# Religion, do we really need it ?



## JojoTheDragon (Mar 23, 2012)

Religion, you are familiar with it. You may call yourself Hindu, Muslim, Christian..etc..etc. But do we really need religion ? Is one's conscience not enough ? Is the simple belief "God is real " not enough that you need to go further and say that I'm "XYZ " religious ? I feel that Religion has created nothing but communal hate. What do you think ?


PS: This is not a thread to determine which is the best religion,but  just to question its existence.


----------



## Gaurav Bhattacharjee (Mar 23, 2012)

Don't need. Don't give a sh!t. Simple.


----------



## clmlbx (Mar 23, 2012)

this is the topic I will really join in for discussion, 

I always say to my family and friends I believe in God but not in religion. 

God is one and to pray-talk to him you don't need to go some where, just speak truly and he/she will listen


----------



## doomgiver (Mar 23, 2012)

so, what you have is an invisible friend, right?
please take a seat over there, dr. freud will take up your case on sunday.


----------



## Sarath (Mar 23, 2012)

Religion is necessary as much as it is redundant


----------



## clmlbx (Mar 23, 2012)

^^so what do you have? statues made of stone, a similar walls like your home where you go to worship, what do you have there? 

do you really think that statues are actual god?  or house where you go for worship god is there and no where els?

Edit : No offense at all, just going for healthy discussion


----------



## JojoTheDragon (Mar 23, 2012)

clmlbx said:


> this is the topic I will really join in for discussion,
> 
> I always say to my family and friends I believe in God but not in religion.
> 
> God is one and to pray-talk to him you don't need to go some where, just speak truly and he/she will listen



Same here. 



Sarath said:


> Religion is necessary as much as it is redundant



To learn morals and ethical values? To preserve God ? 
Elaborate please.


----------



## dashing.sujay (Mar 23, 2012)

Religion was never made to discriminate people, but now it is used for same. If abolishment of religion is so necessary for sake of mankind, I'm in, otherwise let it be there.

But I feel, caste is to blamed more than religion. People were never treated either superior or inferior on basis of religion, its caste which made it like that.


----------



## techbulb (Mar 24, 2012)

Every body is not very imaginative religion is a way to give a shape to god be it lord ram,jesus or anybody else ,people believe wat they see ,a statue gives them the feeling that there is a god up there and he will help him in hard times in earlier times communication was very very less so different groups of people in different places created different gods and they are still here


----------



## asingh (Mar 24, 2012)

clmlbx said:


> ^^so what do you have? statues made of stone, a similar walls like your home where you go to worship, what do you have there?
> 
> do you really think that statues are actual god?  or house where you go for worship god is there and no where els?
> 
> Edit : No offense at all, just going for healthy discussion



Humans, need tangibility. And Puranic Hinduism reveled in this. That is why we have tokens/relieves for religion. Even monotheistic religions like Christianity and Buddhism, where the former is virile about idol-worship -has- basque and murals which depict what a "god" could be. Or there would be symbolism like the moon and color green for Islam.


----------



## Sarath (Mar 24, 2012)

A world without religion right now would be catastrophic.

We will have to wait till human beings evolve into much smarter beings to completely remove dependence on religion. I would say another couple of centuries and a few decades in more scientific communities.


----------



## asingh (Mar 24, 2012)

The Nordic countries are all ready moving towards an irreligious model.


----------



## ico (Mar 24, 2012)

Nothing wrong in being religious and practicing your religion.

But there are 4 steps which can transform one into an idiot.

* Conservatism
* Extremism
* Radicalism
* Terrorism

At first, you'll start off being conservative in your beliefs and become sort of narrow minded. You'll dislike other people not from your community or not following your faith or trying to do something progressive or whatever.

Then you'll become an extremist having very very harsh views and trying to force your opinion on others.

Then a radical with demands. And in the end, a terrorist.

This thing is applicable to each and every damned human on this Earth. Worst thing is, humans are actually fighting against terrorism. What we should be fighting against is - conservatism. That's the root. Cutting branches won't do anything.

Conservative politicians embedded in the system with a "vote mobilisation" agenda? That's even worse.

I'll also like to add one more thing - if one is of the opinion that "religion sucks" or "religion should be abolished" or "all worship places to be destoryed" etc. - then he also falls in category 2.


----------



## Liverpool_fan (Mar 24, 2012)

Faith, it is fine. Religion? It's a bunch of propaganda set up by certain people in order to push their beliefs and fortify their power and influence in the society.



Sarath said:


> A world without religion right now would be catastrophic.
> 
> We will have to wait till human beings evolve into much smarter beings to completely remove dependence on religion. I would say another couple of centuries and a few decades in more scientific communities.



Chinese are as much irreligious as it can go. And tell you what there have been far less riots and idiotic wars in their history.


----------



## clmlbx (Mar 24, 2012)

asingh said:


> Humans, need tangibility. And Puranic Hinduism reveled in this. That is why we have tokens/relieves for religion. Even monotheistic religions like Christianity and Buddhism, where the former is virile about idol-worship -has- basque and murals which depict what a "god" could be. Or there would be symbolism like the moon and color green for Islam.



you answered the question, human mind needs tangibility, statues or house where you worship is nothing more then illusion of God to you, so you don't need to do anything special or be any where specific to remember God.. you can do it anywhere, only thing matters is you do truthfully..

Deep you go to any religion and compare you get same rituals,same concepts,culture, to me it is difficult to find much difference.



ico said:


> I'll also like to add one more thing - if one is of the opinion that "religion sucks" or "religion should be abolished" or "all worship places to be destoryed" etc. - then he also falls in category 2.



how is that ? many problem will be solved if religion is abolished(statement), I don't say "all worship places to be destroyed" but why consider that places any more important then any other building. 

and how does that fall in category 2? I have that type of opinion and we don't force on it,  on contrary religion is forced in our country, 



Liverpool_fan said:


> Faith, it is fine. Religion? It's a bunch of propaganda set up by certain people in order to push their beliefs and fortify their power and influence in the society.
> 
> Chinese are as much irreligious as it can go. And tell you what there have been far less riots and idiotic wars in their history.



+1, I fully agree with you.


----------



## ico (Mar 24, 2012)

clmlbx said:


> how is that ? many problem will be solved if religion is abolished(statement), I don't say "all worship places to be destroyed" but why consider that places any more important then any other building.
> 
> and how does that fall in category 2? *I have that type of opinion and we don't force on it,  on contrary religion is forced in our country,*


The bold part is the reason you don't fall in Category 2. 

I'm obviously talking of the "Extremists" there. Extremists of all sort.


----------



## nims11 (Mar 24, 2012)

clmlbx said:


> this is the topic I will really join in for discussion,
> 
> I always say to my family and friends *I believe in God but not in religion*.
> 
> God is one and to pray-talk to him you don't need to go some where, just speak truly and he/she will listen



I believe the same. I have my own principles which i consider valid. I don't want to be classified as a jain or hindu or anything else as religion has nowadays become a tool for classifying people.


----------



## dashing.sujay (Mar 24, 2012)

^At least its better than caste.


----------



## theserpent (Mar 24, 2012)

^ Yeah.Thats what i hate.Why do People In India classify people on bases of caste and religion?


----------



## dashing.sujay (Mar 24, 2012)

Religion is fine IMO.


