Is religion obsolete?

MatthewVII

So before anyone assaults me about what I'm thinking, just hear me out.

Just to clarify, I'm a former Catholic (by birth, not by choice) and now an atheist

So what I was thinking, I can see how religion was a necessary institution in the past, but it's functions have largely been replaced.

1) Religion was used as a way to explain phenomena. We now have science for that

2) Religion and the prospect of damnation for sins was a pseudo-threat of punishment for crimes, misdeeds etc. Now we have laws and law enforcement to carry this out

3) Religion was used as a way of explaining why man is on earth and man's place in the cosmos. Biology and astrology can explain both our origins and the nature of the universe at large

Currently, the only purpose religion serves is as a moral compass or guide, which I believe need not be enshrined in a formal tenet as they are basic ways of being a good person which all people should learn as they grow up without need for organised religion. Respect and caring for your fellow man is a social evolutionary mechanism which came about in early society from the observation that together, societies are stronger, not from ethereal forces commanding us to behave so.

With that, I believe the modern concept of religion no longer is necessary for a healthy society, and years of adherence to strict scriptures may have caused portions of society to become maladaptive and narrow (read: homophobia, secularism, disillusionment)

Any thoughts?

mikemac

MatthewVII wrote: »

Just to clarify, I'm a former Catholic (by birth, not by choice) and now an atheist

Have you officially left the Catholic Church?
I don't know what the official term is, it's not excommunication but something like it.

MatthewVII

mikemac wrote: »

Have you officially left the Catholic Church?
I don't know what the official term is, it's not excommunication but something like it.

Nope, I don't think religion is something you should have to officially secede from, it feels like cancelling a subscription or something. Besides, I had no choice in my baptism so I should be able to leave with similarly little effort.

Religion is spiritual, it shouldn't be bureaucratic

CDfm

You seem to have loads of questions for someone who is so sure.

Maybe its about living a better life then you did yesterday.:D

MatthewVII

CDfm wrote: »

You seem to have loads of questions for someone who is so sure.

Maybe its about living a better life then you did yesterday.:D

My questioning is only for those who accept a belief which I find illogical

And humans have more power to change the quality of their lives than an external power, or to quote my favourite seanfhocal "Cabhraionn Dia leis an te a cabhraionn leis fhein" - God helps those who help themselves

swimgal08

Religion is true no doubt and yes there is a after life you need to see a priest

explain miracles

visionary's

eddie stone

all these amazing people one main ruination of this country is people like you and websites like this greed and things like removing c operate punishment from schools would solve alot of anti-social behave r from our streets like knife crime drugs etc.

its going down the drain thanks to people like you .

maybe the recession is a good people , people may turn back to god .

and start talking to each other again and i mean in the REAL world
thing you aren't too for miler with spending so much of your life wasting time on silly things like internet forums.

CDfm

MatthewVII wrote: »

My questioning is only for those who accept a belief which I find illogical

And humans have more power to change the quality of their lives than an external power, or to quote my favourite seanfhocal "Cabhraionn Dia leis an te a cabhraionn leis fhein" - God helps those who help themselves

well - i am a catholic - and that is essentially our belef system.

Tar.Aldarion

swimgal08 wrote: »

Religion is true no doubt and yes there is a after life you need to see a priest

explain miracles

visionary's

eddie stone

all these amazing people one main ruination of this country is people like you and websites like this greed and things like removing c operate punishment from schools would solve alot of anti-social behave r from our streets like knife crime drugs etc.

its going down the drain thanks to people like you .

What are you doing up at this hour? Surely your parents should have you in bed?


Anyway, OP this is not the place for this thread. The people here believe in christianity so it is obviously never going to be obsolete for them.
Also, yes, other services are now available instead of the churchs but I believe most people need something to believe in.

MatthewVII

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

Anyway, OP this is not the place for this thread. The people here believe in christianity so it is obviously never going to be obsolete for them.
Also, yes, other services are now available instead of the churchs but I believe most people need something to believe in.

