Be a Supporter!

Does "God" hold us back?

  • 5,171 Views
  • 180 Replies
New Topic Respond to this Topic
djack
djack
  • Member since: Aug. 10, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 27
Movie Buff
Response to Does "God" hold us back? Aug. 27th, 2011 @ 10:12 AM Reply

At 8/27/11 07:38 AM, CcZero wrote:
At 8/26/11 07:52 PM, djack wrote: Text
That's social Darwinism. Did you even read the texts you linked? Do you even understand the concept of evolution?

At 7/26/11 12:59 AM, ImaSmartass2 wrote: I don't need to repeat what I already said. Social Darwinism. Is. Not. Evolution. Has nothing to do with Evolution.

Social Darwinism is also called social evolution because it is part of evolutionary biology. Yes I do understand evolution. In fact, I often seem to understand evolution better than the people who try to defend it in threads like this. Besides, three of the links I posted linked directly to sites that referred to evolutionary biology and evolutionary theory. Only one was about Social Darwinism and that one linked to a page about social evolution. You would know that if you actually looked at what I posted, but since you replaced my entire post with the word "text" I have a hard time believing you paid any attention to it.

CcZero
CcZero
  • Member since: Dec. 22, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 12
Blank Slate
Response to Does "God" hold us back? Aug. 27th, 2011 @ 11:37 AM Reply

At 8/27/11 10:12 AM, djack wrote: Social Darwinism is also called social evolution because it is part of evolutionary biology. Yes I do understand evolution. In fact, I often seem to understand evolution better than the people who try to defend it in threads like this. Besides, three of the links I posted linked directly to sites that referred to evolutionary biology and evolutionary theory. Only one was about Social Darwinism and that one linked to a page about social evolution. You would know that if you actually looked at what I posted, but since you replaced my entire post with the word "text" I have a hard time believing you paid any attention to it.

Okay, sure.

Link number one:
This historical text describes the different kinds of experiments conducted by the Nazis during world war two. The part that you've decided to focus on reads as follows:

The third category of medical experimentation sought to advance the racial and ideological tenets of the Nazi worldview. The most infamous were the experiments of Josef Mengele at Auschwitz. Mengele conducted medical experiments on twins. He also directed serological experiments on Roma (Gypsies), as did Werner Fischer at Sachsenhausen, in order to determine how different "races" withstood various contagious diseases. The research of August Hirt at Strasbourg University also intended to establish "Jewish racial inferiority."

Other gruesome experiments meant to further Nazi racial goals were a series of sterilization experiments, undertaken primarily at Auschwitz and Ravensbrueck. There, scientists tested a number of methods in their effort to develop an efficient and inexpensive procedure for the mass sterilization of Jews, Roma, and other groups Nazi leaders considered to be racially or genetically undesirable.

Note how the scientists researched sterilization methods because some groups were deemed to be undesirable. The Jews were undesired because they robbed the German people of their hard work while they themselves avoided any physical labour. That is what the Nazi propaganda said.
There are no records that I am aware of where the government states that what was done was done because the inferior races hindered the Evolution of the Arian race.

The sentence you cited, "The research of August Hirt at Strasbourg University also intended to establish "Jewish racial inferiority."", does not point at evolution in any way. It's simply the Nazis trying to strengthen their propaganda that uses the "Survival of the fittest" idea, implemented in a social environment. The fittest being the ones who can support themselves (The superior Aryan race), whilst the Jews, Romans and other inferior races could not. They were said to leech off of the hard work of the Germans.
This is what the propaganda said, and this is their main reason and justification for doing what they did.

Link number two:
If you read the entire article you can see that the word was used as a way of describing the inferior races (Jews, and all that. You know the drill.) in a social environment. That German who implemented it in Nazi literature even quoted the man who used it first, "The Under-Man -- the man who measures under the standards of capacity and adaptability imposed by the social order in which he lives.".
Once again, there are no records that I am aware of where the government states that what was done was done because the untermensch hindered the Evolution of the Arian race. Please share any quotes and provide a reliable source if you've got any.

Link number three:
This one's a bit obvious. And it doesn't link to Social Evolution. Not anywhere that I can see, anyway.
Even if it did, social evolution isn't the same as the biological evolution theory. Social evolution is about different social behaviours.

