There's probably no God

Atheists have started advertising. The most talked about ad campaign in England, now plastered across the outside of 800 British buses, declares: "There's probably no God, so stop worrying and enjoy your life." The campaign opened last week with rousing speeches by Richard Dawkins and representatives of the British Humanist Association, after a ...

[Coolmind]

god is pretend

[MAT1034]

The atheist equivilent to the crucifix.

[Divine Alien]

So there are many atheists.

[Casi]

We have no evidence in a God, so there probably isn't one. It's illogical, unreasonable and unnecessary for this world to have a God.

[nina]

MAT1034 wrote:

The atheist equivilent to the crucifix.

right

we'll go around wearing chains with nothing on them

[supersonic boom]

Those without religion have no hope. Those without hope have contempt for those with hope. Those with hope have religion.

Not in all cases but you get my drift.

[nina]

supersonic boom wrote:

Those without religion have no hope. Those without hope have contempt for those with hope. Those with hope have religion.
Not in all cases but you get my drift.

hope for what?

hope for a happy afterlife? so what, there's no evidence there is one

no one needs false hope

hope for a better world happening on earth, sure, that's not limited to believers

[supersonic boom]

nina wrote:

<quoted text>
hope for what?
hope for a happy afterlife? so what, there's no evidence there is one
no one needs false hope
hope for a better world happening on earth, sure, that's not limited to believers

Fair comment, but in my experience people on the whole seem happier and more content when in a religious group.

[Casi]

supersonic boom wrote:

Those without religion have no hope. Those without hope have contempt for those with hope. Those with hope have religion.
Not in all cases but you get my drift.

With religion, because I used to be Catholic, was actually pretty empty.
Yes, I did have "hope" in God, Jesus and Heaven. I had hope in the words of the bible. Yet, I felt empty?
Why? I had no hope for myself. I believed that God controlled everything and that I had nothing to do with my own life.
In fact, despite being a Catholic, I was very opinionated. I have always been Pro-Choice and because of that, I was conflicted with my religion and my own personal beliefs.

I'm an atheist, and I have more hope in my life. I hope for a good future. I hope for broadening my horizons and educating myself. I hope for a good life.

Basically, you don't need religion for hope. Honestly, you can find hope anywhere.

Abraham Lincoln, who did not belong to any religion (though he did believe in God) hoped for the freedom of all, even slaves.
Thomas Jefferson, most likely a deist again not belonging to any religion, had hope for our country and it's ideals.
Machiavelli, who shunned faith and religion, had hopes for a good basis on government and politics. He had studied politics and society to hope for good leadership.
Voltaire, among other free thinkers/deists of the Age of Enlightenment, had hope for the progress and perfectablity of society through reason and logic.

As you can see, religion is not necessary for hope.

A couple weeks ago, I was studying The Age of Enlightenment compared to The Medieval World View.

In the Medieval Times, life was organized by a Feudal Manorial System centered around the church. It was a very narrow lifestyle where the average person wouldn't stray as far 30 miles from his/her manor.
Their only hope in life was to go heaven. Anything else? Not likely, not even for the upper class.

Soon, you may have heard of the Bubonic Plague, that killed over half of Europe's population.

Did people still have hope from religion? No.

People "repented" for their sins by hurting
themselves through whips and other various forms of torture.
The survivors of the plague lost hope for all life and fell into a deep depression that was most likely a post traumatic response.

Now, compare this to The Age of Enlightenment.
Atheism was still, of course, a very rare thing. Instead, there was deism.

Isaac Newton, a deist, used logic to come up with three major points in people's perception of the world.

1.Reason
2.Nature
3.Progress

To sum that all up, Newton used reason to study nature of everything to create anthropology, sociology and psycology along with calculus and other forms of mathamatics to discover that these studies can help benefit mankind and ultimately lead to progress.

A good example of these studies leads me back to Machiavelli and his creation of political science and it's use in a better government.

What does all this mean?
Hope.

We don't need a belief in supernatural beings to gain hope.
We have hope in our futures. We have hope in our progress.

[Casi]

I apologize for my long winded argument, I hope I didn't waste too much of your time.

I want to say one more thing.

Just because I don't belong to any religion doesn't mean I'm unhappy, hopeless, or have contempt to those are religious.

