14 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

and it threatens an eternity of torture if you don't comply and believe in the unbelievable.

Religion is not just about belief or intelligence. It also works through human psychology and chemistry, through comfort, reward, fear, hope, and the feeling that something greater is close or present. For many, that experience feels completely real. At the same time, religion has helped shape societies and morals, while also being used by some for power and personal gain. So it is more accurate to see religion as a mix of biology, emotion, culture, and control, not simply ignorance.

And just from a brief look at this forum, there do not seem to be that many openly religious people here,

Then there are the NDEs (near-death experiences), not all of which seem to be inventions of assorted nitwits ...

As modern physics/maths/cosmology increasingly suggests that consciousness is a basic element of all reality - perhaps the only base - the question arises: What happens to my consciousness when I 'die' here on earth. Increasingly, serious scientists are suggesting that consciousness survives the dead body. The question then is: where? how? what happens next? And how does that work with the Big Crunch followed by the Big Bang in an infinity of space-time?

3 hours ago, impulse said:

The smart money says that there's no downside to believing (even if you're wrong), but a huge downside if you don't believe, and you're wrong.

Personally, I think the fear of retribution in the afterlife is what allows western society to thrive. Otherwise, it would be a free-for-all of thievery and debauchery.

You are referencing Pascal's Wager.

The problem Blaise Pascal did not seem to note was that the issue isn't a True/False; it's multiple choice.

If deities condemn non-believers to some eternal punishment, one still has a problem deciding which one to follow. Jesus? Allah? Zeus? Shiva? Yahweh? L Ron Hubbard? Who?

Even if there is one true faith, the odds of each person picking the winner are not good.

Decent people are not driven to good behavior out of fear of eternal damnation. Being nice has its own rewards, as well as increasing the likelihood someone survives.

Religion evolved as a way of explaining natural phenomena. It worked until science started coming up with evidence instead of belief.

IMO religion extends a false hope of an afterlife, when there is no evidence to support such a state.

As for original sin, the concept a new-born is somehow burdened with the same misdeeds as a hardened criminal, that is absolute twaddle.

2 minutes ago, Wingate said:

Even if there is one true faith, the odds of each person picking the winner are not good.

It is actually quite good if you choose one of the Abrahamic branches. Same God, slightly different house rules, and some family rules are judged or treated differently, but same same.

6 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

IMO religion extends a false hope of an afterlife, when there is no evidence to support such a state.

While the person is still among the living, is 'false hope' better than no hope at all? After all, they will never know that the hope was false, but will possibly live and die as a happier person because of it.

When I hear anyone trying to back-up their faith with the 'fact' the Bible is literally the word of God, I'm always reminded of this quote from the comedian David Cross -

'Back when the Bible was written, then edited, then rewritten, then rewritten, then re-edited, then translated from dead languages, then re-translated, then edited, then rewritten, then given to kings for them to take their favorite parts, then rewritten, then re-rewritten, then translated again, then given to the pope for him to approve, then rewritten, then edited again, the re-re-re-re-rewritten again...all based on stories that were told orally 30 to 90 years AFTER they happened.. to people who didn't know how to write... so..." - David Cross

Or my other favourit biblical quote 'And the Lord said unto John, 'Come forth and you will receive eternal life'

But John came fifth, and won a toaster! (anonymous)

2 minutes ago, ColeBOzbourne said:

While the person is still among the living, is 'false hope' better than no hope at all? After all, they will never know that the hope was false, but will possibly live and die as a happier person because of it.

You may be right. However, religions make large sums of money from believers, I would rather spend the money on myself.

I suggest you read "One more Sunday" by John D MacDonald. It outlines the case for religion being an industry.

Religion and nationalism are the biggest cancers in society, preventing us just being human to each other.

I was raised Quaker, though my parents were agnostic. We were not Richard Nixon Quakers but the kind that supports equal justice and freedom from wars.

Although the Religious Society of Friends was started by Christians, very few Quakers today feel any connection to Christianity.

Quaker meeting are held in silence, waiting for the Divine to move you to share with others. It wasn't very long before I discovered that Divine was not outside us but within. I call it conscience. I have a hard time walking past injustice.

One of the saddest things I've seen in Thailand is the conversion of the hilltribes. In one area I visited, there had been three years of drought. The Evangelicals promised if the tribals accepted Jesus, the rains would fall.