I covered the last link when I talked about how the inferior races were so in the society. Money grabbing and all that.

I do understand the point you're trying to make, though. Religion isn't the only means of justification out there. It is however a big one and it gives people the right to do certain morally questionable actions. I believe that if it didn't exist, the amount of these actions would not be as high as they are. They would still exist, but not as much as it does today.

On another note, even if the Nazis did use evolution as an excuse, it wouldn't turn Evolution into a horrible thing. It's a scientifically proven theory, accepted by the majority of the academic society. It describes how species evolve to survive better in their environments.
Religion on the other hand, implores you to follow its rules because you're fucked if you don't. It doesn't have any scientific proof or back up.

But fuck, we're supposed to talk about religion. I suggest making a new thread if you want to talk whether or not the Nazis did what they did because of evolution.

CcZero
CcZero
  • Member since: Dec. 22, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 12
Blank Slate
Response to Does "God" hold us back? Aug. 27th, 2011 @ 11:44 AM Reply

And I forgot to mention, that's social Darwinism. It's philosophy of superiority. "Fuck the people who don't contribute to society" if you want it put in an extremely simple way.

I'm just waiting for you to state that you're now ignoring me and my arguments, as you've done in the past with some people.

djack
djack
  • Member since: Aug. 10, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 27
Movie Buff
Response to Does "God" hold us back? Aug. 27th, 2011 @ 01:01 PM Reply

At 8/27/11 11:37 AM, CcZero wrote: Note how the scientists researched sterilization methods because some groups were deemed to be undesirable. The Jews were undesired because they robbed the German people of their hard work while they themselves avoided any physical labour. That is what the Nazi propaganda said.
There are no records that I am aware of where the government states that what was done was done because the inferior races hindered the Evolution of the Arian race.

The sentence you cited, "The research of August Hirt at Strasbourg University also intended to establish "Jewish racial inferiority."", does not point at evolution in any way. It's simply the Nazis trying to strengthen their propaganda that uses the "Survival of the fittest" idea, implemented in a social environment. The fittest being the ones who can support themselves (The superior Aryan race), whilst the Jews, Romans and other inferior races could not. They were said to leech off of the hard work of the Germans.
This is what the propaganda said, and this is their main reason and justification for doing what they did.

Right, the whole idea of survival of the fittest and advancing a people by forcibly removing undesirable traits has absolutely nothing to do with evolution. The belief that these traits are inherited and that when those with the undesirable traits are removed from the gene pool it will improve the fitness of the entire group has no possible connection to evolutionary theory.

Link number two:
If you read the entire article you can see that the word was used as a way of describing the inferior races (Jews, and all that. You know the drill.) in a social environment. That German who implemented it in Nazi literature even quoted the man who used it first, "The Under-Man -- the man who measures under the standards of capacity and adaptability imposed by the social order in which he lives.".

You read the etymology but ignored the section on Nazi propaganda. When it comes to the Nazis, the origin is meaningless because the Nazis warped it to their own uses just like with the swastika which was originally a symbol of peace but is now associated solely with the Nazi party and the holocaust. Had you read the part on Nazi propaganda you would have seen this, a direct quote from a piece of Nazi propaganda, "Just as the night rises against the day, the light and dark are in eternal conflict. So too, is the subhuman the greatest enemy of the dominant species on earth, mankind. The subhuman is a biological creature, crafted by nature, which has hands, legs, eyes and mouth, even the semblance of a brain. Nevertheless, this terrible creature is only a partial human being." Is that proof enough for you? If not there is also this within the same part of the article, "Nazi anthropologists attempted to scientifically prove the inherent 'inferiority' of the Slavs." It's not about the Jews but the Slavs were also persecuted by the Nazis.

Once again, there are no records that I am aware of where the government states that what was done was done because the untermensch hindered the Evolution of the Arian race. Please share any quotes and provide a reliable source if you've got any.

See the above quotes. Or you could just do some real research on the subject yourself. The whole reason I didn't post this earlier is because it is so easy to find that you don't even need to leave the first page of a Google search. I shouldn't have to do the research for you, if you haven't researched it yourself then don't comment.

Link number three:
This one's a bit obvious. And it doesn't link to Social Evolution. Not anywhere that I can see, anyway.