Sorry if I'm out of place, I just wondering what Catholics thought of the place religion has in today's society

swimgal08 wrote:

explain miracles

Miracles can be explained by logic. Those that can't are due to random occurrence, no different from a coin landing on tails rather than heads, or so I believe.

swimgal08 wrote:

Eddie Stone

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddie_Stone

swimgal08

MatthewVII wrote: »

Sorry if I'm out of place, I just wondering what Catholics thought of the place religion has in today's society



Miracles can be explained by logic. Those that can't are due to random occurrence, no different from a coin landing on tails rather than heads, or so I believe.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddie_Stone

:mad:

swimgal08

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

What are you doing up at this hour? Surely your parents should have you in bed?


Anyway, OP this is not the place for this thread. The people here believe in christianity so it is obviously never going to be obsolete for them.
Also, yes, other services are now available instead of the churchs but I believe most people need something to believe in.

when u have REAL friends and act normal i may start talking to ya

wasting ur life on this,,, great life huh !!

swimgal08

MatthewVII wrote: »

Miracles can be explained by logic. Those that can't are due to random occurrence, no different from a coin landing on tails rather than heads, or so I believe.

so how is this done than just by luck is it //.. i dont think so

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPYEw3BOj6I


open your eyes and witness god and then you will feel fulfilled but until then there will be a empty part in your heart

MatthewVII

Please, for your own sake, found your belief on something other than an obvious scam. Have some more respect for your religion than giving in to those profiteers

sionnach

MatthewVII wrote: »

With that, I believe the modern concept of religion no longer is necessary for a healthy society

Of course religion is no longer necessary for a healthy society. 80% of swedes do not believe in God but Sweden is arguably one of the most civilized states in the world and consistently topping quality of life surveys. Ditto for Norway.

MatthewVII wrote: »

Years of adherence to strict scriptures may have caused portions of society to become maladaptive and narrow (read: homophobia, secularism, disillusionment)

There's no "may have" about it, it certainly has caused very large portions of society to be narrow minded and intolerant, not just in thought but in deed.

Tar.Aldarion

swimgal08 wrote: »

when u have REAL friends and act normal i may start talking to ya

wasting ur life on this,,, great life huh !!

Cool, I'll send you a message when I get friends, you send me one when your legal.

Húrin

MatthewVII wrote: »

So before anyone assaults me about what I'm thinking, just hear me out.

Just to clarify, I'm a former Catholic (by birth, not by choice) and now an atheist

So what I was thinking, I can see how religion was a necessary institution in the past, but it's functions have largely been replaced.

1) Religion was used as a way to explain phenomena. We now have science for that

2) Religion and the prospect of damnation for sins was a pseudo-threat of punishment for crimes, misdeeds etc. Now we have laws and law enforcement to carry this out

3) Religion was used as a way of explaining why man is on earth and man's place in the cosmos. Biology and astrology can explain both our origins and the nature of the universe at large

Currently, the only purpose religion serves is as a moral compass or guide, which I believe need not be enshrined in a formal tenet as they are basic ways of being a good person which all people should learn as they grow up without need for organised religion. Respect and caring for your fellow man is a social evolutionary mechanism which came about in early society from the observation that together, societies are stronger, not from ethereal forces commanding us to behave so.

With that, I believe the modern concept of religion no longer is necessary for a healthy society, and years of adherence to strict scriptures may have caused portions of society to become maladaptive and narrow (read: homophobia, secularism, disillusionment)

Any thoughts?

Yes. This is the right place to ask these questions. You have asked your questions in an honest and civilised way and for that I doubt you will be subjected to any written 'assault'!

1. Explaining natural phenomena is indeed something that Christian churches tried in the past, but it was never a central reason for their existence.

Science is good and there is no conflict between science and religion, contrary to popular belief. I think some people think there is because they expect more from science or religion than either can deliver.

Science deals with physics (the physical, material universe) and religion deals with metaphysics (beyond physics; or, explaining the ultimate nature of being and the world).

