Is Religion Designed To Hold Us Back?

The saying "Good without God" should be seen as a view & not just used as some Atheist slogan. Whoever said earlier about Spirituality being okay & not being religious was right on! I for one am Spiritual, however, I am also an Atheist! I believe in no God, however I believe in some greater "Thing"?? I don't see this as a "Person", or a "God", and can not use the word "Creator", but ya have to admit that it was some very odd & interesting "Thing" that got this whole Universe, or Universes? going! Whoa, anyway, the point I'm trying to make is that I have never been jailed, had drugs do me damage, I enjoy only A beer on the weekend, volunteer where I feel I can help, & CONSTANTLY go way out of my way for people! Even still, when I get in these talks with Christians & the like, they will try to FORCE their Religion on me, tell me my Atheism is disgusting, immoral, etc., while they smoke their joint, or sit drunk at the pub. :-P Meanwhile, I do not talk of my Atheism to them, nor argue with them, I just want to sit & have a normal, calm, polite conversation. But apparently God wants to argue with me!

There I feel better, I got that out

reply to post by AfterInfinity

And in relation to religion, even if they find out "God" isn't real, that doesn't mean there aren't cosmic powers to take care of us, should we learn how to use them. It just won't have the same name or face anymore.

It’s good to see you agree there are things we do not understand. Just how helpful do you think religion is in helping us find those answers nowadays?

That's why I advocate change in religion, not the abolishing of religion.

And just how are you going to change it? Mormonism, scientology, Islam, Catholicism, and Christianity all changed religion going all the way back to the first stories. So how does that help us now?

I don't deny that. However, should you scrap the entire car because the tires are going bald?

No you put new tires on but is that supposed to be in relation to religion or is metaphorical just easier? I do not consider the analogy equal to the problem at hand.

reply to post by Grimpachi

It’s good to see you agree there are things we do not understand. Just how helpful do you think religion is in helping us find those answers nowadays?

We don't understand because we're afraid and because we're blind. Modern religion? Not very helpful. Just kind of numbs the pain of duality.

And just how are you going to change it? Mormonism, scientology, Islam, Catholicism, and Christianity all changed religion going all the way back to the first stories. So how does that help us now?

That's the question, isn't it?

No you put new tires on but is that supposed to be in relation to religion or is metaphorical just easier? I do not consider the analogy equal to the problem at hand.

You speak as though one bad part of religion makes all of religion worthless. Just like the balding tires on a perfectly good car, all of religion shouldn't be scrapped for the inadequacy of one facet.

reply to post by CashStronomer


I understand exactly where you are coming from.

That said I have noticed it is very hard to have a conversation about religion without it turning into specific religions. People have a tendency to hold one over the other in these conversations. My original OP was about all religion in general however I continually have to speak to one ideology or another. It becomes frustrating.

reply to post by boncho


ETOH ethyl alcohol is designed to instill mental retardation
in people who are not supposed to be mentally retarded.
it also makes them easier to control,
they spend their money on alcohol, more and more of it.

reply to post by AfterInfinity

You speak as though one bad part of religion makes all of religion worthless. Just like the balding tires on a perfectly good car, all of religion shouldn't be scrapped for the inadequacy of one facet.

This is where we fundamentally disagree. I say it is outdated, overused, and abused to the point it is a hindrance to humanity’s progress.

edit to add

It is more than one facet or religion. The only argument most people have for religion is morality and I do not believe we need religion to instill morality as a species it has been used for very immoral purposes because it is a tool.

reply to post by Grimpachi



So are guns, yet we still use those. And hundreds of needless deaths are caused by them every day. Yet guns can still be used to wonderful effect - its the people behind the guns that cause the problems. And so with religion. You have the people who use it for the wrong reasons, or use it for RIGHTEOUS reasons (they're the same in my mind) and others get hurt because of it.

That doesn't make religion bad. That makes people bad. How about, instead of rendering religion obsolete, render people obsolete? That should solve the problem. Because even without religion, people will just find another reason to kill each other over stupid stuff.

"The human species is fundamentally insane. Stick two or more in a room together, and they'll start dreaming up ways of killing each other." - Ollie, The Mist

reply to post by Deetermined


reply to post by AfterInfinity




Sorry I totally disagree with that premise.