Sorry I wasn't completely clear about that. The link is labeled as Social Darwinism which that page defines as a theory of social evolution which also includes a link.

Even if it did, social evolution isn't the same as the biological evolution theory. Social evolution is about different social behaviours.

And how those behaviors effect the fitness of both the individual and those around them as well as how these traits originally developed and came to be inherited genetically.

I covered the last link when I talked about how the inferior races were so in the society. Money grabbing and all that.

So you're just going to ignore a paper specifically about how evolutionary theory affected the psychiatric state of the Nazis and modern society?

I do understand the point you're trying to make, though. Religion isn't the only means of justification out there. It is however a big one and it gives people the right to do certain morally questionable actions. I believe that if it didn't exist, the amount of these actions would not be as high as they are. They would still exist, but not as much as it does today.

I guess here we are going to have to agree to disagree since clearly nothing I can say will change that opinion.

On another note, even if the Nazis did use evolution as an excuse, it wouldn't turn Evolution into a horrible thing. It's a scientifically proven theory, accepted by the majority of the academic society. It describes how species evolve to survive better in their environments.

I didn't say evolution was a horrible thing, I didn't even imply it was a horrible thing. I provided a historical setting where something universally considered to be morally reprehensible was justified without the use of religion.

Religion on the other hand, implores you to follow its rules because you're fucked if you don't. It doesn't have any scientific proof or back up.

There are a lot of rules in society without any valid reasoning or scientific proof to back them up but you still have to follow them or you're fucked. Even the scientific community has rules that shouldn't exist but anyone who doesn't follow them or worse speaks out against them gets fucked over. Have you ever wondered why only 2% of climate scientists disagree with the theory of man made global warming? It isn't because of all the evidence supporting it, it's because going against the majority leads to unreasonable levels of resistance from the rest of the community and a loss of funding from anyone that listens to or has something to gain from the rest of the community.

But fuck, we're supposed to talk about religion. I suggest making a new thread if you want to talk whether or not the Nazis did what they did because of evolution.

Like I said, repeatedly, evolution was not the cause it was a justification. There is a difference between the two. I really shouldn't have to post that as many times as I have.

At 8/27/11 11:44 AM, CcZero wrote: I'm just waiting for you to state that you're now ignoring me and my arguments, as you've done in the past with some people.

I did that with Smartass and E1EE7 because they repeatedly proved to be trolls. I gave them both numerous opportunities to prove that they weren't and they failed every time. If you want me to ignore you though, don't worry. You are well on your way to proving that you too are a troll given how much of what I've said you ignored. An entire link, half a wikipedia article, and your moronic claim that survival of the fittest has nothing to do with evolutionary theory are an excellent start to proving you are a troll.

CcZero
CcZero
  • Member since: Dec. 22, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 12
Blank Slate
Response to Does "God" hold us back? Aug. 27th, 2011 @ 02:00 PM Reply

"Right, the whole idea of survival of the fittest and advancing a people by forcibly removing undesirable traits has absolutely nothing to do with evolution. The belief that these traits are inherited and that when those with the undesirable traits are removed from the gene pool it will improve the fitness of the entire group has no possible connection to evolutionary theory."

Work ethics are not inherited. They disliked the stereotype Jew, the banker who just sits on his ass and gets money by doing no physical work. Same thing with the other "inferior" races. They disliked the stereotype whom did not contribute in a strong physical manner to society. It's not evolution, it's Social Darwinism. And it isn't the same thing as evolution.

"You read the etymology but ignored the section on Nazi propaganda. When it comes to the Nazis, the origin is meaningless because the Nazis warped it to their own uses just like with the swastika which was originally a symbol of peace but is now associated solely with the Nazi party and the holocaust. Had you read the part on Nazi propaganda you would have seen this, a direct quote from a piece of Nazi propaganda, "Just as the night rises against the day, the light and dark are in eternal conflict. So too, is the subhuman the greatest enemy of the dominant species on earth, mankind. The subhuman is a biological creature, crafted by nature, which has hands, legs, eyes and mouth, even the semblance of a brain. Nevertheless, this terrible creature is only a partial human being." Is that proof enough for you? If not there is also this within the same part of the article, "Nazi anthropologists attempted to scientifically prove the inherent 'inferiority' of the Slavs." It's not about the Jews but the Slavs were also persecuted by the Nazis."

