You really dont get it. Anyone who is cruel, or kills no matter what they tell you isnt really religious, spiritual or any other word along that line Its just a fake front.
I see what you're getting at, but I don't buy it.
The men who flew the planes into the twin towers were 'religious' by any definition of the term - they just followed an extreme subset of religion.
The men who flew the planes into the twin towers were 'religious' by any definition of the term - they just followed an extreme subset of religion.
Even if they truly thought that "God" wanted them to do that. That doesn't mean that all religious people want to kill others.
Some mentally ill people think that god tells them to kill people doesn't mean he did or that he is a evil God just that men do evil things and use whatever they can to justify it.
Do you really think those priest and nuns that abused so many children believe in a after life? Do you think they truly followed a "man" of love and kindness?
To me its more likely that they dont believe or believe that their rewards will come from the devil.
I dont know what goes on in the training of those young people who suicide missions but bet its some kind of brainwashing .
Have a read on Kamikaze bombers.
You can't grasp this rather simple point either can you?
No one is inspired to kill by atheism. There is no atheists handbook that commands anyone to murder non-atheists. People are inspired by religion to come together and kill in the name of religion - and religious killings tend to be of the mass murder variety.
Human beings kill for all manner of reasons, but almost every non-religious murder has everything to do with the psychology of the individual committing the murder and nothing to do with any belief system.
IMHO your points in this thread are far from simple, but instead are very convoluted and twisted due to your dislike of anyone or anything religious. And you're blaming them for all the ills of the world when far more complex issues are at play - the 9/11 disaster being one of them, which was more political than religious anyway.
There are millions of people who have been murdered for political reasons, throughout human history.
When I was very young, I remember talking to my dad about death and that the concept of death scared me. He told me that there was nothing I could do about it-everyone was going to die. His comments took the fear away and I've never been concerned about it since.
It just so happens that we are Catholics, but that had absolutely no bearing on the answer. A a Catholic I do believe in Life after death but I'm not going to waste my time trying to persuade others of my belief. However, one point did occur to me some years ago and I have posted it here before. If folks who don't believe in life aftr death are right, then when we die we'll just fade away, but what if there IS life after death? What will the non-believers say?
In context I understand exactly what Matt meant; that they would be 'rewarded' in the (what we know to be non-existent) afterlife.
That's not what he said. I was under the impression that he thought that the terrorists knew that the afterlife was non existent. That's why it didn't make sense.
In any case, not everyone KNOWS it to be non existent.
When I was very young, I remember talking to my dad about death and that the concept of death scared me. He told me that there was nothing I could do about it-everyone was going to die. His comments took the fear away and I've never been concerned about it since.
It just so happens that we are Catholics, but that had absolutely no bearing on the answer. A a Catholic I do believe in Life after death but I'm not going to waste my time trying to persuade others of my belief. However, one point did occur to me some years ago and I have posted it here before. If folks who don't believe in life aftr death are right, then when we die we'll just fade away, but what if there IS life after death? What will the non-believers say?
Oops!!
That they formed their beliefs sincerely based on the evidence available to them and any being who held that against a person wasn't someone whose side they'd want to be on anyway. That they'd rather be sincere and honest in life than fake a belief they never had since their own values are that honesty and integrity are more important than self-interest.
That they formed their beliefs sincerely based on the evidence available to them and any being who held that against a person wasn't someone whose side they'd want to be on anyway. That they'd rather be sincere and honest in life than fake a belief they never had since their own values are that honesty and integrity are more important than self-interest.
I do agree with original poster, in that I'm scared of being dead as being an atheist I'm absolutely certain that's it, game over.
Which then makes me wonder how much religious people really do believe in the afterlife, because religious people cling on to life just as desperately as atheists. Whereas if you've had a really cr*ppy time of things for years and years surely you couldn't/wouldn't wait to get on with your next life (in that imaginary place none of the most brilliant scientist to grace our planet have ever discovered).
I very much disagree that religion is evil though. religion is only when its used as an excuse for tribalism, or where people's terrible own agendas are justified by claiming its from a higher authority. But if religion suddenly didn't exist the exact same evil would continue but under a different justification. After all middle-east extremism is in the main violence towards the west for continually ruling over and controlling the politics and powers in charge of their oil rich middle eastern countries.