I am talking about the advancement of the human race not whether or not people are going to kill each other.

Surely , you have to agree that more good has been done than bad when considering religion. Surtanly no reason to abolish it?

reply to post by BlueMule


You are absolutely right in so many ways,what do maps and menus do for you ??They instruct you how to reach a decision or a destination,but they dont show you what exactly is there,you must make of that what you will.Who says a treasure map isnt a travesty map??We need to have faith to follow a map or a menue and faith is our greatest power individually,not to be wasted on maps and menus.

Faith is only meant to be vested in other people.

Originally posted by slugger9787
reply to post by boncho

 

it also makes them easier to control,
they spend their money on alcohol, more and more of it.

Prohibition?

Al Capone wasn't that easy to control...

Originally posted by 1NEO001
Surely , you have to agree that more good has been done than bad when considering religion. Surtanly no reason to abolish it?

I think as a species we need to grow up and act our age and that means we should discard the stories we were brought up on. We can keep the lessons we learned but there is no need to hold on to superstations.

When speaking about more good being done than harm are you speaking of one religion or all religion?
When taking into account all religions at this time in the world do you think they divide or unite us?
When considering all of history with religion can you name any other force that has caused more war, devastation, and death?
Have you considered how much religion has halted progress in our history and continues to until this day?

I do not think we can abolish religion that would be forcing something on others just like religion has been forced on many throughout history. I guess I am hoping we can consciously evolve past it.

My two cents.....religion is archaic, obsolete and defunct. The sooner we get rid of it and become responsible for our own actions the better off we'll be. Could take a while.......tap,tap,tap..........

Originally posted by Auricom

Originally posted by Grimpachi
Is Religion Designed To Hold Us Back?

Nope.

Just the constant and idiotic fighting between the religious and non-religious. That's what's holding us back.

It is a duality thing. The one thing that both Jesus, Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism are telling us to avoid to lose small mind and be able to connect to god/ONE/reality Conciousness/Brahman. The specific religion is not important and faith even less at least in my case. When you are ready then god will find you no matter your religion so be an atheist if you like and do not care when people sprout hate for you being different in your views.

Originally posted by Grimpachi
reply to post by Joneselius

 

I think you mistook what I said. I stated I am more agnostic than atheist and I do not doubt your personal experiences or feelings however those feelings are chemical explained through science and the study of our physiology and psychology much like chocolate can bring on feelings of love.

No doubt that the event that you call a feeling is a chemical---well since you are a agnostic/atheist the identical thing can be said about what you call a thought. Your thoughts are nothing more than electro-chemical events which may or may not be programmed from the evolutionary process from the primordial slime pool. So if your thoughts and his feelings are both explained by electro-chemical science, then why trust your thoughts more than someone elses thoughts. If your thoughts have no purpose other than the end result of chemicals moving around inside your head? then why speak them out loud.?

I am open to spirituality in a sense that energy cannot be created or destroyed only transformed/changed but I do not consider Christianity any better than the teachings of Islam especially when you consider that they are branches of the same faith.

Islam and Christianity are not branches of the same faith. They are of Abrahamic descent.



Religion has always been used as a tool to control the masses through a simple method of reward and punishment. It is used on a grand scale understandably however the entire premise is flawed in nature.

And how are you so intelligent to be able to know this, just relying on the random chemical combinations of stuff in your head that you call a thought?

Edit to add

The world be considered flat (it states in the Bible "the earth is hung as a sphere in space") no one would have discovered America (Christians in Spain financed Christopher Columbus to sail to America) we would have never gone to the moon (I think that Kennedy was president when we entered outer space---A practicing Roman Catholic) or attempted to fly for that matter because that was gods domain slavery (most of the framers of the constitution were christian and worded the constitution via the GREAT COMPROMISE knowing that slavery was to be abolished) would still be prominent forget most science and all that goes with it. It was designed to control and hold back the human race and not inspire us to move forward.

edit on 16-11-2012 by Grimpachi because: add

reply to post by Grimpachi

Dear Grimpachi,

I'm pleased to see the interest in your thread, I'm sorry I stepped away for as long as I did. You know, I wish I could get to Florida and spend a couple of days sampling the food and beverages with you and discussing things. Oh well, I'd better start responding.

