Would you rather live in a world without science...or in a world without religion? Showing 8,951-9,000 of 12,463

[cerebus]

John wrote: "its so they can say "see? religion is unnecessary" There can be no other reason that I can think of.

But, its like saying "can you become sober with organizations BESIDES AA? ok, then, lets stop AA then."

Does this mean if there were a mosque and a synagogue in the same town, we should eliminate one because they both provide a similar service? "
Nope, nope, nopety, nope.
As I said to Shannon, it is purely and simply to address those who do (usually hit-and-run) posts saying "we need both" or somesuch.

[[deleted user]]

cerebus wrote: "Shannon wrote: "Personally, I'm okay with that. "
And I was fairly sure I'd made it clear I was too, but just in case i haven't.....Me too!"

Glad that you feel the same way. It makes sense to me, given our differences and the fact that different things touch different people.

[cerebus]

Shannon wrote:
Yup, and I'm pretty sure as had been discussed before, a lot of those figures come from censuses and historically have not included an option for no religion, and even if they do are frequently answered (as I have done myself in the past) based on the religion you are born into, whether we believe or not.
To be honest I don't expect any figures to settle this either way, but thought it only fair to ask if you can say that those states are less religious than others, on what basis that claim is made, and what those numbers are, particularly if you have them to hand.

[John]

I'm tired and ready to go to bed so any of the above may have serious typos.

[Travis]

cerebus wrote: "Shannon wrote: "Did you boycott Seinfeld due to the "Soup Nazi" story and jokes?"
Not that I watched it with any regularity (thought it a fairly average show myself), but no....but would probably h..."

Heck, I don't even like to watch the 'Sound of music'.

[[deleted user]]

cerebus wrote: "Yup, and I'm pretty sure as had been discussed before, a lot of those figures come from censuses and historically have not included an option for no religion, and even if they do are frequently answered (as I have done myself in the past) based on the religion you are born into, whether we believe or not."

I'd say it would be hard, given this. I'd also say, if other countries don't include a "no religion" option, that people are guessing when they say countries are predominately non-religious.

However, here you go .... We have a no-religion option.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/graphi...

[Travis]

John wrote: "Shannon wrote: "What is the point of asking what religion gives that is unique and can't be found elsewhere? Really and truly, what is the point of that question?"

its so they can say "see? religi..."

We keep asking, because we keep getting told we have to keep religion.
But the thing is if science goes away, we are screwed and then when we re-discover science, it's all the same stuff.
If religion goes away...you get to sleep in on sunday and then if it is rediscovered it will most likely be something different than the current word of god.

religion is not something built into the physical laws of the universe, it's a man made construct and when it goes away, things seem to be okay...yeah, some people miss calling it 'Thor's day', but otherwise, we just move the holy book into the mythology section and get on with our lives.

[[deleted user]]

Travis wrote: "Heck, I don't even like to watch the 'Sound of music'.
"

Raindrops on roses and whiskers on kittens,
Bright copper kettle and warm wollen mittens,
Brown paper packages tied up with strings,
These are a few of my favorite things ....

Do a deer, a female dear,
Re a drop of golden sun ....

You are 16 going on 17 ...

(Clearly, I have and do watch Sound of Music ... just about everything Thanksgiving. Don't they play it around Thanksgiving, for some reason?)

[Travis]

Shannon wrote: "Travis wrote: "Heck, I don't even like to watch the 'Sound of music'.
"

Raindrops on roses and whiskers on kittens,
Bright copper kettle and warm wollen mittens,
Brown paper packages tied up with..."

Man, only thing worse than regular nazis are the ones that sing!
I think that's why Indiana Jones beats them up all the time, he's worried they are going to start singing.

[[deleted user]]

Travis wrote: "Man, only thing worse than regular nazis are the ones that sing! I think that's why Indiana Jones beats them up all the time, he's worried they are going to start singing. "

Don't know whether I should yell, "Godwin's" or sing,

Climb every mountain
Search high and low
Follow every by-way
Every path you know

Climb every mountain
Ford every stream
Follow every rainbow
'Till you find your dream

or....

My favorite ...

Edelweiss
Edelweiss

(Something, something ...)

Small and bright,
clean and white,
You look happy to greet me!

Mountain of snow may you bloom and grow,
bloom and grow, forever!

Edelweiss
Edelweiss

(Something, something ...)

