Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

That's up to you to decide that or not. Thing is, I'm not the type to try to proselytize, so it doesn't matter much to me if you believe or not.

But I look at an example: recently I was driving on the highway. I was turning onto an exit, where it makes for a rather long turn. The recommended limit is 40 mph, and there are signs warning that there is a strong chance of your car tipping over if you go too fast. I was going too fast, and I couldn't make the turn.. my car started swerving, and it was about to tip over. But instead, I managed to get it to swerve and merely drove it into a ditch.

And you'll think it stupid, but I see no reason why that wouldn't be a miracle that I didn't flip over and get into a serious accident, and I also consider it a miracle that despite the driver who was driving slightly behind me, that I didn't cause any damage to his car (because I swerved right in front of him). You could say that it was nothing more than quick reflexes, but I still look back on that incident and I see it as more.

You could say that it was nothing more than quick reflexes, but I still look back on that incident and I see it as more.

Like your sig!

STAB... STAB... STAB.... STABBY!!! OMFG OMFG LOL

but seriously, ive had some experiences like that too.

there was this one time, where i was thrusting, and it got stuck..

currently and if im mistaken correct me, but the worlds economy actually depends on people buying shit they dont need, righ. then wouldnt the economy fail or be weakened with the loss of the major cristian holliday christmas?

and to all u atheist muther fucker out there youll have an eternity in hell to prove god doesnt exist-<stephen colbert>

Ladies and gentlemen im starting to think this topic was started by a troll.

At 1/1/07 04:57 PM, internet-lord wrote: Ladies and gentlemen im starting to think this topic was started by a troll.

That's interesting considering the topic starter has been actively responding to his own topic with well thought out and well written posts.

At 1/1/07 04:57 PM, internet-lord wrote: Ladies and gentlemen im starting to think this topic was started by a troll.

No, not a troll but I am quite hermit outside of job. My point of this topic was to cause people to think how religion even if one does not hold to it still somehow is part of us. I know I am not a pagan and yet Christmas (originally the winter solstice) is part of my holiday celebrations. My only quirk with my topic is it seems people are using it to debate science and religion which is only part of it.

I have to say some of you folks are really starting to get my point and really trying to skin this by the teeth. I am not the type to think I am entirely right but my point is to cause people to think.

*sigh*

First of all the guy's name was spelt Nietzsche.

I'm reading "Thus Spoke Zarathustra" at the moment and its pretty amazing, (although a pretty difficult read..) lots of interesting issues about god and human perception of life and meaning.

At 1/1/07 02:57 AM, Frak61 wrote: currently and if im mistaken correct me, but the worlds economy actually depends on people buying shit they dont need, righ. then wouldnt the economy fail or be weakened with the loss of the major cristian holliday christmas?

and to all u atheist muther fucker out there youll have an eternity in hell to prove god doesnt exist-<stephen colbert>

Ding Ding Ding. We have our most ridiculous post of the thread.

Man you make your religion look bad. :(

I swear i've yet to encounter an intelligent Christian who doesn't resort to:
"Man Jesus is gonna kick your ass when you die! You'll see!!"

As the topic starter said Christmas has absolutely nothing to do with the birth of Jesus. It was because they were trying to convert other religions to christianity that they changed the meaning of holidays on already established times instead of trying to create new holidays which would make the transition from pagan or cathar (bon hommes) to catholic more difficult.

Jesus would have been born sometime in February and he would have been of Arabian decent. Christianity is a filthy warmongering example of how the winners of wars write history books and the majority of simpleton farm hands lap it up because they don't know any better.

Im not an atheist btw, I believe there is probably something. The universe is almost to beautiful and incomprehensible to have just happened but I'm not so gullible as to believe that anyone on Earth has ever had any idea of what really is out there.

We just create stories and myths to assure ourselves that there is a reason and to keep the populous in fear of punishment in an afterlife that doesnt exist and if it does exist in some form it most certainly won't be anything like what you read in the bible.

I swear i've yet to encounter an intelligent Christian who doesn't resort to:
"Man Jesus is gonna kick your ass when you die! You'll see!!"