My failure here was that I did not fully understand your question, even though you made it quite clear. My response dealt with Christianity because it is the only religion I know much about. But, after some sleep, I think I have the answer you're looking for. The purpose of religion, as a concept, in today's life.

The first part is that without religion there would be no tool to describe or explain things coming from a supernatural realm. Too many people have experienced "strange" things to satisfy with a "Oh, I'm sure science will explain that some time in the future." I don't mean just alien sightings and auras either. While I don't want to go into specific examples, many have had experiences that they swear are related to God.

But a more basic reason is that religion provides us with the only source of a "should" in our lives. Take, for example "Thou shalt not kill," if it hadn't come from God what is it's logical foundation? I mean, you can tell someone in a godless society that he shouldn't kill and he could reasonably respond with "Why not?" You might mention survival of the species, but you'd be stumped when he asks "Why should the species survive?" You could try the old "Do unto others" line, but he could reply "I'm ready for them, nothing like a good fight."

I am not saying that society would become lawless if there was no God, but I am saying that there is no logical reason to have a rule, there is no way to create a "should," without God in the equation. Oh, you could threaten people, "Don't kill or we'll kill you," but there is no logically moral basis for the threat. Anybody, or group, can become a dictator, but without a God saying "This you should do, and this you shouldn't do," there is no way to create a logically sound "should," they'd just be imposing there own prejudices.

Anyway, I want to thank you again for the patience you've shown and the willingness you have to discuss these things. It's a real treat for me. I'll start saving up for a Florida trip.

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by charles1952


"I wont attack anyone over my beliefs,true some will."

This is only one part of your post so I want to be clear that it doesnt represent everything you are saying.

That said,this is a perfect example of how religon has been used to seperate humanity,this is the one single area where we are thrown off course completely.You CANNOT ever attack anyone over their beliefs.Under any doctrine,EVER.

Humanitarian concern must be the single catalyst of any organised relgon or it is by proxy non-humanitarian.

How could anyone with a humanitarian concer support diversity of beliefs that encompasses at any level attacking another human being---in fact immediate rejection of anything like this is a natural reaction,for what powers would we ignore our natural humanitarian concerns??

There has never been a battle of dietys because we exist in a cumulative reality which we all manifest together---nothing was preexisting,no dietys were pre-existing us.We created every single one.

There have been wars through history which have been supported by humans using their religous beliefs as catalysts of the conflict,as support for aggression based on survival of a doctrine,not of human beings,fighting for your survival is fine but doing it itn the name of a diety is not fine,initiating survival based on humanitarian right of existance is natural,screaming the name of an imaginary diety as you behead another human is worshipping an imaginary power that you actually manifest through this action.

Battle for your existance without imaginary dietys and you will only battle for true survival,and here on earth there is not and never has been room to do that against other humans,our cumulative battle has ALWAYS been with nature and the universe,our fight for survival is not against each other ,it never was and cannot ever be.

Science supports a battle against nature that brings us to a universal reality which supercededs on every level all doctrines ever tacticly concieved by a human mind.

Religons historical battle to supress knowledge and science to keep itself alive is a HISTORICAL wrong,but over the centuries religon because it is catalysed by human minds has always morphed and changed and adjusted and survived to live another day.

Religon is not a THING with sentient rights to survival,it is an imaginary idea which we strive to manifest in our physical reality,it is not a possible thing to do,it is a constant and permanent work in progress,it is only our continued organised efforts to maintain this cerebral imaginary concept which keeps the idea alive.

There is no war to ever be had with an idea,ever,religon is under no threat of death or dissolution ,none whatsoever,it simply cannot ever be so because it is simply an IDEA a shared IDEA,hence any religon that posesses resources and power that is in any way even indirectly related to interference in Humanitys progressive path into the universal reality we all exist within must be given amnesty within conflicts between us if there must be conflicts,this amnesty is critical because without it the killing will completely destroy humanity and simply leave ideas or idetys ,do you see??Without us here the ideas cannot exist,hence your common sense can tell you how and why religons were first catalysed within the human consciousness.Religons were catalysed to make it possible for humans to battle and kill each other with no checks and balances,we are told the opposite that without religons we would kill each other on a global scale,this is obviously backwards.