[[deleted user]]

Travis wrote: "religion is not something built into the physical laws of the universe, it's a man made construct and when it goes away, things seem to be okay...yeah, some people miss calling it 'Thor's day', but otherwise, we just move the holy book into the mythology section and get on with our lives. "

In your opinion, of course.

[[deleted user]]

@Cerebus

This is more recent data; however, it doesn't, from my quick scan, give information on how many individuals said they weren't religious ... no religion.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/153479/Mis...

[cerebus]

John wrote: "cerebus wrote: "I'm having in this case a discussion with one particular believer..... ." you wrote a lot of stuff and just so we don't get all bogged down, I'll just make some statements.

1. I co..."
I honestly had made no assumptions on your views on gay marriage, it is an example I use because it is of topical interest, and the most vocal in trying not to allow it are the religious groups. Not all, and I am aware there are religions/denominations/individuals who don't accept this position.

I understand how this seems like a "gotcha", all I can say is it is genuinely not intended that way. It is a question I have asked of others, and am curious how those who take some parts of the bible, or any religious text, as inerrant, then feel confident enough to reject other parts as open to interpretation. It feels like having it both ways, justifying some things with the bible as being god's word, and sweeping the bits they don't agree with under the carpet. My questioning of you was intended to ascertain whether you approach the bible in that way, some parts unquestionably god, other parts not. If that is your approach, it is my intent to try and understand how that distinction can be made. As for 'caring' what or how you believe, at the end of the day I don't, and have no interest in persuading you. And it is not something that is unique to religion btw, I have the same questions, and discussions, with people who on one hand deride creationists and say "but evolution has overwhelming evidence and is the scientific consensus" while in the next breath reject AGW despite their being a similar weight of evidence and scientific consensus. Those people are doing the same thing I object to with those who pick and choose inerrancy in the bible....they use and accept science to support one position, but then pick and choose to ignore the bits that don't fit their ideology.

[cerebus]

Shannon wrote: "@Cerebus

This is more recent data; however, it doesn't, from my quick scan, give information on how many individuals said they weren't religious ... no religion.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/15347..."
THanks for the links Shannon, I will check them out when I have a chance to give them proper consideration (over the weekend)....

[cerebus]

John wrote: "I'm tired and ready to go to bed so any of the above may have serious typos."
typos are fine, gotta keep an eye out for any Godwin's though! :)

[cerebus]

John wrote: "beyond this, I don't know what to tell you. "
A good joke?

[cerebus]

Shannon wrote: "Glad that you feel the same way. It makes sense to me, given our differences and the fact that different things touch different people. "
It would be a boring world if we all agreed :) (Unless of course everyone agreed with me....then we'd have utopia! :D)

[cerebus]

Shannon wrote: "(Clearly, I have and do watch Sound of Music ... just about everything Thanksgiving. Don't they play it around Thanksgiving, for some reason?) "
Interesting...in most places I've lived it was very much a christmas movie....not sure why, and I've only ever seen it once myself, under considerable duress :)

[cerebus]

This is so cool :)

[cerebus]

John wrote: "Both salt and sugar may go into the same recipe. I believe there is a melange of meaning, that speaks to me differently depending on what I need. "
Yup, but salt and sugar are not mutually exclusive. Claiming the bible is the inerrant word of god and claiming the bible is not the inerrant word of god, are
mutually exclusive. I am not assuming this is your claim, I am asking to see if that is your claim.

[Michael]

Cerberus wrote: "Nah, just more standard trolling from Michael....his attempt to rile people."

You've accused me of that before. So that'll be your standard response to it, I suppose. All in the spirit of the debate cycle, I suspect.

And as for the riling people thing - yeah, I'm the only one aiming for the face in this debate obviously. It was a viper pit long before I showed up. Occasionally it gets a bit offensive, as we have recently discovered. You need to find a better troll, one who is really trying (and wanting) to offend you. That's not me.

[[deleted user]]

John wrote: "Yet you've lashed me with a cat of nine tales for two days because of what YOU BELIEVE I BELIEVE and then made me correct your misassumptions all the while judging me like a worm on the sidewalk. "

Oh, John.... Did you really mean to make that comparison?

[Travis]

Shannon wrote: "Travis wrote: "religion is not something built into the physical laws of the universe, it's a man made construct and when it goes away, things seem to be okay...yeah, some people miss calling it 'T..."