----------



## axes2t2 (Mar 24, 2012)

*i.imgur.com/mxtu8.jpg


----------



## CommanderShawnzer (Mar 24, 2012)

Liverpool_fan said:


> Faith, it is fine. Religion? It's a bunch of propaganda set up by certain people in order to push their beliefs and fortify their power and influence in the society.
> 
> 
> 
> Chinese are as much irreligious as it can go.* And tell you what there have been far less riots and idiotic wars in their history*.



Tianamen square. yeah rolling tanks on peaceful protesters. thats better than riots right?
forcing people to become communists
i think China falls in ico's category 3


----------



## Sarath (Mar 24, 2012)

I am not saying that abolishing religion will cause less wars and make the world more peaceful. 

There will come a time when religion will fail to convince people to stop finding answers. That's when people would transform to religious nerds. 

However meanwhile people would still kill each other for money, power and shi* like that.


----------



## Liverpool_fan (Mar 24, 2012)

CommanderShawnzer said:


> Tianamen square. yeah rolling tanks on peaceful protesters. thats better than riots right?
> forcing people to become communists
> i think China falls in ico's category 3



We are talking about the entire history of China rather than the opressive nature of their current government or their commie leanings. Get better comprehension skills, that's the advice I'll give you.

China wasn't divided on religious lines for a start, and their religions didn't fight for centuries as the Abrahamic religions did in the medieval times. Nor do you see mass religious riots as you saw in Gujarat in China.


----------



## Anorion (Mar 24, 2012)

So money and power are bigger prolems than religion? Yeah wud agree to that ... Irresective of religion, spiritualism helps a lot on a personal front, and blv having a spiritual guru in whatever form is very imp


----------



## Liverpool_fan (Mar 24, 2012)

To be fair all three are inter-related in some way or other.


----------



## rhitwick (Mar 24, 2012)

Add a poll.


----------



## Blue Ripazah (Mar 24, 2012)

IMO we do not need any religion ...it only creates discrimination among the humans ....so its better to live as one rather than different people from different religion


----------



## nims11 (Mar 24, 2012)

^^ that just sounds well at a thinking level. Religion atleast manages to create a sense of good and evil in minds of people.


----------



## Blue Ripazah (Mar 24, 2012)

nims11 said:


> ^^ that just sounds well at a thinking level. Religion atleast manages to create a sense of good and evil in minds of people.



Presence of religion will increase the factors for conflict amongst each other


----------



## Liverpool_fan (Mar 24, 2012)

nims11 said:


> ^^ that just sounds well at a thinking level. Religion atleast manages to create a sense of good and evil in minds of people.



That's faith. Just a part of religion.


----------



## gopi_vbboy (Mar 24, 2012)

Yes religion is needed.In case of hinduism, we have many hindu temples which cater the hunger of poor ppl.Nothing is greater than feeding the hungry.

Who told religion creates divide?Temples today dont ask ur religion to enter or to have a food at a feast.

So religion is necessary as it helps ppl.


----------



## clmlbx (Mar 24, 2012)

you say nothing greater then feeding hungry people  and no one asks what religion you are of, then why do you need religion? you just need humanity.. you don't feed because of religion but because of humanity.. 

Humanity is answer to all this, not religion


----------



## dashing.sujay (Mar 24, 2012)

Feeding hungry people is due to _faith_, and religion increases faith IMO. Without religion, there would be no God.


----------



## CommanderShawnzer (Mar 24, 2012)

*religions do not create divides directly but people can use religion to create divides*
*Any Religion's general purpose and message is to help people spiritually,create a feeling of fraternity and generally to create a feeling of respect and reverence towards God*
what religion has become today is what people have made it into.nowadays power hungry people use religion to create divisions in society and teach wrong things to the faithful



and generally most anti-religion people are upset because something bad may have happened in thier life
thats why they're bitter towards God and Religion.they might deny it but such experiences in thier life remain in thier subconscious mind and affect thier decisions/views


----------



## Blue Ripazah (Mar 24, 2012)

clmlbx said:


> you say nothing greater then feeding hungry people  and no one asks what religion you are of, then why do you need religion? you just need humanity.. you don't feed because of religion but because of humanity..
> 
> Humanity is answer to all this, not religion



Indeed 
you just need to be a human with clean soul to.feed and help others


----------



## CommanderShawnzer (Mar 24, 2012)

and the most idiotic reason why we need religion
*Public Holidays*


----------



## Faun (Mar 25, 2012)

Watch The Mist to get the gist of what happens when one idiotic zealot sways the opinion of others. Terrifying to imagine.


----------



## theserpent (Mar 25, 2012)

Blue Ripazah said:


> IMO we do not need any religion ...it only creates discrimination among the humans ....so its better to live as one rather than different people from different religion



+1.I read an article recently in TOI.That almost many Britain  will be Non-Believers by 2030sform to non-believers in britain

Like now in India some people still say hes an *****.We should stay away from him,This student is an *******.We should either not give him admission or ask him lots of donation.



> London, March 3 (IANS) Britain may no longer be a Christian country by 2030 as the number of non-believers is set to overtake the number of Christians, a media report said.
> 
> Christianity is losing more than half a million believers every year, while the count of atheists and agnostics is going up by almost 750,000 annually, the Daily Mail reported.
> 
> ...


----------



## Anorion (Mar 25, 2012)

God is a recent prolem, religion was knowledge the earliest oral traditions being converted to written word. God, faith, belief etc are all relatively recent additions to religion, and only a small aspect of it, religious texts were the only source of history and geography at their time, and all religions stress on studying, so its not really that diff from science, or logic 
Kapila, the first of the saptarishis, the earliest known Indian whose philosophies survive was an atheist


----------



## Faun (Mar 25, 2012)

Anorion said:


> God is a recent prolem, religion was knowledge the earliest oral traditions being converted to written word. God, faith, belief etc are all relatively recent additions to religion, and only a small aspect of it, religious texts were the only source of history and geography at their time, and all religions stress on studying, so its not really that diff from science, or logic
> Kapila, the first of the saptarishis, the earliest known Indian whose philosophies survive was an atheist



You are confusing religion here.


----------



## clmlbx (Mar 25, 2012)

Anorion said:


> God is a recent prolem, religion was knowledge the earliest oral traditions being converted to written word. God, faith, belief etc are all relatively recent additions to religion, and only a small aspect of it, religious texts were the only source of history and geography at their time, and all religions stress on studying, so its not really that diff from science, or logic
> Kapila, the first of the saptarishis, the earliest known Indian whose philosophies survive was an atheist



I can agree on that too, Religion is nothing more then a guidelines for how to live your life.. which was passed by Generation to generation.

Many rituals in religions  can not be understood in current time but when you take that and travel back in time(Imagination) then you may understand it, might be it was said before electricity or before any other  knowledge of science or with different live styles


----------



## CommanderShawnzer (Mar 25, 2012)

Blue Ripazah said:


> IMO we do not need any religion ...it only creates discrimination among the humans ....so its better to live as one rather than different people from different religion



*people use religion to create discrimination towards people of other faiths*.religion was not made to create discrimination.nearly all religions tell us to love each other


----------



## dashing.sujay (Mar 25, 2012)

Its the current generation which is discriminating on the basis of religion, otherwise it was never an issue.


----------



## Liverpool_fan (Mar 25, 2012)

dashing.sujay said:


> Its the current generation which is discriminating on the basis of religion, otherwise it was never an issue.