I find myself a very happy person with a lot of optimism for our futures.
I don't think I need to believe in an afterlife that may or nor exist to give myself hope.
Like nina said, there's no use for false hope.

[supersonic boom]

Good arguement.
As I said in my arguement in my experience people on the whole seem happier and more content when in a religious group.

The good thing about religion is that people of differing backgrounds share the same basic ideals, do things together, share with each other. Again, this is my experience on the subject. I don't believe in everything the Bible says and the Church does not rule my life, but it has a major part to play in my life and brings me happiness and a feeling of belonging and yes, hope.
If I am wrong then I will find out when I depart this world, the same goes for everyone else on this great world of ours.

God bless, and thanks for your comments.

[Casi]

supersonic boom wrote:

Good arguement.
As I said in my arguement in my experience people on the whole seem happier and more content when in a religious group.
The good thing about religion is that people of differing backgrounds share the same basic ideals, do things together, share with each other. Again, this is my experience on the subject. I don't believe in everything the Bible says and the Church does not rule my life, but it has a major part to play in my life and brings me happiness and a feeling of belonging and yes, hope.
If I am wrong then I will find out when I depart this world, the same goes for everyone else on this great world of ours.
God bless, and thanks for your comments.

Thank you for your comment.

I find, though, that there are many groups for people to share the same ideals and ideas.
While I see from you that religion can have an impact on happiness, it's not the only thing that can.

[nina]

supersonic boom wrote:

<quoted text>
Fair comment, but in my experience people on the whole seem happier and more content when in a religious group.

I think that comes from a sense of belonging to a group

we are social animals

and happier/content are subjective

you;d have to remove a person from the group and see if they'd be moreso in another group to really test that

there is some merit to the ignorance is bliss

intelligent people tend to worry more about world/life events

people who don't bother paying attention to the world around them aren't bothered by them

and worse

people convinced there's something else taking care of them, aren't putting any effort into taking care of themselves

why put effort into environmentalism when god can wave his hand and fix everything after the apocolypse?

are those the kind of thinkers you want making policy?

[Divine Alien]

Casi wrote:

I apologize for my long winded argument, I hope I didn't waste too much of your time.
I want to say one more thing.
Just because I don't belong to any religion doesn't mean I'm unhappy, hopeless, or have contempt to those are religious.
I find myself a very happy person with a lot of optimism for our futures.
I don't think I need to believe in an afterlife that may or nor exist to give myself hope.
Like nina said, there's no use for false hope.

If you don't believe in afterlife, does this mean that you are not going to prepare for your future need? Those who don't believe in afterlife would not need to prepare the future, in physical or spiritual. Am I right?

[Divine Alien]

Casi wrote:

<quoted text>
With religion, because I used to be Catholic, was actually pretty empty.
Yes, I did have "hope" in God, Jesus and Heaven. I had hope in the words of the bible. Yet, I felt empty?
Why? I had no hope for myself. I believed that God controlled everything and that I had nothing to do with my own life.
In fact, despite being a Catholic, I was very opinionated. I have always been Pro-Choice and because of that, I was conflicted with my religion and my own personal beliefs.
I'm an atheist, and I have more hope in my life. I hope for a good future. I hope for broadening my horizons and educating myself. I hope for a good life.
Basically, you don't need religion for hope. Honestly, you can find hope anywhere.
Abraham Lincoln, who did not belong to any religion (though he did believe in God) hoped for the freedom of all, even slaves.
Thomas Jefferson, most likely a deist again not belonging to any religion, had hope for our country and it's ideals.
Machiavelli, who shunned faith and religion, had hopes for a good basis on government and politics. He had studied politics and society to hope for good leadership.
Voltaire, among other free thinkers/deists of the Age of Enlightenment, had hope for the progress and perfectablity of society through reason and logic.
As you can see, religion is not necessary for hope.
A couple weeks ago, I was studying The Age of Enlightenment compared to The Medieval World View.
In the Medieval Times, life was organized by a Feudal Manorial System centered around the church. It was a very narrow lifestyle where the average person wouldn't stray as far 30 miles from his/her manor.
Their only hope in life was to go heaven. Anything else? Not likely, not even for the upper class.
Soon, you may have heard of the Bubonic Plague, that killed over half of Europe's population.
Did people still have hope from religion? No.
People "repented" for their sins by hurting
themselves through whips and other various forms of torture.
The survivors of the plague lost hope for all life and fell into a deep depression that was most likely a post traumatic response.
Now, compare this to The Age of Enlightenment.
Atheism was still, of course, a very rare thing. Instead, there was deism.
Isaac Newton, a deist, used logic to come up with three major points in people's perception of the world.
1.Reason
2.Nature
3.Progress
To sum that all up, Newton used reason to study nature of everything to create anthropology, sociology and psycology along with calculus and other forms of mathamatics to discover that these studies can help benefit mankind and ultimately lead to progress.
A good example of these studies leads me back to Machiavelli and his creation of political science and it's use in a better government.
What does all this mean?
Hope.
We don't need a belief in supernatural beings to gain hope.
We have hope in our futures. We have hope in our progress.