I don't think anyone can accuse me of Jesus badgering because I don't think it is my job as a Christian to defend Jesus since I believe he is the word which means he can stand on his own. No, I believe that if vengeance is necessary God can handle that. As for me, I rather be transparent with a God-like character commanded by the Bible.

As the topic starter said Christmas has absolutely nothing to do with the birth of Jesus. It was because they were trying to convert other religions to christianity that they changed the meaning of holidays on already established times instead of trying to create new holidays which would make the transition from pagan or cathar (bon hommes) to catholic more difficult.

Believe it or not I even debate with my own protestant family the importance of the holiday which for me is more family than this foolish Christmas spirit which now a days amounts to commercialism. I am not a strong supporter of Christmas since Protestants only recently started celebrating Christmas. In fact, no Jehovah witnesses were not the first to stop celebrating many of the so called "Christian" holidays.

Jesus would have been born sometime in February and he would have been of Arabian decent. Christianity is a filthy warmongering example of how the winners of wars write history books and the majority of simpleton farm hands lap it up because they don't know any better.

I am with you for the most this but this is really not important to this topic. More importantly if one looks historically at the Warmongers they are not any close to being true Christians. No one can argue for Constantine nor any of the famous holy land Popes. Constantine was not a Christian till his death bed and used the Cross as a relic and did not look towards Christ. The Popes were out to bring spoils and relics back from the holy lands and try to keep Turks out of the Holy Lands. They were protecting land and offering salvation which not even a priest or pope is ordained to do so. Salvation comes through Christ and not through pastors, bishops or even Mary.

Im not an atheist btw, I believe there is probably something. The universe is almost to beautiful and incomprehensible to have just happened but I'm not so gullible as to believe that anyone on Earth has ever had any idea of what really is out there.

This is again not the point of this topic so you are ranting. But cool I am happy that you choose your beliefs based on your on convictions and rather than the beliefs of others.

We just create stories and myths to assure ourselves that there is a reason and to keep the populous in fear of punishment in an afterlife that doesnt exist and if it does exist in some form it most certainly won't be anything like what you read in the bible.

Whether that is true or not is not the point of my discussion either. You cannot deny the cultural undertones of Christianity and many other religions that still pervade the western psyche whether "Jesus Christ" as an insult or "By Jove I think he's got it *(a reference to Zeus in Latin). Our moral code is built upon Judaism, Christianity, Pagan, Roman and Greek gods not too mention many others.

Whether one believes in God or gods one cannot deny the presence of religion which even happily pops up in politics without any opposition from the political philosophy of the separation of church and state.

If you find yourself debating the validity of religion in this thread please stop. The purpose is to discuss if religion is dying or it still pervades within our culture.

Nietzsche stated " In a culture where rationalism is the supreme concept of reality God will cease to exist "

Do you believe this to fail like I do or do you see rationalism putting death to God?

At 1/2/07 09:38 PM, TonioMiguel wrote: Do you believe this to fail like I do or do you see rationalism putting death to God?

Of course it will fail. I don't know which famous philosopher came up with it before me, but people are afraid of the implications of a purely rationalist view of the world. Religion offers a far safer, less worrisome view of the world, makes humanity feel important. As such, there will always be people that will cling to religion. Either because they're afraid, because they like religion's alternative better, because they don't understand or like science's answer, you name it. It's the way it's always been in the past, and I don't see any reason why it would change. Gods have been rejected before, but they've always been replaced with new Gods.

In Newton's era science held a far stronger position. It was not mere speculation, through experiments scientists were supposedly able to distill Truth. If God would have died, it would have been then. In modern times we have a far more sensible approach to science and rationalism.

As for religion as a cultural undertone, that's true of course, but it's nothing more than that: an undertone. The actual meaning is lost. You'll find atheists exclaiming "goddamnit", that doesn't mean he/she damns god, it's merely a cultural expression. Just like your example of Jove. The words remain, but the original meaning is lost.

