Would this world be a better place without religion?

[levi501]

Just got a Christian spam mail and thought it fitting:
<snip>

lol, congratulations... you found a way to get off topic without quoting scripture.

 

[jonwsj]

Socrates: "The unexamined life is not worth living."

Meaningless? Hardly. If anything, the idea of life having meaning--if Christianity does indeed believe such a thing-- could only have been borrowed by Christianity, not from it.

For an atheist, the _examined_ life is not worth living.

But you're right--I shouldn't have said meaning comes from "Christianity"--it comes from belief in the _God_ of Christianity. All of nature points to the existence of God, and always has, including when those quotes you mentioned were written. People can get a concept of this God simply by looking at nature around them. With this concept of God, they can give everything they see meaning.

But if we all just crawled out of some slime millions of years ago by chance, with no rhyme or reason, we are valueless and everything is meaningless.

I know that I have value because I was created for a purpose by a Supreme Being who cares about his creation. This God is what gives me value.

--Jon

 

[Randall McNally]

If everyone was like me - no overwhelming need for ontological closure, no particular desire for metaphysical fairness - then the sudden removal of religion would be minimally disruptive. But I think perhaps the reason I am quite comfortably an atheist, while many theists find atheism inscrutable, is that everyone is not like me in significant ways.

 

[levi501]

Who's more moral... those who don't believe in a God but act morally on their own volition...
..or those that believe in God and act moral to appease him?

 

[sanaa]

Who's more moral... those who don't believe in a God but act morally on their own volition...
..or those that believe in God and act moral to appease him?

those who dont believe in a God and act morally on their own will

 

[Ninja Turtles]

Who's more moral... those who don't believe in a God but act morally on their own volition...
..or those that believe in God and act moral to appease him?

Kind of in line with is one genuinely moral if they act on faith or if they act because they know (as in know the truth behind the faith)?

 

[eptatorata]

But if we all just crawled out of some slime millions of years ago by chance, with no rhyme or reason, we are valueless and everything is meaningless.

I know that I have value because I was created for a purpose by a Supreme Being who cares about his creation. This God is what gives me value.

I like to turn this around.

If we are created for a purpose, then we are valueless and everything is meaningless, because we exist only for the creator's self-gratification.

If, on the other hand, life as we know it arose because it could, then we have a unique chance and opportunity to set our own goals and make our own meaning.

 

[ChristianCenturion]

I like to turn this around.

If we are created for a purpose, then we are valueless and everything is meaningless, because we exist only for the creator's self-gratification.

If, on the other hand, life as we know it arose because it could, then we have a unique chance and opportunity to set our own goals and make our own meaning.

That fails to address that the Creator has a purpose for His children of gratification (or better termed as benefit) to others created by Him.
It only has some worthlessness when we do not live up to that purpose; however, there is also a purpose in the bad example for others to learn from - so that too has reason and proper boundaries.

As you can tell, I am not joining in the thought that some people are worthless or that gratifying God is valueless. It is also not lost on me that in that post there was a shift in value simply because it was from God to man.

 

[Eudaimonist]

For an atheist, the _examined_ life is not worth living.

From personal experience, you are mistaken. In fact, this is one of my key principles in life, and it has never let me down.

 

[jonwsj]

I like to turn this around.

If we are created for a purpose, then we are valueless and everything is meaningless, because we exist only for the creator's self-gratification.

If, on the other hand, life as we know it arose because it could, then we have a unique chance and opportunity to set our own goals and make our own meaning.

We can't make our own meaning. We either have meaning or we don't. If there is no God, then to think we have meaning is to delude ourselves.

--Jon

 

[Randall McNally]

For an atheist, the _examined_ life is not worth living.

Just stop before your efforts to force us into a philosophical box become really irritating.

But you're right--I shouldn't have said meaning comes from "Christianity"--it comes from belief in the _God_ of Christianity.

Egoism has really given you tunnel-vision.

All of nature points to the existence of God, and always has, including when those quotes you mentioned were written. People can get a concept of this God simply by looking at nature around them. With this concept of God, they can give everything they see meaning.

