Religion: If You Don't Believe In It Why Does It Bother You?

The ideals of Satanists are too hurt and maim.

My personal beliefs are a little different to most people.

As far as I can see it, science has explained nearly everything back to the big bang and can estimate some of the future (star life cycles, expanding universe etc).

But there are still a lot of un-answered questions, the biggest of which is; ‘What caused the big bang’. Now scientists are trying to figure that out, but all we know for sure is it happened.

Chaos theory is great and all, but I struggle to accept that the universe just popped into existence because it could. Something started that big bang, there was something before the big bang and whatever did ‘cause’ the big bang is the closest thing we have to a god imo.

I often wonder if our universe is in some way inside another one (think Russian dolls) where our universe makes up 1 atom (or 1 proton) of larger universe, and our atoms are universes in their own rights.

Not quite Flionheart. There are many sects of Satanism, much like there are many sects of Christianity or any religion for that matter. A few Satanic sects are actually atheistic and simply view Lucifer as a symbol.

I won't say there aren't individuals or groups of Satanists that hurt and maim, but even then, most rumors and stories that are blamed satanic cults turn out to be urban legend, or not committed by Satanists.

Generally the ideals of true Satanists comically don't differ much from most of the desires of the atheists and agnostics in this thread, it's about the pursuit of knowledge to better understand your existence, and about taking control and responsibility over your own life, leaving your success (and failures) as no one's glory but your own.

"Religion: If you don't believe in it why does it bother you"

Because someone who blows up the *** bus I sit in because of religion sure as hell bothers me.

Definitions from Wikipedia. One could argue as to Wikipedia's reliability as a source of information but feel free to compare those to the ones found in official dictionaries.

Religion: A set of beliefs (...).

Belief: The psychological state in which an individual holds a proposition or premise to be true.

Science: A systematic enterprise of gathering knowledge about the world and organizing and condensing that knowledge into testable laws and theories.

It looks pretty difficult to me to call science a religion while agreeing to those definitions. It also looks difficult (to me) not to consider them based on a completely opposite model of thought.

Aren't believers the ones who should struggle to accept how no one created God and how God had no beginning? They'll argue about how it's impossible for something to come out without being designed, yet they'll tell you God didn't need to be created. Their argument to demonstrate how God had no beginning (and how they know for sure) usually looks like "well... whatever" /slams the door...

I put two of the words you mentioned in italic. Please think about what science really is based on. Science is not asking you to accept something. It will not pretend to be right about something, unless it can be demonstrated by many people, using many different methods. If you can provide evidence that some scientific knowledge is incorrect, "evidence" will humbly be brought back to the rank of "theory" (without needing to wait 4000 years for scientists to admit their wrong).

If you can improve a theory by demonstrating concepts that a previous model wasn't able to explain, your model will be used until someone else comes out with a better one. Science is an ever-improving collective effort because it relies on testable laws and theories. You're not supposed to accept science, you're supposed to help science by testing its limits and trying to prove it wrong. Science is a reliable methodology that I think we should all try to use when we reason.

I always think that the best approach to religion is that blind faith and blind doubt are equally as stupid.
That thought only really represents my concept of divinity and deities etc.
Religion as ideology for living your life is just baffling to me.
I mean religious types knock science but you have to consider that progressive, contemporary sciences conduct experiments in search of insight and the majority of results favour inconclusion. Science isn't afraid to say "we don't know". Isn't a system based on *belief* quite worrying when it claims to have the answers all of the time?

Sorry but I think that's a judgment. It's also a pretty destructive stereotype, perhaps true about many, but not very useful to point out. You should remember that religious people are still people with a brain. They have the ability to reason rationally, only, because of indoctrination, they have been conditioned into believing that an answer can be true to them without being demonstrated. They'll often use similar rhetoric: "It's true to me" or "I know it in my heart" ...

