Top Ten Reasons Why Religion is Pointless
The Top Ten
My religion is a mix of Buddhism and scientific facts and theories. (I believe in reincarnation, but I also believe in the infinity universe theory.) - narutoisepic864
There is no solid evidence for any popular "science" purporting to explain the origins of the universe, life, life that reproduces itself, and most saliently, intelligent life that is self-replicating. Scientism is one of the most fanatical religions, ever.
Science is not a religion, there is solid evidence for scientific theories. Also a scientific theory is not a random idea someone has, it requires evidence. Evolution has plenty of evidence which includes DNA and the fossil record. Evolution has also been directly observed in laboratories in certain insects. - mtndewlord
Religions are fairy tales of adults.Just look up in the sky (universe through microscope) you will get the true answers
"You gotta be kidding me! " While you may not worship science, and accept all its claims and premises with fanatical religious fervor, no matter how illogical, improbable and counterintuitive they may be, many others DO.
"Harmless" behaviors? A highly arguable assertion.
I do admit that they’re harmless, but it’s not about it being harmful or not. It’s about if it makes OUR creator and Master (Jehovah God) feel bad. We owe it to Jehovah God to do whatever he pleases. He didn’t have to create us but he did, so we owe our lives to him. Besides, it’s more about the fact that it’s unnatural, not so much about it being harmless
Any creature is observed to have 2 directives: to survive and to mate. if any animal were to do anything that prevented one of those functions, they would be considered malfunctioning by most scientists. however, when humans do things that prevent reproduction (unnatural sex, abortion, sex without insemination, etc) we consider it completely normal. when a person stops desiring survival (starving themselves, suicidal actions, etc) we send them to a therapist. it seems to be inconsistent. and that is from a scientific perspective, and most atheism is built on a scientific foundation. say what you want to, but logic in and of itself proves that something always comes from something else, even if we don't understand it. and there is more than enough proof in the resurrection, just read the case for Christ. and if Jesus is the son of God, was born, died, and was raised, then everything else in the bible is true. I say that based on how most everything else is historical (possibly myth, ...more
One of the more idiotic statements to grace this site.
But it's true, you don't need a religion to be moral, you wouldn't even know most people are atheist/agnostic unless you asked them - mtndewlord
It actually is if you think about it. Without religion, people make up their own ideas and rules, therefore going into the immoral side. Why do you think people out there in the world get drunk, have sex, and go into unnatural things? It’s because they do whatever they want without proper morals to guide them from religion like Jehovah’s Witnesses
No "religious war." Merely a debate about logic, and the lack thereof. If someone wants to reject Aristotlean logic regarding causation, and argue for spontaneous generation...go for it.
"That's ridiculous...Better systems like a democracy do not require religion either." The issue here is not that the tenets of any particular religion must be strictly followed in order to preserve liberty, but rather that, as history CLEARLY proves, tyranny results when people recognize no higher authority than man. As for democracy, that is NOT the system laid out in the US Constitution. It failed miserably in Athens, where it was born, and its illegitimate implementation is destroying America, politically and fiscally. Lenin said democracy was merely an interim step between capitalism and communism, and that scenario is being played out in the US. Before you declare something "ridiculous," you need to have some clue as to what you're talking about.
Actually, there is some sense in religion, and it is clear from the fact that some people consider it to be meaningful to them. So, at least for somebody, it has sense and value, which makes the wording "Top Ten Reasons Why Religion is Pointless" simply false. Nevertheless, I agree that there are some pointless arguments based on religious dogmas. For example, the claim that human morality needs a supernatural basis. If you eliminate religion, they say, people will have no reason to follow moral rules. In fact, our moral sense exists quite separately from religion, and people can elaborate the notions of right and wrong without guidance of religion (for example, using some form of utilitarian ethics or deontological one).
This was tried in the 20th century. It was called communism. As a result of looking to "logic" to determine morality, 300 million people died "untimely" deaths. Thank you, Nietzsche, Marx and Darwin.
Wow, what a brilliant argument. Do you really think that people responsible for atrocities of the 20th century did what they did because they were atheists? By the way, Darwin never had a social theory so you cannot blame him - GeneralGrievance
People need to be strong enough to decide what is right/wrong. Every good moral has strong logical reason behind it, and doesn't need religion to explain why something is right/wrong. - mtndewlord
Wiccan here, I don't believe in after-life like a Christian, Jew, Muslim.
I like to live this life to the fullest.
The concepts are not mutually exclusive, unless by "living this life to the fullest," you mean doing whatever the hell you want to do, no matter who or how many it harms.
Harming others is not okay obviously, I was not implying that, I think you missed the point - mtndewlord
The point was not "missed." It was simply judged invalid.