Well, can you give me an example of religion that would occur without man making it up?
What aspect of religion occurs in nature?

Which mythology are people really pushing for a comeback?
Are there huge groups sitting around pinning for the days of Aztec sacrifices or saying 'Boy, I miss the good old days when we worshiped at the temple of Neptune?'

and lastly, of course it's my opinion! Why do people always say that?
Who thinks I came here as a spokesman for the international atheists council?

[Michael]

John wrote "I spent all yesterday being grilled, poked, prodded accused of things I didn't do and castigated for things I didn't say, as well as having everything I DID say scrutinized line per line and thrown back in my face, called names and treated like a monster all the while I was trying to find a point of mutual civility."

That's the regular MO for some (of course not all) around here, John, you're right. But you'll probably be further interrogated and maybe at a push even accused of trolldom for saying so. As I've said before, attempting to be civil around here is occasionally looked at with scorn. If the Troll Witchfinders do show up and knock at the door, as with me, they could save themselves some time by asking two valuable questions:

1) do they think you genuinely and honestly believed what you said? My opinion is that you did.

2) are they so insecure they think (delusionally) you were poking at them individually or even as if they were some faceless Christless corps (watch that phrase get steamed open and peered into!)? My opinion is you were not.

For proactive reference, in case of confusion, all my opinions were honest and were forthrightly expressed in the belief that those reading them could handle it, even if they disagreed. I don't even object to the atheism, I have close atheistic friends and it's not a deal-breaker. I don't expect us to be sitting here, planning to meet up to compare scrunchies or the best colour for your nails, but if being forthright and honest makes me (or anyone) a troll, well there you go. Your threshold for controversy is very poor, and those who can't take an opinion for what it is without mewling about it and throwing unnecessary accusations should go find a less contentious subject area, like "Why does Bella love Edward?"

[[deleted user]]

Travis wrote: "lastly, of course it's my opinion! Why do people always say that?"

I always say that because I've seen non-believers here give believers a ration for making religious statements as if they're true. Like, ... Jesus was a great teacher, etc.... It's been seen as presumptuous, rude, etc... for believers to make statements as if they're accurate and true, for all people.

(Further, I've seen non-believers make statements here before regarding certain things. I took them to be 100% true. The statements were very definitive and, despite my belief in God, I don't play fast and loose with facts. So, I assumed everyone would be as scrupulous about such things. One day I decided to look something up. It wasn't that accurate. I mentioned it at the time and the danger of making statements, as if they're true. People will believe. It will be belief given the fact that it won't be based on fact. Thought non-believers, many non-believers, weren't fans of belief.)

In addition, I talk about my opinion, because I tend to want to respect people. Even before seeing the reactions of some non-believers here, I've been very careful in how I speak about religious things. As a teacher, I'm insanely careful. As a teacher in America where there is separation of church and state. For instance, a few months ago when doing Lord of the Flies with my sophomores, a student started making comparisons to Jesus and started talking about Jesus and the life and workings of Jesus. He spoke quite definitively. My follow up? Some people believe that. Some people believe he was a great teacher but not a savior. And, then, ... there are atheists who would have a different take.

I'm unclear as to why some are expected not to make declarative statements that are totally and completely definitive, whereas others don't hold themselves or people with similar views to the same standard.

[[deleted user]]

John wrote: "Shannon wrote: "Oh, John.... Did you really mean to make that comparison? "

*sigh.*"

Unclear as to whether you're sighing for my having asked if you meant to compare your having been questioned and called names by Hazel, which you forgave, to being whipped in a brutal fashion.

Or, perhaps, you're sighing for having made the comparison.

I'll lay my cards down. I, personally, believe Jesus lived, was tortured, and was crucified. I also know many people, throughout history, we tortured via whipping. Further, I've been questioned closely here, treated respectfully and disrespectfully, etc... for well over a year. I've had up to five non-believers questioning me at once. I've seen it done to others. However, for me, ... I'd never compare the two, literally or figuratively.

[[deleted user]]

John wrote: "Shannon wrote: "John wrote: "However, for me, ... I'd never compare the two, literally or figuratively. "

Good for you."

Well, I'm a James woman myself. I tend to read James over and over. It's my go-to. The tongue and works ....

[R.L.]