However, by assuming that they CAN'T reason, an atheist is not respectful to their intelligence. Even though it is extremely difficult for indoctrinated people to accept evidence that contradicts their beliefs, it is possible. If there was a reason for them to start douting, because of some events in their live making them disagree, there's a reasonable chance they would see atheism as a positive alternative instead of looking for a new set of beliefs.

Incorrect.If it is not subject to testing it cannot be measured, ergo cannot be statistically criticised, ergo cannot reject its own null hypothesis.
There are lots of scientists who have religious believes that they do not find mutually exclusive to their scientific backgrounds.
As for me, I don't know nor care. That's the best agnosticism you will find for free :P

Lol I CBA with the video tbh. I will look at it though...

dooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooosh

This type of video kinda bugs me. It's a very arrogant, condescending delivery of analogies that don't really have any substance.

Critical statistical analysis teaches you early on that association and causation aren't mutually inclusive so using the inverse of decreasing probability isn't really going to work.
Then stupid crap like 'a mosquito in a room'
The probability of success of getting a succinct outcome in an open system on a random variable using an unreliable method... do I need to go on?

I mean you could even excise god and just say "can you measure for an unknown variable in an open system without a definitive model of detection?"

-No- :3

Well, we haven't been able to successfully clone humans for different reasons. I think one of most obvious ones is that our scientific knowledge is still growing and that we just lack the understanding required to achieve such stunt. There's even a debate of ethics which holds many of us back from even wanting this to happen. I'm sure you don't even want to think about how people would abuse this for military purposes...

But just because we haven't succeeded doesn't mean we can't. If you could go back in time, and predict the weather, you could easily be considered the Weather Forecasting Prophet of God. We're capable to prevent raining, nowadays. It was done for the Beijing Olympics. We're also able to calculate approximately how old dinosaur fossils are... it's not 5000 years.

If you want good arguments for atheism, read "The God Delusion" from Richard Dawkins, published in 2006. He's a very famous scientist, not just some teenager trying to feel justified. His arguments are a lot more rational and a lot less arrogant than this video too. You'll be amazed at how many good reasons we have to discard the possibility of a god.

Also, here's a quote I love:

"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours." ~ Stephen Roberts

@Odin.Trelan
I have not read all prior 37 pages of this thread, but somehow I stumbled upon this post and I want to respond to it specifically with my thoughts. Enjoy.There is something very interesting about life as we know it. Everything follows a similar pattern. All life is shaped similarly. Everything lives and dies and reproduces. It is safe to say that life is made up of cycles. There are cycles in nature. There are cycles in creations of man. There are cycles in history. So what isn't to say that the universe does not follow a similar pattern. If everything we know on this planet goes through cycles. Why not everything outside of this planet as well? Stars even get born and die. There is a new-age theory that states that the big bang was just one of many. That in fact the universe contracts and expands over and over. Perhaps the universe is infinite and has always existed. It is not a concept easily swallowed as everything humans observe has a start and end. But if so many people believe in God, then why not the the universe as infinite and eternal?Agreed. Thus the dilemma arises. God could not have created himself, or just popped out of nothing. That question is applicable in this case as well.This is what I was talking about previously. There must be something at some time that started it all. Because that is all humans can comprehend. But God is beyond comprehension. One could spend several lifetimes thinking of every single thing God entails and still not even scratch the surface. It's easier to just think of God in three or four words. Omniscient, Omnipotent, Omnipresent and I suppose toss "all-loving/compassionate" in there for good measure. I don't normally think that, because it should automatically be assumed. The other three traits are strangely not present in all faiths throughout history. Particularly the last one, as it is another unfathomable concept. In all places, and all time periods simultaneously. It gets even more difficult to chew on when the concept of free-will is thrown in the mix.So a being can be eternal, but a universe cannot? What exists beyond the edges of the universe? Another -finite- universe that another -eternal- God created? That doesn't add up for me.Contradiction: "There must be something at some time that started it all, a first cause."I like that logic.I don't think that alone would be enough to persuade any given man to consider the possibility of a God. I think there must be some inherent traits that man must possess. For example, there is not a human being alive that has not wondered what their purpose in life is. Or why it is they exist. Or what will happen after they die. These are distinct human traits.