For instance, science has the potential to show us all the things that exist in the universe and how they function, but it cannot answer the questions like "why is there a universe?", "has is any meaning?", "does God exist?", "is the universe a part of or apart from God?" and so on. For this, religion and philosophy offer their services.

2. Laws existed in the old days too. I think that in the past there was more of a sense that morality was universally true, not invented by human constructs, and not relative to cultures. Thus, morality had more credibility and thus inspired people to take it more seriously. It was indeed a characteristic of the past that people followed religious instruction merely for the fear of going to hell. This is not true Christianity or true Catholicism. It is a symptom of lazy clergymen just telling people what to do rather than helping them to follow Jesus.

3. I think that expecting this much from biology and astronomy is a case of expecting too much, coming back to point 1.

Humans do not need a moral guide like religion simply to know what is good morality. For that we have our consciences, which I believe to be God-given.
However we all know that we are not genuinely good people, because we often act against our consciences.

I agree that organised religion has a tendency to dilute and corrupt the original message which gave rise to it, which is how the highly prescriptive Catholic church here in the bad old days came to so much resemble the strict, self-righteous Pharisees that Jesus rebuked in his time.

One last point is that there are religions, and forms of Christianity, other than Catholicism.

Biro

sionnach wrote: »

There's no "may have" about it, it certainly has caused very large portions of society to be narrow minded and intolerant, not just in thought but in deed.

If you think that humanity would be any more or less diverse in its range of psychopaths, narrowminded people, voilent people, deranged people etc without any religion in human history then you'd be mistaken.

Biro

Húrin wrote: »

Science is good and there is no conflict between science and religion, contrary to popular belief. I think some people think there is because they expect more from science or religion than either can deliver.

I wish people could get this through their heads.

Húrin

sionnach wrote: »

Of course religion is no longer necessary for a healthy society. 80% of swedes do not believe in God but Sweden is arguably one of the most civilized states in the world and consistently topping quality of life surveys. Ditto for Norway.

I would expect that this is more a result of decades of prosperity, and a culture of temperance, than an outcome of atheist enlightenment.

Biro wrote: »

If you think that humanity would be any more or less diverse in its range of psychopaths, narrowminded people, voilent people, deranged people etc without any religion in human history then you'd be mistaken.

I am a Christian and I think sionnach is right. I don't think he was saying that there would be less violence without religion, he just pointed out that churches have caused intolerance.

The New Testament does not teach tolerance as a virtue because Christians are expected to base their behaviour towards others on love, rather than mere tolerance. Historically a lot of Christians Churches have failed to teach this, and it was thus, not practiced.

Biro

Húrin wrote: »

I am a Christian and I think sionnach is right. I don't think he was saying that there would be less violence without religion, he just pointed out that churches have caused intolerance.
The New Testament does not teach tolerance as a virtue because Christians are expected to base their behaviour towards others on love, rather than mere tolerance. Historically a lot of Christians Churches have failed to teach this, and it was thus, not practiced.

I agree with the part in bold, but blaming churches is kind of like blaming football for all the scumbags who fight against each other at matches. Those guys would find any reason to fight with other people. Just so happens that football is their chosen reason. Getting rid of football won't make them happier and more peaceful.
Same with NI and "the troubles". Everyone seems happy to blame it on a Catholic versus Prodestant war and then shout about how religion is the cause of all the suffering, but that's not true in this case. It's essentially an Ireland versus England war if you like (no need to delve into the history here for this example) and the religion thing was just used as a means to identify the origin of anyone in particular. It would have been easier if we had different skin colour like in some countries wars, but in this case we had to settle for which religion one was to decide which "side of the fence" one sat on!

Mal-Adjusted

MatthewVII wrote: »

3) Religion was used as a way of explaining why man is on earth and man's place in the cosmos. Biology and astrology can explain both our origins and the nature of the universe at large

surley you mean Astronomy, not astrology?

sionnach

Biro wrote: »

If you think that humanity would be any more or less diverse in its range of psychopaths, narrowminded people, voilent people, deranged people etc without any religion in human history then you'd be mistaken.

Ah but it's not these evil people I'm on about. It's the good people who do evil deeds because of what their religion tells them is "right".

