Written by EddieGunner on 05.01.2008 at 05:36

religion is huge massive ficiton, that someone long long time ago, said thrse god and bla bla storys and books like kuran and bible, wrote, just for purpose of contrlong huge masses of ppl, under somethign that is called religion, it's just a fiction nothing else
for me religion is same thing is fan of some football club, religius ppl r funs of god's

Your deduction of what defines religion is rather flawed.

First you say that it is fiction? What do you mean by that? Are you saying that the beliefs they are based upon are fictitious? What about something like Buddhism? Could you explain what is fictitious about that? Or certain scientific collaborations are considered to be religious, so is science false?

Second you state that it is from long ago, what about Scientology? Or any of the other religions that have popped up over the past few decades?

Third, you state that they were created to control huge masses. This is obviously false if you actually study the origins of many religions. Could you tell me what teachings of Buddha or Christ Jesus are about controlling people?

It really seems you don't understand what the term religion means. While it is often associated with spirituality and faith-based groups, some of the most religious people I have ever met are atheists.

Well I do not think that religion is the responsable for the wars that have happened in this world, I believe is a matter of fanatism ( which in the mayority of the cases happened to be religion) and in the case of Iraq vs USA, a conflict of interests. Lets be honest, they just want to continue being the global potency and Iraq has something they want to get their hands on...and that is crude oil.

We just can't tolerate the idea of somebody thinking differently. That's the real problem I think.

Written by Coté on 14.01.2008 at 22:45

We just can't tolerate the idea of somebody thinking differently. That's the real problem I think.

Of course it is. That is an inherit problem with all of us. Why do you think we get annoyed or angry when our neighbor likes a different professional sports team than us? Or car? Or music? It's all because we can't stomach other's beliefs and preferences. Sad really we still haven't got past such things as gay rights or religious persecutions.

I think that religion IS a major cause of warfare but I disagree with the thought that it is the ONLY reason.

Religion isn't the cause. If you think that's the case then you're misguided or biased towards religion. When someone has the opinion of "religion causes war" they are a bit naive. What it really is, as many have mentioned, is a difference of opinion. Religion is not a tool of war or something that was created to cause war, what it does do is seperate people. Even with writing this post, some people will disagree with me. In some instances, our disagreements will turn into a philosophical discussion, in other instances we may get so angry at each other that we'll begin to abuse each other through our posts (since we can't do it verbally or physically).

Religion is simply the most common form of seperation for people. Those that know the history of Europe will know that initially there were no national borders, it was simply called Christendom. Land was seperated into empires and essentially regions were seperated according to people's beliefs. Now we have nations rather than empires and religion only plays an auxiliary role in most nations, but the same hostility is still present due to our seperation. Anyone that has talked to enough people will know the racial stereotypes people commonly have against each other. So race, religion, music, politics, philosophies... all of these can create hostility and war due to people's differing views and characteristics.

To illustrate my point in the best possible way on this forum, I'd use the example of heavy metal. If someone kept bagging you about listening to heavy metal and continually hurt your pride, if you were an angry or impatient person you would probably snap eventually and retaliate in some way. Religion is exactly the same. No one likes to have their views challenged, especially if they believe that challenge to be unfair or are biased towards it.

Written by Fuath on 31.12.2007 at 12:51

i think that religion does cause war, but if there is no religion, (therefore nothing to believe in) then what do we do next? how do we react to different things? religion i think is a restraint, yes it can cause war, but is also gives us moral values and ways of living life, without these "restraints" i think it would throw alot of things out of whack, if it never existed would be a completely different outcome.
the only religion i havent heard start a war would have to be the buddhists, but im not saying it has happened

Well, technically the main contributions of religious beliefs to 'morality' is this 'no contraception or abortion' and 'no premaritial sex' thing. Otherwise, I don't see how morals would have not derived. I mean, come on, what kind of person would be able to tolerate their family being killed, being stolen from, etc? Obviously, they would construct laws against it.
Not to mention that 'treat others like you would want others to treat yourself' never actually happened due to religion, slavery, etc, didn't exactly stop with the Bible because people can interpret it to mean whatever they want it to, and even biblical fundamentalists could say that blacks/women/heathens don't count as humans, so they don't count.
The thing is, it's hard to think back to a time without religion, since people obviously thought of some explanation of their surrounding area, such as the sun being a chariot and such.
Also, the fact that millions of atheists are living peacefully in the world, and I don't feel like cutting random people's throats, I don't think that removing religion removes morals. Unless anyone here is going to volunteer to say that without belief in a guy in the sky they would murder and rape everyone, in which case your morals are comparable to people who, if they were invisible, would go rob a bank and rape people.
Even if it is argued that religion was important in the forming of morality (Since we can't interview ancient, dead people, you can't really prove it either way), it still doesn't seem necessary today, though I'm not going to advocate banning it