Of course, droughts only last so long and all the traditional fertility and worship symbols on the roof peaks had been replaced by crosses.

6 hours ago, Kyoto Kyle said:

People often say religion exists to give answers to the big questions.

Depending of, if the god is lazy or not. Our Pastafarian-god – may His noodly appendages touch you...😇 – don't care much, but luckily did give us a beer volcano and stripper factory. The latter probably is all rainbow colours, so everybody is welcome, when time comes for an otium somewhere up in the Seventh Heaven. And when finally up there we might find time to think of the big questions – if not too busy partying...🥳 – if there are any such big questions to think of. Down here on "Middle Earth" we stick to scientific facts combined with the glory history of pirates...

Yes and same with marriage.

There are some positives in these texts, such as Muslims fast during Ramadan.

I think the Bible also mentions fasting.

One reason people are overweight is we stopped fasting. Fasting is anti-consumerism in a world where $$ is the new God and more is better.

9 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

There are some positives in these texts, such as Muslims fast during Ramadan.

I think the Bible also mentions fasting.

One reason people are overweight is we stopped fasting. Fasting is anti-consumerism in a world where $$ is the new God and more is better.

This is what the Abraham religions have to say about gluttony

All three Abrahamic religions warn against overindulgence in food and drink, but they do not frame it in exactly the same way. The common thread is moderation, self-control, and not letting appetite rule you.

In Judaism, the exact Christian category “gluttony” is not usually a central doctrinal label, but the Hebrew Bible clearly warns against it. Proverbs says not to join those who “gorge themselves,” because “drunkards and gluttons become poor,” and Deuteronomy uses “a glutton and a drunkard” as part of the description of a rebellious son. That shows excess eating and drinking are treated as signs of moral disorder, not just bad manners.

In Christianity, gluttony becomes more explicit and systematized: it is one of the seven deadly sins in Roman Catholic theology, defined as excess in eating and drinking. The New Testament also condemns being ruled by appetite, as in Philippians: “their god is their belly,” meaning bodily desire has taken over their moral life.

In Islam, the basic idea is also clear: eating and drinking are allowed, but excess is condemned. The Qur’an says, “Eat and drink, but do not waste,” and adds that God does not love the excessive. So the focus is not on a formal “deadly sin” list, but on avoiding extravagance and lack of restraint.

7 hours ago, Kyoto Kyle said:

Has religion become something that mainly appeals to those who lack intellectual depth, who are looking for certainty and belief over logic, or merely answers over understanding.

If this would be true, then you must be hyper religious, right?

The Vatican got rich from dummy’s giving them their money for more than a 1000 years, it’s a giant ponzi scheme for generations

26 minutes ago, 3NUMBAS said:

The Vatican got rich from dummy’s giving them their money for more than a 1000 years, it’s a giant ponzi scheme for generations

The Vatican has, over centuries, built immense wealth and power through property, gold, art, wine, manuscripts, historical records, scientific knowledge, relics and pilgrimages, indulgences, tithes, inheritances and bequests, fees tied to church services in some eras, and the alliance between spiritual authority and state power, often drawing from the faith and sacrifices of ordinary people, including the poor, while surrounding itself with elaborate ceremony, robes, hats, and vestments, and offering the promise of an afterlife to those who confess their sins.

In earlier times, religions were often formulated, structured, preserved, and interpreted by unusually capable thinkers, scribes, priests, and teachers, and then transmitted into societies where the great majority of people were not literate. In many early civilizations, formal education was closely tied to the training of scribes and priests, and these groups were central not only in preserving religion, law, and knowledge, but also in helping build civilization itself. Through structure, discipline, shared belief, and systems of reward and meaning, they helped organize large populations and give societies continuity and direction. Today, by contrast, many priests seem less like guardians of wisdom and more like servants of larger institutions, hierarchy, and self-interest.

3 hours ago, D Peter said:

Religion is a multi‑purpose human invention:

• It gives meaning

• It creates community

• It provides moral rules

• It offers comfort

• It connects people to something larger

• It organizes societies

{AI}

Look at your list.........

You could have just said it's a cult for the weak minded.

3 hours ago, cdemundo said:

Fascinating.

One question: WTH is your point?

