Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038

Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038

There are 23584 comments on the Psychology Today story from Apr 25, 2012, titled Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038. In it, Psychology Today reports that:

My blog posts on religion have attracted a lot of controversy. Religious people are annoyed by my claim that belief in God will go the way of horse transportation, and for much the same reason, specifically an improved standard of living.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Psychology Today.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#16100 May 29, 2013
Except when he beat them.
spudgun wrote:
<quoted text>I imagine Muq will respond "our prophet was so kind to his wives and concubines. He was a model of virtue and compassion. And they all lived in a house of candy and lived happily ever after." :D

“Right click Left click Yay!”

Since: Dec 10

Nehwon

#16101 May 29, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
I found his "atheists are not all evil" speech particularly interesting. In it, he allowed that non-catholics (atheists, even) might just win heaven, if they lived as good people.
That?
That right there? Opens a wide door to the admission that they don't own the "way to heaven", nor that the catholic-way is the sole, single, exclusive brand from which to choose.
Of course, the $$-counters in Vatican quickly squashed the idea-- but I wonder?
The cat *is* out of that bag, now... what direction will this pope take the church, simply by agreeing with some policy, and not with others?
I would think that setting policy is one of his functions...
.... Interesting Times.
I must admit, I only know about Jesuits from Wikipedia (history) and personal accounts about them posted on the internet (many). So far, what I've seen I like. They seem to take the message of Jesus of being decent to each other into rather hostile places.

From what I've seen of this pope, I wouldn't be surprised if he invoked the papal infallibility doctrine by sitting on St. Peter's chair and pronouncing a Catholic dogma.

The pope is supposed to be only infallible when speaking ex cathedra on the matters of Catholic doctrine. That's why it's only been invoked 7 times in the last couple thousand of years.

It is interesting times.

And I'd say the internet is a big part of the reason why it's so interesting.

“Right click Left click Yay!”

Since: Dec 10

Nehwon

#16102 May 29, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Ans.
I am really happy that you wanted to give our prophet "Benefit of Doubt", others on this thread have not been so generous.
I have explained the "Middle of road" policy in my earlier post.
I just do not what you people have against this " 1400 years old or 1000 old" systems.
Would good things and appreciable things and rules be discarded "Just because they were practiced 1000 or 14000 years back".
Would the practice of truth, honesty, sexual morality etc would be discarded just because they are "Thousands of years old".
Have cases of kidnappings, rapes, killing and molesting "loose women on deserted spots" removed in our present society?
Just read crime stories in any country and you will find increasing numbers of single unguarded women being molested.
Why you have to put up with all these risks and inconveniences and not provide a escort to your women "Just because it is a 1000 or 1400 years old practice"?
Ask British, they are so proud of their century old practices and display them proudly.
Every nation has carving for their old history and their old ways.
I try to put things in perspective for their times. Mohammed is one of them. He did things that history remembers and is an influence on the current world.

"Would good things and appreciable things and rules be discarded 'Just because they were practiced 1000 or 14000 years back'."

Those rules need to stand the test of time. From the Bible, Leviticus claimed that eating anything from the seas that didn't have scales or fins was an abomination before God.

But am I going to hell because I eat clams or shrimp? or did Leviticus have a shellfish allergy and, because such holy man became ill, it must be ungodly?

You see, I look at the religious texts looking for good ideas that are still worthwhile. Rules in those same texts may not be valid as we have learned quite a bit about the world since they were written down.

But way too many people think that if it's in a religious book, that should never change and they are willing to kill others for not thinking the same way.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#16103 May 30, 2013
greymouser wrote:
<quoted text>
I must admit, I only know about Jesuits from Wikipedia (history) and personal accounts about them posted on the internet (many). So far, what I've seen I like. They seem to take the message of Jesus of being decent to each other into rather hostile places.
From what I've seen of this pope, I wouldn't be surprised if he invoked the papal infallibility doctrine by sitting on St. Peter's chair and pronouncing a Catholic dogma.
The pope is supposed to be only infallible when speaking ex cathedra on the matters of Catholic doctrine. That's why it's only been invoked 7 times in the last couple thousand of years.
It is interesting times.
And I'd say the internet is a big part of the reason why it's so interesting.
Yes-- the internet allows otherwise small stories, which would have been either buried or not printed at all, to get out to people who find them ... interesting.

I think it was the internet that helped to spread the word, that catholic priests were diddling kids, then being moved to a new parish, and diddling *those*-- all the while Vatican trying to cover it up & paying hush-money.

Vatican cannot buy off the internet: nobody owns it, information travels as it will.

And as the story began to break, the formerly silent major news players began to ignore the bribes, and give the story some air time.

As you said: interesting times.
henry

Bad Tennstedt, Germany

#16104 May 30, 2013
Imhotep wrote:
<quoted text>
I find the ones that quote Scripture to be the most hilarious.
Naturally we already know what they're going to say before it's even out of their mouth.
We're going to hell - Jesus loves me - you're doomed to the lake of fire - etc.
Once again irony the meter goes boom.
So profound is this delusion they think this threatens the irreligious!
It is impossible to fear something that does not exist. That's the simple point they all miss.
Religions are crimes! They are stealing peoples life times!
henry

Bad Tennstedt, Germany

#16105 May 30, 2013
Imhotep wrote:
<quoted text>
Welche Teil von Deutschland kommst du her?
Wir haben Freunde in München und Koln.
I am an Atheist and communist!