The first cave men who realised there was competition for resources found it necessary to compete with each other in nature,because there was a NATURAL instinct to PRESERVE all human life they didnt find this an easy thing to do,so they simply made up ideologies that encouraged and supported this resource based competition,like taking a drug before a fight ,cerebral steroids that override the mental checks and balances we are ALL born with.

This is a sales job,spin-doctoring,and it is out of control.

All religons are catalysed by the same dynamic,human survival,but because there was never anything other than ourselves to direct this survival instinct at we needed to create our own discension.There came a time in history when we were able to take care of our needs fully,but then dynamics were engineered to create division amogst us via an artificially contrived sense of need for resources based on hidden greed, each growing group eventually came to the same dynamic point of using this tactic to in a non-humanitarian manner to support this greed which then catalysed humanitys path,when one man saw the storerooms full and realised that the surplus could be used to manipulate and enslave other humans,based on a have /have not mentality---religon evolved into a self propogating entity wherever it had numerical human support,this is non-humanitarian thinking and it wasnt squashed back then,it was instead supported and entrenched,by a very few humans,and then this power was handed down over centuries and centuries.

Religon is not anyones enemy,it is an imaginary belief system that CANNOT exist on any level anywhere if science exists,there can only be one,this has been the current basis of religous struggles since the beginning,science and nature lead us to the same reality based picture,religon cannot exist on that pallette,and because of this we see continued conflicts and wars,it isnt us fighting each other it is imaginary ideas entrenched and armed over centuries of spin-doctoring archaic survival based concepts originating from a need for food shelter and water,this imaginary concept has been using us as pawns to fight each other so the idea itself may have a reality to remain in the way it has historicly survived.

We cannot control humans wishes to create ideologys,we just cannot let those ideologies morph into entitys of and within themselves as has been done.

The church and state have always been synonymous,but this was just to fool people into dieing for the state,creating an unrealistic imaginary reason and justification to kill other humans for resources,there are even rewards incorporated into most ideologies.

This is the history we have to deal with,this cannot be changed,it can be rewritten if knowledge is suppressed,but if knowledge is freely shared then the truth is revealed,and it shows us we need to PROTECT relgous freedon by DISARMING and DISENFRANCHISING all religons that are self-propogating.The risk we take there is that if we discover a foe in the universe greter than ourselves we will NEED this tactic again.

In the bottom of my heart I feel that the first humans who catalysed religon were fighting a battle for survival we are not aware of with a foe so strong that we needed to catalyse our fight for survival in a place it couldnt be accessed,in our heads and hearts,I seem to feel that humanity catalysed this greater power concept as a survival tactic not against each other BUT for each other,we just dont have the full story,its like a truce was signed we dont know about and the history is hidden from us,or a battle was won using this ideology,not a WAR but a battle,and we have refused to lay down our weapons.

My instincts tell me religons were designed for tactical militray reasons and not for use AGAINST each other,but the opposite to empower us to challenge the universe for our place in natures ballet.

There is the historicl potential for religon to have already accomplished a task we cant even imagine and then its true power and tangibility were taken to pieces and stored for future use,its may just be that because the original ideas were of course catalysed and manifested by the human mind that over history many humans have found these pieces and experimented and used them for their own individual and small special intrest group designs.This does not however supercede the fact that all religons are pieces of the same great humanitarian sword which I believe one day soon will be weilded on behalf of all of humanity with a 100% humanitarian focus and intent.If just ten men decided to allow the natural assimilation of their major doctrines based on a 100% humanitarian origin with the agreed understanding that together WE ALL CUMULATIVELY CREATE god[lower case "g"intentionally out of respect for humanity not disrespect for our ideas] and with the ideal that THIS CUMULATIVE HUMANITARIAN IDEOLOGY IS WORTHY OF PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION,and with the understanding that humans will never weild this sword upon humans---we need a universal context at this point to allow religons to do as nature intended them to do to protect and preserve humanity in a universal sense.We need a way to make religous perspectives speak the same language again,and I believe we have this ability now,all around us,we just need to use integrity and honesty,we must DEMAND INTEGRITY AND HONESTY.Show us life on Mars or the moon or anywhere and you instantly catalyse 6 billion humans ,you instantly show each and every one the meaning and value of a cumulative secular mindset.And you lay upon the hip of humanity the sheath of the greatest protection we can manifest in the universe--the Humanitarian Sword of Integrity.