Mongolia does not exist; it is an abstract construct of the human mind. No human mind, no Mongolia. We all have faith that there are things we really know nothing about. People believe atoms got together to make molecules, which got together to make cells, that got together to make different organs, and wrap themselves all in a bag with legs on a speck smaller than a grain of sand in this universe.. Is there a purpose? I do not believe in God, but I don't put down those who do because I don't have any better answers.

Religions, like communism, work fine as long as humans have no involvement.

Not sure if this goes in this thread or the conspiracy thread.

Mysterious death of "the smiling Pope" .... he ruffled too many feathers of people in power it seems. And they're not afraid to get heavy handed.

An examination of the mysterious 1978 death of Pope John Paul I (Albino Luciani) just 33 days into his papacy. Claims are detailed that he was preparing to purge Vatican officials, including Archbishop Paul Marcinkus and Cardinal Jean Villot, over their alleged links to the Banco Ambrosiano scandal, the Freemasons, and the P2 lodge. The report outlines suspicious circumstances, including a refused autopsy, a rushed embalming, and the disappearance of crucial documents he held at his death. His successor, Pope John Paul II, allegedly allowed the corruption to persist.

1 hour ago, unblocktheplanet said:

One of the saddest things I've seen in Thailand is the conversion of the hilltribes.

Someone should go out there and UN-convert them.

if you want to have a chat with God himself, just do a blast of DMT and you'll meet him.

https://media2.giphy.com/media/N1eSbsofSQE24/200.gif?cid=d9f52f32bxrgv4b0zcjovc3qb1nypkbk0qph7ntdxkhnpzg4&ep=v1_gifs_search&rid=200.gif&ct=g

3 hours ago, sqwakvfr said:

It seems like organized religion is aimed at the poor and hopeless. I recall hearing this often "this life is miserable and hopeless but my reward is waiting for me in heaven". I met a woman once who was living a hopeless and miserable life(poor, uneducated and had a long list of low paying dead end jobs). She told me "I found a new church and now I have hope for better things to come when I go to heaven."

This is why the Philippines have so much religion

5 hours ago, KhunLA said:

I'd believe the low IQ thingy, if 2 of my brothers weren't Christian warriors, and I consider them both, very intelligent.

Religion does seem to control the masses of ignorant people, who believe anything they are told, without the knowledge to dispute. Does seem as the world becomes more educated, less are falling for the farce of religions.

So how do you square that your brothers are very intelligent, yet still believe in religion and then in your next paragraph you say as the world becomes more educated, less are falling for the farce of religions? It seems like there's a logical disconnect there.

3 minutes ago, georgegeorgia said:

This is why the Philippines have so much religion

Seems like the playbook of the Catholic Church?

2 hours ago, Lacessit said:

IMO religion extends a false hope of an afterlife, when there is no evidence to support such a state.

Agreed, but is believing in an afterlife the same as believing in reincarnation? Same concept really, believing there something more to come when the electricity shuts off, right?

5 hours ago, impulse said:

The smart money says that there's no downside to believing (even if you're wrong), but a huge downside if you don't believe, and you're wrong.

The downside is wasting your time, money, and mental energy on something that is highly unlikely to exist. I see no merit in that. Seems like a big enough downside to me as it probably also affects your life in other negative ways if you go through your entire life believing n something that isn't true. Like waiting for Santa Claus to come down the chimney your entire life and he never does.

8 hours ago, save the frogs said:

It's for intellectually lazy people.

But so is atheism -- nothing exists.

And then just go back to watching sports and drinking beer.

See if you can crack the code.

I am an atheist who does not drink beer or sit around watching sports, and I have had a productive life without religion. Not believing in something is not the same as thinking nothing exists, that is just a bizarre misunderstanding. There are countless needles and unproven things I do not believe in, and plenty that clearly do exist and can be experienced every day.

5 hours ago, bunnydrops said:

If I asked here if the country of Mongolia exists, most would say "yes" even though they have never been there or met a Mongolian. They are sure of their belief because they have "faith" in some "higher power".

Even if you have never been there yourself, you could get on a plane tomorrow and go to Mongolia to prove it exists. That is not faith, it is verifiable reality. There are maps, photos, flights, and millions of people who can independently confirm it exists.

Calling that “faith in a higher power” stretches the word until it means nothing. The difference is you cannot do anything remotely similar to demonstrate that religion is true.