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#16106 May 30, 2013
henry wrote:
<quoted text>
I am an Atheist and communist!
But I like you anyway!

<smile>

:D
MUQ

Jubail, Saudi Arabia

#16107 May 31, 2013
SG wrote:
01. The fact that all life is related to each other is a wonderful thing. Also we know that that is true, unlike your goat herder myths!

here is a main problem with Islam which I haven’t mentioned to date

02. All religions, and Islam in particular, have an patriarchal view of the world.

This I think is a big part of the problem.

It is not just that men are the only ones in positions of power in Islam. It is also that we all have male and female aspects to our being. And the Abrahamic religions have done huge damage to the human psyche. People are dominated by the male aspect and wish to dominate others.

Muslim males are often deeply unbalanced individuals, not in touch with their feminine side.

In the muslim world males enforce male rule and privilege. Females are subordinated and treated as less than human.

This infects all aspects of society - social, legal, economic and political.

Women are viewed as the property of men, and role is restricted to reproduction and servitude.

In many of the pre christian societies women often played a role as queen-priestess, goddesses were worshipped along side male deities, and women held greater power than in many societies today. This took a backward step with the adoption of Christianity. The Abrahamic religions represented a victory for an extreme-male patriarchy and a deranged and unbalanced view of the world and themselves.
Ans.

01. Life related to each other, is indeed a wonderful thing, who denies it?

02. Your hatred for ABrahamic religions includes Muslims, Christians and Jews.

So I will ask Christians and Jews to answer your charge why should I only take that role of defending the faith!!
MUQ

Jubail, Saudi Arabia

#16108 May 31, 2013
Ed Sed wrote:
What centuries-old practices? The British may have traditions like the monarchy but they are modernized, constantly reviewed and open to challenge. No British Monarch can interfere in democratic processes the way they did less than 100 years ago, far less 1400.

The next Monarch won't even take the title 'Defender of the Faith' as it is widely accepted in the UK that people of all religions and none must be treated with equality and without bias. Why anyone would want such nonsense as religion reflecting on their good name is another question.

Your version of Islam isn't hundreds of years old. It's just that your attitudes to women, gays, atheists, science, education and your fellow man generally are slow to change. That religionists follow an old tradition is a myth. People of one age or era have far more in common with each other than people of the same faith in a different age. We are collectively responsible for what happens today, not in the past and religions today are more bickering tribes than they are defenders of values or traditions.

http://www.jesusandmo.net/2013/05/29/some/

From:
http://www.ndtv.com/article/world/millionaire ...
quote:
"I want to tell my story, but it will also be the story of 61 million children who can't get education," Malala said.
Unquote.

When her and her age group are properly educated they can educate the 'Muqs' of this world. Then perhaps there will be the chance for more peace, security and mutual respect for all.
Ans.

Every nation has customs and practices that are rooted in their psyche and what makes them a different nation.

The way they dress, the way they eat, you will find them different as you move around each country.

They are not dogmatic but never the less being different from each other.

In Islam also there is freedom in how people dress and what they eat.

The compulsory part are the acts of worship and basic rules of morality.

It is not a sign of “modernism” to be kind hearted and encourage Sodomy and Lesbianism and allow for every type of sexual immorality.

The western society by doing that is sowing the seed of its own destruction.

The signs are appearing already and the philosophers are worried as how to contain it, but once you open the flood gate.

And since when you have decided me amongst those who “attacked Malala”?

Islam is for educating children both male and female? But by education does not mean that you follow the Western system of mixed boys and girls school.

They should get education but not the western rules of sexual immorality.

PS:

People are giving impression that Malala is actually a Christian
MUQ

Jubail, Saudi Arabia

#16109 May 31, 2013
GM wrote:
01. I try to put things in perspective for their times. Mohammed is one of them. He did things that history remembers and is an influence on the current world.

"Would good things and appreciable things and rules be discarded 'Just because they were practiced 1000 or 14000 years back'."

02. Those rules need to stand the test of time. From the Bible, Leviticus claimed that eating anything from the seas that didn't have scales or fins was an abomination before God.

But am I going to hell because I eat clams or shrimp? or did Leviticus have a shellfish allergy and, because such holy man became ill, it must be ungodly?

You see, I look at the religious texts looking for good ideas that are still worthwhile. Rules in those same texts may not be valid as we have learned quite a bit about the world since they were written down.

But way too many people think that if it's in a religious book, that should never change and they are willing to kill others for not thinking the same way.
Ans.

No you have right to challenge and find faults in religious texts and I am not against it.

But to lay a charge that any thing and every thing written in these books has “become old and lost its effectivity” it also not correct.

In islam there is not a “long list” of what to eat, but a very short list of what “Not to eat”!!

You can see the difference in approach.

