"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." -Albert Einstein

What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof - Christopher Hitchens

If you quote Einstein,
also quote him with that:
A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death

Myhand, i never implied otherwise

Do you really think that Christians don't think for themselves, but this mysterious deity known as God thinks for them? Well, if that's the case, all Christians should think alike, then why are so many Christian denominations at war with each other? Ex. Catholics and Anglicans.

I agree with you on one point, that the rulers think of religion as useful. This can be seen throughout history. However, those rulers twist religion into a tool they use to control their people. Christianity today, (along with many other religions) have undergone such "twist". For example, a king may use and I quote "[restriction] by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death" as an excuse to carry out his will, using religion as aid. That does not mean the religion originally has this "restriction," but merely because the king (or ruler) distorted this religion into this. Thus, as age progress, the believers are transformed of believing in such "restriction." And in the eyes of others, they appear brainwashed by the religion, which I agree they are.

I think if you are religious merely in fear of hell, or for the rewards in heaven, then I agree that they are indeed very poor.

Do you really think that Christians don't think for themselves, but this mysterious deity known as God thinks for them? Well, if that's the case, all Christians should think alike, then why are so many Christian denominations at war with each other? Ex. Catholics and Anglicans.

The World is divided into armed camps ready to commit genocide just because we can't agree on whose fairy tales to believe. - Ed Krebs

I agree with you on one point, that the rulers think of religion as useful. This can be seen throughout history. However, those rulers twist religion into a tool they use to control their people. Christianity today, (along with many other religions) have undergone such "twist". For example, a king may use and I quote "[restriction] by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death" as an excuse to carry out his will, using religion as aid. That does not mean the religion originally has this "restriction," but merely because the king (or ruler) distorted this religion into this. Thus, as age progress, the believers are transformed of believing in such "restriction." And in the eyes of others, they appear brainwashed by the religion, which I agree they are.

Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest. — Denis Diderot

I think if you are religious merely in fear of hell, or for the rewards in heaven, then I agree that they are indeed very poor.

Faith means not wanting to know what is true. — Friedrich Nietzsche

"This is my simple religion. There is no need for temples, no need for complicated philosophy. Our own brain, our own heart is our tememple. The philosophy is kindness." -Dalai Lama

It seems that Hitchens, Krebs, Diderot, and Nietzsche all speak for myhand. And Einstein and the Dalai La are merely tools of tagg! - Qi

If atheists are so wise, rational and logical, then why hasn't one come forth to provide a wise, rational, and logical argument for the non-existence of any god? - Qi

If the beliefs of theists are correct, why hasn't one come forth to prove the starting point of their religion -- a god exists? - Qi

Qi, what do you believe then?

I'm an agnostic Christian. Agnostic because I don't think science has proven without a doubt the non-existence of any wholly other 'god'. Christian because 'European cultures' (including the US) are so infused with Christian culture that to deny Christianity would be to deny the basis of so much of our morals, laws, ways of thinking, ways of feeling.

Hm... Interesting combination

I'm an agnostic Christian. Agnostic because I don't think science has proven without a doubt the non-existence of any wholly other 'god'. Christian because 'European cultures' (including the US) are so infused with Christian culture that to deny Christianity would be to deny the basis of so much of our morals, laws, ways of thinking, ways of feeling.

Are those christian values ??
Were the people before the suggested life of Christ (near 0 AD) such barbarians who would rape/kill/murder/steal at random ??
I don't think so.......

http://tannerlectures.utah.edu/lectures/documents/Striker88.pdf

The ancient greeks did way more for our morality, law system and ways of thinking then the christians (who descended from desert tribe nomads) did.

Furthermore any further progress from the original morality we had inherited from the Greeks and Romans was not associated with the church itself but rather came along because of the changing Zeitgeist of the people in different era's.

One could even argue that humanity developed it's morals not only without religion, but was actually hampered in it's progress because OF religion:

http://history.hanover.edu/hhr/94/hhr94_3.html

Ancient Greeks/Romans: The majority were theists. Thus, your ideas combined: "Atheists are more intelligent, because ancient theists influenced the West more than modern theists." To argue in favor of atheism by bringing up polytheists is odd.

The zeitgeist argument: This applies to all people and all periods of history. You are merely defining zeitgeist and then saying that, since you have defined zeitgeist, it is proof that zeitgeist is the reason behind your argument.

"One could even argue that humanity developed it's [sic] morals not only without religion, but was actually hampered in it's [sic] progress because OF [sic] religion." Yes, that is true. But that is not the argument I made. So you dislike organized religion. That's wonderful. But a dislike does not prove the non-existence of anything. I dislike many things. They still exist. You may dislike Christianity, but it has still influenced Western cultures and you.