The beautiful thing about religion is that it can never be proven wrong, and that there's so many reasons to hope it's true. As long as religion continues to offer hope of a better, more meaningful life, it will never die. No matter how ridiculous it may be. (Just look at crazy sects like scientology, there are crazy loons following that too).

mm i am personally a disbeliever in god and believe religion is mostly (or was) a way to get money out of people. now its nothing more than an excuse to start wars. 'OMG they call Allah god kill him. or visa-versa

At 1/3/07 11:24 AM, candymancan wrote:

At 12/29/06 08:15 PM, fasdit wrote: Dre man, do you think that science is the primary reason we have a high standard of living?

I think you and Dre-Man are talking about two entirely different aspects of science, scientific theory, and technological facts are two entirely different things. Just because of the machines and gadgets we have today due to science, does not in any way give more merit to scientific theories, and you know it.

Wait, what? Huh? What do you think the basis for technology is? How do you think machines are conceived, developed and built? You think that the calculations for a GPS system come out of the blue, just by guessing? You think that firing artillery is entirely seperate from chemistry and ballistics? Falsification and experimental evidence, never heard of it?

Technology is the application of scientific theories. Entirely different things, just when I thought I'd seen it all, you prove that Einstein was right about stupidity.
It seems to me that you don't have the slightest clue about what science or technology is.

mm why is it the religious pple say god is the answer to everything(wrong) and the atheists say science has all the answers (again wrong). science is imperfect and it is nigh impossible to prove something for definite. it is just based on our current data. religion is just a bunch of things people wrote to explain things. that or may not have append. you have to take the leap of faith. and be willing to waste your Sunday morning in church.

At 1/2/07 09:38 PM, TonioMiguel wrote:

If you find yourself debating the validity of religion in this thread please stop. The purpose is to discuss if religion is dying or it still pervades within our culture.

Nietzsche stated " In a culture where rationalism is the supreme concept of reality God will cease to exist "

Do you believe this to fail like I do or do you see rationalism putting death to God?

Ah Ok, I see what you're getting at now.

I think religion has become a mere shadow of what it used to be in comparison to say 500 - 1300's but it will probably never die.

There are too many fundamentalist areas. Iraq/Egypt/Iran for Islamic faith, the Bible Belt of America for Christianity etc.

These people know nothing but religion. It is all their lives revolve around. I think as the world becomes more rational and as intelligence increases and knowledge becomes more easily transferable we will see a decrease in the number of educated people indulging in a religion, hopefully.

On that matter of Nietzsche I don't believe it to be something we can judge yet.

Rationalism is a pure concept that we will most likely never obtain as a society and it is almost 100% certain that it would be impossible for every individual to achieve objective rationalism so in that sense Religion will never die completely but I would hope that one day people would step back from the mass cultism we have going on now and make religion a personal virtue based on thoughts and ideas rather than what someone told them at some point.

At 1/3/07 06:59 PM, candymancan wrote: 1.) I don't go to church.
2.) Religion IS the answer to everything, and there's nothing you can do to prove otherwise.
3.) If Atheists don't believe that science is the answer to everything then they have absolutely no basis to their beliefs, or lack thereof. Thus proving religion the better argument, and answer.

1) that was a joke
2) i don't belive science has the answer to everything. because our data cannot answer everything. but i would rather believe what science tells me than some random people from thousands of years ago in a fictional book.
3) look at point 2

At 1/3/07 06:45 PM, candymancan wrote: Definately not scientifically spawned creation theories (The Big Bang, Evolution) which is obviously what Dre-Man was talking about previously.

Sure not creation theories, but you were talking about scientific theories in general. And evolution is not a creation theory, it's a biological theory. The Big Bang is though.

How do you think machines are conceived, developed and built? You think that the calculations for a GPS system come out of the blue, just by guessing? You think that firing artillery is entirely seperate from chemistry and ballistics? Falsification and experimental evidence, never heard of it?

That is completely and entirely off-subject. What those two were arguing about previously was science vs. religion when it comes to creation theories. Not guess and check/hypothesis and conclusion science.