Actually current generation is a lot better.


----------



## dashing.sujay (Mar 25, 2012)

Liverpool_fan said:


> Actually current generation is a lot better.



I don't think so. There was never ever any serious issue(s) in old times as compared to now. Its "kaliyug" and will be doomed.


----------



## theserpent (Mar 25, 2012)

Liverpool_fan said:


> Actually current generation is a lot better.



The People born in the generation 90's are better


----------



## Liverpool_fan (Mar 25, 2012)

dashing.sujay said:


> I don't think so. There was never ever any serious issue(s) in old times as compared to now.



That's not true. In medieval times there were problems like Sati, Child Marriage, Lack of Female education, Untouchability, and all that. Then the moronic Hindu-Muslim fights, Crusades, Auranzeb's opression of Sikhs and what not. Currently it is a LOT better
Kaliyug and all? They are just stories. Every age, man has lived is "Kaliyug" in any case.


----------



## dashing.sujay (Mar 25, 2012)

Liverpool_fan said:


> That's not true. In medieval times there were problems like Sati, Child Marriage, Lack of Female education, Untouchability, and all that. Then the moronic Hindu-Muslim fights, Crusades, Auranzeb's opression of Sikhs and what not. Currently it is a LOT better
> Kaliyug and all? They are just stories. Every age, man has lived is "Kaliyug" in any case.



_Sati, Child marriage, Lack of female education, untouchabiliy and all that_ are not at all religious problems. Rather they were social problems which existed (partially _existing_) in Hinduism, now spread to other religions also.

Hindu Muslim fights was just any greedy man's invasion, just a coincidence that it was between Hindus Vs Muslims (it was actually b/w India and central-east Asia). I agree with Auranzeb's oppression of Sikh (and every other damn religion), but don't persons like him exist in every period of time? And kaliyug is full of them. And kaliyug is not just a story, its _in front of us_.


----------



## Faun (Mar 25, 2012)

dashing.sujay said:


> I don't think so. There was never ever any serious issue(s) in old times as compared to now. Its "kaliyug" and will be doomed.



No, it is not kaliyug in literal sense. It's what you make out of it.


----------



## Liverpool_fan (Mar 25, 2012)

dashing.sujay said:


> _Sati, Child marriage, Lack of female education, untouchabiliy and all that_ are not at all religious problems. Rather they were social problems which existed (partially _existing_) in Hinduism, now spread to other religions also.
> .


These social problems existed as a consequence (partly or fully) of religious and cultural beliefs.


----------



## dashing.sujay (Mar 25, 2012)

Liverpool_fan said:


> These social problems existed as a consequence of religious and cultural beliefs.



But they weren't due to inter-religious issues. Intra-religious issues are there in every religion, that's due to cramped & orthodox thinking of some moral dictators.


----------



## Liverpool_fan (Mar 25, 2012)

Religion is not just about inter-religious issue, is it? We can't ignore the issues within a religion. For me this makes religion and customs and traditions even more worthless and more of pain than gain for humanity. (Mind you there are good things like Spirituality, (true)Morality, among other things but unfortunately bad things drowns the good points).


----------



## Anorion (Mar 25, 2012)

Yea some forms of religion is BS but all that stuff is easy to filter out we need the wisdom of religion always and religion should reinvent and reform itself periodically.
Thats all recent tho- past 800-1200 years.. these prolems were universal - and these prolems came about because of war. Even in recent history (alexandr's) time - peasants were not attacked and land was not destroyed during war and farmers could farm alongside soldiers who faught without fear of pillage. Fortunately this is behind us now. The prolems are leftover from that time. (till wwii)
used to be a mega-skeptic of religion, eated all richard dawkins books, then started reading the stuff first hand and there was just so much more than dogma in there - even the bits tht dont make sense they are all short and easy to consume sort of like really good microblogs
Hinduism was not so erm... mystical... for the most part of its existence. even now there are some ancient knowledge passed on only in oral form - or from practice. yoga, or samkhya and even plain old logic (nyaya) were the predominant schools of thought. NOne of these suffer from any hangups about belief, or prayer


----------



## dashing.sujay (Mar 25, 2012)

I agree that issues within a religion can't be ignored. But IMO moral police are more responsible than any religion. Its those sucker people who mend the things according to them, and they'll continue to do even if there is nothing called religion, dividing society on some other criteria.


----------



## CommanderShawnzer (Mar 25, 2012)

too many extremist athiest/agnostics here............


----------



## gopi_vbboy (Mar 25, 2012)

Anorion said:


> God is a recent prolem, religion was knowledge the earliest oral traditions being converted to written word. God, faith, belief etc are all relatively recent additions to religion, and only a small aspect of it, religious texts were the only source of history and geography at their time, and all religions stress on studying, so its not really that diff from science, or logic
> Kapila, the first of the saptarishis, the earliest known Indian whose philosophies survive was an atheist



Srinivasa ramanujam was theist .Vivekanada was a great philospher who believed in hinduism.God has meaning relative to religion and not a recent addition


clmlbx said:


> you say nothing greater then feeding hungry people  and no one asks what religion you are of, then why do you need religion? you just need humanity.. you don't feed because of religion but because of humanity..
> 
> Humanity is answer to all this, not religion



You fail to understand that Religion is form of  humanity.You put money in temple.They feed ppl in prasadams.Isnt that humanity?



Liverpool_fan said:


> Religion is not just about inter-religious issue, is it? We can't ignore the issues within a religion. For me this makes religion and customs and traditions even more worthless and more of pain than gain for humanity. (Mind you there are good things like Spirituality, (true)Morality, among other things but unfortunately bad things drowns the good points).



yes you need to extract the good out of religion instead of being atheist n living in bliss.



clmlbx said:


> I can agree on that too, Religion is nothing more then a guidelines for how to live your life.. which was passed by Generation to generation.
> 
> Many rituals in religions  can not be understood in current time but when you take that and travel back in time(Imagination) then you may understand it, might be it was said before electricity or before any other  knowledge of science or with different live styles



Religion is not a guidline how to live.Instead think of it as an encyclopedia of life.Religious text like Bhagvat gita teaches you morals of living and many other aspects.Vedas are huge source of information.


----------



## dashing.sujay (Mar 26, 2012)

gopi_vbboy said:


> yes you need to extract the good out of religion instead of being atheist.



This.


----------



## whitestar_999 (Mar 26, 2012)

> Religious text like Bhagvat gita teaches you morals of living and many other aspects.Vedas are huge source of information.


interesting!which religion are you referring to because bhagwat gita & vedas are older than the origin of term "hindu" & there is no concrete evidence that vedic culture follows any of the known religion currently.unless more is known about vedic culture it is better to leave it out of religious debates.


----------



## gxsaurav (Mar 26, 2012)

For centuries, religion has been a great method to unify people. Think of the time when humans used to live in tribes. All tribes used to fight each other over land, resources etc but when the concept of Gods or religion came into existence, these people unified under the name of religion whether it was Christianity, Greek Pantheon or Nordic Gods. 

Also, religion has been a great tool to control un-educated people in the name of what will happen after death. Since they don't know what will happen to them after death, they think they should do as their religion dictates so as to have a better afterlife on which they have no control. They only have control over their existing life.