I can't see what you're trying to prove by saying this. It's propaganda that is trying to give none-Aryans a bad reputation. It doesn't mention anything about any reasons, excuses, or justifications. They obviously tried to gather proof of the racial inferiority of the Slavs, but they failed.

And no, the above quotes don't say jack shit about anyone using Evolution as a means of justification. It's not a matter of not doing research, the problem is that it doesn't exist.

And I didn't suggest that you said Evolution is a horrible idea, I'm saying that it would be completely retarded to call the theory bad or evil even if any of this had been true.

There are moral rules, scientifically backed up rules, and rules that the community agrees on being necessary. Anything else is oppression.

"Like I said, repeatedly, evolution was not the cause it was a justification. There is a difference between the two. I really shouldn't have to post that as many times as I have."

I meant justification, please excuse my inability to write properly.

"I did that with Smartass and E1EE7 because they repeatedly proved to be trolls. I gave them both numerous opportunities to prove that they weren't and they failed every time. If you want me to ignore you though, don't worry. You are well on your way to proving that you too are a troll given how much of what I've said you ignored. An entire link, half a wikipedia article, and your moronic claim that survival of the fittest has nothing to do with evolutionary theory are an excellent start to proving you are a troll."

No, Smartass and E1EE7 gave you proof backed up by the majority of the scientific community. Said facts suggested that your statements were incorrect. You proceeded to ignore the facts, and state that they only care about either Expelled or that the individual is "Ignoring what you're saying". I still believe that what Smartass said should be able to finish this discussion alone;

"If you can actually find something that says "Jews are slowing Evolution" in Nazi literature, please tell me. Because I have searched diligently and found nothing."

This is what it's all about. Unless the Germans went out and said "We killed the races we see as inferior because they're slowing down evolution for us", you've got no argument. Any "intellectual analyses" made in the aftermath by any scientist or historian is irrelevant.

brainiac3397
brainiac3397
  • Member since: Aug. 29, 2011
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 03
Blank Slate
Response to Does "God" hold us back? Aug. 30th, 2011 @ 11:16 AM Reply

Nope...we're fine. Only you hold yourself back. If you argue that you can't see god then argue he is holding you back,you must be drinking expired liquor (wha?) or smoking something that doesn't even have a name.


De Nihilo Nihil Fit

UncleCubone
UncleCubone
  • Member since: Aug. 12, 2011
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 16
Writer
Response to Does "God" hold us back? Aug. 30th, 2011 @ 06:39 PM Reply

Well, no. Personally, God saved my life. In a way. All my life, my life felt a little empty, I could never figure out what it was I needed to do to fill the hole. So I took up weed. I was addicted for about 2 days before my mom found out. She got me a bible. She made me read it and get clean immediately. I felt a connection with the book. Now my life doesnt feel all that empty. I think having faith in something helps you with your problems. So no, I definitely do not think God holds us back, but instead, pushes us forward.


SIG BY AMARANTHUS. | PUNK ISN'T DEAD. | I USED TO BE BROKENRECORD6299
| I'm in a band 'n stuff.| Here's some advice on how to be a writer.
I ENJOY CRANBERRY SAUCE. A LOT.

BBS Signature
BanglaBoy96
BanglaBoy96
  • Member since: Jun. 12, 2009
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 22
Audiophile
Response to Does "God" hold us back? Aug. 31st, 2011 @ 09:26 AM Reply

God gave us free will, We hold ourselves back and say
"Duuurrr if god exists Y DOEZ BHAD tings Hapen!? He ish a bhad creeator"

Us humans are never happy with anything what is done nice for us.
We have free will we complain about God NOT interfering in our lives
If we HAD NO free will, we'd be bitching about god being so bossy.
It's a load of crap if you ask me. We hold ourselves back as individuals


NEED A VOICE ACTOR?! YOU GOT ONE RIGHT HERE SWEETIE ;)

BBS Signature
Camarohusky
Camarohusky
  • Member since: Jun. 22, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 09
Movie Buff
Response to Does "God" hold us back? Aug. 31st, 2011 @ 09:54 AM Reply

God doesn't hold us back. Being human does.