I repeat, you were talking about science in general, not about "creation science", whatever that may be. And almost all positive science is guess and check, hypothesis and conclusion. The exclusions are human science and normative science. The Big Bang and Evolution theory are what you call "hypothesis and conclusion". The Big Bang theory comes, at least in part, from the observed red shift, which proves the galaxy is expanding. Evolution theory started with Darwin, but has since become evident with the study of bacteria and genetically engineered organisms.

Technology is the application of scientific theories. Entirely different things, just when I thought I'd seen it all, you prove that Einstein was right about stupidity.
It seems to me that you don't have the slightest clue about what science or technology is.

You truly think that the Big Bang, and Evolution theories will come in handy when it comes to machines and modern technology? It is you, who apparently knows nothing about what the difference between modern living technology, and scientific theories.

For example in genetic engineering, evolution is VERY important. When changing properties of species and unleashing them in the wild, the notion that other organisms WILL adapt to that change is quite essential. For example creating a plant which makes its own pesticide leads to the creaters dependant on that plant to either go extinct, or to adapt to the pesticide. It's quite important to foresee the consequences of said adaptation. Also the incorrect usage of antibiotics leads to resistant bacteria, another thing that would not happen if there was no evolution.

These are all issues that would never surface if the evolution theory was invalid. If everything were static as "non-evolution" says, then there would be no changes in the properties of other organisms when you change one. Since they do adapt, it's quite obvious that evolution is as real as the earth is round.

And the Big Bang theory is important for experiments regarding dark matter, more applications might surface later, as the theory is worked on and improved. Most theories start out without direct applications. When complex numbers where first developed, they were thought of as nothing more than a mathematical curiosity. In this day and age, complex numbers are used in almost every natural science.

Just because the applications are not evident at first, doesn't mean there are none. If you cease to develop the theory because it doesn't fit with your religion, then of course you won't find any applications.
It was the same with the earth being flat. What possible applications could there be for the earth being round, it's just a stupid senseless theory that goes against the Bible, burn the heretics. But the theory that the earth wasn't flat led to the discovery of America.

As for:

1.) I don't go to church
2.) Religion IS the answer to everything, and there's nothing you can do to prove otherwise.
3.) If Atheists don't believe that science is the answer to everything then they have absolutely no basis to their beliefs, or lack thereof. Thus proving religion the better argument, and answer.

1: good for you. Thank you for that insight.

2: religion is just as much an answer to any question as the word "because" is. It's an answer, it's the answer to everything, and it's worth jack shit.

3: science and atheism aren't related. Whether or not you believe there is a god has nothing to do with being a scientist. For example, Einstein hated rabid atheists as much as he hated rabid religious zealots.

Science merely says you shouldn't believe things without basis and you shouldn't continue to believe certain things if there is overwhelming evidence to the contrary. There's just as much evidence for the existence of "a God" as there is for no sort of God existing: none.

Claiming to have knowledge about the properties of said God is a different thing alltogether of course.

At 1/3/07 06:59 PM, candymancan wrote: 1.) I don't go to church.
2.) Religion IS the answer to everything, and there's nothing you can do to prove otherwise.
3.) If Atheists don't believe that science is the answer to everything then they have absolutely no basis to their beliefs, or lack thereof. Thus proving religion the better argument, and answer.

1.) Then you are going to burn in hell. Ha ha see ya there.
2.) No religion isnt the answer. And there is PLENTY of things to prove otherwise. Such as noah's ark, Jesus's brothers and sister, and there have been NO confirmed sightings of God or Jesus.
3.) I dont believe that science is the answer I believe FACT is the answer. Like science and religion with there holes if it isnt shown as fact then its shit to me. The only thing in science that hasnt got complete proof that I fully pay attention to is the dinosaurs because theres little to nothing known about them so it makes them more interesting to me.

I'm sure rationalism can never be totally obtained - for example when looking at great art, or falling in love. These things cannot be rationally explained (if you like great art, there is no biological reason why you should prefer Picasso to Rembrant, and yet some people do)

If rationalism can never truely be reached, then it follows that the concept of God will never go away.

