I am Atheist and I believe that GOD is an important concept for others to carry on their lives and give them strengths (hope) in a state of lows to carry on. All are not ready to face the heads-on reality, they need something to hang on. We should respect that and don't try to change who is strong believer of GOD.
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
Gagan, I appreciate your concern and humanity for others. But I must disagree because the god crutch is believing and relying on a lie. It also can switch quickly in an instant to assigning blame, taking credit, or making bad mistakes, while living this lie.
There are many effective and realistic tools that can replace the god crutch. Grief counseling, assertiveness, even credit counseling are examples where the "god" factors does not need to intrude. Family and community support are also available tools, all not needing god.
My wife is a trained psychologist, and many years ago she was employed by a faith-based organization that housed and cared for mentally challenged adults. Along with mental retardation comes behavior and health issues. In this organization, when a client was experiencing problems, the standard practice was "pray for them" when my wife was very aware that there were many effective tools, such as behavior modification, anger management, even getting a hearing aid.
The god crutch is a poor tool, while learning to deal with reality is the permanent solution.
I sort of agree. I do not want to rip the rug of "hope" out from underneath people, and I fully understand that there are people in certain point of their lives that really really need the god concept or they may quite literally "break."
However, the more I read and learn, both here and elsewhere, the more I learn about the incredible harms various major religions inflict.Both in the past and present. Also, now a days, there is so much more information readily available to anyone. World wide literacy rates are at all time highs, a lot of the potential benefits religion offered, (especially in terms of answers, even if they are made up ones,) are no longer needed today, as we have real answers. Real solutions. Increasingly religion is something that holds us back as a human race instead of helping it.
Religion is not all bad, but everyone needs to evaluate does the good outweigh the bad? Based on everything I have learned, no, it does not, especially in this day and age.
I think I am fine with the idea of people operating as atheist 99% of the time and in times of extreme distress or on their deathbed they fall back to popular religious ideas for comfort for a short period. But we do not need the large religious apparatus for that. That role can be filled with a short book about the possibilities of peace and afterlife and wellbeing with a supernatural flair for those that want it on their deathbed or in times of extreme distress. To be dismissed again when life returns to a normal. No large amounts of money/power involved, or rules one must follow, or group to join, just a little lie to make people feel better at the times that need it for the people that want it.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
▮ I am an atheist that always likes a good debate. ▮
▮ Please include @LogicFTW in responses directed to me. ▮
▮ Useful list on forum usage. A.R. Member since 2016. ▮
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
T o kind of continue what David said. Yes, the "god" crutch can help some people get through the horrific chances of life. However, as David said, it is ultimately the "person" who gets themselves through the "lows."
And yes, I do respect the right of all persons to believe in whatsoever they wish to believe. My fourth commandment even says so:
In other words, I respect the right of others to believe what they wish to believe, but it does not mean I have to respect their beliefs.
Repeating David: The "god" crutch is a very poor tool. The only benefit it may offer is having others around for support when going through the "lows" of life. Ultimately, it is still the "person" who gets their self through those "lows."
rmfr
I'm fine with that as long as they keep it to themselves, and don't try to tell others how their deity demands they live their lives, and of course I respect their right to believe the moon is made of cheese if it makes them happy, as long as they respect ALL people as equal and don't cherry pick archaic religious texts to demonise and discriminate against others based on who they are.
It goes without saying my respect of their right to believe, does not therefore extend to respecting any belief itself, as that must depend on the belief. If someone needs a crutch so badly they have to delude themselves the earth is a few thousand years old, and to deny the scientific fact of species evolution, I'm ok with that as well, as long as they don't pretend their superstitious creations myth has parity with scientific facts, and start creating their own propaganda journals, and pretend these are peer reviewed worthy scientific journals. or creationist "museums" filled with this vapid superstitious nonsense.
Of course if they try to ruin any child's education with this rubbish, then fuck their needs, I'll fight them. They can take their own children to church all they want, but only science can be taught as science in schools and universities, and that is non-negotiable.
The one “great virtue” of religion is that it was our first attempt at explaining our origins. Our first attempt at making sense of all the chaos and suffering around us. Because it’s our first attempt it is also our most flawed. While it is true to say that religion can in a lot of cases provide personal comfort and a sense of community to a lot of people, I don’t think that there is anything particularly unique about it in that respect. Again, the reason people assume is uniquely well suited to providing comfort and meaning is because it is so imbedded in society.