Perhaps also a little revelation for the original men. In the Bible's case, Adam and Eve. Throughout the ages there has always been some mythology involving a God or Gods (which is equally just as plausible.) It would be strange to think that mankind made up something that so many people have born witness to. It's easier to think that God revealed that he exists to one person and that guy spread a rumor around that got muddled in the process and changed depending on the persons needs. I suppose that would be like the concept of God evolving. Which falls in line with the model of mankind's existence.Who was it that decided that evolution and Adam and Eve could not coexist? It kind of upsets me because evolution obviously exists. Just as it is a common train of thought to think that everything has a starting point then why not man have a starting point of a man created by God? From that point onward evolution comes into play.Morality is a whole different ball-o-wax. There is absolutely nothing you could ever say or write that displays logically that objective morality exists. The only thing I could possibly think of is that no man is born with a desire to kill. But even that is definitely a subjective opinion. I apologize if it appears I tear you apart a little here, I mean no harm.That would be the case if morality was objective. Yes.By this do you mean that we all have our own version of right and wrong or that we all share similar concepts of what is right and wrong on a basic level. As per say the ten commandments or some such thing.I suppose I agree here as well. The first premise is logical, and dare I say, objective. The second premise is subjective and still attempts to remain in the realm of logic, but falls short as there are other ways of logical thinking that combat it.Here's where you just paint the page with subjective thinking. Everything from here own is most definitely based only on your own perception and memories. Well, you're about to hear someone with that opinion. There are all sorts of scales as to where man's morality lie with this scenario. The government was upset about it because they lost money and they need to "care" about their citizens because a government without support of it's people in America, can scarcely be called a government. It is like how government officials say they believe in God because they want the popular vote from Christians. Or this battle against outlawing illegal immigration in Arizona. Because the lawmaker that pushes for amnesty will win the vote of the immigrants which in turn equals more power. American citizens cares about it because they have been raised to feel pride about their property. The rest of the world cared about it because the USA is a Superpower and anything set to change how they behave to another county will affect the world. Yes, that is my opinion, I will not defend it because anyone can refute it, excepting the part about the government. The way the world is wired is around money. The world currently is not doing too bad. It's a little polluted and run down but it's still spinning. However, the average humans perception on the world is quite a bit more negative...because of the economy in any given country. The state of the world's finances. It has caused people to do all sorts of strange erratic behavior. I'm digressing, sorry.Nope. Only everyone you've seen through the media. Iraq's thought it was super incredibly fantastic.To aid our survival. It isn't??? If the media said that is was a good thing and let Islam keep doing more large terrorist attacks, many, many more people would have died. They would not have survived, and in turn have not helped humanity continue to survive.Our society says it was wrong, so everyone thinks it was wrong. Islam society said it was right, so everyone thinks it was right. Mmm...For sure. And so is what Hitler did which is why he didn't have anyone fight in his army or support his dictatorship.The people who died trying to save people did so because they formed a belief system that entailed saving lives as being more important than keeping themselves alive. Hence why they became police and firefighters. I admire humans that form core values that strongly that they would sacrifice themselves for what they believe in. Whether what they do is "good" or "evil", at least they follow their heart.I agree with you here. Except for one thing. It is now my turn to share a few personal stories. I'll be brief.
I got ripped off about $1,000 by Gold's Gym and did not take it to court. It happened because I was stupid and I accepted the consequences of my actions. In your scenario the aethist caused you to have a reaction which in turn caused you to damage his property. The athiest is aware that his words will cause some offense, and should be willing to accept the consequences. Anything beyond that is society fluff.

I had a $600 sound system in my car. They got stolen one day after I had this luxury for about a year. I will admit, I was depressed for about 4 days over it. But you want to know my honest, initial reaction to what happened. The moment I walked to my car in the morning and saw the driver side door slightly ajar. My heart beating a little fast and my mind full of confusion. "Why did I leave the door slightly ajar?" Then as pull the handle and the door doesn't open because it's locked. I look through the window and see that my stereo is gone. Here was my first thought,

"I wonder what drugs it is that they are doing that makes them want money so bad as to steal a car system?"