Besides, it is always easy to blame God for something. If some year rain did not happen on time, you could blame the God and say "They are angry". Similarly, if you fail in an exam you can say "God wasn't with me" etc etc. When was the last time you said "It was God's will due to which I topped all over India in an exam and not my hard work" 

Today, with science and education and "reason for something happening", people are forgetting religion which I think is a good move for humanity as a species.

To proceed further we need evolution and scientific discoveries and not belief in someone sitting in the clouds who will punish you if you do some sin, but he loves you. 

Also, the worst thing is to mold a religion according to yourself. If people say that they follow Bible or Geeta or Veda, than why do they modify some rules written there? For example, it is written in Geeta that during fast, you are not supposed to eat anything for 24 hrs in a day. This actually has a scientific meaning as due to this you digest all the undigested food and cleanse your body of impurities completely. However, peple still say eating fruits etc is permitted. I ask where??? 

Just cos some rules are not convenient, people mold or change it. If they do it, they are not following religion properly. If you say you are following the book than follow the book properly without any modification to the rules. 

Those religious texts were written thousands of years ago for that society. Is it still applicable? Humanity has changed so the rules of those book and teachings don't apply today. People need to understand this. No religion or book in this world tells to kill in the name of God. People still kill in the name of God which makes me believe they don't follow any religion and are doing this just for their personal gains and covering it with the name of religion. 

Have a look at entire history of humanity. Economy has driven and influenced religion everywhere.

In the end, *True God and religion in this world, in my opinion, are your parents*. They bought you to this world. They raised you and gave you resources to be what you are today and not any imaginary guy sitting in the sky. (we know there is no one in the sky. It is empty space). If you want to have faith in someone or worship someone, go do it to your parents. There is nothing bigger than them in this world.

P.S - Off topic, but once I met father of one of my friend. He is a pretty rich businessman. So this one time we were talking about him donating to some NGO of his son's friend for educating kids. This was an actually genuine NGO and not some fake one for tax benefit or making money. My friend's dad refused saying it is fake and he doesn't want to waste his money. 

Next month, he did a _jagrata_ which I think cost over Rs 20 lakh. Although a person is entitled to spend his hard earned money the way he wants, but I found his this act stupid and I no longer respect him. It was better to educate some poor slum kids than wasting money on rituals of an imaginary god.


----------



## Anorion (Mar 26, 2012)

^yea its relIgion is abused, but even science is abused equally for the same reasons. Doesent matter if a hack is sellIng HD contact lenses or unani ankh surakhsha, hacks r gonna b hacks
 yes religious texts are dated but there are bits in em that are timeless
@whitestar: fair point !
@gopi_vbboy: the rise of vedanta (not to be confus with vedic civilisation) is a post mideval phenomenon, but yeah agree with all your entire post
Religion is not so bad maybe its still relevent on a community level just more festivals cant blv some of you had prolems with holidays


----------



## gopi_vbboy (Mar 26, 2012)

whitestar_999 said:


> interesting!which religion are you referring to because bhagwat gita & vedas are older than the origin of term "hindu" & there is no concrete evidence that vedic culture follows any of the known religion currently.unless more is known about vedic culture it is better to leave it out of religious debates.



Ofcourse its hinduism.

Your logic is so silly.Its like saying digit 0 was invented first so the number 100 is not at all related to it.



gxsaurav said:


> For centuries, religion has been a great method to unify people. Think of the time when humans used to live in tribes. All tribes used to fight each other over land, resources etc but when the concept of Gods or religion came into existence, these people unified under the name of religion whether it was Christianity, Greek Pantheon or Nordic Gods.
> 
> Also, religion has been a great tool to control un-educated people in the name of what will happen after death. Since they don't know what will happen to them after death, they think they should do as their religion dictates so as to have a better afterlife on which they have no control. They only have control over their existing life.
> 
> ...




Yes you seems to be inspired by the story Lord ganapathi and his father Shiva who gives him Mango for considering parents as the world.I Agree worshiping parents is the best thing.

Its mistake of your friends father .I know a person who is also pretty rich , he conducts bhajans in his house for simple reason -to spread the culture of this bhajans.

I also know a person who goes for bhajans, earn 300 - 500 in every one of them and sends those money by DD to his aunt(cos his son left him without caring-blame atheism for that).He believes money earned from doing bhajans should not be used for personal purpose instead for helping.


----------



## gxsaurav (Mar 26, 2012)

gopi_vbboy said:


> Yes you seems to be inspired by the story Lord ganapathi and his father Shiva who gives him Mango for considering parents as the world.I Agree worshiping parents is the best thing.



umm..... non-religious guy here. I don't even know what that story is, neither I want to know.


----------



## whitestar_999 (Mar 26, 2012)

gopi_vbboy said:


> *Ofcourse its hinduism.*
> 
> Your logic is so silly.Its like saying digit 0 was invented first so the number 100 is not at all related to it.


my mistake!i didn't knew you had/pursuing a doctorate in religion/religious studies from an accredited university.*sarcasm*

anyway i will not engage further in this discussion with you as i have already guessed your intellectual caliber.meaningful debate can only be among equals so my best wishes to you in finding those of your caliber here.


----------



## Liverpool_fan (Mar 26, 2012)

gopi_vbboy said:


> yes you need to extract the good out of religion instead of being atheist n living in bliss.


That's all good in theory but in practice people will tend to "extract" those things which are convenient to them. This is where blind faith, fundementalism, intolerance, etc. can kick in and religion is nice pretext for doing anything.


----------



## dashing.sujay (Mar 26, 2012)

Liverpool_fan said:


> That's all good in theory but in practice people will tend to "extract" those things which are convenient to them.



This is Kaliyug!


----------



## Liverpool_fan (Mar 26, 2012)

whitestar_999 said:


> my mistake!i didn't knew you had/pursuing a doctorate in religion/religious studies from an accredited university.*sarcasm*
> 
> anyway i will not engage further in this discussion with you as i have already guessed your intellectual caliber.meaningful debate can only be among equals so my best wishes to you in finding those of your caliber here.


Keep such crap out of this thread. If you want to argue, argue with facts and figures not by some idiotic sarcy crap.


----------



## Desmond (Mar 26, 2012)

Edit: Did not read previous replies, please forgive me.

I'd answer Yes and no.

We might not feel the need for religion now. But, when I am going to die, I'd like to hope that there is a place I'd be going where there is no more suffering and pain, instead of a void, cataclysmic collapse of existence, which it actually is.

Whether God exists or not can only be speculated. There is absolutely no way of knowing whether God is really at the light at the end of the tunnel...unless you die, of course. Therefore, no one has seen God (or God doesn't want to be seen) and all that you have heard about God is from man. So, you are , in fact, believing in a concept of God as perceived by the person you learnt it from, who in turn learnt it from someone who told him and so forth till the annals of history which is now lost.

People need religion as a guide to live their life in an ordered manner. It is common knowledge that (majority of) humans, like cattle, need to be guided, shown the way and will believe anything and look to anyone for guidance. This could be due to the passively inquisitive nature of human beings, causing them to attempt to make order of the chaos around them. In such a scenario, it is always possible for other influential people to take advantage of them. Therefore, we can see religion as a tool of control. If you convince someone of a higher power, he will believe in it and if you convince him hard enough, he might fight for it as well. Giving rise to crusades/holy wars, etc. This would be a good example of religious abuse.

