Religious will be a global minority by 2025

Originally posted by miniatus
Religion never dies, it just changes... one belief system for the next.. as long as man kind can't accept that it doesn't know everything, some form of religion will exist.. and if not religion, silly superstition.. which to me is one and the same.

We have a tendency to make up answers to questions too big to answer.

Follow the Shoe ! No, no, follow the Gourd !

reply to post by Astrocyte

In my mind, there is little difference between abd malik ibn warwan (Caliph who spread Islam by the sword) or any of the so-called "new atheists" - Hawkins, Harris, Dennet, PZ Myers, etc. Give these latter people the power, and the religious would be violently expunged from the earth.

Please give me some evidence for your claim that Hawkins, Harris, Dennet, and PZ Myers have EVER promoted what your ignorantly claiming.

More lies for jesus... soo predictable.

Zombie Jesus saves me from Alien Critters

How about: my poo stinks, and so does yours. I will die, and so will you, just as billions have before either of us existed.

All good. Let's go get a snow cone!

reply to post by Wertdagf


Sam Harris and Daniel Dennett are less offensively vociferous than Richard Dawkins and P.Z Myers. But speaking of the latter, he is well known for saying absolutely outrageous things about the religious.

If what I'm saying still doesn't come off as plausible to you, look at what you just wrote. What makes you think I'm Christian? Or a theist, for that matter? Why do you so nonchalantly misrepresent my reasoning for opposing the dogmatic position of the new atheists? Is it not possible that I'm not Christian? Is it impossible for you to speak to me as someone who believes in God without all the dogmatic baggage that Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus etc, carry on?

This is what leads me to think that you're simply parroting popular opinions. You still haven't read enough - or matured enough - to come to the middle ground.

reply to post by Astrocyte


You claimed that specific people were capable of violence against religion.

I asked for evidence. Your response is always predictable.

reply to post by Wertdagf

You claimed that specific people were capable of violence against religion.

I said based on the rhetoric of certain contemporary atheists - which I honed down to Richard Dawkins and P.Z Myers, it was plausible that if they were in power they would utilize Nazi/Communist methods to weed out the religious.

Some quotes of his

We're confronted all the time with evolving viruses and bacteria. The Red Queen really rules the biological world, and we have to keep running just to keep up pace with the changing microorganisms. Yet policymakers and the public deny vaccination, and evolution itself, and question the value of biomedical research. Maybe they don't believe in evolution, but the microorganisms trying to kill us are taking full advantage of it.

Link

Comparing religious people to viruses and bacteria isn't exactly what I would consider well thought out rhetoric. Can you blame me for believing that this man would develop "vaccines" (policies) to cleanse the system (society) of the virus (the religious)???

He seems to be fond of biological metaphors: "We are not princes of the earth, we are the descendants of worms, and any nobility must be earned.". Someone who considers humankind to be no greater than worms, and any "nobility earned" must be based, not on a basic egalitarian ethic, but on what you believe, is a DANGEROUS person.

And of course, his most infamous and hardest to misinterpret exclamation:

I say, screw the polite words and careful rhetoric. It's time for scientists to break out the steel-toed boots and brass knuckles, and get out there and hammer on the lunatics and idiots.[

Someone like him - give him the power of government, and he would become the next Adolph Hitler, no doubt.

web.archive.org...://pharyngula.org/index/weblog/comments/perspective/



And the moral of the story is: the problem isn't organized religion, but rigid dogmatism.

Religious will be a global minority by 2025

Good.

Originally posted by DeadSeraph

Originally posted by setibuddies
S & F.

Hope that is correct, what with so much violence and lunacy perpetrated in the name of religion. Trouble is, humans being humans, I don't doubt the freaks among us will latch on to some other silly reason / justification to continue being uncivilized.

Bingo. A world without religion is every atheist's wet dream but they are in for a surprise when people still act like #&@holes and find other reasons to kill each other. We don't need the concept of God to act like jerks. Just ask the soviets.