VenomKing666
VenomKing666
  • Member since: May. 12, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 17
Blank Slate
Response to Does "God" hold us back? Aug. 31st, 2011 @ 09:56 AM Reply

At 8/31/11 09:26 AM, BanglaBoy96 wrote: God gave us free will, We hold ourselves back and say
"Duuurrr if god exists Y DOEZ BHAD tings Hapen!? He ish a bhad creeator"

Us humans are never happy with anything what is done nice for us.
We have free will we complain about God NOT interfering in our lives
If we HAD NO free will, we'd be bitching about god being so bossy.
It's a load of crap if you ask me. We hold ourselves back as individuals

Technically speaking there is no such thing as free will, there is an illusion of free will but that's pretty much it. I can explain the matter further is you wish but for now I will only say your argument and explanation is not only unfounded but offers no explanatory value to the discussion.

VenomKing666
VenomKing666
  • Member since: May. 12, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 17
Blank Slate
Response to Does "God" hold us back? Aug. 31st, 2011 @ 09:58 AM Reply

At 8/31/11 09:54 AM, Camarohusky wrote: God doesn't hold us back. Being human does.

1. How does being human hold us back?
2. Do you actually believe in a god when saying that statement.

Camarohusky
Camarohusky
  • Member since: Jun. 22, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 09
Movie Buff
Response to Does "God" hold us back? Aug. 31st, 2011 @ 10:43 AM Reply

At 8/31/11 09:58 AM, VenomKing666 wrote: 1. How does being human hold us back?

We, as humans, are flawed and imperfect. All of the faults we place upon religion exist only because it is the humans that make up the religion that are flawed, not the religion itself.

2. Do you actually believe in a god when saying that statement.

Do I have to?

SolInvictus
SolInvictus
  • Member since: Oct. 15, 2005
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 17
Blank Slate
Response to Does "God" hold us back? Aug. 31st, 2011 @ 10:44 AM Reply

At 8/31/11 09:58 AM, VenomKing666 wrote:
At 8/31/11 09:54 AM, Camarohusky wrote: God doesn't hold us back. Being human does.
1. How does being human hold us back?

limited senses, perception, cognition; we're pretty cool, but we're not perfect... yet (its mother'ucking cyborg time!).

At 8/30/11 06:39 PM, brokenrecord6299 wrote: ...So I took up weed. I was addicted for about 2 days...

roflcopters.


VESTRUM BARDUSIS MIHI EXTASUM
Heathenry; it's not for you
"calling atheism a belief is like calling a conviction belief"

BBS Signature
morefngdbs
morefngdbs
  • Member since: Mar. 7, 2005
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 49
Art Lover
Response to Does "God" hold us back? Aug. 31st, 2011 @ 06:46 PM Reply

So what has perfect got to do with it ?

If you're a good person, respect others & yourself...why does it matter whether you're perfect or not ?

Also I've seen that which others have decided In their opinion was perfect.
In mine it wasn't.
So what, if what I think is perfect ,isn't what you think is perfect ????
How does that make any difference in the grand sceme of the Universe ?

As long as you're happy , why does what someone else think matter & why would you really give a shit ?


Those who have only the religious opinions of others in their head & worship them. Have no room for their own thoughts & no room to contemplate anyone elses ideas either-More

Camarohusky
Camarohusky
  • Member since: Jun. 22, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 09
Movie Buff
Response to Does "God" hold us back? Aug. 31st, 2011 @ 08:20 PM Reply

At 8/31/11 06:46 PM, morefngdbs wrote: So what has perfect got to do with it ?

Perfect only has as much to do with this discussion, in so much as the amount that people impute our failings and faults to that of religion, and not humanity itself.

Iron-Hampster
Iron-Hampster
  • Member since: Aug. 27, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 10
Blank Slate
Response to Does "God" hold us back? Aug. 31st, 2011 @ 09:38 PM Reply

At 8/31/11 09:26 AM, BanglaBoy96 wrote: If we HAD NO free will, we'd be bitching about god being so bossy.

would we really?


ya hear about the guy who put his condom on backwards? He went.

