Originally Posted by AsterialStarGazer

What would be the consequences to culture if the religion was suddenly “thrown out the window” and every person suddenly turned to Atheism?

You would need some extremely traumatic event to make the billions of people worldwide convert to atheism, one that would be incredibly terrifying or extreme.

Ideologues love this childish dream/fantasy of something coming along to prove that they are right so that everyone has to change their mind to agree with them. LOL Oh brother... This childish delusion that the world would be so much better if everyone thought like them is even more laughable.

One does not have to think like this in order to be a spokesman for the ideals one believes in and champions. This comes from a realization that reality is complex, multidimensional and full of paradoxes that requires looking at things from many different points of view.

Originally Posted by KomradRed

As far as education sky rocketing, im pretty sure it would stay exactly the same, or even drop a bit.

Why exactly would technology sky rocket?

So I think KomradRed is absolutely correct. This fantasy and dogma that atheists have a corner on education and technology is just nonsense. Atheism is no more connected to education and opposed to ignorance than theism. Those who champion ignorance will be found in both varieties, just as those who champion education will be also found in both. Atheists can use and have used thought police tactics and demanded obedience to the state in much the same way as theists have used inquisitions and demanded obedience to the church. You see despite the BS that the idealogues are always pushing, whether they do it in the name of reason or in the name of God really is the least important thing.

Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox

Originally Posted by drowsy turtle

closed-minded people are unlikely to accept ideas they do not agree with. They just lose their excuse for not agreeing.

This might sound bad, but I'm 46 and can't remember meeting a close-minded person who wasn't also highly theistic--probably just a mater of the high number of people who are both, especially in the US.

Yes, I very much agree.

This is not to say religious people are all closed-minded; I believe there is a common cause that results in both traits.

Religions affect on society has created many cultures and feelings. As an example, is that faith leads to a thoughts of a possibility to something being achieved (AKA Hope). May I say that religion was and is the source of inspiration to many fantastical arts and the way it has had a part in the building of our country. The many pilgrims and persecuted travelers came to America to find a new life. This would mean that one of the foundations of American is in religion. The possibility for being a peaceful intertwined culture is still a greater goa

if there was NO God then there would be NO religion in any culture. it would have been proven false millenia ago and no one would even attempt to organize any such movement.

On the other hand, some may say that some of the greatest conflicts of the world have been caused by the controversy of religious factors; many have died in these wars. Another argument for the Atheists is that the great number of people that are greatly disillusioned is too disturbing for the existence science and the advancement of it because these disillusioned peoples are too concerned about the others who are much too far away that they are wasting a great number of resources

this is just a lie and not supported by credible history. the majority of conflicts was NOT started by religious people for religious purposes or are you saying the two gulf wars were christian conflicts?

the first one was to free kuwait. the second was just illegal and had noreligious purpose to it. bush was wrong.

the assyrian,persian, babylonian conquests were not motivated by religious purposes, neither were the punic wars, the greek or roman conquests nor were the barbarian invasions of the roman empire. let alone the conflicts started by attilla the hun, the american revolution and civil wars or WW1 & WW2. To name a few.

get off this soapbox because you distort history for your own perverted purpose.

My question for the public is this.
What would be the consequences to culture if the religion was suddenly “thrown out the window” and every person suddenly turned to Atheism?

what would happen--anarchy pure and simple becaus eyou have thrown out the standard for morality and all fear of punishment for disobedience to that standard and ushered ina 'survival of the fitest' mentality.

Education would sky rocket. People would be willing to learn things that may go against their belief system. Technology would also sky rocket. We would have more scientists. People wouldn't be fighting for creationism in our schools.

thisperson would be wrong for he envisions a world free of jealousy, hatred, envy, lusts, etc. when religion goes that just isn't so. when religion goes-so will the garden of eden ideal, as sin will abound because there will be no restraint on evil acts, no justice, no caring about right and wrong and so on.

in fact the Bible talks about this but i will need to fnd the reference first.

Originally Posted by archaeologist

if there was NO God then there would be NO religion in any culture.

This is an unfounded and illogical statement and, therefore, no reason exists to read the rest of your post since more of the same is to be expected.

This is like saying if there was no Santa Claus there would be no Christmas (the modern secular holiday, not the cult classic of the superstitious). Yet kids write him letters and hang stockings every year.

It would be like saying if there were no Tooth Fairy, there would be no one putting deciduous molars under their pillows.

It would be like saying if there were no salt, there would be no "good luck" since no one would be tossing it over their shoulders.

Homo sapiens sapiens are a superstitious and gullible species, subject to believe in fantasy and fairy tale with few good reasons. History demonstrates this. Moreover, the thousands upon thousands of extant and extinct religions in the world, each with gods -many of whom are contradictory and varied from each other- reveal that religion would persist in spite of whether a god actually does. Or are you contending that Quetzacoatl was a real god? Zeus? Ptah? Athena? Ashtera?

