Is atheism/religion a force for good or for bad in society?

[Czechanada]

It's a bit of a red herring to attribute "goodness" or "badness" to either atheism or religion.

Atheists can nonetheless be just as ideological as religious people are; Moreover, modern society, although it appears secular, still contains subtle similarities to religion; Examples of this would be the totemism of consumerism, the symbolism of advertising and logos, the worship of celebrities and similar idols, the non-critical viewing of media, and such.

[Jumalariik]

Most of them are protestant. Most of those are within larger groups if they are relevant. Baptists have the most amount of denominations. Again, they don't differ all that much when they follow scripture.

Again, I have met many denominations who are willing to ordain women, very accepting of homosexuals (marriage), are supportive of birth control, and are pro0choice.

Again, if they follow scripture they don't differ too much. Scripture defines who is a Christian. If you don't try to emulate the Apostles/Saints/Jesus/etc you cannot call yourself a Christian. Anything that goes against Jesus cannot be Christian, thus, a denomination of Christianity that goes against Christianity in a strong way cannot be a Christian. If a pastor advocates killing all muslims, killing adulterers, adultery, exploitation of the poor, he cannot be a Christian, thus, anything done by him in the name of Christianity is not done by Christianity.
the 4 things I listed are things that a Christian cannot advocate and be a Christian.
I would say that I would be all 4 of things, interestingly, the baptist church I attend has had women preach, they are not as right wing as they are made up to be.

[Jormengand]

Considering most of the things in scripture, if they did they would be under arrest.

"Under arrest"? If they successfully did most of the things in scripture they'd create a genocide that would put Hitler to shame.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Again, I have met many denominations who are willing to ordain women, very accepting of homosexuals (marriage), are supportive of birth control, and are pro0choice.

If you don't try to emulate the Apostles/Saints/Jesus/etc you cannot call yourself a Christian.

Wrong, the only thing you need to do to be considered a Christian is believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ.

[Christiaanistan]

Julian Baggini also addresses it in his book "The Duck That Won the Lottery."


And what about the other forty-thousand denominations?

Most of them are protestant. Most of those are within larger groups if they are relevant. Baptists have the most amount of denominations. Again, they don't differ all that much when they follow scripture.

Uhhh, if you follow the advice given in the Book of Numbers, chapter 31, then I'm going to sort of back away from you really slowly.

The thing is, there are a lot of suggestions in your scriptures, like that, which are actually kind of evil. You do not go strictly according to your scriptures at all. You interpret in a manner that you were trained to interpret.

[Jumalariik]

Most of them are protestant. Most of those are within larger groups if they are relevant. Baptists have the most amount of denominations. Again, they don't differ all that much when they follow scripture.

Uhhh, if you follow the advice given in the Book of Numbers, chapter 31, then I'm going to sort of back away from you really slowly.

The thing is, there are a lot of suggestions in your scriptures, like that, which are actually kind of evil. You do not go strictly according to your scriptures at all. You interpret in a manner that you were trained to interpret.

There is a correct way of interpreting scripture and an incorrect way.

[Neutraligon]

Again, I have met many denominations who are willing to ordain women, very accepting of homosexuals (marriage), are supportive of birth control, and are pro0choice.

Again, if they follow scripture they don't differ too much. Scripture defines who is a Christian. If you don't try to emulate the Apostles/Saints/Jesus/etc you cannot call yourself a Christian. Anything that goes against Jesus cannot be Christian, thus, a denomination of Christianity that goes against Christianity in a strong way cannot be a Christian. If a pastor advocates killing all muslims, killing adulterers, adultery, exploitation of the poor, he cannot be a Christian, thus, anything done by him in the name of Christianity is not done by Christianity.
the 4 things I listed are things that a Christian cannot advocate and be a Christian.
I would say that I would be all 4 of things, interestingly, the baptist church I attend has had women preach, they are not as right wing as they are made up to be.

Scripture can be interpreted in many different ways, hence why there are so many different denominations. In fact, by picking and choosing your passages your bible can be made to mean anything. How about this, once all you Christians have figured out a common definition of what it means to be Christian, then we will talk. Until then I'll go with the common definition of anyone who believes in the divinity of Jesus is a Christian.

[Othelos]

Again, I have met many denominations who are willing to ordain women, very accepting of homosexuals (marriage), are supportive of birth control, and are pro0choice.

Again, if they follow scripture they don't differ too much. Scripture defines who is a Christian. If you don't try to emulate the Apostles/Saints/Jesus/etc you cannot call yourself a Christian. Anything that goes against Jesus cannot be Christian, thus, a denomination of Christianity that goes against Christianity in a strong way cannot be a Christian. If a pastor advocates killing all muslims, killing adulterers, adultery, exploitation of the poor, he cannot be a Christian, thus, anything done by him in the name of Christianity is not done by Christianity.
the 4 things I listed are things that a Christian cannot advocate and be a Christian.
I would say that I would be all 4 of things, interestingly, the baptist church I attend has had women preach, they are not as right wing as they are made up to be.

well, if you can find biblical support for those things, those would be valid positions to hold as a christian.

