It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Maybe I am wrong and the human race is still for the most part an ignorant superstitious race that can’t learn from its mistakes. Is it in our nature to hold ourselves back or is it religion that holds us back. I tend to think it is religion.
I think that if the world could discard religion we would be much better off without it. Is religion itself designed to hold us back? It’s just hard for me to except that people are so willfully deluded.
Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by Grimpachi
I hope you'll allow me to explain my position as honestly and openly as I know how.
For me, it starts with the New Testament. What historians and scientists have told us is that, by their analysis, we can be pretty sure we have the words that were originally written. One way they do that is by checking the copies. If 100 people copy from the original writing, the parts that are the same in all the copies can be safely assumed to be in the original.
By an analysis of style, it has been concluded that four different people wrote the Gospels. Four people writing about events will give you a more complete picture than just one.
The idea that this was written as fiction has been pretty well ruled out. That kind of "realistic" fiction, including all the mundane details, hadn't been invented yet. It's nearly impossible that four people would invent it at the same time, then it would be unused as a writing style for centuries. Besides, fiction means inventing things, things that didn't happen or didn't exist. The people who saw these letters were in a perfect position to say "That's not what happened," and some writings were set aside as not legitimate. But not the ones we have today.
I could go on, but the final result for me is that the New Testament has more evidence for it's authenticity than not, and I want my thoughts and beliefs to line up with the truth. The New Testament is the basis for Christianity, so, here I am.
Tool to control the masses? To do what? Christianity teaches me to love my neighbor and my God. It has provided me with a book of inspiration and doesn't push conformity in my life. I won't attack anyone over their beliefs. True, some will, but you're talking about getting rid of religion, not getting rid of people who fail to live up to their religion. (Of course, for Christians, that's all of us.) If the religion was controlling me to kill unbelievers or infidels, then, yeah, I'd have the same problem you do. But it doesn't.
Perhaps, it is just media reports, but I don't see Islam as "playing well with others." Nothing in my reading indicates that they would tolerate a community of a million average Americans or Jews or Atheists in their midst.
Originally posted by Grimpachi
reply to post by charles1952
When I was responding to you what I took from your post is that you were under the assumption that I believed a person would need to lack intelligence to believe in religion.
That kind of "realistic" fiction, including all the mundane details, hadn't been invented yet.
“God's word is true. I've come to understand that. All that stuff I was taught about evolution and embryology and the Big Bang Theory, all that is lies straight from the pit of Hell.
James Inhofe Says the Bible Refutes Climate Change
Originally posted by trope
I don't think any of the classical, major religions started explicitly as hoodwinks (though I do think more modern religions such as Scientology did). This is just so say that the sweeping statement of religions being designed to hold us back is in my opinion incorrect, and the notion that we've somehow attained enough scientific understanding to resolve the questions that cause religion to arise in the first place seems naive. Early religions evolved more so than they were created -- like bdelloids, they picked up pieces of stray DNA along the way and turned into something all together different than they started out. It's clear that not all of those myriad pieces were positive additions. I think it's also worth noting that science has not been a total walk in the park for humanity either, does not always operate in the interests of humanity, and often lacks the heart to know when to stop. Did the Franciscan monks build a nuclear bomb? Did Mother Teresa create sarin gas? This is just to say that a little perspective is in order. There are pros and cons to everything and everyone. It's easy to judge people when we think solely of our strengths and their weaknesses -- harder when both sides are considered in totality. It's also easy to forget that despite the fact that we have many answers, we do not have all the answers, and that not all human brains will react to that emptiness in the same way. If science wants to end religion, then science will have to sufficiently answer more of the bigger questions than it currently answers. And while I sincerely hope we get there, we just aren't there yet.
edit on 20121117 by trope because: Removed stray word.
Did it kill you to find out it wasn’t real how about Santa Clause?
Are you ok with the fact people are killed each day in the name of religion or that our future may depend us moving past these fairytales and if we do not our very existence is threatened?
To answer your post about fundamentalism I have no idea how much it would hold me personally back but as a nation can you deny that it hasn’t held us back?