Religion(s) - or the disagreements over them - have caused more pain and death throughout history than just about anything else, so my first inclination would be to do without religion. But then it occurs to me that science has been used to bring about most of that awful destruction. Perhaps we could get to a state where we are all perpetually on mood enhancers, so the entire question becomes moot. No anger. No religious differences. No care about the latest pharmecutical promotion. Now THAT I could support.

[Travis]

Shannon wrote: "Travis wrote: "lastly, of course it's my opinion! Why do people always say that?"

I always say that because I've seen non-believers here give believers a ration for making religious statements as ..."

and that's fine, but just throwing out the phrase with nothing following it, is the adult version of saying 'Nah-huh!' or 'sez you!'.

it doesn't continue the conversation, it just feels like a snarky attempt to put the brakes on.

If you can give me an example of religion that occurs naturally then I'd like to hear it, or an old religion that went away, became mythology and then came back big as an active religion, then i'd be happy to hear it.

[[deleted user]]

Travis wrote: "it's a man made construct"

Not attempting to put the brakes on your free speech, Travis. I just wish you and others would be as careful with your words as you and others often expect some of us to be. Not snarky. Truth.

The point I'd take from your original post is the above ....

Many believers don't agree that "God" is a manmade construct.

Now, we're in a sticky spot. Remember all the times I said I was a person of faith and wasn't religious. cHriS said the same. Others did. Some nonbelievers, especially Gary, said belief in God equates to being religious and religion. Remember? Remember all of the definitions that were thrown round and about. Remember my discussing what my college psychology/sociology professor said regarding the definition of religion. Remember...? At this point, I'm guessing you wish I didn't have a good memory and wasn't reminding you.

After that whole drawn-out ordeal and my inability to find any references to my college definition, I agreed with Gary, yes, yes, I did, and said I'd follow the definition of religion as proposed by some of the non-believers here. A belief in "God" equates with being religious and religion, regardless of whether or not one attends church, etc....

Right? Right.

So, when I see the above statement in a post, though I think you were referring to organized religion vs. the other religion (you know, where people who don't go to church and aren't members of a religion but believe in a God are still religious and have religion, that religion), I have to say, "In your opinion..."

Because, ultimately, I believe and many believe "God" existed before humans and would exist if we disappeared tomorrow. And, I've been told that belief is religion. Therefore, I disagree with the idea that religion is a manmade construct and know many others who disagree. Given that, I said, "In your opinion..."

Now, if we'd like to change the "ground rules" and redefine religion, that's cool with me. Shall we do that? If we were to do that and say belief in "God" and having faith is different from religion and being religious, woo hoo!

In that case, Travis, you would indeed be right. While I believe God is separate and apart, I think religion, as in organized religion not the belief in God and God, is a manmade construct and I'd not be able to answer your question ... other than to say you're right.

Do let me know, though, if we should change that definition. I do try...

[Travis]

Shannon wrote: "Travis wrote: "it's a man made construct"

Not attempting to put the brakes on your free speech, Travis. I just wish you and others would be as careful with your words as you and others often expe..."

I lump belief in god with the organized church stuff. It's all religion to me and it's how I've treated the topic from the start.
If belief in god is different from religion to you, then why are you on a thread that asks you to chose one or the other?

and both are man made. People invented the man in the sky (whichever one of the many 'one true' gods you believe in) as well as the part where they build a special building and pray and then have coffee and doughnuts.

People say 'nuh-huh', but have not given any example of either existing in nature or the physical laws of the universe etc.

gods and religions come and go. lots of them are now on the mythology shelf and all the ones we have now will most likely go the same way and yet the world keeps going.

So, either we created the whole thing or god doesn't really need us and in either case, it seems we could just get on with our lives without him.

Plus, people keep saying that god will still be here when we are gone and I keep thinking 'which one?'

[Hazel]

Ron wrote: "Religion(s) - or the disagreements over them - have caused more pain and death throughout history than just about anything else, so my first inclination would be to do without religion. But then it..."

Have you read Brave New World?Brave New World

[[deleted user]]

Travis wrote: "I lump belief in god with the organized church stuff. It's all religion to me and it's how I've treated the topic from the start.
If belief in god is different from religion to you, then why are you on a thread that asks you to chose one or the other?

and both are man made."

