Is Believing In God...?

[pimpdave]

Well, that may be true, so here are some Catholic leaders who are not amused in the slightest. Dammit Stephen Fry, stop being honest and making so much sense!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvDz9_5me74

I genuinely believe that this clip is brilliant and Stephen Fry holds his own.

[CreepersWiener]

I love comedy!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55h1FO8V_3w

[Snorri1234]

Well, that may be true, so here are some Catholic leaders who are not amused in the slightest. Dammit Stephen Fry, stop being honest and making so much sense!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvDz9_5me74

I genuinely believe that this clip is hilarious and Stephen Fry holds his own.

Stephen "Motherfucking" Fry is fucking awesome.

[notyou2]

I selected the "no" option.

Can you imagine an entire planet of enviro-nazis? Sheesh.

Please explain the parallel between atheists and environmentalists.

[Snorri1234]

Isn't happysmo1 an atheist?

[Ray Rider]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qySx8tSs8BQ

I think the guy in the purple shirt is the bishop. I love how he's the only one who sees the humor in it, considering how stuffy and humorless those guys usually are.

That's a good one

[john9blue]

Not catching on. I'm assuming that atheists believe that there is no God, while agnostics don't have a belief system at all. Thus, they fit your definition of people not having a belief system.

This is what I thought, too.

No, my definition is that everyone has a belief system. Even agnostics, who believe they don't know what they believe.

Agnosticism means not taking a position, so I don't think it's a belief...

[Army of GOD]

Not catching on. I'm assuming that atheists believe that there is no God, while agnostics don't have a belief system at all. Thus, they fit your definition of people not having a belief system.

This is what I thought, too.

No, my definition is that everyone has a belief system. Even agnostics, who believe they don't know what they believe.

Agnosticism means not taking a position, so I don't think it's a belief...

Well, after reading the COMPLETELY ACCURATE Wikipedia article, I'd say that they believe they don't know and that they can't know.

[BigBallinStalin]

Would there be less war and strife?

No, there's always other reasons for war lying around waiting to be picked up and used.

Yeah, but...would there be less?

Honestly, the question is ridiculous because religion or spirituality can never be destroyed. But, if we want to be ridiculously serious about this question, I'd say no because if there's no religion, then people will find other differences to rely upon and use (much like the exploitation of religion). It doesn't matter if there is or isn't religion; there'd be just as much war. There are plenty of differences among everyone, so there's still plenty of reasons to hate and kill one another.

[Captain_Scarlet]

Religion at its core is about life and offers some reassurances about death, or it would be doomed to failure.

The myths and revelations provide that comfort, the concept of God the result.

Carl Jung tells us that: "It is the role of religious symbols to give a meaning to the life of a man" and that our mortality is also a psychological area that needs to be addressed:

It is particularly fatal for such [matured] people to look backward. For them a prospect and goal in the future are indispensable. THIS IS WHY ALL THE GREAT RELIGIONS HOLD THE PROMISE OF LIFE BEYOND; it makes it possible for mortal man to live the second half of life with as much perseverance and aim as the first.

[BigBallinStalin]

No, my definition is that everyone has a belief system. Even agnostics, who believe they don't know what they believe.

I mean, really, I'm just the one being ornery, but I was thinking of a great clip with Deepak Chopra that pulled off this same joke really well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qySx8tSs8BQ

I think the guy in the purple shirt is the bishop. I love how he's the only one who sees the humor in it, considering how stuffy and humorless those guys usually are.

That was perfect, and haha I'm coughing cuz it's too funny. And the clip on Stephen Fry was very interesting. Thanks for the good links.

[Pedronicus]

jesus f*cking christ another god damn religion thread

Quickly followed by an American political thread regarding healthcare / war / change / patriotism..... ad lib till end.

This forum sucks the sweat from a dead dogs bollocks, over and over again.

[Woodruff]

Agnosticism means the individual recognizes that THEY CAN'T KNOW the truth. In other words, agnostics (whether they be religious agnostics or non-religious agnostics) are the only ones looking at the situation logically.

Whether an agnostic is religious or non-religious would be the belief portion of their perspective. But both sets will agree that they simply cannot know for sure who is right.

Very different from atheism (which I would agree is also a faith).

[Snorri1234]

Agnosticism means the individual recognizes that THEY CAN'T KNOW the truth. In other words, agnostics (whether they be religious agnostics or non-religious agnostics) are the only ones looking at the situation logically.

Whether an agnostic is religious or non-religious would be the belief portion of their perspective. But both sets will agree that they simply cannot know for sure who is right.

Very different from atheism (which I would agree is also a faith).

Uhm...at what practical point does atheism differ from non-religious agnosticism?

[Snorri1234]

Also, is there really any way not to believe or disbelieve in God? Because saying "we can't know" doesn't answer the question about what you believe. It answers a fundamentally different question.

[notyou2]

Agnostics are non-committal fence sitters.

