Religion

[Alardem]

After seeing so many fucking horrible things that are skewed in the favor of the haves rather than the have-nots, it's hard to justify the existence of a God that answers prayers. What makes the luxuries of the businessman much more easily obtained than that of the beggar? It is humanity that is responsible, and humanity that is at fault for the inequality we see.

[Cuyir]

@Dogfood:

The atheist will be smart enough to know that no help will come and that he/she will need to work his/her ass off to survive while the religious person will delude him/herself into believing that help will come/that God will help/ that there's a reason for everything/ and another christian stereotype.

Human will is what gets humans through tough situations (and chance).

Illusions and delusions work (as i've stated before) but you know.

I am not a chest beating atheist. I don't even label myself an atheist. FYI.

[Nice]

After seeing so many fucking horrible things that are skewed in the favor of the haves rather than the have-nots, it's hard to justify the existence of a God that answers prayers. What makes the luxuries of the businessman much more easily obtained than that of the beggar? It is humanity that is responsible, and humanity that is at fault for the inequality we see.

except that the rich-haves are considered greedy and ..well.. have more sins. God teaches modesty not luxury, so that's why he doesn't grant your wishes to get all the wealth of the world, have all the food and shit. And according to bible, those that are poor, will become rich and those that are rich will become poor.

God is not supposed to be Santa Claus

@cuyir
In the example i gave, the two people dont have the opportunity to earn their food.

If a religious person doesnt do anything and just sits on his ass saying "its k, god will give me everything" then he is pretty stupid because he believes God will just throw gifts to him because he is too lazy to earn them himself.

also i love how i always struggle when debating with atheists to keep it "neutral" and not use what i believe as facts in arguments. Even though i believe in God i always use "If there's a God" in debates and not "there's a God so.." We all think that our own views are superior, i know you think that what religious people believe is completely insane and silly JUST as i think how atheists are silly but please try to keep your pride to yourself and be neutral when discussing.

In your case would be how you keep using the word "deluded", trust me, i think you're deluded yourself as much as you think i am but i'm not throwing it against you

[Alardem]

Dogfood: I don't give a shit about 'sin'. What a presumptuous judgment to make about all rich people, too - are all the poor virtuous, and all the wealthy monstrous? That seems too simplistic, and it is not a belief that religious people should endorse. What matters is the misery and sadness in our lifetime, not after we die. This belief in punishment/reward after death is what perpetuates inequality in human society - and believe me, similar versions exist in Hinduism and Buddhism.

Confirmation bias. I've seen too many crippled, sickly, poor people in my life who've prayed and begged and died despite all their greatest efforts. And I see many privileged shits like myself who thank God rather than society/their parents for their happiness.

If there is a being that created our universe, it left a long, long time ago and no longer controls our lives. People control our lives. Makes much more sense than believing that anything as insignificant as humans on a tiny planet in an average-sized solar system in a colossal galaxy actually have any profound impact in the long-term.

[Bridge]

"Poor person 2, so deluded and living in false hope"

But that isn't my argument. If a person wants to believe in God and Heaven and all that, he can do so and I won't judge him. My beef is with religion - the system. There are countless (almost literally) examples of the Church extorting its patrons or deluding them into committing unspeakable acts in the name of religion. Yeah, I'm talking about the crusades here - the mere fact that the system in official capacity not only endorsed such actions but according to Catholic beliefs that endorsement actually came from God. Right? Aren't Popes God's interpreters here on earth? How is the system not broken if men, who are supposed to be God's representatives, can officially sanction sin on such a large scale? These contradictions, along with many many many others, should be enough to make you doubt your beliefs. Why not cut out the middle man, and instead of believing men who you have no reason to think truly represent God, and just believe in your own God? One who doesn't make you arbitrarily jump through hoops and be at the mercy of an easily exploitable system?

[Cuyir]

See? This is why I dislike religion.

The wealthy are instantly called sinners without taking into consideration if they worked their asses off or not.

There's a really irritating part about christianity. They blather on and on about ''those that are poor are closer to god and thus favored'' and yet ask for money. Hell, the catholic church used to be an economic powerhouse thanks to those very same "favored" people.

The contradictions are irritating.

[Alardem]

Religion comes in many different dogmas that all claim to be the best, and it can be exhausting if you happen to live in different cultures.

Now, faith in karma and the teachings of a religious leader can teach compassion and altruism for people. Countless charity organizations have been started up by religious groups. But I would argue that one does not REQUIRE religious faith in order to be compassionate.

Indeed, my belief that we only have one life to live exacerbates my desire to do something meaningful and make others happy before my time gets cut short.