The world without a religion would be a world devoid of morality and ethics (though it seems like the world is moving towards such a scenario). The world would be even more dangerous without religion than with it IMHO. If everyone knew that there will be no retribution for their actions, people would resort to despicable deeds the magnitude of which we cannot comprehend.

Therefore, I think religion is needed a lot more than we think. Irrespective of whether God exists or not or whether it is hogwash created by man to control other men.


----------



## whitestar_999 (Mar 26, 2012)

Liverpool_fan said:


> Keep such crap out of this thread. If you want to argue, argue with facts and figures not by some idiotic sarcy crap.



couldn't said it better.hope you apply this good advice to yourself before posting next time.btw regarding my reply to @gopi_vbboy,*regarding academic matters especially controversial ones like this tone of authority only befits those competent enough which @gopi_vbboy certainly isn't hence the sarcasm regarding the comment"ofcourse,its hinduism".*the same principle applies to you too.do not confuse your authority here with your competence in academic matters.looks like time to check out of this thread.maybe a few years later it will be a bit better here.

P.S.arguing with facts & figures is done when  the other party is also doing the same thing & not making comments like"ofcourse i am correct & your logic is silly".if @gopi_vbboy had replied with some fact citing some credible source that hindu religion is same as vedic culture which many consider a philosophy/way of life & not exactly a religion per se then my reply would have been different.


----------



## clmlbx (Mar 26, 2012)

gopi_vbboy said:


> You fail to understand that Religion is form of  humanity.You put money in temple.They feed ppl in prasadams.Isnt that humanity?



I believe you failed to understand, you say people gives money to temple then temple donates it or feed hungry people, If it is, so why do you need to pass money through temple, can't people directly donate it to NGO or some social group which helps people.. and I never said it is not humanity but why do you need temple(or say name of GOD) to help people.




gopi_vbboy said:


> Religion is not a guidline how to live.Instead think of it as an encyclopedia of life.Religious text like Bhagvat gita teaches you morals of living and many other aspects.Vedas are huge source of information.



what does religion says? Every book says do this do that if you want good life or even after life. or teaches some important morals with stories. This happened because he lied or he had to do that becuase it was truth and no matter how hard your path is but you can't leave truth or humanity..

yes, it also share some way to pray to God, but it also says God is everywhere,God created us, God hears every one so why do you need to be  in some specific place or dress code to pray to him.



gxsaurav said:


> For centuries, religion has been a great method to unify people. Think of the time when humans used to live in tribes. All tribes used to fight each other over land, resources etc but when the concept of Gods or religion came into existence, these people unified under the name of religion whether it was Christianity, Greek Pantheon or Nordic Gods.



But there were many fakers too who just did this just get in power.



gxsaurav said:


> Also, religion has been a great tool to control un-educated people in the name of what will happen after death. Since they don't know what will happen to them after death, they think they should do as their religion dictates so as to have a better afterlife on which they have no control. They only have control over their existing life.



If we do follow religion because of this then it will be like taking advantage of people.



gxsaurav said:


> Today, with science and education and "reason for something happening", people are forgetting religion which I think is a good move for humanity as a species.
> 
> 
> 
> To proceed further we need evolution and scientific discoveries and not belief in someone sitting in the clouds who will punish you if you do some sin, but he loves you.



that is good thing, and you need to ask questions if you want evolve,improve. same thing we say kids ask questions just not stay with "It is GOD decision/choice" 



gxsaurav said:


> Also, the worst thing is to mold a religion according to yourself. If people say that they follow Bible or Geeta or Veda, than why do they modify some rules written there? For example, it is written in Geeta that during fast, you are not supposed to eat anything for 24 hrs in a day. This actually has a scientific meaning as due to this you digest all the undigested food and cleanse your body of impurities completely. However, peple still say eating fruits etc is permitted. I ask where???
> Just cos some rules are not convenient, people mold or change it. If they do it, they are not following religion properly. If you say you are following the book than follow the book properly without any modification to the rules.



absolutely, No normal (I am excluding People like pandits, maulvis they might)human being follows any-their religion fully..



gxsaurav said:


> Those religious texts were written thousands of years ago for that society. Is it still applicable? Humanity has changed so the rules of those book and teachings don't apply today. People need to understand this. No religion or book in this world tells to kill in the name of God. People still kill in the name of God which makes me believe they don't follow any religion and are doing this just for their personal gains and covering it with the name of religion.



+1, Even I said before, these rituals were written thousand of years ago. with different time,live styles, many, if not most of them are meaningless, faded with time..



gxsaurav said:


> .
> 
> In the end, *True God and religion in this world, in my opinion, are your parents*. They bought you to this world. They raised you and gave you resources to be what you are today and not any imaginary guy sitting in the sky. (we know there is no one in the sky. It is empty space). If you want to have faith in someone or worship someone, go do it to your parents. There is nothing bigger than them in this world.



can't say enough about this,



gxsaurav said:


> .
> P.S - Off topic, but once I met father of one of my friend. He is a pretty rich businessman. So this one time we were talking about him donating to some NGO of his son's friend for educating kids. This was an actually genuine NGO and not some fake one for tax benefit or making money. My friend's dad refused saying it is fake and he doesn't want to waste his money.
> 
> Next month, he did a _jagrata_ which I think cost over Rs 20 lakh. Although a person is entitled to spend his hard earned money the way he wants, but I found his this act stupid and I no longer respect him. It was better to educate some poor slum kids than wasting money on rituals of an imaginary god.



+1.  another thing is after death most of them don't donate their organs, which they should do,  There is no gain in burning or burying the Body but if you Donate  you can save many lives.

Pls OP or Mod add poll to this thread.. their are three type of people in this discussion..

1. No religion No God
2. With God but No religion 
3. support both God and Religion


----------



## dashing.sujay (Mar 26, 2012)

whitestar_999 said:


> couldn't said it better.hope you apply this good advice to yourself before posting next time.btw regarding my reply to @gopi_vbboy,*regarding academic matters especially controversial ones like this tone of authority only befits those competent enough which @gopi_vbboy certainly isn't hence the sarcasm regarding the comment"ofcourse,its hinduism".*the same principle applies to you too.do not confuse your authority here with your competence in academic matters.looks like time to check out of this thread.maybe a few years later it will be a bit better here.
> 
> P.s.arguing with facts & figures is done when  the other party is also doing the same thing & not making comments like"ofcourse i am correct & your logic is silly".if @gopi_vbboy had replied with some fact citing some credible source that hindu religion is same as vedic culture which many consider a philosophy/way of life & not exactly a religion per se then my reply would have been different.



+ 10000


----------



## gopi_vbboy (Mar 26, 2012)

whitestar_999 said:


> couldn't said it better.hope you apply this good advice to yourself before posting next time.btw regarding my reply to @gopi_vbboy,*regarding academic matters especially controversial ones like this tone of authority only befits those competent enough which @gopi_vbboy certainly isn't hence the sarcasm regarding the comment"ofcourse,its hinduism".*the same principle applies to you too.do not confuse your authority here with your competence in academic matters.looks like time to check out of this thread.maybe a few years later it will be a bit better here.
> 
> P.S.arguing with facts & figures is done when  the other party is also doing the same thing & not making comments like"ofcourse i am correct & your logic is silly".if @gopi_vbboy had replied with some fact citing some credible source that hindu religion is same as vedic culture which many consider a philosophy/way of life & not exactly a religion per se then my reply would have been different.



