Atheists praying

[Cow Poke]

The long history of barbaric behaviour for which the Abrahamic religions have been responsible has been on a par with the non-Abrahamic populous that surrounded them. IOW: the religion makes no difference for better or worse...which is my point.

I don't suppose you could provide a cite that doesn't blow your statement out of the water.

[Tassman]

I don't suppose you could provide a cite that doesn't blow your statement out of the water.

Beginning with Judaism’s violence against the Canaanites 4,000 years ago, through to the violence of the Inquisitions, religious wars and the Christian colonial expansions and right up to the Islamic extremism of today, the Abrahamic religions have been a history of barbaric behaviour...either because of the religion or despite it.

[JonathanL]

Beginning with Judaism’s violence against the Canaanites 4,000 years ago

Those poor child sacrificing Canaanites.

[MaxVel]

The long history of barbaric behaviour for which the Abrahamic religions have been responsible, has been on a par with the non-Abrahamic populous that surrounded them. IOW: the religion makes no difference for better or worse...which is my point. It's ineffective.



Vice versa more like it!

Your objection can't even get off the ground, since you can't provide an objective moral standard to measure things against. Without that, and a grounding for it, your objection is just a subjective dislike and tells us nothing about the objective worth of religions.

Next, you need to show that a person or people with religion is no different than the same people or person without that religion. Since that can only be speculation you can only convince those who find your speculations valuable. And since you are admittedly dishonest (seeing nothing wrong with plagiarism) and evidently have an axe to grind those who find your speculations convincing is going to be a small and gullible group.

Lastly, analyzing the impact of religions with thousands of years of history across very different peoples, circumstances and cultures is not at all a simple task, except for obviously shallow 'thinkers' like yourself.

[seer]

Beginning with Judaism’s violence against the Canaanites 4,000 years ago, through to the violence of the Inquisitions, religious wars and the Christian colonial expansions and right up to the Islamic extremism of today, the Abrahamic religions have been a history of barbaric behaviour...either because of the religion or despite it.

That is right Tass, in spite of it. There is nothing inherent in the Christian faith that leads to colonial expansion, Inquisitions, religious wars, etc... Just the opposite. But men are wicked and will use and twist even the most sublime teachings in the quest for personal power and wealth. Of course in your world this is all perfectly natural - just animals doing what animals do...

[Cow Poke]

Your objection can't even get off the ground, since you can't provide an objective moral standard to measure things against.

Bingo. But he can rant.

[Cow Poke]

Lastly, analyzing the impact of religions with thousands of years of history across very different peoples, circumstances and cultures is not at all a simple task, except for obviously shallow 'thinkers' like yourself.

But, but, but... religion is EBOL!

[element771]

The long history of barbaric behaviour for which the Abrahamic religions have been responsible, has been on a par with the non-Abrahamic populous that surrounded them. IOW: the religion makes no difference for better or worse...which is my point. It's ineffective.

The quantitative comparison of body count between religious and non-religious societies doesn't speak towards the truth of said religion. However, if you want to go with body count...lets entertain that.

Pol Pot: 1 - 3 million
Hitler: 15 - 20 million
Stalin: 20 - 25 million
Mao Zedong: 40 - 70 million

Total: 76 - 118 million people

Can you come up with a religious body count that is "on par" with roughly 100 million?

[rogue06]

Beginning with Judaism’s violence against the Canaanites 4,000 years ago, through to the violence of the Inquisitions, religious wars and the Christian colonial expansions and right up to the Islamic extremism of today, the Abrahamic religions have been a history of barbaric behaviour...either because of the religion or despite it.

We have only seen the rise of atheistic nations in the past hundred years and their track record to date is not very good. And that is an understatement.

[Tassman]

We have only seen the rise of atheistic nations in the past hundred years and their track record to date is not very good. And that is an understatement.

The track record of the more secular nations, e.g. in the Scandinavian countries, is very good...considerably better in many instances than overtly religious countries, including the USA.