[Nice]

NOTE: I have also edited the post i made before

Dogfood: I don't give a shit about 'sin'. What a presumptuous judgment to make about all rich people, too - are all the poor virtuous, and all the wealthy monstrous? That seems too simplistic, and it is not a belief that religious people should endorse. What matters is the misery and sadness in our lifetime, not after we die. This belief in punishment/reward after death is what perpetuates inequality in human society - and believe me, similar versions exist in Hinduism and Buddhism.

Confirmation bias. I've seen too many crippled, sickly, poor people in my life who've prayed and begged and died despite all their greatest efforts. And I see many privileged shits like myself who thank God rather than society/their parents for their happiness.

If there is a being that created our universe, it left a long, long time ago and no longer controls our lives. People control our lives. Makes much more sense than believing that anything as insignificant as humans on a tiny planet in an average-sized solar system in a colossal galaxy actually have any profound impact in the long-term.

Exactly, you dont give a shit that's why it's difficult to debate with someone like you. Those that pursue wealth are greedy and they pursue it for luxury, which is a "no no" according to bible. Those that become wealthy because they had luck or invented something are definetly not greedy bastards, as long as they dont spend all their money on luxury and for themselves. And also not all poor are angels, obviously.

" What matters is the misery and sadness in our lifetime, not after we die." No it doesn't, not for a religious person. A religious person is going to worry about after life because that lasts forever and is eternal.

According to bible, God gave us free will so we obviously have control of our lives, all the way till our death, it doesnt say anywhere that we are hand puppets to God, not even in the Bible.

But that isn't my argument. If a person wants to believe in God and Heaven and all that, he can do so and I won't judge him. My beef is with religion - the system. There are countless (almost literally) examples of the Church extorting its patrons or deluding them into committing unspeakable acts in the name of religion. Yeah, I'm talking about the crusades here - the mere fact that the system in official capacity not only endorsed such actions but according to Catholic beliefs that endorsement actually came from God. Right? Aren't Popes God's interpreters here on earth? How is the system not broken if men, who are supposed to be God's representatives, can officially sanction sin on such a large scale? These contradictions, along with many many many others, should be enough to make you doubt your beliefs. Why not cut out the middle man, and instead of believing men who you have no reason to think truly represent God, and just believe in your own God? One who doesn't make you arbitrarily jump through hoops and be at the mercy of an easily exploitable system?

Yup, crusades. I'm going to throw the most obvious answer in here. Free will. If God was to smite every single man that does wrong and claims that it's in his name then really what would be the point of our lives. Just puppets under the threat of God. Crusades is a popular topic to discuss and debate even just among religious people, and the simple answer is that God gave us lifes, and he also allowed us to treat our lifes and others just the way we ourselves want. Those that choose to put God and his teachings away from their lives will have their wish granted even afterlife because they wont deal with God then just as they didnt want to in life.

Oops i strayed a bit didnt i?
I DONT deny that the church was corrupt, it definetly was but just because it was corrupt more than 600 years ago does it mean that it will always remain corrupt? And once again even though i follow most catholic teachings i dont agree with others so you're kinda talking to the wrong person because in my personal opinion and philosophy, the vatican is in no way "supreme" and i'm not bowing my head down to what they say i should, i bow my head down to what i believe is right.

[Alardem]

Exactly, you dont give a shit that's why it's difficult to debate with someone like you. Those that pursue wealth are greedy and they pursue it for luxury, which is a "no no" according to bible. Those that become wealthy because they had luck or invented something are definetly not greedy bastards, as long as they dont spend all their money on luxury and for themselves. And also not all poor are angels, obviously.

Except the Bible doesn't matter for billions of people who've come up with other religions for their spiritual needs. I don't give a shit about what some westerner says about how we should rule our life, because I care about people right now and not some hypothetical future.

Christianity started as a movement to help the marginalized and suffering - not to justify their existence.

No it doesn't, not for a religious person.

There lies the problem in debating with STUBBORN people. I know many religious people who can reconcile their faith with still valuing life here and now.

Let's face it: religion came about because life is hard. Too many people die young. When you're suffering, struggling to make ends meet, and dealing with the unfairness of life, it's easier to take heart in the belief that all your good deeds will be paid off.

My argument is - why take that chance? We have the ability to challenge the problems on earth that make many other people suffer, rather than selfishly let it continue to happen after you die and cease to care about anyone else.

[Bridge]

just because it was corrupt more than 600 years ago does it mean that it will always remain corrupt?

You're missing the point. The question isn't whether it's corrupt, it's whether it's corruptible. Why should you place your faith in a system that can be exploited? And that thing about free will you mentioned is just comical because it supports my argument. If every man is free to do whatever he wants and God will not interfere in any way, then why trust the Bible? By that logic God had nothing to do with it, it was written by men and Jesus was not the messiah. Or do you mean to say that he interfered that one time long ago nobody remembers but doesn't want to anymore? Why?