If the concept of God does not go away, then it is true to say God will always exist (in a nonrealist sense - to non-philosophers think of it like "God exists as a part of people's mind, not a person in the sky", but be aware the arguments are a lot more nuanced)

Consequently, one will have to go through one's life aware of the concept of God. Who knows - you may even be tempted by a religion's ideals, and feed back into point two.

mm i think god only exists in our mind because we have had it drilled into our ansesters so it has became a basic belief. but now we seem to want to fight it more. partly because we are not perticually scared by an idea of hell and heaven it feels too unreal.

*huh*PAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA*HUH*AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! I find people who think seing is believing when it comes to religion stupid and close-minded. No confirmed sightings? Did you think for one second that there was ever a "confirmed sighting" of God or Jesus? And there is scientific evidence of Noah's Ark, but because you clearly are too much of an idiot to ever be of any use to the Christian religion, I'm going to stop wasting my time trying to convert you and your pathetic idiocy.

lol i think we have a strange person here. listen why would we want to be part of your pathetic religion? in fact why do we need to be part of any religion? all it does is cause hate and start wars. if we had no religion the world would be a much better place were we would be more responsible for our own actions. and not do them in the name of some god or gods. as the case may be. so don't go acting as if religion is better than athiesm or humanism.

At 1/4/07 11:16 AM, candymancan wrote:

Hi, dre-man.

Oh, Atheism is MUCH better than religion, you believe in nothing, and if you're wrong, you go to hell. I believe in something, and if I'm wrong, alls that'll happen to me is I'll go six feet under and that'll be the end of it. Which sounds better to you?

lol man unfortunately you could be wrong and find out that the real god is Allah or Jewish. then what will you do. you will burn in hell by your logic. there is no afterlife why are we any different from other animals? there is no heaven or hell for them. no divine justice. we are organic beings. the only meaning of life is to survive long enough to breed, and carry on our race. so we are no different than other animals. we will die and that will be the end of it. and I for one am not going to spend my life in wishful thinking. you want proof we are no different from animals OK. the monkey. our closest cousins. they are beginning to have a society. they have wars against other groups of monkeys. they have politics. another example. the wild dog. they feed their sick and young first from the kills. then the rest of the group gets an equal share of the kill. very similar to the way many humans behave. we are animals nothing more.

Hey Dre-Man, normally people change their posting style an itty bit before they let themselves be revealed.

Religion isn't necessarily better because it was invented by man, and in particular, invented by man as a possibly way to control people and keep them in line through fear.

At 1/4/07 10:54 AM, candymancan wrote:

At 1/4/07 08:54 AM, cold-as-hell wrote:

At 1/3/07 06:59 PM, candymancan wrote: 1.) I don't go to church.
2.) Religion IS the answer to everything, and there's nothing you can do to prove otherwise.
3.) If Atheists don't believe that science is the answer to everything then they have absolutely no basis to their beliefs, or lack thereof. Thus proving religion the better argument, and answer.

1.) Then you are going to burn in hell. Ha ha see ya there.

You're an idiot, I have my own service and bible readings in my own home, I don't need to go to a church, which doesn't have the same beliefs as I do anyway. Dumbass.

Oh but the wrath of god will come down on you!!!!!!! ohh scary!!!

2.) No religion isnt the answer. And there is PLENTY of things to prove otherwise. Such as noah's ark, Jesus's brothers and sister, and there have been NO confirmed sightings of God or Jesus.

*huh*PAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA*HUH*AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! I find people who think seing is believing when it comes to religion stupid and close-minded. No confirmed sightings? Did you think for one second that there was ever a "confirmed sighting" of God or Jesus? And there is scientific evidence of Noah's Ark, but because you clearly are too much of an idiot to ever be of any use to the Christian religion, I'm going to stop wasting my time trying to convert you and your pathetic idiocy.

Nope but it proves my point. You will NEVER convert me. Id rather die.