Seriously,we already have much evidence of life in the universe,so we are preoccupied with fighting to keep this fact and reality alive in the face of great multi-front and incorrectly catalysed suppression by MANY doctrines for the same reasons,release to the masses of this data will catalyse humanity beyond their particular religon and bring them all together in a single year.

I believe that if religon is properly understood and approached with 100% integrity it will continue to exist and protect humanity far into the future,but I fear that if there isnt soon a catalyst of this change,meaning a single man or woman to be the spark that we may see humanity become fractured,because religons have MATURED and evolved to a new place we havent seen before,a new universal perspective,we need to tune them all in to the same humanitarian station now.

With free data access and exchange we are EMPOWERED as a SPECIES,we break the conventional bounds of our potentiality.I read on the net that people are beginning to learn how to download genetic directions into our bodies,directions that free our bodies to "reset"on a DNA level,to take us back to the original blueprints we were created from.This could mean that we will soon see many tacticly adjusted DNA codes that have been manipulated removed,things like telepathy and instant communication with each other globally--our lifespans may increase tenfold,disease may simply be eradicated by walking through a simple room,soon our pineal glands may be allowed to keep functioning beyond childhood and we will become lifelong learners of a heretofore unimaginable scale.


But all of these changes do not remove the potential positives of religon,in fact they reinforce this need and encourage us to rexamine our universal mindset---we just suddenly give ourselves an entire universe to search for our origins within,and we are allowed to use a humanitarian interpretation of god as the steed we ride in that great quest and as that mighty sword we carry on our hip as we learn and grow.We just arent allowed to treat god as a humanitarian reality,we cannot humanise an ideology,we must use a tool as a tool and and not forsake it but understand it to be what it is.

Of Humanity,Through Humanity,For Humanity.

reply to post by Grimpachi


So if not religion, then what is going to help us master the immaterial? Are we just supposed to be materialistic to the end of our days? Because religion and philosophy are the only two subjects that incorporate the nonphysical into our lives.

Originally posted by Grimpachi
I really wonder why people still believe in god and or gods in this day and age. Science has advanced to the point where we understand and know for a fact that these stories from long ago are just that (man-made) trying to explain the unknowable at the time. Now religion is more of a hindrance to mankind progressing than anything else and we know it has been that way for such a long time.

People have been and still are being killed because of fairytales. Seriously what is it going to take for mankind to finally snap out of the delusions of religion?

There was a period in history when religion was useful but that age ended a very long time ago. We know religion was and still is a tool to control the masses. It promises a reward in death for compliance in life but we are smarter than that now. We no longer live in caves for the most part the human race is civilized except in places where religion is upheld as fact.

Is religion itself designed to hold us back? It’s just hard for me to except that people are so willfully deluded.

According to Gallup only 15% believe in evolution without God

Here

So you’re saying that 85% of us are willfully deluded?
The case against God is getting more and more difficult as science is proving that our DNA was created, not evolved. Evolutionists have used the argument that a huge percentage of our DNA was junk, thus we evolved and not created, but it turns out we do use nearly all our DNA. Here is some important notes in a September press release from the ENCODE Project.

The Human Genome Project produced an almost complete order of the 3 billion pairs of chemical letters in the DNA that embodies the human genetic code — but little about the way this blueprint works. Now, after a multi-year concerted effort by more than 440 researchers in 32 labs around the world, a more dynamic picture gives the first holistic view of how the human genome actually does its job.

"During the early debates about the Human Genome Project, researchers had predicted that only a few percent of the human genome sequence encoded proteins, the workhorses of the cell, and that the rest was junk. We now know that this conclusion was wrong," said Eric D. Green, M.D., Ph.D., director of the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI), a part of the National Institutes of Health. "ENCODE has revealed that most of the human genome is involved in the complex molecular choreography required for converting genetic information into living cells and organisms."