BBS Signature
VenomKing666
VenomKing666
  • Member since: May. 12, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 17
Blank Slate
Response to Does "God" hold us back? Aug. 31st, 2011 @ 11:34 PM Reply

At 8/31/11 10:43 AM, Camarohusky wrote:
At 8/31/11 09:58 AM, VenomKing666 wrote: 1. How does being human hold us back?
We, as humans, are flawed and imperfect. All of the faults we place upon religion exist only because it is the humans that make up the religion that are flawed, not the religion itself.

Hum... Religion is a concept created by humans, it is flawed by it's nature and what it represents, not because it was created by us, there are also degrees of flawedness in concepts, that are all created by us therefore this finishes to prove my point that the flaw does not come from the fact we created that concept but the nature of the concept itself. Actually arguing anything different would be extremely dumb.

2. Do you actually believe in a god when saying that statement.
Do I have to?

Am I pointing a gun to your head and threatening your life if you don't? So no, you don't have to.

At 8/31/11 10:44 AM, SolInvictus wrote:
At 8/31/11 09:58 AM, VenomKing666 wrote:
At 8/31/11 09:54 AM, Camarohusky wrote: God doesn't hold us back. Being human does.
1. How does being human hold us back?
limited senses, perception, cognition; we're pretty cool, but we're not perfect... yet (its mother'ucking cyborg time!).

Well no shit sherlock, perfection is a concept that does not exist in reality. Of course we have limitations, everything has limitations, but does our nature hold us back? Maybe it does but it's pointless to state it because the nature of every being holds them back by this definition.

VenomKing666
VenomKing666
  • Member since: May. 12, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 17
Blank Slate
Response to Does "God" hold us back? Aug. 31st, 2011 @ 11:35 PM Reply

At 8/31/11 09:38 PM, Iron-Hampster wrote:
At 8/31/11 09:26 AM, BanglaBoy96 wrote: If we HAD NO free will, we'd be bitching about god being so bossy.
would we really?

Holy fucking shit, man you totally destroyed his dumb point with 3 words, and it's hilarious because I didnt think about it when I read it and felt I should and it's funny because what you said is so obviously true.

SolInvictus
SolInvictus
  • Member since: Oct. 15, 2005
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 17
Blank Slate
Response to Does "God" hold us back? Sep. 1st, 2011 @ 12:36 AM Reply

At 8/31/11 11:34 PM, VenomKing666 wrote: Well no shit sherlock, perfection is a concept that does not exist in reality.

it was intended to be a simple figure of speech, simply stating we're awesome but limited. though given the subject of the thread, perfection (or the supposed lack thereof) seems relevant in discussing whether our "creator/sustainer" limits us.
not to mention our many limitations are identifiable and something we seek to overcome in fields other than religion.

...our spiritual limitations are a little less clear.

VESTRUM BARDUSIS MIHI EXTASUM
Heathenry; it's not for you
"calling atheism a belief is like calling a conviction belief"

BBS Signature
VenomKing666
VenomKing666
  • Member since: May. 12, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 17
Blank Slate
Response to Does "God" hold us back? Sep. 1st, 2011 @ 03:06 AM Reply

At 9/1/11 12:36 AM, SolInvictus wrote:
At 8/31/11 11:34 PM, VenomKing666 wrote: Well no shit sherlock, perfection is a concept that does not exist in reality.
it was intended to be a simple figure of speech, simply stating we're awesome but limited.

Sure but the fact we are limited is painfully obvious and like you just agreed, isn,t a bad thing so why come up with it in the first place?

though given the subject of the thread, perfection (or the supposed lack thereof) seems relevant in discussing whether our "creator/sustainer" limits us.

«this thread isnt about "does god hold us back" but rather "does the belief in a god holds us back. God cannot hold us back himself because he doesn't exist, however belief in him sustain other ass backwards beliefs that really make some people act like degenerates.

not to mention our many limitations are identifiable and something we seek to overcome in fields other than religion.

Not sure where you are going here.

...our spiritual limitations are a little less clear.

Once again, not sure what you mean by that.

DingoTheDog
DingoTheDog
  • Member since: Jun. 21, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Blank Slate
Response to Does "God" hold us back? Sep. 1st, 2011 @ 05:41 PM Reply

Mount of improbability anyone?


