There is no justice if atheism is true

That's to say nothing of the role of religion in saving drug addicts and alcholics, in consoling the broken hearted and of places like the Salvation Army hostels for the destitute and broken

Of course it does some good in the world
That answer suggests that I had told that it did no good in the world.

I simply asked for your examples, which you appear to have trawled from a Catholic web site.

Now, as a balance, can you think of instances where theism has not done so well, or done very badly?
 
Now, as a balance, can you think of instances where theism has not done so well, or done very badly?
I could trawl you countless examples of human beings behaving in nasty ways using whatever good cause or another as a cloak
 
The fact that people do not always manage to live up to the moral values taught by their religions does not cancel the compassionate values of those teachings. People are imperfect and often easily deceived and there will always be wolves in sheep's clothing who use religion as a cloak or twist religious 'ahimsa' non-violence as a battle call.
Religion has often over-run other cultures, pillaged and looted them and one way of easing conscience was to class the victims as 'not of God', or even 'of the Devil' . It was alright to do bad things to those who were not of God, or the right God.
After the badnesses religion could defend itself by insisting that 'those villains were not really of us', and after goodnesses religion could point to these and declare 'look at who we really are'.

Religion hates being reminded of the badness. My wife has been reading about the girls of the Catholic laundries in Ireland, the last one closed down in 99'.....the stories are of slavery, and letters to early churches support.......slavery.

Humans can be good or bad, and religion has nothing to do with it.
 
I could trawl you countless examples of human beings behaving in nasty ways using whatever good cause or another as a cloak
Can you give any examples of where religion has done just that? As a balance?
 
Religion has often over-run other cultures, pillaged and looted them and one way of easing conscience was to class the victims as 'not of God', or even 'of the Devil' . It was alright to do bad things to those who were not of God, or the right God.

After the badnesses religion could defend itself by insisting that 'those villains were not really of us', and after goodnesses religion could point to these and declare 'look at who we really are'.
All tribes have their (false) war gods. Nothing to do with the 'ahimsa' that (most) religions actually teach.
Humans can be good or bad, and religion has nothing to do with it.
This is the central point. You make it an unequivocal fact. But religion helps a lot of people. So ...

(edited)
 
Last edited:
All tribes have their (false) war gods. Nothing to do with the 'ahimsa' that (most) religions actually teach.
This is the central point. You make it an unequivocal fact. But religion helps a lot of people. So ...

(edited)
And non theists help a lot of people, so where are we?
Claims by any groups that they are especially righteous or 'moral' should be scrutinised with care, I think.
 
And non theists help a lot of people, so where are we?
Claims by any groups that they are especially righteous or 'moral' should be scrutinised with care, I think.
But do they claim to be? Do monks of any religion claim to be? Do honest followers of the 'spiritual path' claim to be? On the contrary they continually remind themselves that they are not -- although they aspire.
Jesus Christ Son of God have mercy on me, a sinner
(The Jesus Prayer)

To me you equate religion with self-righteous hypocrisy. There are hypocrites in all faiths -- true -- but it does not cancel the teaching itself. It's what Christ most fiercely condemned.

At least you seem to accept that religions are not entirely evil; that they can do some good. I'll take that for now

Whatever ...
 
Last edited:
"... God and His infinite goodness, patience and understanding ..."
1Romans 2:4
 
Last edited:
All tribes have their (false) war gods. Nothing to do with the 'ahimsa' that (most) religions actually teach.
This is the central point. You make it an unequivocal fact. But religion helps a lot of people. So ...
Hinduism does not teach absolute 'ahimsa' like Jainism. Even Buddhism or Sikhism do not do that. There are times when 'dharma' demands war.
 
But do they claim to be? Do monks of any religion claim to be? Do honest followers of the 'spiritual path' claim to be? On the contrary they continually remind themselves that they are not -- although they aspire.
But you do? Some posts here definitely suggest that religion is more 'moral'
But the word 'moral' is as hard to define as the word 'spiritual' imo. A willow-the-wisp.

The laws of Moses all together were a brilliant blue print for a successful healthy secure people (back then) and I don't see too many people supporting those at all. Christianity tended to cherry pick its ideas about what is moral from those, discarding hundreds of others.
To me you equate religion with self-righteous hypocrisy. There are hypocrites in all faiths -- true -- but it does not cancel the teaching itself. It's what Christ most fiercely condemned.

At least you seem to accept that religions are not entirely evil; that they can do some good. I'll take that for now

Whatever ...
The teaching itself? Jesus supported the Laws of Moses back then, and somehow Christianity managed to persuade itself that Jesus didn't really mean that.
Religions...evil? I don't even believe in a real 'Evil' nor a tangible 'Devil' so how you can tell me how I equate or what I accept is hard for me to understand.

Human beings have made this place dirty, have a dreadful conduct history and we need to change our mindsets and values massively, and none of that is about a religion, this one or that one. imo
 
But you do? Some posts here definitely suggest that religion is more 'moral'
God has rescued me and saved me from a very bad place. That's what I know. I love God. It is the centre of my daily existence
The teaching itself? Jesus supported the Laws of Moses back then, and somehow Christianity managed to persuade itself that Jesus didn't really mean that.
You say @badger
You say

Anyway ...
 
Last edited:
God has rescued me and saved me from a very bad place. That's what I know. I love God. It is the centre of my daily existence
Then that is the bottom line.... All the best to you if you've been in dark places and come away from them.
I love my perception of Deity as well, but I just perceive that the real true boss around here is Mother Nature, and I do embrace her with all her gifts and terrors, as I walk in to her chaos. But this my kind of talk isn't much of a sell, I find.
You say @badger
You say

Anyway ...
Yeah....... I acknowledge your faith and your love, I do. As you know I'm a Deist of sorts.
 
The teaching itself? Jesus supported the Laws of Moses back then ...
A constant claim, and a biblical reference to support it, but it's also biblically evident that how Jesus interpreted the Law brought Him into conflict with the authorities.

As ever, it's a question of 'the spirit v the letter', but I think we can say that Jesus was not happy with the interpretation of the Mosaic Law in His day, so while you might say the Laws "were a brilliant blue print for a successful healthy secure people", they were open to abuse, and were abused.

As you point out, it's (we) the people, not the institutions.
 
Human beings have made this place dirty, have a dreadful conduct history and we need to change our mindsets and values massively, and none of that is about a religion, this one or that one. imo
Unless they change their mindset and values about religions, no change is likely to come. :(
 
A constant claim, and a biblical reference to support it, but it's also biblically evident that how Jesus interpreted the Law brought Him into conflict with the authorities.
Jesus knew the laws, believed in the laws, but the authorities were a corrupted bunch of hypocrites, just like the Baptist told .

As ever, it's a question of 'the spirit v the letter', but I think we can say that Jesus was not happy with the interpretation of the Mosaic Law in His day, so while you might say the Laws "were a brilliant blue print for a successful healthy secure people", they were open to abuse, and were abused.

As you point out, it's (we) the people, not the institutions.
The laws were indeed brilliant and while they were kept the people prospered. They were warned how things would go wrong of they ignored them.
 
Back
Top