If you lump belief in "god" with the organized church stuff, you'll likely be able to understand that we might disagree when it comes to your thoughts, namely that religion is a manmade construct. You think that. That's fine. But, it is your opinion. In your opinion, it is truth and is the truth for everyone on the planet. Great! That's cool. That's still your opinion, though.

Regarding why I'm here, on a thread that asks me to choose, ....

Well, Travis, my dear sweet mother didn't raise me to be a square peg that will fit in a square hole. She didn't raise me to always be a good and quiet little girl who thinks what people want me think, does what people tell me to do, and answer questions the way people want me to answer them.

My answer continues to be ... I'm glad I live in a time and place in which I don't have to choose between the two and will stand for that right.

Regarding my participation in this thread, .... As I've said before, given that I do answer questions and share of myself, I work in a profession in which my primary contacts are kids. While this thread can be incredibly frustrating from time to time for many reasons, I find it to be ... somewhat smart. More than somewhat smart, sometimes. Enough times. It's a way for me to challenge my thinking and myself in general.

Now that I have answered that question, I have one for you.

You were disturbed by my saying, "In your opinion," in response to one of your pronouncements. You thought that was my way of, basically, flipping you off and telling you to shut up. Stopping the discussion.

Then, you said, "If belief in god is different from religion to you, then why are you on a thread that asks you to chose one or the other?"

Given the fact that I refuse to choose one or the other and have done so for almost two years, does your question imply that I should shut up and go to another thread? Is it your way of saying, ... what was it, 'Nah-huh!' ... take your toys and go home, Shannon? A way of putting the brakes on my thoughts and opinions?

Notice.... I'm perfectly fine with you sharing your opinions. I'm fine with everyone sharing their opinions, as long as they're not being abusive to people, talking out of their arses, or being borderline inappropriate. At those times, I'll likely say something. I'm not going to tell them to go to another thread; I will likely call them on their asinine behavior, inaccurate information, etc... But, I'll not suggest they go elsewhere.

If you want to poke fun at the blanket carrying and binkie sucking believers who believe in the big man in the sky, you can do that all the live long day. It makes me cringe, but you have the right. You can even say "God" isn't real and that religion is a manmade construct. Etc..., etc.... I'd just like it if you'd say, when making sweeping pronouncements, that it's your opinion. That's all. I don't want you to another thread.

Does that go both ways?

[Travis]

Shannon wrote: "Travis wrote: "I lump belief in god with the organized church stuff. It's all religion to me and it's how I've treated the topic from the start.
If belief in god is different from religion to you, ..."

It seemed a weird point to distance yourself from religion on a 'religion vs science' thread.
No snark meant, just to have spent 180 pages debating that and then suddenly, go, but I'm not into religion.
It's like joining the hot dog vs hamburger thread and then announcing you're a vegan.

I'm on the science side, and do not pick and choose, I'm sticking with science, I'm not going to say 'But, I don't believe in science.' and I will stand by the big lumpy mass/umbrella term that makes it all up.

We could maybe we should start a 'god vs science' thread, as you don't have a side in this one.
Okay, that part was a bit snarky,but to be suddenly nitpicking terms feels like something chris would do and you are better than that.


and again, even after you've used 'in your opinion' more in one post than that other poster used 'crap', you haven't given any argument that actually concerns my points.

I don't mark things as 'my opinion', as I have only ever spoken for me, despite the air of authority I radiate, but at the same time, wether sweeping or not, I will make statements, and people are more than willing to dispute/challenge/ argue/ admire as they wish,
but I'm not cushioning the blow.

If there is a god, if religion springs out of the fabric of the universe, if somehow the Aztecs are making a big comeback, then tell me, show me, dispute what I've said.
Like, science, I'm sticking by my statements, unless given an actual counter argument.
If what I say is opinion, not fact, than give me the facts that prove it's just opinion.

You are welcome to think after every post I make 'that's his opinion', but telling me it, in no way counters or disproves what I've said and that's the debate/discussion I'm here to have.

[[deleted user]]

Travis wrote: "a big comeback"

Define big....

[[deleted user]]

Travis wrote: "It seemed a weird point to distance yourself from religion on a 'religion vs science' thread."

Different people are different, Travis, and think about things differently, despite the fact that some wish we'd all adhere to the same definitions and a few even claim we can't converse at all unless we do.