I knew the risks I was taking having a sound system in my car. I knew one day that it would get stolen. My system got stolen because I provided the perpetrators with the opportunity to steal it. I did not have a car alarm installed in my vehicle to deter them, etc.Good catch. Although it could have been that he knew you thought they were wrong and was trying to persuade you to see your side. That is what debate entails.He he, that's nice. I agree. Interestingly enough, I had a conversation with a man tonight that said, "I firmly believe in God because of how wicked the world is." or something to that effect. I asked him if he believes in God so that he can cope with this harsh reality with the thought of a pure life after this one. He said yes, but alluded to some personal experiences he had that built his faith.I have to ask, since you said you want to see if he revealed himself more specifically in history, have you checked out the "Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ" It often cross-references with the Bible and contains only writings of prophets and all that fun stuff. Curious to know your opinion on it after reading. I have read the bible when I was younger, and I do have an opinion on it. That it is a good thing, just don't take it too seriously. It speaks of love and forgiveness and kindness and compassion. Of only good wonderful ideas that should not be perverted. Yet somehow the biggest church in the world is molesting young boys. That's not in the bible.I really, really like how you phrased this. I am trying to develop some amount of faith in a higher power..to no avail thus far. But after reading this I am thinking that perhaps I have been going about it all wrong.

Thank you for your time, hope you enjoyed reading, sorry for the super long post. Goodbye.

P.S. I do not support terrorism and am not a registered voter in the U.S.

I'm well aware of Richard Dawkins but I don't respect his methods either. He has an agenda to crush religion and he warps the science around getting to that end. I think he needs someone to pull him to one side and teach him about impartiality or, at the very least, remind him what a null hypothesis is lol.

I think this debate has projected me as a pro-god, pro-religious person when I'm really not. I personally agree with Einstein's account of morality being the product of sentience, a human concern and nothing backed by divine influence.
I'm also of the belief that religion should be personal, or at least kept within its community. It is meant to be about the devotion and not the promotion. I personally disagree with several elements posed by religions and rather than have those feelings stimulated and reciprocate. I'd sooner the relgious folk and fellow science folk could just get on with things.

And before someone comes back and says "science is always speaking out" remember you're using a computer. Say 'thank you' to science before you berate it :P

This thread came up today on the most recent so I started reading some of the posts. I will readily admit that I did not read all 40 pages @.@. I also want to make the comment that it is good to see people talking about something of value and importance on these forums.

My question to all of you who debate science verses religion is what if neither is completely wrong or right? What if they are not in juxtaposition to one another but actually confirm and compliment one another?

Judea-Christian beliefs say that God created man in his own image. Technically that Satan was an adversary who lead Adam, Eve and from certain accounts Lilith out of the proverbial Garden of Eden by eating fruit from the tree of knowledge.

What if God was a race from another planet; the leader of a project to find out their origin. What if Satan and the 1/3 of Angels thrown from this concept of Heaven were merely scientists who wanted to give humans knowledge they felt would give them an advantage during this project?

If ignorance is bliss this concept would hold true. Especially if you read the current versions of biblical stories.

As for Satan and his 1/3 of followers. It is then stated by Judea-Christian Biblical account that they spent 1,000 years upon the earth before God created "hell" and cast them into it. It was during this phase of human existence that mythologies became rampant. Several religions having similar and the same "Gods" came from all ends of the earth. Mayans, Romans, Greeks, Egyptian, Norwegian and Asian cultures which had no ways of communicating with one another all managed to come up with religious mythologies that mirror one another. Are we so simple to believe that this was a mere act of coincidence? What if indeed their beliefs were based on these greater beings who assisted God that had been cast aside? Beings that probably had knowledge of genetics, chemistry and other sciences. Beings that had no sense of obligation to order. Why is it so hard to believe that they might have used that knowledge to make animals that would not be seen anywhere else in history? Or super humans with powers unattainable by most during that period in history? Or to create land marks using advanced concepts of engineering and design that would out last the test of time as well as natural disasters?