Religion doesn't cause war any more than ethnic cuisine or world music. Poverty and inequity cause war. True, religion is sometimes used as an a priori justification for waging war on others - which certainly gives the impression that religion is the culprit - but it is the economic competition for resources that actually triggers a conflict. If there was no religion (like in John Lennon's "Imagine") people would find another pretense to fight one another. Incidentally, that's how civil wars happen even when both sides have the same religious faith - the class divide becomes a handy alternative pretense under these circumstances. (French Revolution, anyone?)

I'd mention the Russian Revolution, too - except that those revolutionaries were actually atheists and I know that would burst a lot of bubbles on this forum. If religion causes war, what on earth would make good atheists rise up and murder their fellow countrymen?

some wars has, some wars has not

Written by [user id=22888] on 25.01.2008 at 10:35

Incidentally, that's how civil wars happen even when both sides have the same religious faith

That is an all too true statement. I have been doing a lot of studying these past several months about the theology behind the American Civil War. It is so interesting how both sides claimed aspects from the Bible to be their standing block. A great deal of it was also tied up in poloitics. From a political stand point, I can understand where the Conferdates were coming from with the concept of fighting for their rights. At the same time, many members of the Union army joined because they felt that all men, no matter what color their skin was, were equal in the eyes of God and no man should enslave another man.

While offically the war was fought to preserve the Union, the real cause was that of a theoplogical nature.

Written by Dane Train on 27.01.2008 at 20:27

Written by [user id=22888] on 25.01.2008 at 10:35

Incidentally, that's how civil wars happen even when both sides have the same religious faith

That is an all too true statement. I have been doing a lot of studying these past several months about the theology behind the American Civil War. It is so interesting how both sides claimed aspects from the Bible to be their standing block. A great deal of it was also tied up in poloitics. From a political stand point, I can understand where the Conferdates were coming from with the concept of fighting for their rights. At the same time, many members of the Union army joined because they felt that all men, no matter what color their skin was, were equal in the eyes of God and no man should enslave another man.

While offically the war was fought to preserve the Union, the real cause was that of a theoplogical nature.

I disagree. The civil war was fought for the freedom of oppressed men. Whites were profiting from the submission of blacks. A war would have eventually happened, even without religion. The Biblical justifications were just the tip of the proverbial iceberg; the face sitting atop a massive block of social tension. In their hearts, men already knew why they needed to fight - the beast was already in place. Religious scripture simply closed the deal and unleashed the beast. And if religion had not been available, some other excuse would have sufficed.

Written by [user id=22888] on 27.01.2008 at 22:06

I disagree. The civil war was fought for the freedom of oppressed men. Whites were profiting from the submission of blacks. A war would have eventually happened, even without religion. The Biblical justifications were just the tip of the proverbial iceberg; the face sitting atop a massive block of social tension. In their hearts, men already knew why they needed to fight - the beast was already in place. Religious scripture simply closed the deal and unleashed the beast. And if religion had not been available, some other excuse would have sufficed.

But where did this idea of freedom come from?

Written by Dane Train on 27.01.2008 at 23:02

Written by [user id=22888] on 27.01.2008 at 22:06

I disagree. The civil war was fought for the freedom of oppressed men. Whites were profiting from the submission of blacks. A war would have eventually happened, even without religion. The Biblical justifications were just the tip of the proverbial iceberg; the face sitting atop a massive block of social tension. In their hearts, men already knew why they needed to fight - the beast was already in place. Religious scripture simply closed the deal and unleashed the beast. And if religion had not been available, some other excuse would have sufficed.

But where did this idea of freedom come from?

If someone forced me to pick cotton for excruciating long hours in the hot sun, paid me nothing, and threatened me with torture or worse if I tried to escape - I'd seek freedom even if I didn't know there was a word for it. Freedom is not a sterile idea to be found only in textbooks or Scripture. It is a basic need of all living things - even caged animals seek it. To be deprived of freedom is tantamount to death itself. Men recognize that as surely as our instinctual need for food and shelter.

Written by [user id=22888] on 27.01.2008 at 23:22

If someone forced me to pick cotton for excruciating long hours in the hot sun, paid me nothing, and threatened me with torture or worse if I tried to escape - I'd seek freedom even if I didn't know there was a word for it. Freedom is not a sterile idea to be found only in textbooks or Scripture. It is a basic need of all living things - even caged animals seek it. To be deprived of freedom is tantamount to death itself. Men recognize that as surely as our instinctual need for food and shelter.