Steven Weinberg wrote:

With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil — but for good people to do evil — that takes religion.

Biro

sionnach wrote: »

Ah but it's not these evil people I'm on about. It's the good people who do evil deeds because of what their religion tells them is "right".

I don't agree. Some people who are prone to evil deeds will seek any justification, including religion.

Galvasean

Mal-Adjusted wrote: »

surley you mean Astronomy, not astrology?

Man that's a doozy!

sionnach

Biro wrote: »

I don't agree. Some people who are prone to evil deeds will seek any justification, including religion.

I agree with you, I don't see how my above post contravenes your view.

MatthewVII

Mal-Adjusted wrote: »

surley you mean Astronomy, not astrology?

Hoisted by my own retard. How embarrassing.

*dies a little*

sionnach

MatthewVII wrote: »

Hoisted by my own retard. How embarrassing.

*dies a little*

Don't worry, the alignment of Mars and Venus in the coming days will fill you with vitality

Húrin

Steven Weinberg wrote:

With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil — but for good people to do evil — that takes religion.

Well Dr Weinberg, I do feel it is somewhat unfair that I am refuting you where you cannot defend yourself - Ireland - but I have a point.

Did you ever consider that for bad people to do good, that takes religion? Who are these good and bad people anyway and who are you to make that judgement?

Galvasean

MatthewVII wrote: »

Hoisted by my own retard. How embarrassing.

*dies a little*

Petard*

MatthewVII

Galvasean wrote: »

Petard*

Hrm, I can't tend if you're joking about not picking up on my joke. I'll assume you did and I apologise. If you didn't, retard is a pun on petard, to make fun of how retarded my original mistake was.

Galvasean

MatthewVII wrote: »

Hrm, I can't tend if you're joking about not picking up on my joke. I'll assume you did and I apologise. If you didn't, retard is a pun on petard, to make fun of how retarded my original mistake was.

It would appear I have been hoisted by my own petard. How embarrassing.

*dies a little*

Run_to_da_hills

I would consider organised religion as obsolete.

kelly1

Mal-Adjusted wrote: »

surley you mean Astronomy, not astrology?

Surely you mean surely, not surley

Zombrex

kelly1 wrote: »

Surely you mean surely, not surley

don't call him surley :pac:

kelly1

MatthewVII wrote: »

1) Religion was used as a way to explain phenomena. We now have science for that

2) Religion and the prospect of damnation for sins was a pseudo-threat of punishment for crimes, misdeeds etc. Now we have laws and law enforcement to carry this out

3) Religion was used as a way of explaining why man is on earth and man's place in the cosmos. Biology and astrology can explain both our origins and the nature of the universe at large

Currently, the only purpose religion serves is as a moral compass or guide, which I believe need not be enshrined in a formal tenet as they are basic ways of being a good person which all people should learn as they grow up without need for organised religion. Respect and caring for your fellow man is a social evolutionary mechanism which came about in early society from the observation that together, societies are stronger, not from ethereal forces commanding us to behave so.

With that, I believe the modern concept of religion no longer is necessary for a healthy society, and years of adherence to strict scriptures may have caused portions of society to become maladaptive and narrow (read: homophobia, secularism, disillusionment)

Any thoughts?

MatthewVII wrote: »

Any thoughts?

You whole argument is based on your belief that God doesn't exist which is really a rather big assumption.

There's nothing to stop you acting as though God doesn't exist. But doesn't make any difference to the question of God's existence. People always have and always will try to build a societies without God.

*IF* you beleive there's no life after death, then God becomes largely irrelevant. If on the other hand our whole purpose in life is to love God (and neighbour) in order to become what we are destined to be, then God becomes central.

Christianity explains the purpose of human life on this planet and is far far more satisfying than the meaninglessness proposed by atheism.

Christianity is far more than a set of moral guidelines. It gives meaning to all aspects of life, including suffering. It explains why we humans behave so shamefully and what we can to do to be restored to God's friendship. It tells us that every good deed we do will be rewarded and that those who remain faithful to God's laws will be rewarded with everlasting, joyful life. Christ promised that He had conquered sin and evil once and for all and that the faithful will be crowned victorious with Him at the end of the world when everyone will be judged according to their love of God and neighbour.