If you are an atheist with superior logic, reasoning, and wisdom, why do you beat around the bush? Prove gods don't exist! Prove that atheist culture would replace the polytheistic (not only Greco-Roman or Scandinavian, but the polytheistic base of all European cultures) and monotheistic (Christian) elements of the past. Do that and I'll become an atheist in a heartbeat.

Yet for all your logic, reasoning, and wisdom, I doubt you are able to prove the most basic points of your beliefs. You can't prove gods don't exist; theists can't prove gods do exist; and you both argue about trivial details unrelated to your ultimate premises, mainly by personal attacks (be it on an individual or group) that are personal opinions dressed up in logical verbiage to make them appear to be universal facts. No wonder you hate each other so.

Aranka, would you still be an atheist if belief in science and logic were classified as a religion? It seems your atheism comes from a disdain for religion more than a belief in the non-existence of any gods, since you talk of the former and say nothing of the latter.

I'm quite disappointed in the atheists here. The best we get is youtube clips, quotes from dead people, and Aranka.

You are atheists! Superior beings in logic, reasoning, and wisdom! Why do you hide your logic, reasoning, and wisdom from us? What made you decide to identify yourselves as atheists? Maybe that will get to the heart of the matter.

Just becuase we cannot prove something does not exist it does not follow that it does exist.

We are unable to prove that God does not exist nor can we disprove Thor, The Tooth Fairy, Leprechauns or Zeus.

The faithfull congregation choose not to wait for the proof but instead rely on the words of other men who say they have spoken with God. Has anyone spoken with God? How do you know there is some great diety listening? Or is your faith based on second hand knowledge passed down the generations?

Before I was 12 I believed in Catholasism but then after I stopped. Why? Because I started to question the writings of the Bible and what the clergy were spouting. As I gained confidence in my reasoning and my right to question the answers that came back were weak or contradictory. At first I was bordering agnostic with athiesm but then by the time I was 24 I was fully athiest.

I grow more skeptical with age and resentful to the bullshit lies I was made to learn as a child.

I think we humans are better than this. We should have faith in ourselves and not rely on some "Great leader" or his son the "Dear Leader" to solve our problems.
In terms of morality, I rely on sympathy, empathy and reasoning to make sure that I choose the right paths. I don't steal or kill beacuase a) I wouldn't want it to happen to me, b) I imagine the pain that it causes to do these crimes and this feeling of empathy or sympathy helps me not commit crime. I don't need to be threatened with damnation or bribed with an eternal reward. I do it because I know through experience what is right.

So you were raised in a Christian environment and in a Christian family? After learning certain (Christian?) values from your parents and community, you questioned some of the theoretical teachings (but had already internalized certain ethical teachings?). And now, the basis of your thought and actions has absolutely nothing to do with your early environment and familial background?

So, ultimately, you at first accepted the existence of god. Later, you denied this. Then, you were unsure. Now, you are certain that there is no god (you became an atheist at 24)...but you also admit that it is not possible to prove any of this.

So Aranka the Atheist is really just angry and disturbed with religion. And Wordsworth the Atheist is really just agnostic?

Any other atheists out there? So far your kind isn't very impressive. The 'European' (including US) tunnel vision that we inherited from our Christian past seems to be influencing too much of your 'post-Christian' logic, reasoning, and wisdom.

Qi, if there is a god, than which god is he/she ? Do the Christians believe in the true god or do Muslims? There have been thousands of gods created through out time; how do I know the Romans or the Persians didn't believe in the right god? My argument is this: If there is one god; than why does he let humans believe in other deities? Wouldn't it be counter-beneficial for him/her to let humans waste time on something nonexistent? (Anyway, guys I hope we can have a civil discussion on this subject.)

I would also consider myself atheist. I was raised as a Catholic, but begin to doubt many of the church's teachings. By high school, I was pretty much an atheist. I had no quarrel with or hatred towards my former religion; instead, I simply found the ideas silly and a little archaic. The biggest turnoff for me wasn't even the actual church. What really irked me was the narrow minded beliefs of the other Christians (I'm in the bible belt btw). Anyway, my main point is that atheism for me (and hopefully most people) was more of a logical conclusion rather than a rebellious attitude.

Gui, I found your post interesting. However, I would argue that the community itself, not religion is responsible for the "Christian" values. There are plenty of biological/sociological explanations for things like morals, ethics, etc. Becoming an atheist doesn't require you to abandon your moral compass; it means you chose a better way to explain its existence.

I'm sorry if that didn't make any sense. It's pretty early in the morning for me.

Man, I can hear the atheists laugh at you with their superior logic, reasoning, and wisdom. Myhand is getting a youtube clip and some quotes by a famous dead guy ready for you. Aranka is about to tell you about zeitgeist and something unrelated to your questions. Wordsworth the Agnostic Atheist has something coming too.