Yes, that is understandable, but what about the Union men who went to free other men? Where did their idea that all men are equal come from?

Written by Dane Train on 28.01.2008 at 00:19

Written by [user id=22888] on 27.01.2008 at 23:22

If someone forced me to pick cotton for excruciating long hours in the hot sun, paid me nothing, and threatened me with torture or worse if I tried to escape - I'd seek freedom even if I didn't know there was a word for it. Freedom is not a sterile idea to be found only in textbooks or Scripture. It is a basic need of all living things - even caged animals seek it. To be deprived of freedom is tantamount to death itself. Men recognize that as surely as our instinctual need for food and shelter.

Yes, that is understandable, but what about the Union men who went to free other men? Where did their idea that all men are equal come from?

The Biblical teaching of the Golden Rule was - on the surface - the prime motivation for freeing the slaves in the South. However without the aid of supporters in the North, the slaves would ultimately have waged war on their so-called "masters" of their own accord. (As the French rulers were deposed in Haiti 60 years earlier.)

My point remains that although religion often serves as a rallying point for the inception of armed conflict, the seeds of the conflict itself are always rooted in economic and social inequity. Without religion, some other banner of idealism would be co-opted (or created) for the purpose of transforming injustice into uprising.

Religion does not cause war. That it is used as a catalyst for triggering violent confrontation does not make it the source of the ensuing conflict - only a convenient accessory. Human beings can feel pity and empathy for their fellow man - and come to his aid - without first having to frame the situation in theological terms. To suggest that the American Civil War was caused by a difference in the theological interpretation of the Bible does little to acknowledge the very real and terrible suffered endured by African slaves.

The Bible is a powerful book because it mirrors universal truths - not because it creates them. Theology is framed by the harsh realities and hardships of the human experience - not the other way around. No war is ever fundamentally theological in nature - no matter how it may appear on the surface.

well it is relative actually i would say for a start. It's not the religion , if there was no religion there will be something else that causing those wars belive me it's the human race , the human mind , the human greed that causes wars . U know Christianity & Budhism are against war against vilonce yet there is wars caused by a christian man called George bush ... It's bigger than that ... man needs a silly cause to fire a war . & to talk about religion .. it's useless actully whether it's about violence or peace because... religion came down from god to protect us from our evil and it proved its failuer ,we forgot the core and get touched with the nutshell ( prayrs , fasting & stuff .... ) On the other hand you can see that religion ( in my oponion ) proved its failure and done us harm more than good .... so i would say it's a minor cause of war ......

I'm starting to belive that religin is nothing but a fantasy ..... a poision we've been drinking since we were kids that's why u meet someone who says (The Bible is a powerful book because it mirrors universal truths - not because it creates them. Theology is framed by the harsh realities and hardships of the human experience - not the other way around. No war is ever fundamentally theological in nature - no matter how it may appear on the surface. ) sorry for being crule. but i'm getting sick of something called religion whether it's Islam or Christianty or whatever ....

Written by Devolution on 15.02.2008 at 03:19

well it is relative actually i would say for a start. It's not the religion , if there was no religion there will be something else that causing those wars belive me it's the human race , the human mind , the human greed that causes wars . U know Christianity & Budhism are against war against vilonce yet there is wars caused by a christian man called George bush ... It's bigger than that ... man needs a silly cause to fire a war . & to talk about religion .. it's useless actully whether it's about violence or peace because... religion came down from god to protect us from our evil and it proved its failuer ,we forgot the core and get touched with the nutshell ( prayrs , fasting & stuff .... ) On the other hand you can see that religion ( in my oponion ) proved its failure and done us harm more than good .... so i would say it's a minor cause of war ......

I would say that religion has done more good than harm. We tend to ignore those things that work well, and focus on the disasters and the tragedies. True, selfish people have used religion as an excuse for bad behavior, or as a pretense for manipulating others for their own gain. Is that the fault of religion, or the inadequacy of human nature? The Nazis excused their practice of genocide by insisting that it was "logical." So are we to blame "logic" for the massacre of 6 million Jews? That is the reason the Nazis used at the Nuremberg Trials. Should we go on to claim that logic causes genocide?

Written by Devolution on 15.02.2008 at 03:19

I'm starting to belive that religin is nothing but a fantasy ..... a poision we've been drinking since we were kids that's why u meet someone who says (The Bible is a powerful book because it mirrors universal truths - not because it creates them. Theology is framed by the harsh realities and hardships of the human experience - not the other way around. No war is ever fundamentally theological in nature - no matter how it may appear on the surface. ) sorry for being crule. but i'm getting sick of something called religion whether it's Islam or Christianty or whatever ....