Dude, Your argument was that vedas originated in time older than the time origin of Hinduism and hence both are not related.

Just explain me how is that correct.

Just wiki Rig Veda and you can see that under Hinduism section.Is it not enough to prove your false notion.


----------



## Faun (Mar 26, 2012)

DeSmOnD dAvId said:


> The world without a religion would be a world devoid of morality and ethics (though it seems like the world is moving towards such a scenario). The world would be even more dangerous without religion than with it IMHO. If everyone knew that there will be no retribution for their actions, people would resort to despicable deeds the magnitude of which we cannot comprehend.



Cool blanket assumption there. Which religion a bird follows, which religion an animal follows. I guess they must be living in a world devoid of morality and ethics.

There is inherent goodness in everyone which speaks louder than what religion teaches or indoctrinate.

Religion is more like tribe where you tribe is more ethical and supreme than others. Given a chance you would promptly wipe out the competition.


----------



## whitestar_999 (Mar 26, 2012)

vedas are older than the origin of term hindustan so how can you conclusively said that vedic culture/traditions are in fact hindu culture/traditions.when vedas were written what was the religion followed is still not known to this day.there are doubts even regarding the aryan invasion theory & that aryans were the ones who bought vedic culture to india.indus civilization followed which religion is still not known & there are theories that indus/harappa civilizations were replaced by vedic culture.when there are so many controversies/doubts surrounding vedic culture/aryans/... then why gave the example of vedas/gita as hindu religious texts.why do you think gita is so popular even abroad if it is purely a religious text?it is not as it is a way of life/philosophy which can be appreciated by any person irrespective of his/her religious affiliation.labeling such text as religious is what i do not support.i have no problem with your arguments as long as they cite texts of conclusive religious origins like bible,kuran etc.


----------



## gopi_vbboy (Mar 26, 2012)

clmlbx said:


> I believe you failed to understand, you say people gives money to temple then temple donates it or feed hungry people, If it is, so why do you need to pass money through temple, can't people directly donate it to NGO or some social group which helps people.. and I never said it is not humanity but why do you need temple(or say name of GOD) to help people.



Temple is not only to help people.It's part of the temples activity to help people.

What is wrong if we help through temple in the name of God.If we help through temple, it gives some people a feeling that god will bless us.Some people believe it helps to overcome their sins.The reason depends on person.

Tell me one reason what is wrong if you help in name of god.


----------



## Anorion (Mar 26, 2012)

@wut whitestar posted: absolutely hinduism as we know it has been around for only 400-500 yrs
@Faun: they are all not so incompatible, all religions have adapted to local customs, so the worship of dieties is not restricted to any one religion, many overlap. Also, war is no longer really an option. So dialogue is the only way to solve these Prolems
@temples: the biggest temples have upkeep and are involved in many charitable works not just feeding the poor, they were doing the work of NGOs before the NGOs and through many Gs
@rituals fading with time.... Just chuck out "dont pee standing up" but accept "always choose the good way over the pleasant way" you wont find th latter without trudging through the former (although it may hve some health benefits. Its a window to somethings about the world that will never change .


----------



## Tech&ME (Mar 26, 2012)

ok 

I am late in this discussion but anyway my views are as follows:

GOD : Is an imaginary / man made figure which the human-kind believes to be supreme.

RELIGION: Followers of this imaginary / man made figure, who divide themselves into groups of humans, viz Hindus / Muslims / Sikhs / Christian / etc.

*Q : Why humans felt for the earge to create this imaginary / man made figure called GOD ?*

A: To instill FEAR among humans. There are numerous SIN (s) done by humans, so to keep a check on it, GOD was created.

It is very likely that a human who has committed a SIN will likely repeat it if this human start to believe in GOD and eventually also start to *afraid* from this imaginary GOD.

In the present world human have become more powerful and knowledgeable with the advent of science and technology taking much of the space in our day-to-day life and the present human-being seems to have NO FEAR from this imaginary GOD, because somehow, this present human-being discoverd that even if you commit a crime or SIN , there is no requirement to be *afraid* from anyone, because we can get pass it easily. [ criminals today can bribe and get pass their committed crime/ SIN to do more crime, this is the fate of affairs in the present world ]

*Q : Why people divided themselves in groups viz Hindus / Muslims / Sikhs / etc.*

A: This happened due to geographical locations of the human settlement. However, the message given by all this religions are basically the same -- "To FEAR from GOD" which in the present day scenario is obsolete.

Since, it is obsolete, we don't really need ANY Religion, whatsoever.


----------



## doomgiver (Mar 26, 2012)

Tech&ME said:


> ok
> 
> I am late in this discussion but anyway my views are as follows:
> 
> ...



replies in blue italics


----------



## Anorion (Mar 26, 2012)

^thats a horribly wrong understanding there are many ways to live your life, not just that one deemed "normal" by the west and its not like civilisation is giving us unswers human trchnology isnt even good enough to get the food and power v nid from the earth, at such times naked forest dwellers would surely have some protips for us


----------



## Faun (Mar 26, 2012)

Anorion said:


> @Faun: they are all not so incompatible, all religions have adapted to local customs, so the worship of dieties is not restricted to any one religion, many overlap. Also, war is no longer really an option. So dialogue is the only way to solve these Prolems



Lets talk about the number of inter religion marriages  Not so incompatible.


----------



## Tech&ME (Mar 26, 2012)

doomgiver said:
			
		

> muslims dont have that much crap in their islam



And what Taliban does and al-Qaeda do in the name of islam is not *CRAP* according to you !!

PS : I don't want to get into any arguement with respect to RELIGION as a whole. Because , there are members in the forum from every RELIGION, and pointing toward one particular religion and saying it is GOOD and the other totally CRAP , will not be a appropriate thing to do.

In my eyes, ALL religions teach the same BASIC discipline of life which we all must follow. But this teachings are being de-railed in the present world and so it has become obsolete.

Religion in the present context, has become a tool to fight among ourselves, for some selfish idiotic ideas to gain money and power.

Religion should be totally stopped. NO Religion / No GOD / No fighting.


----------



## whitestar_999 (Mar 26, 2012)

> Religion should be totally stopped. NO Religion / No GOD / No fighting.


do not confuse religion with morality.religion or no religion unless morality is there wars/fighting will happen.

Morality is doing right, no matter what you are told. Religion is doing what you are told, no matter what is right." - H. L. Mencken


----------



## asingh (Mar 26, 2012)

*/MOD

Added a public poll*


----------



## Desmond (Mar 26, 2012)

Faun said:


> Cool blanket assumption there. Which religion a bird follows, which religion an animal follows. I guess they must be living in a world devoid of morality and ethics.



How can you compare human intellect with that of animals or birds? Animals or birds are not capable of sin because they live on instincts. But, humans beings are capable of more. 



Faun said:


> There is inherent goodness in everyone which speaks louder than what religion teaches or indoctrinate.



True.



Faun said:


> Religion is more like tribe where you tribe is more ethical and supreme than others. Given a chance you would promptly wipe out the competition.



That's what people have been led to believe. Note that no religion preaches violence, it is some key individuals who sow the seeds of hatred to satiate their bloodlust or for personal reasons.
_Posted via Mobile Device_

Here's something for you guys to chew on:
[YOUTUBE]oeLr2oElXHQ[/YOUTUBE]
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## ico (Mar 27, 2012)

*//Mod Edit:* Added a fifth option in the poll.

