Do we prevent somebody being hurt by superstition or faith by rejecting and challenging those things? 

Is it mistaken to support organised religion in membership or donations?

If people do good because they are human, not because God prompts them then is it right to risk giving God any credit when they alone own their good?

 


We are contemplating, " With or without religion, good people can tell the truth and bad people can tell lies; but for good people to lie that takes religion."

Truth

Religious people do not show great concern for religious truth. Few investigate their own religions. The leaders give them little or no help or encouragement.

The truth can coincide with what you want to believe. It is possible to serve the truth not because it is the truth but because it is what you want to hear. That is not real service of the truth. The believer and the atheist can both be guilty of that.

Once truth is denigrated implicitly or explicitly, the road to corruption is assured. The road is clear for others to be corrupted.

Listing the troubles

Man likes his word to be taken for God's. That is why a religious man can seem to be humble and not be. It is a bigger ego buzz than being worshipped as God. And man would happily die to be adored that much. The less a man does for others and the more he preaches instead, the more he wants his utterances to be deified as those of God.

What is wrong with man-made doctrines and rules being pinned on God?

It is evil in itself.

It exploits people.

It can go out of control and lead to violence.

Some men prefer their faith doctrines to be treated as God's word.

Others prefer their moral doctrines to be treated that way.

It is easier to do it with doctrines. When all is said and done, Christianity is more about doctrine than morals. Religion makes its declarations untestable. This makes inventing a faith or religion as easy as drinking a sip of water.

The person who revels in untestable beliefs thinks beliefs are about him or her and not the world. You need to start with that to make it possible to become a terrorist.

For example, when spells and sacraments fail to help people in any noticeable way, they reason that they will work or are working though it does not look like it. Or they blame the recipients for somehow blocking their power.

For example, no evil however great is allowed to make God's existence doubtful.

For example, science says there was no universal flood so believers argue that there was and it was a miracle. They say science is looking for a natural flood and that is where it gets it wrong.

The person who does it with doctrines tends to be worse than the person who does it with morals.

It is a bit harder to do it with morals. For example, saying homosexuality is wrong is okay until gay people start killing themselves because they feel condemned. Then the true face of the morals is shown.

And though religious people easily believe that the evil they do is part of God's good plan, most people fear such a notion. It is odd how many religious people argue that their evil furthers God's plan when they repent of it. It is a short step away from arguing that evil whether repented or not works for God in spite of itself.

The problem is man?

To say the problem with religion is not religion but man, assumes that religion is divine and good and not merely man-made. It enables the lies of religious leaders and the harm religion does. If it does not command the evil it certainly allows the conditions for it to appear.

It implies that if two people are violent and one has to die then spare the religious one. So please understand that the argument blaming man is proof that religion is not the friend of humanity it appears to be. It is in truth only a facade.

It does not take a lot of faith to cause trouble.

The believer may only know of one or two doctrines of his religion and act badly because of them.

The believer may believe but his faith may not be evidence-based and he may not care about evidence.

People who do such things are certainly lazy thinkers. Obviously if God is smarter than you and he talks to you then there is no point in thinking about it for the thinking has been done by God.

While atheists can be corrupt, at least they will be found out for atheism stands for rationality and questioning. It is harder to bring down a religious person who is corrupt. The religious leader is very often an idol.

It is kinder to blame the beliefs more than the person.

The problem is religion.

Intrinsic right to be listened to?

A religion that is founded by God and saves people and is the truth is claiming an intrinsic right to exist that no other body can have. If a religion is man-made it is to blame for people being fooled and their money being taken and the violence that may happen because being man-made it has no intrinsic right to exist. It has as much intrinsic right to exist as a golf club. And how can any religion have an intrinsic right to exist when religions that contradict it exist?

Religion cannot have an intrinsic right to exist if non-religion has an intrinsic right to exist. The more it is treated or thought of as that which alone ultimately matters the more we should worry. And many religions and faiths do claim that their existence is all that matters. To claim an intrinsic right to exist is going too far and an injustice. Anything intrinsically unfair cannot be a force for true and lasting peace. It cannot be for the best.

Not having an intrinsic right to exist means there is no intrinsic right to be listened to. Religion cannot say it has a message that all should hear even if it is only to give them the chance to reject it.

Non-falsifiable

Supernatural beliefs are protected from disproof and refutation in a way no other kind of belief can be. If a dictator told his people that he makes no mistakes and his policies are right people would see through that. To get away with it he needs to claim to be divinely inspired or something to give his boasts some credence. That way he is able to look credible no matter what rubbish he comes out with.

Religion is arrogant and sees everything apart from itself as inferior

Religious belief seeks to be protected from refutation and the evidence against it. That is not a good thing when people want and love truth and if the likes of an ISIS terrorist is being persuaded to risk his life and take life.

Religion argues that when prayers are not answered they are actually answered but you cannot see how. So if prayer does not work the person will not see it. It is a form of self-indoctrination and insults those who don't pray and who see it does not work.

And religion argues that God exists and even if the universe were 99% hell it would still say that evil has nothing to do with showing God does not exist.

Religion has no justified existence when the big picture is looked at. Its existence then and furtherance especially through recruiting and unduly influencing children then is no neutral matter - religion should be helped to go extinct through educating people and applying a social stigma to its most committed devotees (parents in particular!) though being careful to be reasonably tolerant and patient. An evil that is just evil is not as bad as an evil that is able to corrupt goodness. We must not forget that most of those to blame for grave violence are just ordinary people. They are you and they are me. What about the notion that as there are human civilisations that are kindly and ones that are not that we cannot say the reason people can be so bad is not human nature but what they believe? This is assuming that belief must be the reason for moral differences between people where one culture slaughters monstrously and another does not. Doing nothing is nothing but it must do something positive. So belief needs severe challenging and severe questioning.