More argument from ignorance and special pleading. Please, do the world a favor and read a fucking book that doesn't come from your limited worldview of the Christian book store (i.e. philosophy 101).

This is an unfounded and illogical statement and, therefore, no reason exists to read the rest of your post since more of the same is to be expected

not at all. if soemthign does not exist, thereisno conception of what ti couldbe. man got the idea of flying from watching birds, if their were no fling animals of any sort, no one would know what flying was and there would be no desire to fly.

This is like saying if there was no Santa Claus there would be no Christmas (the modern secular holiday, not the cult classic of the superstitious). Yet kids write him letters and hang stockings every year.

It would be like saying if there were no Tooth Fairy, there would be no one putting deciduous molars under their pillows.

except the concept of someone giving a gift originates with God thus someone has an exmple to follow and is able to conjure up an alternative. remove God you remove santa claus and other mythical creatures.

God is not mythical but the others are including morse, greek, roman mythology. without God you would not have those stories.

the nly one being illogical or doing specialpleadings (an excuse to ignore the truth) is you.

Originally Posted by archaeologist

Religions affect on society has created many cultures and feelings. As an example, is that faith leads to a thoughts of a possibility to something being achieved (AKA Hope). May I say that religion was and is the source of inspiration to many fantastical arts and the way it has had a part in the building of our country. The many pilgrims and persecuted travelers came to America to find a new life. This would mean that one of the foundations of American is in religion. The possibility for being a peaceful intertwined culture is still a greater goa

if there was NO God then there would be NO religion in any culture. it would have been proven false millenia ago and no one would even attempt to organize any such movement.

*sigh*

Opinion cannot be disproved.

Something which does not exist cannot be disproved, unless it can be observed, in which case it exists.

Religion is a construct of the human mind. There are evolutionary advantages to religion, such as group co-operation and caring for those at a disadvantage. It may also have been a way of coping with an increase in inteligence in the species.

Originally Posted by archaeologist

On the other hand, some may say that some of the greatest conflicts of the world have been caused by the controversy of religious factors; many have died in these wars. Another argument for the Atheists is that the great number of people that are greatly disillusioned is too disturbing for the existence science and the advancement of it because these disillusioned peoples are too concerned about the others who are much too far away that they are wasting a great number of resources

this is just a lie and not supported by credible history. the majority of conflicts was NOT started by religious people for religious purposes or are you saying the two gulf wars were christian conflicts?

Phew. Well done, you covered every war ever, there.

Originally Posted by archaeologist

the first one was to free kuwait. the second was just illegal and had noreligious purpose to it. bush was wrong.

Never mind that it was a christian state attacking a muslim state with different beliefs....

Originally Posted by archaeologist

neither were the punic wars, the greek or roman conquests nor were the barbarian invasions of the roman empire.

Actually, the Romans generally conquered to spread their religion and idealism.

The barbarians would have had different religious beliefs, and refused to accept the Roman gods.

Although you may very well be able to show that some wars were not linked to religion, you cannot dispute that a large number were primarily religiously motivated.

Originally Posted by archaeologist

get off this soapbox because you distort history for your own perverted purpose.

Look who's talking.

Originally Posted by archaeologist

My question for the public is this.
What would be the consequences to culture if the religion was suddenly “thrown out the window” and every person suddenly turned to Atheism?

what would happen--anarchy pure and simple becaus eyou have thrown out the standard for morality and all fear of punishment for disobedience to that standard and ushered ina 'survival of the fitest' mentality.

Not so. There is a better system already in place: secular law.

Otherwise, how do you explain my morales?

And even outside of secular law, explain why I am a pacifist and a vegetarian?

Originally Posted by archaeologist

Education would sky rocket. People would be willing to learn things that may go against their belief system. Technology would also sky rocket. We would have more scientists. People wouldn't be fighting for creationism in our schools.

thisperson would be wrong for he envisions a world free of jealousy, hatred, envy, lusts, etc. when religion goes that just isn't so. when religion goes-so will the garden of eden ideal, as sin will abound because there will be no restraint on evil acts, no justice, no caring about right and wrong and so on.

This is a matter of perspective.

I, for one, think it is immoral and wrong for you to ignore evidence, and believe what has been shown to be false.

Originally Posted by archaeologist

in fact the Bible talks about this but i will need to fnd the reference first.

The bible is not a reliable or accurate source; save your time.

And even outside of secular law, explain why I am a pacifist and a vegetarian?

Vegetarianism is actually part of the 11th commandment

"Thou shalt now deny thy huge sausage within thy mouth"




Hey, it's what the Roman Catholic Priests seem to follow...