Hundreds of researchers across the United States, United Kingdom, Spain, Singapore and Japan performed more than 1,600 sets of experiments on 147 types of tissue with technologies standardized across the consortium. In total, ENCODE generated more than 15 trillion bytes of raw data and consumed the equivalent of more than 300 years of computer time to analyze.

"We've come a long way," said Ewan Birney, Ph.D., of the European Bioinformatics Institute, in the United Kingdom, and lead analysis coordinator for the ENCODE project. "By carefully piecing together a simply staggering variety of data, we've shown that the human genome is simply alive with switches, turning our genes on and off and controlling when and where proteins are produced. ENCODE has taken our knowledge of the genome to the next level, and all of that knowledge is being shared openly."

Read full article here

I think spirituality is alive and well, I just think that maybe the church has lost influence in this day and age. In my own opinion, the church has lost some of its credibility because most church leaders don’t stand up for what they believe in anymore. In the face of political correctness, they have bowed down and chosen not to speak on things that even the bible references and I think it’s because they don’t want to offend congregation members and this is very sad. My wife and I used to attend church regularly until about three years ago my wife asked our minister a couple of moral questions and he refused to give a straight answer not knowing where we stood on the issue. This confirmed our belief that modern day churches are more concerned about their bottom line than they are about the spiritual well-being of their followers.
Our minister was a fun, energetic story teller and we liked him. So did many others because for several years the membership continued to grow and as that happened so did the facility with new additions to the nursery, the gymnasium, the coffee room, bible study area and so on. It became apparent that it was all about raising more money. Very sad IMO. My wife and I still teach our children about Jesus and the bible. We pray together. But these things are done at home now.

reply to post by one4all


Dear one4all,

You've put a lot of effort into your post, for which I thank you. Please forgive me if I overlook some points you've made, it is unintentional.

"I wont attack anyone over my beliefs,true some will."

Since we lead off with this, allow me to explain. I didn't want to criticize individual religions, but I admit I was thinking of Islam. I agree with you that attacking anyone over their beliefs is wrong, and I don't know of another religion besides Islam that calls for it.

Humanitarian concern must be the single catalyst of any organised relgon or it is by proxy non-humanitarian.

I agree with you again, if you are including concern for the individual's soul as part of humanitarian concern. If, though, you are arguing that the physical body is the only appropriate role for religion, then I would suggest the work would be better done by a soup kitchen or used clothing depot. Religion is for the whole man.

There has never been a battle of dietys because we exist in a cumulative reality which we all manifest together---nothing was preexisting,no dietys were pre-existing us.We created every single one.

I may be misunderstanding you here. I believe that there is a Creator God, but agree with you that all of the ancient gods were simply humanity's best guess as to what that god was like.

I've spent some time looking at your discussion on battles for religious causes. There is a lot there and I can't do it justice, but let me make some small attempt.

I'm not sure that wars between two religious groups over a point of doctrine occur all that often. Although I will except Islam from that statement. The Crusades were to regain conquered territory and the city of Jerusalem, and the fighting in Northern Ireland was over political representation and power between the two religious groups.

our cumulative battle has ALWAYS been with nature and the universe,our fight for survival is not against each other ,it never was and cannot ever be.

If you mean "humanity's" fight for survival is against nature, then I agree. It is one we are scheduled to lose, but you're right, that's the enemy. But if you're talking about an individual's survival, or his city's, or his country's, it is very possible that other men will be a greater enemy than nature.

Science supports a battle against nature that brings us to a universal reality which supercededs on every level all doctrines ever tacticly concieved by a human mind.

I'm sorry, but it can't. It's not within Science's vast powers. Science can only deal with nature, measuring, weighing, and so on. It can't transcend nature, without nature there is no science.

I'm also not certain that you are correct in saying that religion tries to suppress science to keep itself alive. Again, except for Islam, religion has welcomed scientific knowledge. Truth, after all, is truth regardless of the area in which it is found.

You've mentioned some other points, but i hope you'll allow me to take a break for awhile.

With respect,
Charles1952