Voted for the fifth option and quoting my post again.





ico said:


> Nothing wrong in being religious and practicing your religion.
> 
> But there are 4 steps which can transform one into an idiot.
> 
> ...


----------



## Anorion (Mar 27, 2012)

Ok so now its a poll, shud have been is religion relevnt - yes or no 
There are other options too, religion but no god
@Faun: yeah donno much about that, theres Jhodha-Ackbar thats the only one I can think of - if the marriage laws are reformed (which is happening) then it will be less of a prolem

Also cant think of any sci-fi or fantasy thats as good as religious texts, and they draw on religious themes in there deepest and darkest momnts, so even if you treat all of it as fiction its still a lot of bang for buck


----------



## Shah (Mar 27, 2012)

IMO, We DO need a Religion. If there is no religion then none of us will be honest. It's the fact. According to me, Each Religion has a set of rules which we all have to follow to live a peaceful life. If everyone in the world follows a single religion then there will be no communal riots or something like that. It's we who have to choose the best Religion which will guide us to live a peaceful life.

I DO agree that there is a Super Natural Power(GOD) above all creatures. But, I don't think there is a relation between God and Religion. God created us and Religion guides us to live in this wonderful world!


----------



## Desmond (Mar 27, 2012)

IMHO, religion is not the problem. The problem is that there are too many of it and, consequently, disagreements are bound to happen. Even in the same religion there tend to be different sects, doctrines and denominations. So, communal strife arises due to misunderstanding and disagreement.


----------



## Shah (Mar 27, 2012)

DeSmOnD dAvId said:


> IMHO, religion is not the problem. The problem is that there are too many of it and, consequently, disagreements are bound to happen. Even in the same religion there tend to be different sects, doctrines and denominations. So, communal strife arises due to misunderstanding and disagreement.



Agreed...!


----------



## doomgiver (Mar 27, 2012)

Tech&ME said:


> And what Taliban does and al-Qaeda do in the name of islam is not *CRAP* according to you !!
> 
> In my eyes, ALL religions teach the same BASIC discipline of life which we all must follow. But this teachings are being de-railed in the present world and so it has become obsolete.
> 
> ...



did i not say that some factions in the islamic sphere are hell bent on taking over power?
did yu even read my post????


----------



## Desmond (Mar 27, 2012)

Think of religion like this:

Religion is like different OSs. They all do the same task of running your machine, albeit in their own unique (if not same) ways. The main culprits of strife are the OS vendors (manufacturers) who try to propagate their own OS as superior to every other OS in the market. Sometimes they employ tricks like modifying it to appeal to a wider consumer base. Its the fanboys who then fight.


----------



## Tech&ME (Mar 27, 2012)

doomgiver said:


> did i not say that some factions in the islamic sphere are hell bent on taking over power?
> did yu even read my post????



Yes I read your reply.

But please don't make provocative statements. You may be right, but this discussion is not to determine which religion is good and which is not good. Or which religion's ideology is better than the other.

The discussion should be focused on : DO we need RELIGION at all ? so please stick with this only.


			
				DeSmOnD dAvId said:
			
		

> Religion is like different OSs. They all do the same task of running your machine, albeit in their own unique (if not same) ways. The main culprits of strife are the OS vendors (manufacturers) who try to propagate their own OS as superior to every other OS in the market. Sometimes they employ tricks like modifying it to appeal to a wider consumer base. Its the fanboys who then fight.



Yes ! People has time and again misused RELIGION as a tool for their selfish deeds.


----------



## JojoTheDragon (Mar 28, 2012)

Conclusion:

There is no harm in having a Religion, no harm in praying to God. Just don;t be a moron and think that you are something superior because of your religion . Live and let live. And this: 



			
				ico said:
			
		

> Nothing wrong in being religious and practicing your religion.
> 
> But there are 4 steps which can transform one into an idiot.
> 
> ...


----------



## KDroid (Jun 7, 2012)

DeSmOnD dAvId said:


> We might not feel the need for religion now. But, when I am going to die, I'd like to hope that there is a place I'd be going where there is no more suffering and pain, instead of a void, cataclysmic collapse of existence, which it actually is.



A little digression.


This means that you are denying the existence & permanence of soul. There've been several experiments that support the existence of soul.


----------



## ssk_the_gr8 (Jun 7, 2012)

Experiments?


----------



## Liverpool_fan (Jun 8, 2012)

Behave. Support your claim with links. No need to act like a kid and ask others to google.


----------



## mitraark (Jun 8, 2012)

Define "we" .


----------



## Flash (Jul 23, 2012)

Religion is an invisible chain spun by some poeple to disciplinise the people to do good things. God is just an imaginative entity, to make & believe the religion.

As there are different OS'es(religions), there will be different machines ie., Mac/PC (Gods in their own perspective )


----------



## Anorion (Jul 23, 2012)

hmm

this guy is a british economist trying to find out what makes us unhappy 

Stuart Jeffries talks to Professor Richard Layard on the key to happiness | Life and style | The Guardian

basically religion is linked to being in control, of both your lives and emotions, which just keeps the religious more happy


> "Bhutan seems much happier than countries that have a materialist rather than moral ethos. Relationships are rather equal, there's very little status anxiety."


----------



## Faun (Jul 23, 2012)

^^constant state of happiness will be boring.


----------



## krazylearner (Jul 23, 2012)

> But at any rate, the point is that God is what nobody admits to being, and everybody really is.



i believe in this 

By allan watts .


----------



## Desmond (Jul 23, 2012)

KDroid said:


> A little digression.
> 
> 
> This means that you are denying the existence & permanence of soul. There've been several experiments that support the existence of soul.



Sources?

The only experiment I have read about is in the novel "The Last Symbol" by Dan Brown. Please enlighten me about actual experiments if you have come across any. I find it really hard to believe, since I firmly believe human beings to be robots of flesh and blood.


----------



## Neuron (Jul 23, 2012)

All we really need is common sense and religion can't provide one with it and for god i don't think there is any. So there is no point in believing in them.


----------



## doomgiver (Jul 25, 2012)

DeSmOnD dAvId said:


> Sources?
> 
> The only experiment I have read about is in the novel "The Last Symbol" by Dan Brown. Please enlighten me about actual experiments if you have come across any. I find it really hard to believe, since I firmly believe human beings to be robots of flesh and blood.



there was that rofl-inducing experiment with dying people and weighing scales, supposed to find the mass of a soul leaving the body.
and if soul has a physical characteristic, like mass, then it should be influenced by all physical laws, and be limited by them. so, thats another kick in the groin for the "believers"


----------



## Hrishi (Jul 25, 2012)

No religion, But I do believe that there is a strong force in Universe which led to our existence, I call it god.

I am a man of Scientific approach and expect logic behind every thing.So , religion makes no sense to me , but the existence of creator does.


----------



## gaurav_div (Jul 31, 2012)

really brother god is one and we don't really need religion actually god created us human beings but we have divided ourselves on the basis of religions and i agree with you that religion hasn't given us anything but has given us communal hate among ourselves


----------



## sygeek (Aug 4, 2012)

As long as you only practice the "good" parts of it, I'm really fine with it. At least it'll give them an excuse to be good (or maybe actually be good).