Contrast that with what atheism has to offer.

MatthewVII

kelly1 wrote:

Contrast that with what atheism has to offer.

I don't believe based on what makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside. I think people should believe what makes sense to them, and not just believe in it because it gives them an answer they want to hear. For example, I believe that when I die, my consciousness will cease to exist and my body will decay somewhere and that will be it. It won't matter what happens as I will never be able to experience anything. I don't believe that I should let fear of judgement by a higher power prevent me from living a life that is fulfilling to me as opposed to fearing angering someone. That doesn't mean I think what you believe is wrong but you make it sound like you believe in it just because it seems to be a nicer thing to believe than the alternative. That doesn't seem a strong foundation to a belief system to be honest.

towel401

Another 'Christianity justification thread' in the 'christianity justification forum'

MatthewVII

towel401 wrote: »

Another 'Christianity justification thread' in the 'christianity justification forum'

A healthy religion is one in which people challenge belief instead of accepting it without question

Zombrex

towel401 wrote: »

Another 'Christianity justification thread' in the 'christianity justification forum'

The A&A forum is closed for Christmas ... :pac:

kelly1

MatthewVII wrote: »

I don't believe based on what makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

Neither do I. If I did, I'd probably be into Yoga or similar.

MatthewVII wrote: »

That doesn't seem a strong foundation to a belief system to be honest.

You're right, it's not. Fortunately I have lots of sound reasons to believe Jesus is who He says He is.

Húrin

MatthewVII wrote: »

I don't believe based on what makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

kelly1 wrote: »

Neither do I. If I did, I'd probably be into Yoga or similar.

I can see where this is going. There are numerous threads along the same lines which you are welcome to read and participate in. As far as I can tell, this thread is about the social effects of organised religion, not justifying the theology of the Christian version of it.

If every thread on this forum was the same, it would be much the poorer. (as towel401 pointed out!)

PDN

Back to the OP.

It was presented as if religion exists purely for the benefits it confers on society. And from an atheist perspective that is a valid point of view.

However, we are on the Christianity forum. So, if we accept the possibility of God's existence, religion serves to either reveal (in the case of good religion) or to obscure (in the case of bad religion) the truth about God and His purposes for humanity.

CDfm

MatthewVII wrote: »

I don't believe based on what makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside. I think people should believe what makes sense to them, and not just believe in it because it gives them an answer they want to hear. For example, I believe that when I die, my consciousness will cease to exist and my body will decay somewhere and that will be it. It won't matter what happens as I will never be able to experience anything. I don't believe that I should let fear of judgement by a higher power prevent me from living a life that is fulfilling to me as opposed to fearing angering someone. That doesn't mean I think what you believe is wrong but you make it sound like you believe in it just because it seems to be a nicer thing to believe than the alternative. That doesn't seem a strong foundation to a belief system to be honest.

Well you believe things you see and read.

AS Christians we believe that what we see and read makes us better people.

That we dont look at things your way is ok. The christian way is not always warm and fuzzy -sometimes its extremely hard.

Its a big copeout by non -believers ,agnostics and atheists that the only people with gay predjudice and opposition to abortion are Catholics.It just aint so.Yet you cant explain it.

I often see some making poor judgements because of what may call the lack of a moral compass. Existentialists (those who follow existentialist philosophy and are atheist) discuss this dilemma.Sartre, Camus and de Beuvoir were great thinkers and they had problems with the issue.

Shacklebolt

Biro wrote: »

If you think that humanity would be any more or less diverse in its range of psychopaths, narrowminded people, voilent people, deranged people etc without any religion in human history then you'd be mistaken.