3.) I dont believe that science is the answer I believe FACT is the answer. Like science and religion with there holes if it isnt shown as fact then its shit to me. The only thing in science that hasnt got complete proof that I fully pay attention to is the dinosaurs because theres little to nothing known about them so it makes them more interesting to me.

Yes, but because you have no FACTS to tell you how you were created, you have just proven religion the better argument, once again.

religion has facts? Yeah right and im Elvis. Science uses facts. Religion uses blind faith. So go off to your homemade church and pray at the cross made from skirting boards and super glue.

Better to believe in something and have a chance of being right, then believing in nothing and having a chance of being wrong.

More chance in being right when believing in nothing than being wrong in believing in something. If God gaves us free will, then Im using mine to not believe in him.

SO STOP TRYING TO CONVERT PEOPLE, AND LETS HOPE RELIGION DIES QUICKLY!

At 1/4/07 10:54 AM, candymancan wrote:

2.) No religion isnt the answer. And there is PLENTY of things to prove otherwise. Such as noah's ark, Jesus's brothers and sister, and there have been NO confirmed sightings of God or Jesus.

For the record, Jesus was almost certainly a real person, who lived and preached around the same time as the Bible says he did (we're as sure of him as we are of someone like Henry VIII or Shakespeare) Its just very likely that stories about his life were exagerrated or invented by founders of the early church

And there is scientific evidence of Noah's Ark,

Hydroplate theory? That's laughable. Put up or shut up and give me a source - I promise you I can give a point by point rebuttal of everything within.

but because you clearly are too much of an idiot to ever be of any use to the Christian religion

"I say to you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me" (Matthew 25:39-40) - Way to burn in hell, asshole

Yes, but because you have no FACTS to tell you how you were created, you have just proven religion the better argument, once again.

"When people thought the earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the earth was spherical, they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together." - Asimnov

What this quote aims to illustrate is that science may be wrong about some things, but at least it aims to disprove itself. In terms of actual information, it is light years ahead of the out-of-date guesswork of religion. There is an argument that religion is still useful in morality, but certainly not science.

Better to believe in something and have a chance of being right, then believing in nothing and having a chance of being wrong.

What if believing in something leads you to do wrong? Furthermore, does your argument indicate I should wholeheartedly embrace Satanism and peadophilia, as long as I believe them to be moral? If God exists, do you think He would be pleased if He knew that was the reason you believed in Him?

At 1/4/07 01:42 PM, Goldensheep wrote:

At 1/4/07 10:54 AM, candymancan wrote:

2.) No religion isnt the answer. And there is PLENTY of things to prove otherwise. Such as noah's ark, Jesus's brothers and sister, and there have been NO confirmed sightings of God or Jesus.

For the record, Jesus was almost certainly a real person, who lived and preached around the same time as the Bible says he did (we're as sure of him as we are of someone like Henry VIII or Shakespeare) Its just very likely that stories about his life were exagerrated or invented by founders of the early church

Yeah, Tacitus wrote that Jesus was one of many sect leaders. He lived, he was a sect leader, and his sect has since grown to be a major world religion.

And there is scientific evidence of Noah's Ark,

Hydroplate theory? That's laughable. Put up or shut up and give me a source - I promise you I can give a point by point rebuttal of everything within.

Haha, I hope he gives a source. It's been a while since I had a good laugh.

but because you clearly are too much of an idiot to ever be of any use to the Christian religion

"I say to you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me" (Matthew 25:39-40) - Way to burn in hell, asshole

Yes, but because you have no FACTS to tell you how you were created, you have just proven religion the better argument, once again.

"When people thought the earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the earth was spherical, they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together." - Asimnov

What this quote aims to illustrate is that science may be wrong about some things, but at least it aims to disprove itself. In terms of actual information, it is light years ahead of the out-of-date guesswork of religion. There is an argument that religion is still useful in morality, but certainly not science.

Wonderful quote! Also, people back then simply didn't know any better, so it's understandable that they were wrong. But considering both views equal, knowing what we know now, it's laughable. There's no longer the excuse of ignorance.