An honest, unbiased look at the world does not suggest the Judeo-Christian God. If anything, the most reasonable hypothesis is a pantheon, with differing personalities responsible for the observed antagonistic features of the world.

But if we all just crawled out of some slime millions of years ago by chance, with no rhyme or reason, we are valueless and everything is meaningless.

It certainly seems that way if you think value and meaning should be derived from 3.5 billion year old abstractions. Fortunately, I don't think anyone does.

I know that I have value because I was created for a purpose by a Supreme Being who cares about his creation. This God is what gives me value.

Funny. Knowing that I am merely a pawn in some other being's teleology - which entails an outcome that cannot fail to obtain - is something less than my ideal purpose.

 

[eptatorata]

That fails to address that the Creator has a purpose for His children of gratification (or better termed as benefit) to others created by Him.

If we are created for a purpose, then there is no meaning to life other than to measure up to an externally imposed standard. We're glorified lab rats.

It only has some worthlessness when we do not live up to that purpose; however, there is also a purpose in the bad example for others to learn from - so that too has reason and proper boundaries.

Obedient lab rats make for better experiments?

As you can tell, I am not joining in the thought that some people are worthless or that gratifying God is valueless.

No, but what you wrote can be easily misread that way.

It is also not lost on me that in that post there was a shift in value simply because it was from God to man.

Quite frankly, I do not understand what you tried to convey. Do I value man over the alleged interest of a purported deity? Yes.

 

[eptatorata]

We can't make our own meaning. We either have meaning or we don't. If there is no God, then to think we have meaning is to delude ourselves.

The only meaning there is happens to be whatever we give ourselves.

If you need belief in a deity as an enabler, then so be it.

 

[]RiSeN[]

mor-al adj 1. good in character or conduct; virtuous according to civilized standards of right and wrong;just: a moral act, a moral man.2.capable of understanding right form wrong: a little baby is not a moral being.3.based on the principles of right conduct rather than law or custom.4.teaching a good lesson; having a good influence.

Both, in my opinion Levi501, are wrong,

Although both do good works, both have missed the mark. Both are only moral in the intrest of self preservation. Where does an atheist obtain a sense of morality? If there is no God why would atheists also have a need for "good" and "bad" in there history?
One prohibitive command was given to Adam, that forbidding eating of (or even touching) the tree of the knowledge of good and bad. God’s test of man’s obedience and devotion is notable for the respect it showed for man’s dignity.

By it God attributed nothing bad to Adam; he did not use as a test the prohibition of, for example, bestiality, murder, or some similar vile or base act, thereby implying that God felt Adam might have some despicable inclinations residing within him. Eating was normal, proper, and Adam had been told to "eat to satisfaction" of what God had given him. But God now tested Adam by restricting his eating of the fruit of this one tree, God thus causing the eating of that fruit to symbolize that the eater comes to a knowledge that enables him to decide for himself what is "good" or what is "bad" for man. Thus, God neither imposed a hardship on the man nor did He attribute to Adam anything beneath his dignity as a human son of God.

If an atheists does not beleive in God, why would he carry the burden and hardships which come with the knowledge of "good" and "bad"? why would he even have a need for morality as defined in the dictionary?

As for the believer, would his God not be able to see through his empty lip-service, thus leaving him worst off perhaps than the non-believer?
"Never do people gather grapes from thorns or figs from thistles, do they? Likewise every good tree produces fine fruit, but every rotten tree produces worthless fruit; a good tree cannot bear worthless fruit, neither can a rotten tree produce fine fruit. Every tree not producing fine fruit gets cut down and thrown into the fire. Really, then, by their fruits you will recognize those men." "A good man brings forth good out of the good treasure of his heart, but a wicked man brings forth what is wicked out of his wicked treasure; for out of the heart’s abundance his mouth speaks."—Matt. 7:16-20; Luke 6:45.

 

[HazyRigby]

For an atheist, the _examined_ life is not worth living.

Do you have any proof of that?