What's a pity for you to feel empty being a catholic for some times. I am a catholic and I should say with confidence that I am full in the spirit of God/Jesus. You know, we don't feel the spirit filling ourselves in physical but many people experience the fullness of spirit in their life. There is a serious mistake in your life for failing to experience the fullness of life in Jesus as a catholic. Please look back and invite the Lord Jesus into your life humbly.

[Easter Bunny]

supersonic boom wrote:

I don't believe in everything the Bible says and the Church does not rule my life,

Ah, cafeteria-style religion. My favorite kind.

The interesting thing is, in order to accept some of the Bible and reject other parts of it, you must be applying some principles that transcend the Bible.

If you ponder the possible sources of those principles for a moment, things get interesting because they cannot come from the Bible itself without being circular, at best, and positively irrational at worst. And we've all seen what blind acceptance of irrationality can lead to, such as witch trials and stonings.

[Easter Bunny]

nina wrote:

<quoted text>
I think that comes from a sense of belonging to a group
we are social animals
and happier/content are subjective
you;d have to remove a person from the group and see if they'd be moreso in another group to really test that
there is some merit to the ignorance is bliss
intelligent people tend to worry more about world/life events
people who don't bother paying attention to the world around them aren't bothered by them
and worse
people convinced there's something else taking care of them, aren't putting any effort into taking care of themselves
why put effort into environmentalism when god can wave his hand and fix everything after the apocolypse?
are those the kind of thinkers you want making policy?

Yes, lowering our standards of proof just so we can keep our infantile superstitions is not without its price.

The more time we spend thinking about things that aren't true, the less time we spend thinking about things that are true. The opportunity-cost of all the energy we've put into religions is too huge to contemplate.

When you consider how religions have been steadfastly against all progress, it's reasonable to suspect that our lives would have been made a lot less painful and a lot more fulfilling a long time ago if we hadn't wasted so much time pondering the whims of the Easter Bunny, or some equally sad pursuit.

[Easter Bunny]

Divine Alien wrote:

<quoted text>
If you don't believe in afterlife, does this mean that you are not going to prepare for your future need? Those who don't believe in afterlife would not need to prepare the future, in physical or spiritual. Am I right?

All you're doing here is shouting your confession of how religion causes people to be increasingly closed-minded and devoid of imagination, thus, unwittingly, proving the points people make against religious belief.

[Divine Alien]

Easter Bunny wrote:

<quoted text>
All you're doing here is shouting your confession of how religion causes people to be increasingly closed-minded and devoid of imagination, thus, unwittingly, proving the points people make against religious belief.

If one doesn't prepare any, it looks like life is meaningless without any HOPE at all in the afterlife.

[TirzhaZ]

Divine Alien wrote:

<quoted text>
If you don't believe in afterlife, does this mean that you are not going to prepare for your future need? Those who don't believe in afterlife would not need to prepare the future, in physical or spiritual. Am I right?

It means just the opposite, DA. If there is no afterlife, one must make the best of this life. I live my life in a way that positively impacts those around me so that once I'm gone I can leave behind some kind of legacy with my daughter, grandkids, other family members. Those that say "My treasure is in heaven" are content to live a meager existence here because they are fooled into thinking they'll have it better after they die. I wouldn't want to spend my entire life believing it'll get better on the "other side." I'd rather just make it a good life now, and that includes planning for my future. It's about making the most of the time we have because that's all there is.