Tino- The thing is man only one religion is correct. If you break the law you will be held accountable by the authorities. When you go before a judge and after all the arguing is said and done there is only one thing that matters. Guilty or Innocent. So why would man be so ignorant? To think we can do whatever we want, whenever we want and never give an account to our maker? I think it’s the other way around, religion gives someone strength, a sense of morales, conduct, accountablity and a clear definition of right and wrong. So when all is said and done, only one religion is correct out of the many out there, just as man’s law and justice see’s only guilty and innocent likewise so does God’s law.

Squirrl- You are an idiot. Ants build out of a built in natural instict, likewise crickets make noise. Animals can feel a kinship to humans but it’s not a real love. How can you explain animals turning on owners after 5 years of being with them? Why do some states or counties outlaw certain types of dogs who are by nature prone to turning on humans? Why are some animals considered wild and untammable? You buddy need to think before you speak and stop being ignorant.

Now while I believe my religion is the correct one and the others are wrong I’ll not walk around and tell others to convert or rag on someone of a different faith. Thats not what being a christian is all about I do however believe that religions as a whole have really stop serving their purpose at least where organized religion is concerned. Why all the fights over the number of members? Why the witch hunts condeming “heathens” etc? Where was any of that taught and why are men claiming it’s God’s will when they have nothing to back it up? It’s people like that which are giving religion a bad name. I say put down the guns and start looking into what you believe and stop letting organized religious leaders tell you what you believe. That would solve so many issues and end a lot of these debates.

for sure i recognise what youre saying about many being very stubborn about their beliefs, sometimes unable to defend what they believe, very touchy and fearful to even see their beliefs debated. i guess alot of that stems from feeling so strongly about cherished beliefs, and many dont really enjoy philosophical discussion

me i love it :)

i dont think pointing out the definition changes much, thats pretty much what most religious ppl believe

the point about claiming their religion is the only true one, i pretty much think that follows from having a belief at all.

for example, if i believe that there is no God, which i actually think can be a very reasonable position, doesnt it automatically follow that if i meet someone who believes there is a God, then i believe that they must be believing something false?

of course the different religions only think other religions are false in the things they disagree about, and there is often a suprising degree of shared beliefs, which they all therefore agree about. for example, Islam and Christianity are both theistic, and often agree about the nature and characteristics of God. although they disagree strongly about whether or not Jesus is a prophet of God or some sort of incarnation of God.

however the idea that many people hurt people flowing from their religious belief, well goodness i find that incredibly rare indeed, and i come from northern ireland! hehe historically maybe there has been violence over it, but today i very much doubt if for example Islamic followers and Christians fight over the nature of Jesus today, in fact i think they all look forward to debating it and enjoy it, hehe. the violence we see today has nothing or very little to do with theological differences.

clergy, well they all have to study theology to become clergy (im more familiar with Christianity myself). from what i see from many theological teaching institutions, they cannot teach it without doing exactly what you are hoping for, listening intelligently, open minded debate, higher order thinking, etc.

I have nothing at all against personal beliefs and religion, and I do write as much in the last paragraps. What I have a big problem with are those that claim their religion is the only true one and subsequently tell others to shun or otherwise hurt ‘heathens’.

Re: “religions encourage freedom of thought and critical engagement” – yes they do, on paper. Sadly, the clergy and followers tend to skip or otherwise misinterpret those parts of the paper.

Basically, I just want everyone to have an open mind and be capable of higher order thinking…to be able to listen and intelligently discuss these things, instead of outright denial that the world could be any different.

I have come across too many who simply cannot comprehend how someone cannot believe exactly what they do…such closed minds. If you ask them why they believe, they cannot quantify or qualify their belief…their reality is broken beyond repair.

clearly you are a wide reader, and have articulated a view very engagingly and winsomely. you may have even read some of the philosophers i mentioned or others again. plus its a bit elitest of me to suggest that ppl should read analytic philosophers to form a view

but i still recommend reading/studying that sort of thing. other great philosophers of religion include, john hick (religious pluralist, not easily defined as theist or atheist) keith ward, oh and back a little way j.l. mackie

a non sequiter if ever i saw one, made all the more obvious if we replace the word “religions” with something like “world-views”, which would include such things as atheism, or even some form of agnosticism (believing no one knows). not only is it a non sequiter (the conclusion does not follow from the premis) but the more general replacement is also self contradictory/defeating.

sorry trino, most of your essay is a rant, without much substance; merely stating your opinion that believers in God are deluded, without anything to back it up. the slightest hint of an argument points to fanatics, probably due to everyones shared contemporary concerns with terrorism etc.
athough many fanatics do rely upon religion to enable them to do psychologically ridiculous things, most of the time that fanaticism is fuelled by political, social and even poverty related issues, with alot more complexity to it than to simply blame religion. plus the overwhelming majority of theists are not fanatics, and there are atheistic fanatics too.

i often hear a dislike of ‘organised’ aspects of religion, although i never find it that malicious or sinister. teaching kids what you think is true is a natural thing to do i think. most religions encourage freedom of thought and critical engagement. oh and charity cake sales and humanist book groups are also ‘organised’ lol

as for philosophy i do recommend some philosophers both theist and atheist, for anyone to read. leading contemporary theistic analytic philosophers include R. Swinburne, A. Plantinga, W. Lane Craig. Leading Atheist philosophers include W. Rowe, P. Draper, A. Flew, and many many more on both sides. i find it hard to take seriously anymore any arguments that dont appear to have done some reading, lol.

i myself am a cautious religious theist, i certainly dont think all the arguments for theism work, and i find myself thinking that the theist/atheist issue isnt necessarily a zero sum game, i.e. both sides can be reasonable in holding their beliefs. if one side has a good reason to believe, that doesnt mean the other side is suddenly stupid.

enjoyable to read though m8, and i’ll cya in the game *smiley face here*. do reply, good to keep debating, hehe but we certainly wont let it affect our playing together

‘…all religions are false.’ Can’t say I agree with this, but I can say religions are misleading the people on their own quests, rather than that on which the religion was based on.

mister grim, u are a blind man. open your eyes to the world. u only see what u want to see, too scared to see the world for what it is.