But you're right--I shouldn't have said meaning comes from "Christianity"--it comes from belief in the _God_ of Christianity.

Do you have any proof that Buddha or Confucius or Lao-Tsu believed in the "God of Christianity"? How does it work, then, that I have meaning in my life but don't believe in your god?

All of nature points to the existence of God, and always has, including when those quotes you mentioned were written.

Do you have any proof for either of your statements?

But if we all just crawled out of some slime millions of years ago by chance, with no rhyme or reason, we are valueless and everything is meaningless.

I have value. Everything in my life is meaningful. Why is it so hard for you to understand that not everyone needs a god to impart meaning or purpose?

I know that I have value because I was created for a purpose by a Supreme Being who cares about his creation. This God is what gives me value.

You don't "know" that. You believe that. And if that's what gives your life meaning, peachy keen. But don't take your own superficial value judgments and apply them to other people. That's akin to me saying that Christians should just go ahead and kill themselves and go live with Jesus. That sort of statement is pretty silly and insulting, isn't it?

 

[jonwsj]

You don't "know" that. You believe that. And if that's what gives your life meaning, peachy keen. But don't take your own superficial value judgments and apply them to other people. That's akin to me saying that Christians should just go ahead and kill themselves and go live with Jesus. That sort of statement is pretty silly and insulting, isn't it?

I probably would kill myself to be with Jesus if I didn't consider suicide a sin. I'm being honest there, not flippant. But it's really only sinners like me who need a savior. That's why I consider myself blessed to have lived such a sinful life and felt all the guilt which drove me to Christ. Religion is man's way of "getting right" with God. I freely admit that. The only religion that allows you to get right with God is Christianity, because no other religious leader paid in full for anybody's sins. Confucious didn't, Muhammed didn't, etc.

People who are already righteous do not need God and do not need Jesus. There are many atheists who are way more morally upstanding than I am, so they don't need Jesus. That's okay. They don't need a savior. There's nothing I have against them. Yeah, my religion is a crutch. A crutch I need to keep me from falling into hell to pay for all my lying, lusting, gluttony, pride, etc. on my own. Someone already paid for those sins, and I accept that.

--Jon

 

[PandaBear]

Just wanted to point out that all the people you have quoted were AFTER JUDAISM which is what Christianity comes from so perhaps those people borrowed from the OT prophets and patriarchs

I don't know if there is any history on this, but do we know how much contact Confucious and Lao Tse and the Buddha had with Judaism in their lifetimes. They were existant at the same time, but not the same region. Not to mention, the actual writer of the Tao Te Ching is not someone of whom we have much historical background (last I heard).

So you might be correct, but I hesitate to go much beyond "maybe"!

PB

 

[PandaBear]

I don't know if there is any history on this, but do we know how much contact Confucious and Lao Tse and the Buddha had with Judaism in their lifetimes. They were existant at the same time, but not the same region. Not to mention, the actual writer of the Tao Te Ching is not someone of whom we have much historical background (last I heard).

So you might be correct, but I hesitate to go much beyond "maybe"!

PB

I wrote the above, but I need to qualify that I'm writing from memory of a class I took 6 years ago. So all of my statements (particularly "existant at the same time") should be under the "If I remember correctly" umbrella.

PB

 

[PandaBear]

Okay, regarding the OP, I can only speak to how I feel about religon, which has been a huge focus of my adult life. It's been casual study, to be true, and I won't pretend to "be" of any one religion. In fact, I'm drifting. But if the world were to lose religion, I assume the world would hypothetically lose the effects of religion. In some ways, yahoo, because religions warfare won't be missed. Not by me anyway.

However, the art, the wisdom, the worship...I would be devastated to lose that. So much beauty has come from every tradition (of which I am aware), and the dissipation of beauty would be terrible. For me, religion is a channel for my awe, and a palace of inspiration. Could I have those things without religion? Don't know. But I don't want to find out; I'm not prepared. Besides, I may be disgusted by rigidity, but I am delighted by the spirituality.

Regarding how the world would be in terms of behavior, etc., I have no idea. I was an English major.

PB