Sure, but you have to realize that tyranny thrives on the masses believing that a savior will, well, save them, and that they will be rewarded in heaven for the pain they suffer on earth. Take that belief away and you have yourself a population that won't put up with government BS anymore.

The Zionist Jews / Bilderberger bunch are propagating that anti God stuff . All you have to do is to google the Protocols of Zion and read their content . They are intent to destroy the Gentile belief in God in the schools and in the government. They view religion as a problem with their Globalist plan to rule the world " These are not the Jews who reverence God . These are the Talmudic Jews who view themselves as the Supreme people and soon to be rulers of the world . Their Satanic Talmudic Beliefs regard the Gentile as cattle to be used . If you are not a Jew or Muslim you are a Gentile and poorly thought of .
These Zionist Jews are have put themselves in the positions that can control all money and News and information as prescribed by the Protocols . No wonder they have spent so much money trying to discredit the Protocols . But are following them to the letter . And they have just about succeeded in their efforts .

Originally posted by Astrocyte
reply to post by Wertdagf

 

You claimed that specific people were capable of violence against religion.

I said based on the rhetoric of certain contemporary atheists - which I honed down to Richard Dawkins and P.Z Myers, it was plausible that if they were in power they would utilize Nazi/Communist methods to weed out the religious.

Some quotes of his

We're confronted all the time with evolving viruses and bacteria. The Red Queen really rules the biological world, and we have to keep running just to keep up pace with the changing microorganisms. Yet policymakers and the public deny vaccination, and evolution itself, and question the value of biomedical research. Maybe they don't believe in evolution, but the microorganisms trying to kill us are taking full advantage of it.

Link

Comparing religious people to viruses and bacteria isn't exactly what I would consider well thought out rhetoric. Can you blame me for believing that this man would develop "vaccines" (policies) to cleanse the system (society) of the virus (the religious)???

He seems to be fond of biological metaphors: "We are not princes of the earth, we are the descendants of worms, and any nobility must be earned.". Someone who considers humankind to be no greater than worms, and any "nobility earned" must be based, not on a basic egalitarian ethic, but on what you believe, is a DANGEROUS person.

And of course, his most infamous and hardest to misinterpret exclamation:

I say, screw the polite words and careful rhetoric. It's time for scientists to break out the steel-toed boots and brass knuckles, and get out there and hammer on the lunatics and idiots.[

Someone like him - give him the power of government, and he would become the next Adolph Hitler, no doubt.

web.archive.org...://pharyngula.org/index/weblog/comments/perspective/

edit on 7-7-2013 by Astrocyte because: (no reason given)

And the moral of the story is: the problem isn't organized religion, but rigid dogmatism.

edit on 7-7-2013 by Astrocyte because: (no reason given)

Well spoken well reasoned.

Atheists such as Mao PolPot and Stalin prove your words.

Its not religion or atheism, its dogma

reply to post by Astrocyte


Nothing you have posted has supported that, but I don't expect rationality from you.

Richard is in favor of things like removing public funds for religious schools in England who refuse to adhere to normal education standards and refuse students based on the religious beliefs of their parents.



You calling him the next Hitler is absolutely unsupported by any of his words or intentions to change society, but that is what I expect.

reply to post by lonewolf19792000


If I knew I was building a paradigm on lies, I would hand out the same warning. All your verses prove is that the author was a good businessman. Just saying.

reply to post by Wertdagf


I guess you've never heard of P.Z Myers.

My quotes were of HIM, not Richard Dawkins. Though I'm partly at fault for failing to mention that when I began quoting him.

But then again, if you had followed the links I provided, that would have been clarified for you.

reply to post by Astrocyte


By one of those quotes, you seem to be implying there are a lot of lunatics and idiots in America. Otherwise you wouldn't be comparing him to Adolf. Who are the idiots and why do you think there are so many?

Originally posted by Wertdagf
reply to post by DeadSeraph

 

hasn't Russia always been inundated by Catholicism?