BBS Signature
SolInvictus
SolInvictus
  • Member since: Oct. 15, 2005
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 17
Blank Slate
Response to Does "God" hold us back? Sep. 2nd, 2011 @ 10:19 AM Reply

At 9/1/11 03:06 AM, VenomKing666 wrote: ...however belief in him sustain other ass backwards beliefs that really make some people act like degenerates.

precisely, and the idea of being perfect/god-like is something addressed by many religions; most say we aren't "perfect" because of god, nor should we seek to be "gods." plenty of advances have been protested by people thinking "if god wanted us to do [x] he would have made us with [y]."

not to mention our many limitations are identifiable and something we seek to overcome in fields other than religion.
Not sure where you are going here.

science is entirely based on the expansion of our perception beyond natural human limits.


VESTRUM BARDUSIS MIHI EXTASUM
Heathenry; it's not for you
"calling atheism a belief is like calling a conviction belief"

BBS Signature
Camarohusky
Camarohusky
  • Member since: Jun. 22, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 09
Movie Buff
Response to Does "God" hold us back? Sep. 2nd, 2011 @ 11:12 AM Reply

At 8/31/11 11:34 PM, VenomKing666 wrote: Hum... Religion is a concept created by humans, it is flawed by it's nature and what it represents, not because it was created by us, there are also degrees of flawedness in concepts, that are all created by us therefore this finishes to prove my point that the flaw does not come from the fact we created that concept but the nature of the concept itself. Actually arguing anything different would be extremely dumb.

Let's translate here:

Religion is not flawed because of us. But these flaws are because of us. Therefore the flaws that we flawdely think or flawed, are just a llawed product of our flawed thinking about flaws and the flawed state of being flawed. If you think otherwise yer a P00pteard.

How's about you rewrite this meaningless jumble into a single sentence.

And if you are trying to say that religion is flawed because it is religion and not because man is flawed just say so, so we can move forward. Then provide examples.

KillerClam
KillerClam
  • Member since: Apr. 30, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 09
Blank Slate
Response to Does "God" hold us back? Sep. 2nd, 2011 @ 11:45 PM Reply

People can misinterpret the Word of God as a right to be disgusting because Christ Jesus will forgive them, along with taking the passage that states "take up your cross and follow Him" as an instruction to wear a cross necklace and a t-shirt from a mega-church that promotes Christian Militarism rather than telling us to sacrifice ourselves for others and worship Jesus. It's not God that is holding us back, but people. People are fucking idiots.

VenomKing666
VenomKing666
  • Member since: May. 12, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 17
Blank Slate
Response to Does "God" hold us back? Sep. 3rd, 2011 @ 04:18 AM Reply

At 9/2/11 11:12 AM, Camarohusky wrote:
At 8/31/11 11:34 PM, VenomKing666 wrote: Hum... Religion is a concept created by humans, it is flawed by it's nature and what it represents, not because it was created by us, there are also degrees of flawedness in concepts, that are all created by us therefore this finishes to prove my point that the flaw does not come from the fact we created that concept but the nature of the concept itself. Actually arguing anything different would be extremely dumb.
Let's translate here:

Religion is not flawed because of us. But these flaws are because of us. Therefore the flaws that we flawdely think or flawed, are just a llawed product of our flawed thinking about flaws and the flawed state of being flawed. If you think otherwise yer a P00pteard.

How's about you rewrite this meaningless jumble into a single sentence.

And if you are trying to say that religion is flawed because it is religion and not because man is flawed just say so, so we can move forward. Then provide examples.

Okay once again I am not sure if I get your point, but if you say that religion is flawed because men are flawed, and the reason that is is because men made it up (religion that is) then we both agree.

Also SolInvictus I'm pretty sure we in fact agree about that matter.

Camarohusky
Camarohusky
  • Member since: Jun. 22, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 09
Movie Buff
Response to Does "God" hold us back? Sep. 3rd, 2011 @ 10:31 AM Reply

At 9/2/11 11:45 PM, KillerClam wrote: People can misinterpret the Word of God as a right to be disgusting because Christ Jesus will forgive them,

This sort of layman's religion has been battled in all religions for thousands of years.