I'm not mocking but i genuinely want real answers to even consider the possibility of afterlife existing. The big ones for me, are how high up the heirarchy does a species have to be to get an afterlife? Does the crane fly with its 10 day lifespan get an afterlife? My pet dog? Monkeys? If animals do, do we get in for eating them? If no animals, at what point in evolution did humans make it, when we were dinosaurs, chimps, homo erectus, homo-sapian?
Well, I can only speak for myself. That's what I'd say. Others might say similar or might say something completely different.
If this God was the Christian God then I'd throw in the bits of the bible that I didn't agree with and ask whether this was truly his beliefs and actions or just the stories of deluded people, then God would probably fry me if he was that OT God I have in mind. A lot would depend on the God who you were confronted with and exactly what their morality is.
Not at all, just mind-wanderings and musings. I have no feelings of superiority in this matter. Why should I?
You shouldn't. Feelings of superiority don't come into it anyway. I was talking about anticipating someone being in a difficult situation and taking pleasure in that (schadenfeude).
Smilies :D:D at the notion of people being confronted with God and being judged or shamed or forced to explain themselves seems like a very apt definition of anticipating other people being in a sticky situation and taking pleasure in that (schadenfreude). Hasn't happened so therefore...anticipated schadenfreude. The smilies suggest that immediately after the idea was put forward.
Read your post back and honestly tell me it doesn't read that way. "I wonder what they will say when confronted with God. Ooops. :D:D" Is that not anticipated schadenfreude? Seems like it to me.
That's not what he said. I was under the impression that he thought that the terrorists knew that the afterlife was non existent. That's why it didn't make sense.
In any case, not everyone KNOWS it to be non existent.
I used punctuation to help clarify. It's clear in the context of Matt's arguments throughout the thread what was meant.
You shouldn't. Feelings of superiority don't come into it anyway. I was talking about anticipating someone being in a difficult situation and taking pleasure in that (schadenfeude).
Smilies :D:D at the notion of people being confronted with God and being judged or shamed or forced to explain themselves seems like a very apt definition of anticipating other people being in a sticky situation and taking pleasure in that (schadenfreude). Hasn't happened so therefore...anticipated schadenfreude. The smilies suggest that immediately after the idea was put forward.
Read your post back and honestly tell me it doesn't read that way. "I wonder what they will say when confronted with God. Ooops. :D:D" Is that not anticipated schadenfreude? Seems like it to me.
I was being lighthearted and, yes, I do know what schadenfreude means.
The were to show my lightheartedness, not nastiness.
If one is going to point the superiority finger, I suggest one points it more in the direction of some of the non-believers who take, seeming delight, it telling me that as I believe in God and an afterlife, I am thick, stupid, short sighted, gullible and any or combination of the above. This does peeve me as I have never criticised nor evangelised at anyone who has different beliefs from me yet they feel they have freedom to be nasty to me and what I hold important.
*Message to self: don't make lighthearted comments on threads about religion.*
Comments
I see what you're getting at, but I don't buy it.
The men who flew the planes into the twin towers were 'religious' by any definition of the term - they just followed an extreme subset of religion.
See two very long old threads Richard.;-)
You obviously have some difficulty understanding English.
Note the word believed. They believed they would be rewarded in the afterlife they believe in.
Unfortunately for them, and you, the afterlife is non-existent.
See them? I wrote most of them
Anyway I promised myself not to get involved with these threads any more.
Me too, it's utterly futile but often, too tempting.
Ours were much better!
Are we addicts?:o
In fairness it started off with a more interesting premise than the usual religious baiting threads.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3KEhWTnWvE
I'm glad to be released from tea and coffee making duty.:D
Even if they truly thought that "God" wanted them to do that. That doesn't mean that all religious people want to kill others.
Some mentally ill people think that god tells them to kill people doesn't mean he did or that he is a evil God just that men do evil things and use whatever they can to justify it.
Do you really think those priest and nuns that abused so many children believe in a after life? Do you think they truly followed a "man" of love and kindness?