No one can claim Russia has ever been atheist, or even free from the putrid grasp of religion.

The soviets persecuted catholics and every other religious group. "Religion is the opiate of the masses" remember?

The communists may have failed to stamp out religion, but they sure tried. I suppose you will try to imply that had they succeeded, communist russia would have blossomed into an atheist utopian paradise?

reply to post by AfterInfinity


Huh?

P.Z Myers, a professor of biology, said those things. I "quoted" Him. They are not my words, but his.

The crazy lunatics he refers to are religious people who deny the "truths of science". To him, evolutionary theory proves the non-existence of God. Therefore, to believe in God, to subscribe to any religious belief, makes you a "crazy lunatic".

If even the title rings true, as time will tell, then there won't be a 2025. Just my opinion.

The so called "constraints" of morality is the only thing that has gotten us this far. It is easy to focus on the negative aspects, and play into the hands of those who would exploit my beliefs for societal and political agenda. Have at it. Flame away. I look forward to whatever end awaits me. It is just a shame to think of the masses of those who will never know kindness without ulterior motive.

Boba

reply to post by Astrocyte


Well religious beliefs are a disease and should be treated as such. Rightly saying that religious people have poisoned minds and are idiots doesn't equal murder.

This man has spent years committing himself to educating others.

Here is a video of his where he takes a Q&A on evolutionary biology.

reply to post by Wertdagf

Well religious beliefs are a disease and should be treated as such. Rightly saying that religious people have poisoned minds and are idiots doesn't equal murder.

The only proper response to this sheer lack of self awareness is to laugh

You should spend less time fancying yourself as "compassionate" and more time reflecting on why you believe what you believe, and what gives you the right to pontificate and tell others that their beliefs are "diseases" demanding correction.

This same type of religious chauvinism is seen in all the pigheaded fundamentalisms: Islam, Jewish, or Christian. They deny others simply because they imagine themselves as being the sole possessors of "truth". You too. If you had a modicum of self awareness - which you manifestly do not have - you would understand the arbitrariness - the selectivity - the visceral nature, of your belief system.

That you even agree with this maniacs horribly devised rhetoric shows how completely lost you are. Do you know how many atheists consider P.Z Myers crusade against religion to be incredibly counter-productive? That instead of facilitating dialogue, it breeds contempt and distrust? Do you think people like being patronized?

Maybe you should reflect on these facts before you go about "healing" us of our "diseased" belief. Or, you can simply ask yourself this one question: if you are self aware - that is, not being subverted by your feelings - you will acknowledge that some things are categorically beyond our ability to know. God is one of those concepts. It is not a "flying spaghetti monsters" - that horrifically unsophisticated argument hatched by Richard Dawkins that seems to be popular amongst his hordes of followers, but an ultimate concept. Ultimate concepts are by definition beyond conditions. They are not contingent on anything. This world, it's existence - the totality of it. A sphaghetti monster is a clear concept. God, however, is an elusive explanation. There's no image that goes along with it. There's only an intuition, a ratiocination, that this worlds existence must be ontologically united in some primal cause. This cause need not be historical, but constitutive. When I say God, I do not mean "a being in the sky" - I mean a force which pervades existence, which sustains existence, which IS existence. Since this force must be responsible for the design of things , He must also be simultaneously "outside" the natural order. This is called Panentheism by philosophers. God IS the world, natural law, and God is simultaneous beyond it's limitations.

That's my philosophy. Why do I believe this? Because I feel it. It resonates with me.

If it sounds like a disease to you, you can go # yourself.

Edit: just to be clear, I don't belittle other people's belief systems because I know how regulated they are by feelings and experiences. I try to be conscious of the person, so I ignore our philosophical differences. If you're an atheist, cool, fine. You feel different about the God question. Your metaphysics is built to suit your feelings, not mine. I respect that.

reply to post by Dynamike


"Religious will be a global minority by 2025"

Thank God!

... oh wait.