Originally Posted by verzen

And even outside of secular law, explain why I am a pacifist and a vegetarian?

Vegetarianism is actually part of the 11th commandment

"Thou shalt now deny thy huge sausage within thy mouth"




Hey, it's what the Roman Catholic Priests seem to follow...

Pacifism actually defies the bible; I am expected to kill anyone who is not christian, by the bible. Also the amelakites or w/e they were called, but their proud civilisation was wiped out by the Jews a few thousand years ago.

Hey, archaeologist, do you eat pork?

No, this is not a link to putting huge sausages in your mouth...

Originally Posted by drowsy turtle

Phew. Well done, you covered every war ever, there.

I find it cute though. Consider he don't mention one from the very book he claims a working familiarity with--like the god directed Moses - Midianites war. Maybe he just doesn't think they actually happened--that would be a break through of sorts.

He contradicts himself often, but when anyone points it out he fails to quote that part of their text...

I'm always interested as to exactly what he thinks he can argue back about; assuming what he misses out is what he cannot win on.

Makes me wonder if he actually believes himself.

"Actually, the Romans generally conquered to spread their religion and idealism.

The barbarians would have had different religious beliefs, and refused to accept the Roman gods.

Although you may very well be able to show that some wars were not linked to religion, you cannot dispute that a large number were primarily religiously motivated."

Uh, actually no they didn't. Rome didn't conquer and spread its authority throughout the Med and Europe in order to advance its religion. Roman polytheism was very eclectic and could draw parallels with the many other polytheistic religions it came into contact. Jupiter was similar to Zeus, Odin, Ra, and so many others. Religious plurality flourished under Roman rule and the only religious problems Rome had was with faiths and peoples who refused to acknowledge certain aspects of Roman government and society that the Romans themselves viewed as acts of subservience to Roman power. The Jews and Druids of Britain, for different reasons, refused to accept Roman domination and were persecuted heavily.

"Pacifism actually defies the bible; I am expected to kill anyone who is not christian, by the bible."

Really? What about that whole Golden Rule and Turning the Other Cheek things?

Originally Posted by KomradRed

"Actually, the Romans generally conquered to spread their religion and idealism.

The barbarians would have had different religious beliefs, and refused to accept the Roman gods.

Although you may very well be able to show that some wars were not linked to religion, you cannot dispute that a large number were primarily religiously motivated."

Uh, actually no they didn't. Rome didn't conquer and spread its authority throughout the Med and Europe in order to advance its religion. Roman polytheism was very eclectic and could draw parallels with the many other polytheistic religions it came into contact. Jupiter was similar to Zeus, Odin, Ra, and so many others. Religious plurality flourished under Roman rule and the only religious problems Rome had was with faiths and peoples who refused to acknowledge certain aspects of Roman government and society that the Romans themselves viewed as acts of subservience to Roman power. The Jews and Druids of Britain, for different reasons, refused to accept Roman domination and were persecuted heavily.

OK, thanks for the correction, history is not my strong point.

Originally Posted by KomradRed

"Pacifism actually defies the bible; I am expected to kill anyone who is not christian, by the bible."

Really? What about that whole Golden Rule and Turning the Other Cheek things?

"Blessed be the LORD my Rock, Who trains my hands for war, And my fingers for battle (Psalm 144:1)."

"If the thief is found breaking in, and he is struck so that he dies, there shall be no guilt for his bloodshed (exodus 22:2)."

"To everything there is a season, A time for every purpose under heaven...A time of war, And a time of peace (Ecclesiastes 3:1,8). "

"For hands were lifted up to the throne of the LORD. The LORD will be at war against the Amalekites from generation to generation (Ex 17:14-16)."



At best, mixed messages.

Really? What about that whole Golden Rule and Turning the Other Cheek things?

you forgot 'if my kingdom was of this world, my servants would fight'

Religion is a construct of the human mind

this is a fallacy designed to try and escape the reality of God and the future destination of unbelievers

There are evolutionary advantages to religion, such as group co-operation and caring for those at a disadvantage. It may also have been a way of coping with an increase in inteligence in the species.

'the process' has no concept of religion, God or anything thus if it existed, it could not develope such thought or change genes to create such thought.

I find it cute though. Consider he don't mention one from the very book he claims a working familiarity with--like the god directed Moses - Midianites war. Maybe he just doesn't think they actually happened--that would be a break through of sorts.

why should i need to mention them, most of those conflicts are only recorded in the Bible which to you means they did not take place and would be moot. it is nice to see people like you dismiss the Bible when it is against your but then turn around and use it when you think it helps your argument.

Originally Posted by archaeologist

why should i need to mention them, most of those conflicts are only recorded in the Bible which to you means they did not take place and would be moot. it is nice to see people like you dismiss the Bible when it is against your but then turn around and use it when you think it helps your argument.