A weird point? Okay. Not a paper doll cutout. I'm guessing you also think it's weird that I believe in God. Further, I bet you think it's weird that I knew, days before it happened, that my grandfather was going to die on the day before my birthday. Well, when it comes to that last one, you might think I'm fibbing or delusional. Telling the truth but can't prove it scientifically ... so ... it must not be true. Ultimately, I'm going to be myself and not "cushion the blow" ... to borrow your phrase.

So, ... a religion that went away but came back ...?

How about ... Druids?

Of course, I'm guessing they might not fall within your definition of "big" .... Though, ultimately, I'm not entirely sure what that would prove. Even if a religion existed, died out (or was killed), and came back, that would prove what, exactly? Would that be proof of God's existence?

But, hey, if you want me to address that point, I guess I'll say, "Druids."

[cerebus]

John, I am sorry you feel that way, and that you felt you were being unfairly grilled. It was honestly not my intention to trip you up, or trap you. I would have been fine with answering any questions you wanted to send my way.
Michael, you are correct, my comment was glib and a tad unfair.
At this stage I'm gonna walk away from the thread, not as a sulk but simply 'cos enough is enough. Thanks to the regulars who've kept it interesting and I would say for such a contentious issue kept it considerably more civil than most other online discussions, and apologies for the times I let my own civility slip.

[cHriS]

Interesting, cerebus suggesting that he, himself, was unfair and his comment was glib.

He did use the 'troll' word a lot (#8847 #8890, two quick examples). He used it as a putdown rather than use it for what it meant.

Or maybe he had his own interpretation of the word. If one believes in a creator and says so than that person is 'trolling'.

[Travis]

Shannon wrote: "Travis wrote: "a big comeback"

Define big...."

If you have to ask, then it probably isn't big.

[Travis]

Shannon wrote: "Travis wrote: "It seemed a weird point to distance yourself from religion on a 'religion vs science' thread."

Different people are different, Travis, and think about things differently, despite th..."

No, it's weird, that you were seemingly okay with the word religion and then at page 180 changed your mind.
If you weren't okay with the definition of religion, I just figured the point would have come up earlier.
I've been using the same definition the whole time and talking with you and not a peep and it never seemed to be causing a problem or miscommunication.

Are we okay with keeping religion as people that believe in a god as well as whole church thing?

believing in god is weird too, but a different kind of weird and a seperate issue.

Druids are not a bad example, but also serve my point.
They went away, got replaced with another god and yet Britain did pretty good for themselves.
Zeus and company went away and Greece did fine. Heck, the romans 'borrowed' the greek gods, changed their names and then got rid of them for the big guy.

So, if you can trade gods, shut down a whole religion, change churches, heck, the pope just gave his two week notice, then it just throws into question not just the 'one true' aspect, but the whole 'was here before man etc or even reason for holding onto it.

[[deleted user]]

Travis wrote: "If you weren't okay with the definition of religion, I just figured the point would have come up earlier.
I've been using the same definition the whole time and talking with you and not a peep and it never seemed to be causing a problem or miscommunication."

If you recall, this came about due to my saying, "In your opinion...," and your being disturbed by that. I explained why I'd say it was your opinion. Definition of religion as ascribed to by people like you and Gary and likely many, many others, a definition that I've accepted. Given that, no, I don't think religion is a manmade construct, given etc..., etc....

Now that I've explained myself, you're having issues with my feelings regarding definitions....

Hey, I told Gary I'd adopt his definitions of religion and religious. No problem. Given that, though, I continue to say I believe "God" came first. If I'm right, religion isn't a manmade construct. But, we can disagree on that point.

[[deleted user]]

Travis wrote: "Druids are not a bad example, but also serve my point. They went away, got replaced with another god and yet Britain did pretty good for themselves. Zeus and company went away and Greece did fine. Heck, the romans 'borrowed' the greek gods, changed their names and then got rid of them for the big guy.

So, if you can trade gods, shut down a whole religion, change churches, heck, the pope just gave his two week notice, then it just throws into question not just the 'one true' aspect, but the whole 'was here before man etc or even reason for holding onto it. "

How does having many religions and a new pope throw the idea that "God" existed before man into question?

Like I've said before, I believe "God" .... Well, ... I don't think we can know "God's" mind or fully understand "God". I believe different peoples and different religions understand different aspects of "God" and/or come to different truths. If I'm right in this, if, how does the existence of a variety of religions call the idea that "God" existed before man in question?