It is perhaps just me, but I find the realisation that there is no supreme leader who watches my every move and will judge me upon my inevitable death, to be quite empowering and a source of hope rather than despair. I object to the notion that a lack of a belief in god somehow makes our world a bleak place, without hope or a reason to strive for improvement. Realising that there is nobody to save us from ourselves and that this life is the only one we will ever live adds value to our experience. The discoveries of science since the age of enlightenment have given us a more beautiful picture of our universe that religion ever could, in addition to being true and provable.
I see the slow recession of the power of religion as part of humanity’s emancipation from primitive superstition and a movement towards a point where comforting ourselves with obvious untruths is no longer necessary. Not to mention of course the countless ways in which religion has been, and still is, actively harmful to our civilisation.
I am of course not advocating for the forced eradication of religion or religious belief. However, that does not mean that we should in any way bow down to it or except the fact that religion is an inevitable part of the human condition.
To me the recession of power of religion is actually happening rather rapidly lately, not slowly, but of course this is in the timelines of religions in general. Religion goes back at least as far as some of the earliest still surviving written word and we have every reason to believe it goes back further than that. And we have surviving written word going back 5000 years. One way to look at the erosion of the power and wealth of religion is looking at the history of the tallest man made structures in history.
As many of us know The Egyptian pyramids were the tallest structures man has ever made for a long time, a title they held for 3800 years. Obviously a religious structure. Obviously there is some debate over exact definitions, but we are going with man made structures.
Eventually the Pyramids were surpassed by Lincoln Cathedral in 1300, and many other churches and cathedrals. It was not until 1884 with the Washington monument was a taller structure constructed that was not a church or cathedral. Later the Eiffel tower topped that, and then eventually it was radio mast and television towers or even occupied buildings. Eventually the Burj Khalifa surpassed those. All of which were not church financed buildings.
Jeddah tower under construction now, is planned/rumored to be the first building to reach a kilometer in height. Built in Saudi Arabia, but still considered to be a national endeavor not a religious one.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
▮ I am an atheist that always likes a good debate. ▮
▮ Please include @LogicFTW in responses directed to me. ▮
▮ Useful list on forum usage. A.R. Member since 2016. ▮
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
Cave Paintings? Could those not have been the pictograms of the Mog'urs? Preaching and praying to the Great Earth Mother?
Actually almost 8000 years, circa 5800 BCE, if memory serves.
rmfr
@arakish
Yeah, every reason to believe religion goes way way back and was a huge part of culture for a very long time, and now increasingly, religion is waning in culture. During american football season, Sunday belongs to the NFL not the various christian religions, at least in media.
Admittedly I just "googled" oldest surviving written religious text, when writing this post and got a wikipedia entry. Definition of "surviving text" is also prone to interpretation. But again, beyond physical proof it is easy to conclude religion has been around a long time with various archaeology finds of religious artifacts going way back.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
▮ I am an atheist that always likes a good debate. ▮
▮ Please include @LogicFTW in responses directed to me. ▮
▮ Useful list on forum usage. A.R. Member since 2016. ▮
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
I understand how religion served early civilizations, some of it very beneficial. But in this age, those reasons have dissipated and IMO religion only serves itself now. We now have more modern and effective tools to deal with hardships and our curiosity. These days the answer to "where did we come from" is no longer "god" but rather an examination of physics, cosmology and astronomy. Counseling and psychology are much more effective, so that instead of just praying, a person can have therapy or find a method of support.
Young children do need a support, and that is why we have Santa Clause and the Easter Bunny. But as a person matures they should grow both intellectually and emotionally, so that they become trained to deal with reality.
Of course, many people cannot function without that god crutch, and I have no problem with them using that support method. Personally I feel for them, not having a method to deal with life and it's hardships.
And of course, as long as they do not try to force their beliefs on me. I don't preach to them, I don't want them preaching to me.
I agree with that, David.
For me, it's not enough to separate each side in isolation. I think it's time atheists do more than that. This is just my opinion, but it seems to me, anyway, that atheists aren't interested in pointing out the benefits of atheism to theists. That's a mistake, in my view. We're social animals and we need to deal with each other on a human level.
For example, the folks who come to your door. I used to have a roommate who was so fricking rude. He would act like a jerk, invite them in, and slam the door in their faces. How is that going to attract any theists to atheism? It's not. No wonder we get a bad rep.