You assume I agree that most religious wars were religious through history. I don't. Wares are faught for many reasons, sometimes simple power, sometimes for blood or vengeance, sometimes to fight about resources that are dressed up as a religious conflict to motivate the masses.

You're also wrong about my perception of the bible. I don't think everything in there as automatically wrong. I think of the OT bible as a remarkable recording of the oral traditions of the Hebrew peoples. Like most oral traditions it's a combination of origin myths (e.g. first man), things they didn't understand (e.g. different languages) moral lessons (e.g. many rules) often with a kernel of truth but with lots of exaggerations (a flood story), bias interpretations of events, and occasional deliberate distortion to make a brutal past more acceptable (e.g. genocides ordered by god, the exodus etc).

The NT is far more contrived, taking a well traveled Jewish Rabi influenced by many traditions (e.g. Zoroastrianism) who became a radical cult figure who's sermons were retold by his followers who embellished his story long after his death and finally filtered by a council to just a few of hundreds of gospels using to meet their own ends centuries later.

But to get back to the question about wars, faith, blood, resources make up most wars of the past. Wars about the form of government is a relatively recent phenomena.

Originally Posted by archaeologist

Religion is a construct of the human mind

this is a fallacy designed to try and escape the reality of God and the future destination of unbelievers

OK, let's assume this does not apply to your version of extremist christianity (I can't be bothered to have this arguement again).

Surely you still believe this applies to other religions?

Unless they are true as well?

Originally Posted by archaeologist

There are evolutionary advantages to religion, such as group co-operation and caring for those at a disadvantage. It may also have been a way of coping with an increase in inteligence in the species.

'the process' has no concept of religion, God or anything thus if it existed, it could not develope such thought or change genes to create such thought.

Once more you spectacularly misunderstand evolution.

An idea may arrive at random from an individual with the right genes to create it. Being an idea, it can then be passed around, rather than needing to be bred into the population.

At no point, though, does evolution as an entity decide what needs to happen.

This is shown by the huge number of fatal mutations.

Originally Posted by archaeologist

I find it cute though. Consider he don't mention one from the very book he claims a working familiarity with--like the god directed Moses - Midianites war. Maybe he just doesn't think they actually happened--that would be a break through of sorts.

why should i need to mention them, most of those conflicts are only recorded in the Bible which to you means they did not take place and would be moot.

If christianity advertises itself as having a history of extreme violence, then we can assume they are not a pacifistic group, can we not?

The fact that these wars are mentioned in the bible shows that a christian is not a pacifist.

Originally Posted by archaeologist

it is nice to see people like you dismiss the Bible when it is against your but then turn around and use it when you think it helps your argument.

The bible is what christians believe in; so if there are passages about religious war, we can assume that a christian believes in them, and so does not believe his religion promotes pacifism.

To answer my own question of what I may believe will happen to Culture is this. Nothing would be more disastrous. The many foundations and charity benefits would be considered as needless work. The greatest link in communities would be shattered. The stronger would stand above, why anyone sensible would help the "lower ranks." I personally myself believe that religion is very amazing, surviving through thousands of years and gave many the determination to live on.

The controversy of religion may have killed thousands throughout history but is it not the greatest influence on a person’s life.

What's the proportion of public money versus charity that goes to the poor? Serious question.

normally i do not correct people's posts because i am such a bad typist and editor but this one i could not let slip by:

Wares are faught for many reasons

are you writing with a southern accent or...? i didn't know 'wares' could fight.

You're also wrong about my perception of the bible. I don't think everything in there as automatically wrong. I think of the OT bible as a remarkable recording of the oral traditions of the Hebrew peoples. Like most oral traditions it's a combination of origin myths (e.g. first man), things they didn't understand (e.g. different languages) moral lessons (e.g. many rules) often with a kernel of truth but with lots of exaggerations (a flood story), bias interpretations of events, and occasional deliberate distortion to make a brutal past more acceptable (e.g. genocides ordered by god, the exodus etc).

then i was not wrong.

But to get back to the question about wars, faith, blood, resources make up most wars of the past. Wars about the form of government is a relatively recent phenomena.

i would easily disagree with this conclusion.

Surely you still believe this applies to other religions?

the only way to God is through Jesus Christ...you do the math.

An idea may arrive at random from an individual with the right genes to create it.

i understand it quite well, you are saying that something comes from nothing. please prove that.

also you assume 'the process' knows what are the right genes and then leaves them alone never fiddling with them again. too much of a stretch. it is called tap dancing arund the truth--religious beliefs did not come from genes or evolution, the idea of God came from God as he said:

'I put the desire to know me in them' (paraphrased, i need to lookup the verse again) it just so happens the devil gets to influence what people consider God to be and leads them astray.