Religion is for cowards and pedophiles of childrens minds

You see my point though. If religion was just about the trade-off - love god and you don't get killed - then I doubt anyone would take it seriously. It's the fact that people's reasons are more complex than that, certainly in the 21st Century West, that religion creates such debate.

 

We are very selfish and gullible to beleive in god.

Though the person to create such an idea was very clever. Give such primitive people such an idea that cannot be proved wrong nor right is bound to create beleif and disbeleif, which is to be expected.

 

i kinda have the same feelings towards religion.. the way religious people push it onto other people is just ridiculous..

so whats gonna happen in 2012 when jesus doesnt come back..? everyone still gonna believe in him? it seems the only reason he is still believed in, is from teh minds of people who think he is real... because obviously he has never made an appearance, and most likly never will.. thats because the bible was created to help control irrational feelings, give a rulebook to those who require advise, and eventually help control population

o and just for the record, i dont believe in religion.. i think its for weaker minded people who cant live without moral guidance, and need pre-built system of rules. Meaning you will ALWAYS limit yourself, and create a Barrier for yourself against personal, and social growth, and have a more narrow minded view on other peoples way of life.

however, i am entitled to my opinion, so i dont preach my thoughts to others.. only when the conversation comes up, and in a thread like this

'my home is the world, and my religion is to do good'.
how come no one follows that great motto? instead we wage war over religion.. lol yea we are civilized people for sure..

 

2012 and Jesus? Have another one! :cheers2:

 

what have you not heard? lol
supposedly jesus will return in 2012.. i dont believe it.. if it does happen, well then we will know.. and if it doesnt, well im sure that wont stop anyone from believing lol
but ill have another one anyways :cheers2:

 

Because you don't have to pay people to shun their neighbors? What in the world are you talking about?

 

Do you have children?

 

2012? No man knows the day and hour!

 

If this being is omnipotent, then every occurrence, including every human action, every human thought, and every human feeling and aspiration is also His work; how is it possible to think of holding men responsible for their deeds and thoughts before such an almighty Being? In giving out punishment and rewards He would to a certain extent be passing judgment on Himself. How can this be combined with the goodness and righteousness ascribed to Him?

- Albert Einstein

 

Omnipotent means all powerful, not all knowing.

 

it is fact that ethics and human potential coincide. this goes without saying.

but one cannot have faith without reason......because reason is the only motivation for faith. regardless of accuracy....as faith with reason is unreasonable

Omnipotence: The state of being omnipotent
Omnipotent: One having unlimited power or authority
Unlimited: Having no restrictions or controls

 

Omnipotent: possessing complete, unlimited, or universal power and authority
Omniscient: knowing or seeming to know everything

 

what you would like omnipotence to mean with regards to what Einstein wrote about is irrelevant. the implications of his words paint a clear picture of the definition of omnipotence that was utilized.

i thought this would be understood.

 

To me, faith can only exist with reason. It's a weak faith if you can't reason. I guess we have different outlooks on reason.

 

I think most people do follow that "great" motto. Unless you think that people commit atrocities in the name of religion for reasons other than because they (or someone with a gun to their head) think it is the right thing to do, and will make them happy. I mean, if a religion doesn't sell you happiness or at least potential happines, it wouldn't be very popular, would it?

The problem with your great motto is that Person A's notion of what is good not only can be different from Person B's, it is almost inevitably different. It may only be different in a small way, but once you multiply it out and are dealing with six billion people instead of two, dispute is inevitable.

If you wanted to prevent war, you'd do better telling people to be content with their lot than telling them to try to do good things. I mean, if they're content, chances are their actions -whatever they are- won't affect others so much, right?

 

I'm saying that if you create enough social stigma around committing crimes, you don't need a totalitarian system. Instead of controlling every aspect of people's lives through the presence of a constant threat - e.g. huge visible presence of armed police - you can create a situation where the fear of transgression comes more from knowing that your neighbours would be appalled and would rat you out if you did. The fear of getting caught becomes disproportionate to the likelihood that it will happen if messages are strategically placed.

It's a lot cheaper and I would argue more effective to bombard people with discretely encoded moral messages in the media that tell them exactly what the straight and narrow is, because ultimately, that will stay with them. A totalitarian system has the problem that the police can't be everywhere, whereas under a hegemonic system, most people obey the law even when no-one's around, let alone anyone with a gun to their head.

Nope, sorry, he's right. Omnipotence doesn't imply that, because one has the power to do all things, one has done all things.

However, this is academic, since God is largely seen to be omniscient as well as omnipotent.

Nope. Is that significant?

 

2012 comes from a whole different culture, dude. It's like saying Odin has died on the cross for us. And it was just the end of the calendar, all the other possible meanings are wild speculations. :cheers2:

 

Yeah, our last calendar ended 2009 years ago (give or take). Doesn't mean anything happened then.

 

you are misunderstanding context......

give Einstein a little more credit......

 

Why? Because he's Einstein?

It seems like OWB was just pointing out a semantic issue. I don't think he actually disagrees with the verity of the quote or anything.