Atheists don't want to hear this. They just want to stay on their side, and pulverize any theists who dares to trespass. We use all kinds of excuses not to help others understand atheism. How does that get us anywhere? It only makes it worse.
"No man is an island..." applies here.
edit: as a former Fundie, I know too well how frustrating it can be to get a point across because Fundies aren't known for independent thinking. Still, that's no excuse to just stay put and not try to change their minds. Atheism has so much to offer the world. I don't need to say that; we already know. Others need it so badly.
post deleted - doubles
I never evangelize atheism. I stay on debate forums where theists voluntarily come to argue with atheists.
I don't like to hurt the feelings of others and I can understand that people have a need keep believing in whatever nonsense they have been tricked to believe in. But they shouldn't have been tricked to believe that in the first place.
There are major downsides of believing that a fairytale is reality, and others often get hurt by the actions of people who live in delusion.
When I was an active and frequent member in this forum I tried to maintain a thread about that problem, in a feeble attempt to wake people up:
http://www.atheistrepublic.com/forums/debate-room/dark-side-theism-super...
For those who think there is no harm in letting others live in their bubble, I recommend you read that thread and think again.
Hey there, Gagan. Welcome to the AR. Just want to put my two cents worth in real quick before reading the replies of others.
Personally, I am all for respecting the rights of others to believe whatever they need to help them cope with their lives. Yep, fine and dandy with it..... as long as: 1. Their beliefs do not cause harm to others.... and 2. They equally respect MY right to believe however I choose. BUT, the moment they use their belief to justify harming/killing others who do not share the same belief, and/or the moment they attempt to force me to share their belief?.... Well, let's just say they may end up having a bad day if it is at all possible for me to arrange it.... *halo over head*.... Otherwise, live and let live, as far as I'm concerned. To each his own.
Granted, I may sometimes shake my head in amusement and mild bewilderment at the beliefs/practices of some people. Oh, well. Pretty sure there are many who do the same at my beliefs/views/opinions. No harm, no foul. And if somebody happens to look at me and tell me my ideas/opinions are totally stupid and bat-shit crazy, then he/she is perfectly entitled to his/her personal opinion. If I am secure in how I feel and think, then somebody else's opinions should not affect me at all.
Okay, now to go read the other replies....
@ Gagan "All are not ready to face the heads-on reality, they need something to hang on. We should respect that and don't try to change who is strong believer of GOD."
My response to this is "Why are these people not ready to face heads-on reality?" My assertion is that they have been trained. They were trained from early childhood to be weak, helpless, and reliant on myth to make it through their days. They are not dependent on religion or a belief in God. They only believe their version of god is necessary and needed to help them through their days. When they are shown that this belief system is false, many will seek other means of making sense out of the world. Some will become Atheists.
Now, what hope does a God give? "Pray and everything will be okay?" "Leave it to God to solve," "Oh well, everything is God's will." Not one of these statements is motivational. Not one of these statements assists a person in DEALING WITH the problems of life. Nothing fails like prayer. All these statements do is assist a person in AVOIDING RESPONSIBILITY. Yes it may ease their minds. It may help them function in life. But, they are functioning by ignoring the world around them, reality, pretending a magical being is dealing with a problem for them, and avoiding action and responsibility at every turn.
The strength of simply enduring a horrible situation is not strength at all. Praying to a magical being as your child dies because you will not take him to a doctor is complete BS. Accepting God's will or Fate IS NOT STRENGTH. As for hope - the hope of the religious is terribly misplaced. Their hope is in the belief that some divine being is going to make things okay. If things work out, they praise this divine being for its intervention and their minds slip further down the rabbit hole. If things get worse, well it is the will of the divine being so everything is okay anyway. THIS IS NOT HOPE/
RELIGION AND BELIEF IN GOD OFFERS NEITHER HOPE OR STRENGTH. Not by my usage of the words.
Gagan,
Strong believers in a god tend to be strong persecutors when they amass power. If believers would only stick to their little groups and not bother others, then you point gains some credibility. Unfortunately, that is the one thing true believers cannot do if they believe their truth should be protected. Such people are threatened by an environment that challenges their views. If they are a small group then they can seal themselves off in the manner that so many cults do. But if they are a large group that takes in new people, then they are continually at war with those who challenge their beliefs. Since they feel so strongly about their god, such encounters tend to get nasty. They develop an extreme sensitivity as an aid to making their immediate environment "safe." With the accumulation of power they become persecutors.