I request the religious and non-religious of the world unite and wipe agnosticism from the face of this planet.....damn fence sitters

[Aradhus]

Would there be less war and strife?

No, there's always other reasons for war lying around waiting to be picked up and used.

Yeah, but...would there be less?

Honestly, the question is ridiculous because religion or spirituality can never be destroyed.

Of course it can, and it will, don't be so myopic.

But, if we want to be ridiculously serious about this question, I'd say no because if there's no religion, then people will find other differences to rely upon and use (much like the exploitation of religion). It doesn't matter if there is or isn't religion; there'd be just as much war. There are plenty of differences among everyone, so there's still plenty of reasons to hate and kill one another.

That is such a nonsensical, blindly illogical viewpoint, I find it scary that people, for religion, will bend over backwards so far their head is between their legs.

Statement A - people that killed for religion would have killed anyway
Statement B - Castration doesn't stop rape

Both of those statements could technically be true. But you won't see people running around saying castration doesn't stop rape.

History is not on your side, and neither is logic.

[Snorri1234]

But, if we want to be ridiculously serious about this question, I'd say no because if there's no religion, then people will find other differences to rely upon and use (much like the exploitation of religion). It doesn't matter if there is or isn't religion; there'd be just as much war. There are plenty of differences among everyone, so there's still plenty of reasons to hate and kill one another.

That is such a nonsensical, blindly illogical viewpoint, I find it scary that people, for religion, will bend over backwards so far their head is between their legs.

Statement A - people that killed for religion would have killed anyway
Statement B - Castration doesn't stop rape

Both of those statements could technically be true. But you won't see people running around saying castration doesn't stop rape.

History is not on your side, and neither is logic.

So uhm... what?

You're not making a lot of sense here. You could be bringing up quite a few points against Bigballin's statements, but you're not exactly doing that. You could argue that religion is a better convincing tool than others, or that religion goes hand in hand with racism and xenophobia and that those would lose power if religion is eliminated. Hell, you could argue that there's a list of things that make people wage war and that eliminating religion would decrease those reasons and therefore decrease the number of violent conflicts.

But your reasoning in this particular post is neither logical or understandable.

[BigBallinStalin]

But, if we want to be ridiculously serious about this question, I'd say no because if there's no religion, then people will find other differences to rely upon and use (much like the exploitation of religion). It doesn't matter if there is or isn't religion; there'd be just as much war. There are plenty of differences among everyone, so there's still plenty of reasons to hate and kill one another.

That is such a nonsensical, blindly illogical viewpoint, I find it scary that people, for religion, will bend over backwards so far their head is between their legs.

Statement A - people that killed for religion would have killed anyway
Statement B - Castration doesn't stop rape

Both of those statements could technically be true. But you won't see people running around saying castration doesn't stop rape.

History is not on your side, and neither is logic.

So uhm... what?

You're not making a lot of sense here. You could be bringing up quite a few points against Bigballin's statements, but you're not exactly doing that. You could argue that religion is a better convincing tool than others, or that religion goes hand in hand with racism and xenophobia and that those would lose power if religion is eliminated. Hell, you could argue that there's a list of things that make people wage war and that eliminating religion would decrease those reasons and therefore decrease the number of violent conflicts.

But your reasoning in this particular post is neither logical or understandable.

That's a shame too because I was hoping he'd take that route.

[BigBallinStalin]

Honestly, the question is ridiculous because religion or spirituality can never be destroyed.

Of course it can, and it will, don't be so myopic.

Haha, that was funny. Trying explaining how religion or spirituality can be destroyed.

[Snorri1234]

Yeah figured that would be a far better angle to take.

[jefjef]

Religion is often used as an excuse for war but in reality it is GREED, POWER and GREED.

Without religion in the world I believe there would be not only more war but even more destruction and death.

[pimpdave]

All I can say is that listening to Lady Gaga's Christmas song is a spiritual experience.

Since that song can now not be destroyed (since it's on the internets) it follows that spirituality will never be destroyed.

[Woodruff]

Agnosticism means the individual recognizes that THEY CAN'T KNOW the truth. In other words, agnostics (whether they be religious agnostics or non-religious agnostics) are the only ones looking at the situation logically.

Whether an agnostic is religious or non-religious would be the belief portion of their perspective. But both sets will agree that they simply cannot know for sure who is right.

Very different from atheism (which I would agree is also a faith).

Uhm...at what practical point does atheism differ from non-religious agnosticism?

Atheism states that there is no God. Non-religious Agnosticism states that the person doesn't believe there's a God, but they recognize it's POSSIBLE. One is an absolute and the other is not.

Also, is there really any way not to believe or disbelieve in God? Because saying "we can't know" doesn't answer the question about what you believe. It answers a fundamentally different question.

Exactly, as I already pointed out...that is precisely why there are two paths of Agnosticism. The two separate paths are the beliefs, where as the "We can't know" is a side-bar to that.

[notyou2]

I understood that agnostics did not state there was or wasn't a god.....complete indifference....damn fence sitters