[Jumalariik]

Again, if they follow scripture they don't differ too much. Scripture defines who is a Christian. If you don't try to emulate the Apostles/Saints/Jesus/etc you cannot call yourself a Christian. Anything that goes against Jesus cannot be Christian, thus, a denomination of Christianity that goes against Christianity in a strong way cannot be a Christian. If a pastor advocates killing all muslims, killing adulterers, adultery, exploitation of the poor, he cannot be a Christian, thus, anything done by him in the name of Christianity is not done by Christianity.
the 4 things I listed are things that a Christian cannot advocate and be a Christian.
I would say that I would be all 4 of things, interestingly, the baptist church I attend has had women preach, they are not as right wing as they are made up to be.

Scripture can be interpreted in many different ways, hence why there are so many different denominations. In fact, by picking and choosing your passages your bible can be made to mean anything. How about this, once all you Christians have figured out a common definition of what it means to be Christian, then we will talk. Until then I'll go with the common definition of anyone who believes in the divinity of Jesus is a Christian.

What about a follower of Jesus?
A bit of semantics.
I say a follower.

[Post War America]

A most resounding no, religion or lack of it is not necessarily a force for good by itself. It is all dependent on how it is used. As an example I am going to use a very narrow definition of religion, the Roman Catholic Church as a small case study. So, the Catholic Church has been associated with a number of seriously awful things but for the sake of brevity I will only name the first two that come to my mind:

The Spanish Inquisition & The Crusades: Both were horrific events that were largely caused by the use of the Catholic Church in the advancement of its own interests, and could be construed as the advancement of the Greater Evil (A force for bad).

On the other hand however, we find that it was the same Catholic Church that Mother Teresa was a member of, and the same Catholic Church that allowed (maybe even supported) the preaching of Liberation theology, which was a driving factor in mass movements in Latin America to overthrow their Tyrannical Rulers (the effect of this is debatable but...).

So this might not be the best argument, but I would say that Religion or lack thereof is not itself a good or evil but it is largely how it is used .

[Neutraligon]

Scripture can be interpreted in many different ways, hence why there are so many different denominations. In fact, by picking and choosing your passages your bible can be made to mean anything. How about this, once all you Christians have figured out a common definition of what it means to be Christian, then we will talk. Until then I'll go with the common definition of anyone who believes in the divinity of Jesus is a Christian.

What about a follower of Jesus?
A bit of semantics.
I say a follower.

And again, considering what a follower of Jesus is can be up to interpretation, it is not a good definition. May different people interpret the bible very differently, and all of them claim to be followers of Jesus. Those people killing children in Africa for being witches, they claim to be following Jesus.

[Jumalariik]

What about a follower of Jesus?
A bit of semantics.
I say a follower.

And again, considering what a follower of Jesus is can be up to interpretation, it is not a good definition. May different people interpret the bible very differently, and all of them claim to be followers of Jesus. Those people killing children in Africa for being witches, they claim to be following Jesus.

They objectively are not, must I point out all of the basic scripture that would prove this?

[Old Tyrannia]

Atheism is simply a viewpoint on one particular issue, the existence/nonexistence of God or gods. As such, it is not inherently good or bad. How people respond to the belief that there is no God, however, can have negative or positive impacts on society. In my experience, philosophies incorporating atheism as part of their doctrine/worldview- such as Marxism and Objectivism- have tended to be overwhelmingly negative and destructive in their effects.

Religion, on the other hand, is more than just a belief or lack of belief; a religion is an expanded worldview incorporating cosmology, morality and all sorts of other stuff. Depending on the teachings of that religion, they may be positive or negative. The religion of the Mexica people of pre-colonial Mexico? Negative, because it mandated the deaths of thousands and thus led to war and human sacrifice. Not good. On the other hand, religions such as Christianity, Islam, Buddhism etc. are basically positive influences on society, promoting such principles as non-aggression, charity, fidelity, honesty, humility and so forth. But because humans are essentially complex, flawed beings guided by our personal needs and desires, there is nothing that we cannot corrupt to achieve our own selfish goals, including religion. Hence the Fred Phelpses and Osama bin Ladens of the world.

[Czechanada]

A most resounding no, religion or lack of it is not necessarily a force for good by itself. It is all dependent on how it is used. As an example I am going to use a very narrow definition of religion, the Roman Catholic Church as a small case study. So, the Catholic Church has been associated with a number of seriously awful things but for the sake of brevity I will only name the first two that come to my mind:

The Spanish Inquisition & The Crusades: Both were horrific events that were largely caused by the use of the Catholic Church in the advancement of its own interests, and could be construed as the advancement of the Greater Evil (A force for bad).