Protecting our freedom means challenging such sensitivity, not accommodating it. Of course, frank language should not exceed that which is required to expose the errors and deflate pretensions. Each situation must be judged on its own merits, meaning that some individuals might be spared.
Apparently with Alcoholics Anonymous, when you have to assert belief in a supreme being who will help make you better because you are unable to get over your addiction by yourself (in their view), alcoholics actually do a worse job at giving up alcohol than a control group of alcoholics that tried nothing.
I do agree however that for many people, life would be unbearable without their belief in god, and that there may be little realistic prospect of moving on from such a belief.
"I do agree however that for many people, life would be unbearable without their belief in god, "
Yet some of the most irreligious and atheistic societies on the planet, like Denmark and Sweden, also rank among the happiest and most fulfilled, and the healthiest in the world in study after study. Most of their citizens do not believe in a deity, even laugh at the concept, and although they engage in Christian ceremonies it's only as a cultural link to their past. They preserve values that promote well being and shun religious ideas that are pernicious. They consistently rank among the most successful nations in the world at promoting equality, and as little as three generations ago their ancestors were overwhelmingly religious.
People don't need religion to make them happy or moral. They just have been convinced they do. Religions are good at creating a need then offering to satisfy it.
I recommend "Societies Without God" by Phil Zuckerman
Its very well written and researched.
@Sheldon
I absolutely agree with your points, but there are many people who are very emotionally invested in their belief in god and the associated rituals, including being part of their religious community. It isn't straightforward to just reset your mind and for example to replace one set of friends with a new set of friends (which may or may not be necessary).
I was in NA for awhile. Higher Power was always explained as your personal higher power, whether that was a god or simply your better nature. It was left open to individual interpretation. We used to refer to Christian 12 steppers as 13 steppers. Once they reached the 12th step they took one extra step. Funny. What helped me the most was being accountable to other human beings. Have not been to a meeting in almost two decades but the nasty poisons that plagued me have not plagued me since.
Yay for the chimp!
Sapporo, please provide sources "alcoholic actually do a worse job at giving up alcohol than a control group of alcoholics that tried nothing:
You know this based on.....?
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/resist/r_chap_2.htm
The Efficacy of 12-Step Groups and 12-Step Treatment by Charles Bufe and Stanton Peele (2000)
I found out about that summary of the AA from the rationalwiki page on the Alcoholics Anonymous - you may prefer to read that:
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Alcoholics_Anonymous#Alcoholics_Anonymous_...
"alcoholics actually do a worse job at giving up alcohol than a control group of alcoholics that tried nothing."
All I have read indicates that AA's "Success Rates" are no better than anyone else's success rates. I have not heard worse; however, I have monitored attendance in AA programs for the courts and I can tell you that there is more alcohol in the parking lot of an AA meeting than there is at the local bar. One thing really dragging down their success rate is "court mandated referrals." These people are just there doing their time, getting signatures on their little forms and spending the rest of the week just as they had spent it before court.
I LISTEN TO THESE GUYS TOP SCIENTISTS IN THEIR FIELDS.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjItc3_wHxM
Sapporo says:
"Apparently with Alcoholics Anonymous, when you have to assert belief in a supreme being who will help make you better because you are unable to get over your addiction by yourself (in their view), alcoholics actually do a worse job at giving up alcohol than a control group of alcoholics that tried nothing."
Magnificent says:
This is the second time you've posted that. My original question about how you know this was never answered, but you just made the claim a second time, and edited it, this time.
So how do would you know? Did you find the info online? Or... is it your guess? If you're not going to answer the question, this will tell me you have no idea what you're saying. Considering the topic, not to mention the lives lost to this disease, I find your off-the-wall claim to be very careless.
sorry, but I do. There are many recovering alcoholics on this forum. so, please. Put up.
I found the study online. I do not know what you mean by saying I'm not answering your question, unless you missed my reply that included a link to the research.
It all depends on how they are using their belief in God . Simon and Andrew were casting their nets, whereas James and John were mending their nets. Nets= sins
@ Senior Citizens...
So, according to your last few posts the bible isn't in any way written to be read by normal people who look at text and have agreed value on the words. According to you the whole thing is a metaphor and you ( and only you) have the the key to translating what was really meant in the text.
Which of course relies 100% on your subjective translation.
Jesus was walking on water. Water = silly ideas.
post deleted. This post is ridiculous.
Pages