Regarding the Druids, ....

First, the Druids didn't go away. They were slaughtered. Along with Boudicca, can't help but notice no one answered that question awhile back. Be that as it may .... They were decimated. You contend their God was replaced and things went pretty well in Britain.

Ummm.... Separate and apart from a discussion about religion, I could ask a ton of questions about this idea. But, religion can stay, as well as my questions.

Things went well for whom? The native tribes who suffered at the hands of the Romans? "Well" is defined as...? I don't know a ton about Druids; I don't think many people, who are honest, know a lot about Druids. But, let's start with their knowledge. I think Druids underwent extensive education and training. Imagine what we lost when they were murdered? What might they have known of astronomy, herbal medicine, etc...? If they hadn't been wiped out by Romans with different gods and different beliefs, how might our lives be different? Would they be better or worse? Did the environment benefit from their destruction? Would the water be cleaner if Druids lived and thrived? I don't know. My guess? Quite possibly. Would Britain have become the Britain with a thirst for wealth and power and colonization?

It's fascinating to think about these things, but it's impossible to know how things would be different if the Druids and their beliefs hadn't been eradicated. Our lives might be worse. Our lives might be better.

Finally, part of your post, the one I responded to and not this one, dealt with a religion that disappeared and came back. Okay. Druids. I wasn't sure what you were getting at with that, but .... Here's the example. Druids. How does this dot connect with your ideas and where you were going?

[Travis]

Shannon wrote: "Travis wrote: "Druids are not a bad example, but also serve my point. They went away, got replaced with another god and yet Britain did pretty good for themselves. Zeus and company went away and Gr..."

But, if we can never know and/or understand god or even know if anybody got it right, then that puts into question the whole god thing.

God must exist...why...?
Well, because we have a whole bunch of conflicting stories, some we don't actually think are real and a bunch that went extinct and a few others that we will walk away from if questioned too hard that says he is.


My other point is religions go away for a variety of reasons and the world is still here, heck, most of the places the religions came from are still going strong.
So, what makes the ones still around so special? Religion is the one true word of the one true god...well, not that one, or that one and that one's just silly, but ours are the real deal and deserve respect...at least until ours get downgraded to mythology.

So, are we just narrowing down the list until we get to the actual, for real one true religion and last church standing wins or did we accidently wipe out the one true one already or maybe they are all wrong and they could all go the way of the worshipers of Athena and we'd all get on with our lives.

The Druids went away and god didn't seemed concerned enough to help out, so either they weren't the right ones or god doesn't care.

We lose some knowledge, and then find it again, but when we lose a religion it goes away and is replaced by something different.
knowledge is discovered, religion is invented.
We lose knowledge, it's a bad thing, we lose a religion and...well, they are like buses another one will be along in a minute.

[[deleted user]]

Travis wrote: "But, if we can never know and/or understand god or even know if anybody got it right, then that puts into question the whole god thing."

Very true, at least as far as I'm concerned. It's a question for each of us to answer. I assume we'll find different answers depending on how we're led or on who we are.

[[deleted user]]

Travis wrote: "We lose knowledge, it's a bad thing, we lose a religion and...well, they are like buses another one will be along in a minute. "

And, yet ... there's one constant that doesn't go away. "God" ... I put God in quotes due to the fact that I know God is called by different names by different peoples.

(Regarding the rest of your post, ... about the one true, etc.... I'm not going to respond as you're not really addressing me or anything I've said, which is fine. But, I'm guessing I don't need to respond since it's not on point where I'm concerned.)

[cerebus]

It's alright cs, you were a troll who evaded answering any questions, then sneaked back in with a new name. I may have pulled the 'troll' trigger too soon on some, but you're still an evasive, sneaky, duplicitous troll.

[cHriS]

One minute he is walking away and the next minute he's back. Now I will have to put the cork back into my bottle of Bollinger.

[Ling]

the more you read and understand Science, the more you become interested with Religion. And you might end up telling yourself that someone/something must be the reason of all that there is.

[cerebus]

Bollinger? Not where I'd suggest you put your cork. I'll walk away, but I'll make an exception for you cs. You and your prevarication and cowardice.

[cerebus]

And unlike you and your leaving, if I come back it won't be with a name change trying to hide my return. Troll.