Yes, & that includes atheism (i.e.: Communist countries, etc.). - clusium
I’m going to just share my opinion: Jehovah’s Witnesses is the only religion based on my experience that hasn’t been bad or taken too far at all. It’s the only religion with solid evidence for things based on the Bible and has the Witnesses actually bonding with each other. I’ve never seen any other religion have that automatic relationship and connection with each other.
"Evolution is science, there is plenty of evidence." No, there isn't. The "fossil record" contains ZERO intermediate species. Can you use "evolution" to explain irreducible complexity? Do you even know what it is? Can you explain the genesis of sexual reproduction? As for "climate change," if you think it's legitimate science, you're ignoring a world of fact, and simply accepting propaganda, and THAT'S "ridiculous."
There are transitional fossils that show transitions in a species evolving, it's as simple as a Google search. And irreducible complexity is a pseudoscience, meaning it fails to meet the standards of actual science. And there are many things Evolution can't explain, but that does not make it untrue. And as for climate change, what facts exactly? - mtndewlord
Again revert thing in science is not 100% proven because it's science! That's what it is! Theories! That's why we have a creation/evolution debate I support creation but I think both sides give good amount of evidence I've seen almost every evolution website and every creationist site. Both are persuasive, but people who just go with evolution are those who just want to not obey God even if they were brought up in a Christian home.
Remember that according to Science, gravity is also a theory as it's mechanism hasn't yet been proven. Just because something hasn't been proven with science yet doesn't mean that it will never be. The real benefit of science is that if something is not true, then it can be DISproved by a reproducible method. Nothing in religion can be disproved nor definitively proven. - Xean45
Young Earth Creationists reject evolution and the age of the Earth because of how they interpret the Bible - mtndewlord
Which came first, the chicken, or the egg? Evolution is not science, as it simply doesn't work. Neither is anthropomorphic climate change (see: East Anglia scandal).
Evolution is science, there is plenty of evidence. Same with climate science. And just because there was a scandal involving climate change doesn't mean the whole idea is wrong, that assertion is ridiculous. - mtndewlord
The Crusaders, need I say more?
Why does opinion in religion matter? This why I don't believe in humanity.
Might just be the opposite. Ever hear the expression, "There are no atheists in foxholes? "
Except for Paganism, Wicca. Did they cause war?
It most certainly is NOT the "only" reason. In fact, it's the least obvious one.
I’m going to be honest: That’s because the things you mentioned are wrong due to being unnatural.
What blind obedience? Book of Shadows, kitchen witch, horoscopes.
"How is it ironic...? " The irony is in your "blind obedience" to "scientific" dogma. You believe there is "solid evidence" for macro evolution, the "evolution" of one species into another, when no such evidence exists, nor can such a process be biologically, rationally explained. The "fossil record" contains NO examples of intermediate species, including any validating DNA. Any observable "evolution" that has been "directly observed" represents MICRO evolution (green grasshoppers are more likely to survive in a green environment, and therefore pass on their DNA) in which NO "new species" is observed. Blindly accepting pronouncements which are contrary to both evidence and logic qualifies scientism as religion, indeed.
If you insist upon adhering to macro evolution as fact, then answer two questions: 1) Can you reconcile irreducible complexity with "evolution? ", and 2) Which ...more
Archaeopteryx, Australopithecus afarensis, Ambulocetus natans,... examples of intermediate species in the fossil record. There are many, many "missing links" that have been discovered. Denying that said evidence exists does not make it so.
The concept of evolution of species is a relatively new one. Naturally, any evolution observed during that time period is micro. Not being able to observe something that takes 100 years in a one month time period does not disprove the notion that the 100 year process could be possible.
Irreducible complexity, an evidence lacking pseudoscientific thought experiment posing as concrete reasoning, is refuted by comparative genomics and rejected by evolutionary biologists. It is deemed an "argument from ignorance".
The chicken or the egg? Another fun thought experiment for grade school children that relies on the perceived paradox of it being impossible for one species to bear another. However, since species are ...more - Primersk
So does your obvious political indoctrination. There is great irony in the fact that you don't see it.
True, political indoctrination happens and can be harmful, I agree. How is it ironic to my statement? - mtndewlord
Blind Obedience to something with no strong evidence for to be more specific - mtndewlord
Christians and Muslims will often mock "new age" religion, and vice versa. Many political fights and wars are fought over religion. Even something as simple as a friendship/relationship can be ruined because of religious differences - mtndewlord
Well people are going to have opinions and different religions. You’re just going to have to deal with it, knowing that Jehovah will make you feel better
And people should never make judgements because all ideas are equally valid, and all behaviors are just wonderful, right?
That’s a part of life my friend, people will always judge you no matter what. Religion isn’t the only reason for judgement
I think that was really good it has helped me lea
Puts a lot of pressure on me
Again, people will judge you and have disagreements. That’s what happens with, Oh I don’t know, everything else!
South Park, Family Guy, Sausage Party.