You quoted me, but I am not sure you understood what I am saying. I believe we are in agreement, so let me go into more detail:

Religions endure in part because they contain teachings that we already know to be true. We all know that causing suffering is wrong. We all know that violence is hurtful. We know these things in our hearts. Religion spells out these truths in holy books and claims to be the source of these ideas, but that is false advertising. Religion is neither the source of morals, nor is it the source of strife. Claiming that religion causes war is as absurd as suggesting that religion created love. Someone who wants to wage war will find any justification available, religious or otherwise. That is why I assert that religion is not a cause of the human condition; it is merely a reflection that shows us what is already there.

You miss in this discussion one very important thing. Wars are coming from separation. Separation of ideas or ideologie, separation of economic or social standards. I am a christian and I can tell you that religion can cause such an separation. When one becomes religious, any sort of, even a scientist, this person changes. When people around, friends, family, see a positive change, they might think about conversion. They get and raise children in their own ideologie and so you got groups. Those believe the same as we do, they do not believe and others believe something else which is wrong in our opinion. Their are separated groups. You can see this clearly in northern Ireland, where the Irish people where catholic and the english where protestant.
In this case it was a war against Irish and English people, but also against religion. You can't see war and religion apart from each other. Religion is not as individual as you might think. It is something that happens in groups also.

religion is not a cause of war. it's an excuse to fight and a way to get the poor and dum people behind a leader.
To take the example of Iraq:
only the uneducated iraqis really fight for their religion, the leaders fight for oil in the region of Kirkuk and the Americans want the black gold too.

Written by belisarius on 27.02.2008 at 16:39

only the uneducated iraqis really fight for their religion, the leaders fight for oil in the region of Kirkuk and the Americans want the black gold too.

How many universary schooled people get themselves bombed. I believe that those are many. When you read the papers and see the news it often are pretty smart people, at least when they can find out the identity. I know that they use people with the Down syndrome also, but the people behind it are often high gradueted. I know that these guys are wicked, but that has more to do with their own practical believes than with the way they are raised or teached.

ok, you're right. i should have been less radical when i said "uneducated iraqis". but i think that education and the way someone's raised define their practical believes, because the way of believing is taught. but again you can disagree

It's ok, the point is not that they are educated or not. The point is there dedication to their faith and the actions they think need to be part of it. I myself am a christian, very dedicated, yet, I don't go roud the streets killing people, neither do ik kill little children (psalm 137:9 Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones). The point is that my interpretation of the bible isn't the interpretation of others, which is good, but can cause religious wars. That is just the point.

Written by [user id=30512] on 02.03.2008 at 00:35

It's ok, the point is not that they are educated or not. The point is there dedication to their faith and the actions they think need to be part of it. I myself am a christian, very dedicated, yet, I don't go roud the streets killing people, neither do ik kill little children (psalm 137:9 Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones). The point is that my interpretation of the bible isn't the interpretation of others, which is good, but can cause religious wars. That is just the point.

Well, then, isn't that what religion is then? If someone draws an interpretation from a certain religion to do favorable things for others, what most would call "morally good", then people say that is what religion is usually about. But if people interpret to kill nonbelievers, or hurt others, why is that not what religion is too? Without the actions of humans, religion is nothing. It's man that makes it come alive, and why wouldn't all of the actions of humans, if they believe it is truly at the heart of their religion, be just another facet to that religion?

To Harmonic
Good explination man ... thanks .... i totaly agree with you and i qoute from you " It is merely a reflection that shows us what is already there "
But do you agree with me that religion if its a mesaage; has proved its failuer ? And the funny thing everyone thinks he is right, and because they think they are right they conflict with other powerfull messages. I wounder how simple men like mohamad , jesus , mosses bodha etc.. could do this conflict over centuries and made thier names mentioned in so so many generations. Man don't wrong me ' but the middle east can creat smart men '.That's wierd.

I thnk that it has to do with religion and ignorance and not accepting other peoples thoughts on whats right and wrong. No one can get passed the diffrences in people
pretty much i think were a flawed species

I really believe that what I believe is true. Everything I say, on this forum, but also when I am eating my lunch on school and chatting with friends, I am trying to convince you of the truth that's in the bible. But many of the things in the bible are meant for a specific place and time. So, I am not going to try to convince anyone to kill anyone. Maybe you think it is ignorant, but, even though I accept anyones own thoughts, I do not agree with any thought and when I think a thought is wrong, I try to convince of what's I think is right. I am completely sure that I am right, and please, try to convince me if you think I'm not. If I believe, but I am not sure I am right, what is the value of my faith? It has none, so, I am confident that I am right, even though I doubt sometimes also on certain things.