This sort of religion, the repent and you will be saved regardless, was made for the peasants because thye did not have the resources to live a fully monastic life devoted to religion. It has been interpreted (wrongfully so) to mean that you can do as much bad as possible and then repent and be OK, whereas it was really meant to allow people to enter their respective afterlife without having to devote their life to that of religion (i.e. being a monk, nun, and alike).

Camarohusky
Camarohusky
  • Member since: Jun. 22, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 09
Movie Buff
Response to Does "God" hold us back? Sep. 3rd, 2011 @ 10:35 AM Reply

At 9/3/11 04:18 AM, VenomKing666 wrote: Okay once again I am not sure if I get your point, but if you say that religion is flawed because men are flawed, and the reason that is is because men made it up (religion that is) then we both agree.

Yes, but I take it one step further. When people attack religion for holding us back, I counter by saying religion does not hold us back, it is only us humans that do it. Religion, being created by humans, provides nothing but a conduit for our good and evil. Religion doesn't do anything bad, the humans that exploiut it do.

VenomKing666
VenomKing666
  • Member since: May. 12, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 17
Blank Slate
Response to Does "God" hold us back? Sep. 3rd, 2011 @ 07:35 PM Reply

At 9/3/11 10:35 AM, Camarohusky wrote:
At 9/3/11 04:18 AM, VenomKing666 wrote: Okay once again I am not sure if I get your point, but if you say that religion is flawed because men are flawed, and the reason that is is because men made it up (religion that is) then we both agree.
Yes, but I take it one step further. When people attack religion for holding us back, I counter by saying religion does not hold us back, it is only us humans that do it. Religion, being created by humans, provides nothing but a conduit for our good and evil. Religion doesn't do anything bad, the humans that exploiut it do.

Exept religion does hold us back by crippling people's minds, it is a concept created by humans so yes you could say it is humans that hold themselves back but then you are arguing definitions and not facts. You are also removing meaning to the issue and just adding confusion.

Camarohusky
Camarohusky
  • Member since: Jun. 22, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 09
Movie Buff
Response to Does "God" hold us back? Sep. 3rd, 2011 @ 10:19 PM Reply

At 9/3/11 07:35 PM, VenomKing666 wrote: Exept religion does hold us back by crippling people's minds

Religion doesn't cripple minds any more than any other social acitivty does. Show me specific examples of exactly how reoligion cripples minds. When you do that guess what you will have done? You will have created a list of everything wrong with humans.

To say that religion cripples people's minds more than any other social activity is just plain stupid.

You are also removing meaning to the issue and just adding confusion.

No, I am saying that God does not hold people back as it is US that holds us back.

VenomKing666
VenomKing666
  • Member since: May. 12, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 17
Blank Slate
Response to Does "God" hold us back? Sep. 4th, 2011 @ 03:50 AM Reply

At 9/3/11 10:19 PM, Camarohusky wrote:
At 9/3/11 07:35 PM, VenomKing666 wrote: Exept religion does hold us back by crippling people's minds
Religion doesn't cripple minds any more than any other social acitivty does.

You would be wrong here.

Show me specific examples of exactly how reoligion cripples minds. When you do that guess what you will have done? You will have created a list of everything wrong with humans.

Challenge accepted: It pollutes people's moral compass and makes it easier for them to accept unforgivable things and make them acceptable on the mere flawed basis that morals come from god therefore everything god says to do is moral.
It corrupts the very meaning of morality because when you have rleigion based views why do you help people? Is it, you know, because they are suffering and it is helpful to them to help them or because you fear this all seeing god that might send you to hell?
And most importantly it is an ideology that strongly supports people shutting down their brains and not to show critical thinking and just accept anything trough "faith" which they pretend is a virtue.

Now is that a list of what is wrong with people? No it's a list of what is wrong with religion, and please don,t use the cop out answer of: "Well these are actions done by humans so its humans herp a derp" Of course every action good or bad is done by humans but that's irrelevant to the issue, the point is that religion "promotes" bad ideologies and behavior (while pretending they are good) that accentuate bad behavior. Which is what "Religion holds us back" means.

To say that religion cripples people's minds more than any other social activity is just plain stupid.

It's just plain accurate. Compare a secular group like a bunch of nerds playing DnD and the westboro baptist church, only one of them goes out to protest dead soldiers and hates "fags" can you guess which one it is?