To me its more likely that they dont believe or believe that their rewards will come from the devil.
I dont know what goes on in the training of those young people who suicide missions but bet its some kind of brainwashing .
Have a read on Kamikaze bombers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamikaze#Cultural_background
IMHO your points in this thread are far from simple, but instead are very convoluted and twisted due to your dislike of anyone or anything religious. And you're blaming them for all the ills of the world when far more complex issues are at play - the 9/11 disaster being one of them, which was more political than religious anyway.
There are millions of people who have been murdered for political reasons, throughout human history.
In context I understand exactly what Matt meant; that they would be 'rewarded' in the (what we know to be non-existent) afterlife.
It just so happens that we are Catholics, but that had absolutely no bearing on the answer. A a Catholic I do believe in Life after death but I'm not going to waste my time trying to persuade others of my belief. However, one point did occur to me some years ago and I have posted it here before. If folks who don't believe in life aftr death are right, then when we die we'll just fade away, but what if there IS life after death? What will the non-believers say?
Oops!!
That's not what he said. I was under the impression that he thought that the terrorists knew that the afterlife was non existent. That's why it didn't make sense.
In any case, not everyone KNOWS it to be non existent.
That they formed their beliefs sincerely based on the evidence available to them and any being who held that against a person wasn't someone whose side they'd want to be on anyway. That they'd rather be sincere and honest in life than fake a belief they never had since their own values are that honesty and integrity are more important than self-interest.
Probably.
Anticipated schadenfreude....interesting.
Hallejuah! You finally admit the thinking that there is no afterlife is opinion and not fact! That's all I wanted to hear from you.
Ha ha! Good one.
I'm sure you're right, Jim, probably!!
Which then makes me wonder how much religious people really do believe in the afterlife, because religious people cling on to life just as desperately as atheists. Whereas if you've had a really cr*ppy time of things for years and years surely you couldn't/wouldn't wait to get on with your next life (in that imaginary place none of the most brilliant scientist to grace our planet have ever discovered).
I very much disagree that religion is evil though. religion is only when its used as an excuse for tribalism, or where people's terrible own agendas are justified by claiming its from a higher authority. But if religion suddenly didn't exist the exact same evil would continue but under a different justification. After all middle-east extremism is in the main violence towards the west for continually ruling over and controlling the politics and powers in charge of their oil rich middle eastern countries.
I'm not mocking but i genuinely want real answers to even consider the possibility of afterlife existing. The big ones for me, are how high up the heirarchy does a species have to be to get an afterlife? Does the crane fly with its 10 day lifespan get an afterlife? My pet dog? Monkeys? If animals do, do we get in for eating them? If no animals, at what point in evolution did humans make it, when we were dinosaurs, chimps, homo erectus, homo-sapian?
Well, I can only speak for myself. That's what I'd say. Others might say similar or might say something completely different.
If this God was the Christian God then I'd throw in the bits of the bible that I didn't agree with and ask whether this was truly his beliefs and actions or just the stories of deluded people, then God would probably fry me if he was that OT God I have in mind. A lot would depend on the God who you were confronted with and exactly what their morality is.
Anticipated schadenfreude....interesting.[/QUOTE]
Not at all, just mind-wanderings and musings. I have no feelings of superiority in this matter. Why should I?
You shouldn't. Feelings of superiority don't come into it anyway. I was talking about anticipating someone being in a difficult situation and taking pleasure in that (schadenfeude).
Smilies
Read your post back and honestly tell me it doesn't read that way. "I wonder what they will say when confronted with God. Ooops.
I used punctuation to help clarify. It's clear in the context of Matt's arguments throughout the thread what was meant.
I was being lighthearted and, yes, I do know what schadenfreude means.
The
If one is going to point the superiority finger, I suggest one points it more in the direction of some of the non-believers who take, seeming delight, it telling me that as I believe in God and an afterlife, I am thick, stupid, short sighted, gullible and any or combination of the above. This does peeve me as I have never criticised nor evangelised at anyone who has different beliefs from me yet they feel they have freedom to be nasty to me and what I hold important.
*Message to self: don't make lighthearted comments on threads about religion.*