It is then so hard to believe that in order to maintain the integrity of his project God would then create a cataclysmic event such as a flood to erase any damage that had been done after eliminating his adversaries from this realm? That Atlantis might have been a real place - the home to these beings. That in flooding the Earth depicted in the Biblical stories of Noah and his Ark would serve to remove all psychical evidence of these beings in an attempt to get the earth back on course. We are all aware that there are areas of our own planet so buried under water that we have no access to them and very little knowledge about their contents.

Then the world goes on for thousands of years, progressing slowly in technology and advancing at a rate normal for our species without incident as we flash forward to the late 1960's. The reports of Aliens landing on the planet. The creation of Area 51.

It is at this point in our existence that we go from technology advancing at the pace of a snail to that of a cheetah. We go from black and white television to broad casting pictures from the far depths of space in the time span of less then 50 years. When prior our advancement had been minimal at best over hundreds of thousands of years.

If we hold true to the concept that God created us in his image to find out the roots of his own origin and we couple that with the reports of Alien abduction as well as the prior evidence - Is it so hard to believe that both the religious views of God as well as some of the scientific concepts of our creation aren't in fact one and the same?

If God created us to be like him/her/it - is is so hard to believe that God would have a vested interest in us as a collective, in our well being, care and maintenance? Is it also such a far stretch that our own concepts of science would be so far from that of our creator(s)? If we are doing an experiment we monitor it's progression. Sometimes from a distant level based on desired results and sometimes with physical analysis which requires us to be present and to interact with our test subject.

We are electro-chemical beings. Even the concept of a spirit can be assimilated to the knowledge that energy can not be created or destroyed it merely changes form. What if just as there is on earth an energy source from which all souls or (energy forces) come from. It is so described in Jewish mysticism as "The Guff of Souls" also depicted in the movie The Seventh Sign. If we do in fact have a source of energy that gives each one of us life the concept of ghosts, reincarnation, past lives, heaven and, hell as well as the concept of life after our earthly existence is probable. What if the determination of the transformation of our energy is based on the chemical reactions and actions our bodies produce during our time here? What if just as we have control in our lives here - once we die our beliefs actions and desires dictate what our energy transforms into?

I chose to take human experience as evidence when making a basis for my own decisions about my creator. When you look at not just religion or science but at the history of human experiences as a whole, a lot of different aspects of our lives have common threading that intertwines across all boarders.

And so far in my short time here I believe that religion is the corset to the soul, that it was created by earthly leaders to control the masses. The concept of be good now and get a reward when you die just sounds like one of those email scams from South Africa. Just a little to good to be true and not something I am willing to buy into. I am also saddened by the fact that religious beliefs have killed more people through out history then any other reason for war combined. But it does not negate the thought that I do believe that some greater being created me or that even though I am very much an ant upon this spinning rock to most, that occasionally I am a blimp on God's radar. That I couldn't possibly know all there is to know about life and/or death.

But that is me, those are my thoughts, I am an individual and how I find God is different from the way the other 8 billion people on this earth do. Many people need religion, they need the sense of structure it provides as well as the community. Yet many other people need the comfort and security of tangible evidence in order to place their trust in any thing. It is this individuality that makes us amazing creatures.

Ghandi said it best, "God is an elephant in a dark room, a Jew may touch his tusk and say that God is hard and smooth, a Buddhist may touch his skin and argue that he is rough and dry and yet a Christian his tail and tell the others God is soft and fluffy. They will sit around this room and dispute that they are right and the others are wrong when in fact it would be more prudent to celebrate the fact that they each found God, all in their own way."

However one thing we should focus on is that we have been given the gift of life. If there is a greater being responsible, big bang, or even if it is just our parents who are the reason we are here we should be thankful for that blessing and the opportunities it provides us all. :)