Islamic scholars say that general rule in Islam is “Every religious practice is banned, except what is allowed by Quran and Prophet”

And every practice to do with secular issues “Is allowed unless banned by Quran and Prophet”.

So Islam is much more relaxed and open that earlier religion.

In Quran one quality of Last and Final prophet is that “He allows what is good (and pure) and prohibits them what is bad (and impure), he releases them from their heavy burdens and yokes that are upon them…”(7:137)

Islam is much easy to follow than Judaism and other religions.
spudgun

Stoke-on-trent, UK

#16110 May 31, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
02. Your hatred for ABrahamic religions includes Muslims, Christians and Jews.
I dont have any feelings of hate towards individual followers of any of those religions. It is the beliefs that I reject, as superstition. It is not the person but the credulous beliefs I have an issue with. There is simply no need today for reverence of imaginary beings.
spudgun

Stoke-on-trent, UK

#16111 May 31, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
In Quran one quality of Last and Final prophet is that “He allows what is good (and pure) and prohibits them what is bad (and impure),
And thats the problem, you are modelling your life on someone else, on a 7th century arab. And as pointed out repeatedly, owning slaves, child brides, concubines, and following superstitious rules is a primitive way of life.
henry

Bad Langensalza, Germany

#16112 May 31, 2013
Imhotep wrote:
<quoted text>
Welche Teil von Deutschland kommst du her?
Wir haben Freunde in München und Koln.
In former Deutsche Democratische Republik (GDR) there was no war. When the GDR was annexed by the Western part, the whole of the capitalist Germany started wars.
henry

Bad Langensalza, Germany

#16113 May 31, 2013
NoxchiCho wrote:
Nah , probably islam will rule the world in a few decades .
In a few decades the world will be a nuclear Inferno!
henry

Bad Langensalza, Germany

#16114 May 31, 2013
Dak-Original wrote:
<quoted text>
..and exploiters.
All capitalists are exploiters!
henry

Bad Langensalza, Germany

#16115 May 31, 2013
NoxchiCho wrote:
Nah , probably islam will rule the world in a few decades .
Perhaps the world will be a nuclear Inferno!
henry

Bad Langensalza, Germany

#16116 May 31, 2013
EdSed wrote:
<quoted text>Too true.
A statistical study of data from 89 nations shows that raising women’s status is key to a better quality of life for all; as women’s status rises, so does fiscal support for the stereotypical “women’s work” of caring for children, the elderly, and people’s health (whether done by women or men)--work essential for the “high quality capital” needed for the postindustrial/knowledge economy.
source:
http://www.partnershipway.org/core-pathways/w...
I sometimes wonder if there is a sort of civilising or healing process that can be discerned as progressing since the extreme violence of the middle-ages when warlords were the norm. Anyway, empowering women seems key to a peaceful and prosperous society.
The catholic church was (and is!) hostile to women too!
henry

Bad Langensalza, Germany

#16117 May 31, 2013
greymouser wrote:
<quoted text>
I must admit, I only know about Jesuits from Wikipedia (history) and personal accounts about them posted on the internet (many). So far, what I've seen I like. They seem to take the message of Jesus of being decent to each other into rather hostile places.
From what I've seen of this pope, I wouldn't be surprised if he invoked the papal infallibility doctrine by sitting on St. Peter's chair and pronouncing a Catholic dogma.
The pope is supposed to be only infallible when speaking ex cathedra on the matters of Catholic doctrine. That's why it's only been invoked 7 times in the last couple thousand of years.
It is interesting times.
And I'd say the internet is a big part of the reason why it's so interesting.
The catholic church is one of the biggest capitalist corporations in the world! Not peacefully but by wars this empire has been robbed together!
henry

Bad Langensalza, Germany

#16118 May 31, 2013
Dak-Original wrote:
<quoted text>
..and exploiters.
So are all capitalist exploiters!

“Formerly "Richard"”

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

#16119 May 31, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Ans.
No you have right to challenge and find faults in religious texts and I am not against it.
But to lay a charge that any thing and every thing written in these books has “become old and lost its effectivity” it also not correct.
In islam there is not a “long list” of what to eat, but a very short list of what “Not to eat”!!
You can see the difference in approach.
Islamic scholars say that general rule in Islam is “Every religious practice is banned, except what is allowed by Quran and Prophet”
And every practice to do with secular issues “Is allowed unless banned by Quran and Prophet”.
So Islam is much more relaxed and open that earlier religion.
In Quran one quality of Last and Final prophet is that “He allows what is good (and pure) and prohibits them what is bad (and impure), he releases them from their heavy burdens and yokes that are upon them…”(7:137)
Islam is much easy to follow than Judaism and other religions.
More spam from you and nothing about your abuse, rape and murder of little girls.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 3 min dollarsbill 247,758
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 25 min thetruth 2,358
News In America, atheists are still in the closet (Apr '12) 27 min thetruth 47,900
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 28 min thetruth 12,905
News As an atheist, how do I maintain my relationshi... 34 min Thinking 60
News Atheism, the Bible and sexual orientation 57 min Thinking 30
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) Wed macumazahn 20,900
More from around the web