Better to believe in something and have a chance of being right, then believing in nothing and having a chance of being wrong.

What if believing in something leads you to do wrong? Furthermore, does your argument indicate I should wholeheartedly embrace Satanism and peadophilia, as long as I believe them to be moral? If God exists, do you think He would be pleased if He knew that was the reason you believed in Him?

If you don't serve me you, your family and children will burn in hell forever! Better believe me and give me what I want, can't risk me being right now can you?! I can't even begin to understand how you could see belief as an insurance policy...

I am really starting see some of you folks focusing on my purpose of this topic and I am liking where some of you are going.

Some of your arguments about the big bang are really fascinating but they are not really the purpose of this topic.

I liked how one of you mentioned how religion seems to be more of a phased out philosophy such as saying Jesus Christ as a swear has less meaning today then it did early. Let's not forget his still bothers protestants but I am also focusing on Western culture in general.

Hints of Judeo and Christian influence in society can still be seen when someone sneezes in America its God Bless, and some use the German statement that means the same (Gusuntite no I cannot spell it), and in Mexico and Spanish speaking countries (yes, western cultures) they say Jesus. This still is in the intention to religiously bless someone. Even if you do not think about it our intention is to make them feel better or positive thinking.

Another important aspect of Christianity is brotherly love. This translates into neighborly hospitality and anti-racism. Christianity does not teach to hate non-Christians but denominational dogma (teachings) does. Christianity is also part of the idea that everybody needs to treat others with respect or "Treat others the way you would like to be treated" I do understand that the Golden rule lives in most religions but for America its roots are from Christianity. These beliefs are religious although they do seem ethical. Ethics does not support proper respect.

I want to here more from opposing views that feel that religion is losing its place in society. Yet, the last election proved that using God to get votes can backfire if your part shows that it really does not value religion. Bush has learned this the hard way. For America, people do still value people who hold a strong Christian value which means American culture is far from a society with no use for God. Be thinking about this when you make your responses.

Please, I want to hear your respones.

At 1/4/07 05:58 PM, TonioMiguel wrote: I am really starting see some of you folks focusing on my purpose of this topic and I am liking where some of you are going.

Yah it's a good topic :)

Some of your arguments about the big bang are really fascinating but they are not really the purpose of this topic.

When science is under attack by ignorant people, I must try my best to enlighten them and defend science ;)

I liked how one of you mentioned how religion seems to be more of a phased out philosophy such as saying Jesus Christ as a swear has less meaning today then it did early. Let's not forget his still bothers protestants but I am also focusing on Western culture in general.

Hints of Judeo and Christian influence in society can still be seen when someone sneezes in America its God Bless, and some use the German statement that means the same (Gusuntite no I cannot spell it), and in Mexico and Spanish speaking countries (yes, western cultures) they say Jesus. This still is in the intention to religiously bless someone. Even if you do not think about it our intention is to make them feel better or positive thinking.

You're wrong about that german statement. It's "gesundheit" and it means health. It doesn't really refer to God, though it is indeed a blessing. The intention is indeed that, but it's not inherent to christianity. Muslims would say "Yarhamukallah", meaning "May Allah have mercy on you". Religion has been a fundamental part of culture for thousands of years, it's only natural that it leaves a mark in the language. But "Salud, gezondheid, gesundheit" and so on, it doesn't refer to God anymore. It's expressing that you hope that the person will get a good health, not requesting some God to grant it.

Another important aspect of Christianity is brotherly love. This translates into neighborly hospitality and anti-racism. Christianity does not teach to hate non-Christians but denominational dogma (teachings) does. Christianity is also part of the idea that everybody needs to treat others with respect or "Treat others the way you would like to be treated" I do understand that the Golden rule lives in most religions but for America its roots are from Christianity. These beliefs are religious although they do seem ethical. Ethics does not support proper respect.