'Bad people will do bad things and good people good things, but only religion seems capable of making good people do the most horrific of things'. Cant remember the person who originally said that.

xxmarymoxx

the older generation had no choice only to belive in god as it was beat into them by priests and nuns at school how sick is that the catholic church is a joke but at least now we have a choice and can say to a priest i dont or never did belive in god and im not afraid to say it people go to church the church taker there money kids today have nothing to fear you wont get some pervert priest bangin the door wanting to no why u were not at mass and u will burn in hell if u dont go

Fanny Cradock

Rather unsurprisingly, a term like 'pervert priests' is unacceptable here. Please read the charter and enjoy the rest of your Christmas.

xxmarymoxx

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Rather unsurprisingly, a term like 'pervert priests' is unacceptable here. Please read the charter and enjoy the rest of your Christmas.

how is the truth unacceptable its a known fact not all priests but some

Fanny Cradock

Yes, it may be a known fact that a minority of priests are paedophiles, but then again, so are a minority of Irish men, a minority of American women, a minority of agnostics, a minority of left-handed people, a minority of teachers and a minority of those with grey hair.

While you are perfectly entitled to your opinion on this forum, it must stay within the boundaries of the charter. Given that your previous post was nothing other than an attempt to paint a ghastly caricature of Catholicism and priests, I'm asking you nicely to cork off some of that bile.

Thanks

xxmarymoxx

ok no worries

Cantab.

MatthewVII wrote: »

So before anyone assaults me about what I'm thinking, just hear me out.

Just to clarify, I'm a former Catholic (by birth, not by choice) and now an atheist

So what I was thinking, I can see how religion was a necessary institution in the past, but it's functions have largely been replaced.

1) Religion was used as a way to explain phenomena. We now have science for that

Rubbish. Science is not a replacement for religion.

MatthewVII wrote: »

2) Religion and the prospect of damnation for sins was a pseudo-threat of punishment for crimes, misdeeds etc. Now we have laws and law enforcement to carry this out

Rubbish. Just because something is "legal" doesn't mean it's right. For example: prostitution and abortion.

MatthewVII wrote: »

3) Religion was used as a way of explaining why man is on earth and man's place in the cosmos.

A very bold statement from someone who claims to know better than the Catholic Church.

MatthewVII wrote: »

Biology and astrology can explain both our origins and the nature of the universe at large

Surely you must be having a laugh? Biology is a gift from God -- a gift that enables man to make use of his surroundings for the betterment of all, whilst getting profound insight into the beauty of the universe. Astrology is the work of the devil AFAIC.

MatthewVII wrote: »

Currently, the only purpose religion serves is as a moral compass or guide, which I believe need not be enshrined in a formal tenet as they are basic ways of being a good person which all people should learn as they grow up without need for organised religion.

Being a "good person" (whatever that means when you declare there's no need for a moral authority!) is only a half truth. How about we just let everyone decide their own moral authority and sit back and watch as the devil takes over and anarchy ensues?

MatthewVII wrote: »

Respect and caring for your fellow man is a social evolutionary mechanism which came about in early society from the observation that together, societies are stronger, not from ethereal forces commanding us to behave so.

Respect and caring for your fellow man is infinitely times more than some "evolutionary mechanism" (whatever that means). I would argue that society is much, much weaker as a result of evil infiltrating every aspect of our community. We need God to protect us from this.

MatthewVII wrote: »

With that, I believe the modern concept of religion no longer is necessary for a healthy society, and years of adherence to strict scriptures may have caused portions of society to become maladaptive and narrow (read: homophobia, secularism, disillusionment)

Without belief in God, there is no point in living as far as I'm concerned. God created man in His likeness and has given us a clear framework for the family, the community and society as a whole. This is how we should live -- not according to some popularist fad or the whims of the day. Relativism and the "individual knows best" are today, the greatest threats to Christianity and the way God wants us to live.

Simpleton analysis of the meaning of live and a shallow perspective on history, philosophy, science and theology just does not cut it. Unless of course you're happy to live your life in ignorant bliss. Purposely avoiding the hard questions does not lead to happiness in its truest sense.

toiletduck

Cantab. wrote: »

Without belief in God, there is no point in living as far as I'm concerned.

No matter how many times I see this pop up, I'm always amazed