6000 years actually. And, proven wrong? Take a look at [url]www.answersingenesis.org [/url] and you'll be converted. Take another look at [url] http://www.drdino.com/[/url], the website of Kent Hovind and you'll be just like me.
I believe all these things to be true, indeed. But, I do not believe in the things that science has proven wrong. I look at science, I try to follow science, but any proof on this subject, did you find it? I didn't yet. Maybe sometimes I will be proven wrong, I don't know everything of course, but right now it is hard enough for science to make a reliable theory, now they need to proof it.


"Evolution is a speculation about the unobservable and unrepeatable past. Thus it comes under origins science."

Written by Dane Train on 10.01.2008 at 01:03

Written by EddieGunner on 05.01.2008 at 05:36

religion is huge massive ficiton, that someone long long time ago, said thrse god and bla bla storys and books like kuran and bible, wrote, just for purpose of contrlong huge masses of ppl, under somethign that is called religion, it's just a fiction nothing else
for me religion is same thing is fan of some football club, religius ppl r funs of god's

Your deduction of what defines religion is rather flawed.

First you say that it is fiction? What do you mean by that? Are you saying that the beliefs they are based upon are fictitious? What about something like Buddhism? Could you explain what is fictitious about that? Or certain scientific collaborations are considered to be religious, so is science false?

Second you state that it is from long ago, what about Scientology? Or any of the other religions that have popped up over the past few decades?

Third, you state that they were created to control huge masses. This is obviously false if you actually study the origins of many religions. Could you tell me what teachings of Buddha or Christ Jesus are about controlling people?

It really seems you don't understand what the term religion means. While it is often associated with spirituality and faith-based groups, some of the most religious people I have ever met are atheists.

Leave him alone, its hip to be an atheist.

I think perhaps he forgets that theres different degrees of belief in something such as the bible, as in to take it literally or not. The control factor I think hes thinking of the people who take the bible %100 literally, which is mostly insane people. People forget that the bible was written by people from a mostly jewish community, and that Jesus' community (community sounds bad, but I lack a better word) was almost entirely Jewish, and that a lot of jewish teachings are done in a matter of symbolism and metaphors, so Jesus spoke to those people accordingly so the masses of the time would relate better. Most religions mostly show a guideline of a good lifestyle to follow, for example, almost every religion supports 'The Golden Rule' in some wording or another, I'm far from a religious person but even that makes sense to me. Religion doesn't cause war, people who misinterpret messages cause war and this "control" you speak of. You may think that in order to be following the church one needs to follow the church's teachings word for word, I think that as long as you follow the basic ethics and what not you are supporting that religion, and as previously said, most religions have similar guidelines it just comes down to a matter of how you choose to worship

....wow, that was deep. My metal brain is hurting....time for a stupid comment:

Religion doesn't cause wars, I cause wars!

Written by Doc G. on 02.04.2008 at 11:57

Religion doesn't cause wars, I cause wars!

Ha. I guess it's just that. Religion doesn't cause war, people do. And if people pull certain interpretations from the Bible, or any other book, it's their fault, not the scriptures, right? Right? RIGHT? (IRONY! READ BELOW.)

Exodus 22:20 - ""Whoever sacrifices to any god other than the LORD must be destroyed."

Interpretation? Hm...

Written by Clintagräm on 03.04.2008 at 03:38

Written by Doc G. on 02.04.2008 at 11:57

Religion doesn't cause wars, I cause wars!

Ha. I guess it's just that. Religion doesn't cause war, people do. And if people pull certain interpretations from the Bible, or any other book, it's their fault, not the scriptures, right? Right? RIGHT? (IRONY! READ BELOW.)

Exodus 22:22 - ""Whoever sacrifices to any god other than the LORD must be destroyed."

Interpretation? Hm...

Exodus 22:22 reads: "Do not mistreat any widow or orphan"

Written by Doc G. on 03.04.2008 at 03:41

Written by Clintagräm on 03.04.2008 at 03:38

Written by Doc G. on 02.04.2008 at 11:57

Religion doesn't cause wars, I cause wars!

Ha. I guess it's just that. Religion doesn't cause war, people do. And if people pull certain interpretations from the Bible, or any other book, it's their fault, not the scriptures, right? Right? RIGHT? (IRONY! READ BELOW.)

Exodus 22:22 - ""Whoever sacrifices to any god other than the LORD must be destroyed."

Interpretation? Hm...

Exodus 22:22 reads: "Do not mistreat any widow or orphan"

Ha! I know, fixed that one, look above. 22:20.