On the other hand however, we find that it was the same Catholic Church that Mother Teresa was a member of, and the same Catholic Church that allowed (maybe even supported) the preaching of Liberation theology, which was a driving factor in mass movements in Latin America to overthrow their Tyrannical Rulers (the effect of this is debatable but...).

So this might not be the best argument, but I would say that Religion or lack thereof is not itself a good or evil but it is largely how it is used .

As a technicality, Mother Teresa wasn't exactly the good person that her myth makes her out to be.

[Neutraligon]

And again, considering what a follower of Jesus is can be up to interpretation, it is not a good definition. May different people interpret the bible very differently, and all of them claim to be followers of Jesus. Those people killing children in Africa for being witches, they claim to be following Jesus.

They objectively are not, must I point out all of the basic scripture that would prove this?

Do not suffer a witch to live is in scripture. And before saying, but that was the old testament, remember they have scriptural support, and you yourself are picking and choosing which part of scripture to obey.

[Farnhamia]

They objectively are not, must I point out all of the basic scripture that would prove this?

Do not suffer a witch to live is in scripture. And before saying, but that was the old testament, remember they have scriptural support, and you yourself are picking and choosing witch part of scripture to obey.

"Witch part"?

[Jormengand]

Jumalariik.

Earlier, in a PM to me, you said there were over a billion Christians in the world. However, now you are saying that only fundamentalist Christians are really Christians at all. This would put the number of Christians somewhere in the third, fourth, or perhaps fifth order of magnitude, not the ninth. Your statements are in contradiction, which do you hold to be correct?

[Old Tyrannia]

They objectively are not, must I point out all of the basic scripture that would prove this?

Do not suffer a witch to live is in scripture.

Actually, that's widely believed to be a mistranslation. The real commandment is "do not suffer a poisoner to live," which in the context of the time is fairly understandable.

[Neutraligon]

Do not suffer a witch to live is in scripture.

Actually, that's widely believed to be a mistranslation. The real commandment is "do not suffer a poisoner to live," which in the context of the time is fairly understandable.

Mind sourcing that, even the Chabad translation translates it as sorceress.

[Jumalariik]

They objectively are not, must I point out all of the basic scripture that would prove this?

Do not suffer a witch to live is in scripture. And before saying, but that was the old testament, remember they have scriptural support, and you yourself are picking and choosing witch part of scripture to obey.

Ok, I'll do it.
Matthew 5:39
2 Corinthians 3:6
Mark 13:21-3
John 8:7

If you know the context of John 8:7, you will see my point.

[Neutraligon]

Do not suffer a witch to live is in scripture. And before saying, but that was the old testament, remember they have scriptural support, and you yourself are picking and choosing witch part of scripture to obey.

"Witch part"?

Exodus 22:18

[Neutraligon]

Do not suffer a witch to live is in scripture. And before saying, but that was the old testament, remember they have scriptural support, and you yourself are picking and choosing witch part of scripture to obey.

Ok, I'll do it.
Matthew 5:39
2 Corinthians 3:6
Mark 13:21-3
John 8:7

If you know the context of John 8:7, you will see my point.

So again you are picking and choosing. They are simply picking a different verse.

[Jormengand]

"Witch part"?

Exodus 22:18

I think Farn was commenting on the silly typo.

[Purpelia]

I am not going to go into the good and bad of religion when it comes to individual sects or implementations. Because unlike what most people will say those are actually irrelevant when compared to the real evil.

Religion is a toxic force of evil, not because of what it does but of what it represents. Religion represents a form of escapism. It offers up an alternative to the harsh life we live in. Now to a degree that would be fine. There is nothing wrong from recreation ally escaping reality. We do it all the time when we watch movies, read books or play video games. However unlike most other forms of escape religion presents it self as if it was real. In fact, it insists on it. And that is where the evil comes from. Because once you do that, once you accept fantasy as reality you lose touch with what is and what matters. The moment you allow your actions and moral choices to be influenced by something that is fantasy you allow them to detach from the real world. And from that point onward it does not matter if this influence is net good or bad on an utilitarian scale because the process of reaching those results is inconsistent with reality. It basically becomes the equivalent of using a completely random number generator to solve equations. Some times you get the answer right, some times you get it wrong. But there is no connection between the system you are trying to work within (the equation) and the system you use to solve problems within it. And if those two are not connected you simply can not have consistently correct results.

[Farnhamia]

"Witch part"?

Exodus 22:18

At the risk of belaboring it, you talked about witches and then said, "... you yourself are picking and choosing witch part of scripture to obey."