[seer]

The track record of the more secular nations, e.g. in the Scandinavian countries, is very good...considerably better in many instances than overtly religious countries, including the USA.

And you know that you can't compare the two. And why don't you include secular nations like North Korea, China, Cuba, or Laos?

[Juvenal]

To quote Heisenberg:

“The first gulp from the glass of natural sciences will turn you into an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass God is waiting for you”

Can't be certain, but I assume that's a veiled death threat at Schrodinger's cat.

or Francis Bacon:

“A little philosophy inclineth man's mind to atheism, but depth in philosophy bringeth men's minds about to religion.”

And yet, the further one goes into science and philosophy, the more atheists one encounters.

[element771]

Can't be certain, but I assume that's a veiled death threat at Schrodinger's cat.

It is obviously.

And yet, the further one goes into science and philosophy, the more atheists one encounters.

A couple of things....

I think that the "new atheists" confirm the quote in some respects. They may be okay at science but their level of philosophical discourse is laughable.

The number of atheists in science has remained steady for pretty much a century... not sure about philosophers.

However I did find the following quote from Thomas Nagel to be refreshingly honest:

“I speak from experience, being strongly subject to this fear myself: I want atheism to be true and am made uneasy by the fact that some of the most intelligent and well-informed people I know are religious believers. It isn’t just that I don’t believe in God and, naturally, hope that I’m right in my belief. It’s that I hope there is no God! I don’t want there to be a God; I don’t want the universe to be like that. My guess is that this cosmic authority problem is not a rare condition and that it is responsible for much of the scientism and reductionism of our time."

[Juvenal]

It is obviously.

Not until we've seen the bottom of the glass.

A couple of things....

I think that the "new atheists" confirm the quote in some respects. They may be okay at science but their level of philosophical discourse is laughable.

Not especially good at science, either.

The number of atheists in science, has remained steady for pretty much a century... not sure about philosophers.

The proportion has held steady, considerably higher than in the general population, but, as the population of atheists has grown, the proportion of scientifically and philosophically literate atheists has declined. We're being swamped out.

But as scientific and philosophical competency increases, the proportion of atheists also increases to over 90 percent in the National Academy, and the remnant theists have highly nuanced views of divinity.

However I did find the following quote from Thomas Nagel to be refreshingly honest:

“I speak from experience, being strongly subject to this fear myself: I want atheism to be true and am made uneasy by the fact that some of the most intelligent and well-informed people I know are religious believers. It isn’t just that I don’t believe in God and, naturally, hope that I’m right in my belief. It’s that I hope there is no God! I don’t want there to be a God; I don’t want the universe to be like that. My guess is that this cosmic authority problem is not a rare condition and that it is responsible for much of the scientism and reductionism of our time."

Nagel's a bit of a nut, with a history of supporting the redefinition of science far enough to include alchemy, astrology, and intelligent design. His honesty may not be suspect, but his views of science and scientists most certainly are. His fame, in Christian circles, is far out of proportion to his philosophical impact, something I've noted holds true for most Christian scientists and philosophers.

It's like theistic affirmative action or something.

Unless you're Francis Collins, in which case you're despised for supporting that evillusion stuff. Entirely by coincidence, I'm sure, the proportion of biologists who are atheists is higher than in any other field. It's not as if Christians were deliberately driving them out of their churches. Nah, that couldn't be it.

Nagel doesn't speak for any but the smallest fringe of scientists. He certainly doesn't speak for me.

I'll agree with him to this extent: I'd prefer, when trying to scrutinize the inscrutable, that there weren't any divine actors out there chortling with glee as they bump the chess table and make the game unplayable.

[Adrift]

Nagel's a bit of a nut, with a history of supporting the redefinition of science far enough to include alchemy, astrology, and intelligent design.

Do you have a source on that, or know where I can find it? That's pretty surprising.