While my religion teacher says the essence of christianity is not brotherly love, but love for God and Jesus, opinions differ there. Brotherly love is a beautiful message. However, such an ideal, the golden rule, they can also be derived from a more rational basis. Moral science comes to the same conclusion. And when you act a certain way out of a belief, conviction, that it is the right thing to do, it's a lot more meaningful than when you act that way because some higher power forces you to do it through punishment and rewards (after death). When you come to act a certain way because of your own beliefs, because of reflecting upon them in a rational way, they are a lot more valuable.

Second, deriving beliefs from a moral basis as oposed to from a religious basis, helps prevent misinterpretations or even abuse of religion. Far too many people have used religion in order to get people to act contrary to the essential message of their religion, and contrary to morality.

Third, religion always has the danger of fundamentalism. Fundamentalism leads to the same road, abandoning the essence of the religion, abandoning morality, and abandoning rational thought. It leads to people killing for their religion, to ethnic cleansing, to crazy loons claiming the earth is flat or was created 6000 years ago. Christianity is not about killing heathens, it's not about whether the earth was created as a cosmic accident or not, it's about brotherly love, and love for Jesus. People try to get more from religion than it can offer, and the more fundamental they become, the more they lose track of the essentials of their religion.

I want to here more from opposing views that feel that religion is losing its place in society. Yet, the last election proved that using God to get votes can backfire if your part shows that it really does not value religion. Bush has learned this the hard way. For America, people do still value people who hold a strong Christian value which means American culture is far from a society with no use for God. Be thinking about this when you make your responses.

I think God, be it Jahweh, Allah or Zeus, will always be an inspiration. But we must not allow religion itself to continue to be a reason for our actions. We must not believe in God as an insurance policy if we die, just so we can get into heaven should the religion whose God it is be right. We must not act a certain way because an old book tells us it's how we should act.

As I'm most familiar with christianity, I'll give another example from it. We have an account of an amazing man that lived 2000 years ago, that set an example of how to live. He has inspired many people, and has shown a possible way of living. Jesus has shown it is possible. It's up to us to reflect on his conduct, and see if and why it is an admirable way of living, decide for ourselves what is moral, and eventually follow his example.

I love my fellow man, and I'll do my best to help others. Not because Jesus told me, not because I think I'm going to heaven for it. Because I think if we all pitch in, all love our fellow man, and all try to make each others' lives a tiny bit more pleasant, we can make a better, more comfortable world. We don't really know whether God/Allah/Zeus/... exists, we don't know what they want, we don't know what, if anything, comes after death.

What we CAN do is try our very best to make life on earth as pleasant as possible. Seperate from any religion, but definitely inspired by it.

Because religion will always lead to fundamentalism, as it requires blind faith and suppression of rational thought. There's nothing wrong with the central message of the most important religions in the world, but the implementation will always go wrong if it's based on sheer blind faith.

But it is a fact that the more civilized and advanced a society becomes, the smaller the influence of religion becomes. All modern western powers have secularity. And that's a good thing, for the reasons I've mentioned above.

That said, religion will always remain. The cavemen had gods, the egyptians had gods, the romans had gods, christianity exists for 2000 years, and crazy sects like scientology are popping up and getting a following. Religion is simply in human nature.

I love this thread. calms me down.

At 1/4/07 05:58 PM, TonioMiguel wrote:
Hints of Judeo and Christian influence in society can still be seen when someone sneezes in America its God Bless, and some use the German statement that means the same (Gusuntite no I cannot spell it)

Actually Gesundheit roughly translates to "healthiness". A wish of good health to someone who sneezes... nothing religious about it.

Carry on.

At 1/4/07 08:57 PM, Ravariel wrote:

At 1/4/07 05:58 PM, TonioMiguel wrote:
Hints of Judeo and Christian influence in society can still be seen when someone sneezes in America its God Bless, and some use the German statement that means the same (Gusuntite no I cannot spell it)

Actually Gesundheit roughly translates to "healthiness". A wish of good health to someone who sneezes... nothing religious about it.

Carry on.

Soooo what's the German equivalent of "truthiness?

And did I somehow manage to miss a huge science vs. religion argument with a dre man alt? Wow I need to get on the ball more.