----------



## DigitalDude (Aug 5, 2012)

I will take the privilege of not being politically correct. The term 'Religion' is just a mask for hiding political ideologies. It is a political construct just like communism etc. to control population, influence demographics, capture land and exert power. The biggest curse of India is that all the ancient culture, heritage, spirituality, cosmology, technology and science have been dumped into a similar religious construct 'Hinduism' by the mughal/british invaders and traders. So hinduism has been made to fit into the western notions of religion. there is no precise and proper word for 'religion' in sanskrit or tamil. we have 'Dharma' and 'Araneri'(Tamil). The words that come close to religion are sampradaya or matha but they are also not correct.. esp matha/matham being attributed to 'religion' is not an ancient one.

I will be surprised if any of you have read the Gita, Quran and Bible from 'cover-to-cover'. *All religions DO NOT say the same thing* apart from few common sense. this is the biggest lie on the naive population  Myth of Hindu Sameness : Rajiv Malhotra Also read the book 'Being Different' by Rajiv Malhotra. especially the argument of Believers Vs Atheists is a response to Abrahamic religions. In hinduism belief is neither a pinnacle thought nor the basis, 'belief' should not be confused with 'bhakti yoga' which is entirely different. The human population is not homogeneous, there are variety of personalities and everyone cannot intellectually contemplate life's challenges and questions before them. Some are satisfied with bhakti/devotion to god, some are satisfied with karma yoga and only a very few are capable of intellectual contemplation gnana yoga. and there are various schools of thought within hinduism even for atheism like carvaka's. so this abrahamic forced homogeneity cannot be clubbed together with Indian integral hetrogenity. if one reads the introduction part in vivekananda's Raja Yoga, he even mentions that the prerequiste for it is that one should completely erase the thought of a god as a personality. even Ashtavakra Gita.




whitestar_999 said:


> interesting!which religion are you referring to because bhagwat gita & vedas are older than the origin of term "hindu" & there is no concrete evidence that vedic culture follows any of the known religion currently.unless more is known about vedic culture it is better to leave it out of religious debates.


just because newton named gravity as such it does not mean it was not in existence before. it just got a collective name thats it.
please read about 'saraswati river valley civilisation' and 'dwaraka city under-sea excavations'. but one may also like to call it sanatana dharma instead of the recent naming of hinduism. this 'recent' naming may also not be an absolute fact. there are many arguments regarding this HINDU sacred word Hindu in Vedik Scriptures




clmlbx said:


> ^^so what do you have? statues made of stone, a similar walls like your home where you go to worship, what do you have there?
> 
> do you really think that statues are actual god?  or house where you go for worship god is there and no where els?


air is also present everywhere then why do we need fans and ACs? why do we have statues of leaders and personalities? why does one have a photo of a loved one in their purse? is the photo=the person? isn't it a symbolic representation of something larger and a conduit to focus or relate the mind(or meditate) to that particular thing/person? temples were (and even today are) the heart of an ancient Indian society. acting as an enabler of social gatherings, an amphitheatre for drama, music and speeches (which depicted, strengthened culture and provided moral compass to many), a place of social security for the homeless and needy, the area an economic hub for many traders. another important aspect of a temple was that it was a medical centre. for eg. people went to a vishnu temple early in the morning to get tirtham (water kept in a copper vessel over night which is good for the health and also influenced by certain sanskrit mantras), few tulsi leaves which strengthens your immunity esp against common cold, a jadari on the head to douse the ego.

Ayn Rand's objectivism may make one feel very intellectual but IMO that's a detriment to society as an organism as is evident from the vices that the one-dimensional materialistic western society is experiencing. and for the Indian society it will kill our historical identity.




ico said:


> Nothing wrong in being religious and practicing your religion.
> 
> But there are 4 steps which can transform one into an idiot.
> 
> ...


this is more of a liberal 'politically correct' rhetoric. this 'transformation' line of argument assumes 'selective' acceptance or 'partial' following of the particular religion's teachings. but in reality most religious texts mandate you either are 100% compliant or 0%. The people in this 'selective acceptance' club are either ignorant of their own religion or in denial or worse conciously hiding facts for an ultimate political goal. conservatism is not any kind of root to any problem. it is 'discrimination' that is the root. be it based on caste, religion, race, money or class. this 'discrimination' is even a fundamental part of many religious theology. that is where all the problem starts. even some atheists' assume being an atheist makes one an intellectual by default - the problem of discrimination is here also.




Tech&ME said:


> [...]But please don't make provocative statements. You may be right, but this discussion is not to determine which religion is good and which is not good. Or which religion's ideology is better than the other.
> 
> The discussion should be focused on : DO we need RELIGION at all ? so please stick with this only.


isn't this a fallacy? how can you group all religions into a single entity if you want to discuss on the issue of the relevance of religion. that basic assumption is itself false. if you want to be politically correct then an objective discussion is not possible.



krazylearner said:


> > But at any rate, the point is that God is what nobody admits to being, and everybody really is.
> 
> 
> i believe in this
> ...


yes we will believe in our own principles only if a westener tells it _
"Alan Watts (1915-1973) a professor, graduate school dean and research fellow of Harvard University, drew heavily on the insights of Vedanta. Watts became well known in the 1960s as a pioneer in bringing Eastern philosophy to the West."......_Hindu Wisdom - quotes on hinduism 41-60




Liverpool_fan said:


> These social problems existed as a consequence (partly or fully) of religious and cultural beliefs.


that is the illusion created by the marxist historians. many so called social and caste problems were direct result of brutal mughal/british invasions and subsequent rule. for eg Amazon.com: Dowry Murder: The Imperial Origins of a Cultural Crime : Veena Talwar another eg. is there were no records of any caste conflicts before 1884 even in Max Muller's history. one has to read the accounts of various ancient chinese, arab or other travellers to india like huan tsang, al-baruni, megasthenes.




clmlbx said:


> Deep you go to any religion and compare you get same rituals,same concepts,culture, to me it is difficult to find much difference.


No. again this is a common belief albeit false. some maybe time specific and obscure now but many Indian rituals have definite purpose, scientific/health basis. for eg. *vivekitam.wordpress.com/2011/05/01/athirathram-a-perspective-3/




theserpent said:


> +1.I read an article recently in TOI.That almost many Britain  will be Non-Believers by 2030sform to non-believers in britain


that is an gross generalisation. I read few articles that may be relevant here. U.S. Views on God and Life Are Turning Hindu - Newsweek , Muslims will become majority in Europe, senior Vatican official warns - Telegraph , BBC News - Europe: Nationalist resurgence




clmlbx said:


> I believe you failed to understand, you say people gives money to temple then temple donates it or feed hungry people, If it is, so why do you need to pass money through temple, can't people directly donate it to NGO or some social group which helps people.. and I never said it is not humanity but why do you need temple(or say name of GOD) to help people.


assume the Temple and it's trust to be the NGO. why not ? JSTOR: An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie
(one fact - majority of temples in India come under the administration of the state governments. a part of temple collections goes to the government. this does not happen for other religious places of workship)



clmlbx said:


> what does religion says? Every book says do this do that if you want good life or even after life. or teaches some important morals with stories. This happened because he lied or he had to do that becuase it was truth and no matter how hard your path is but you can't leave truth or humanity..
> 
> yes, it also share some way to pray to God, but it also says God is everywhere,God created us, God hears every one so why do you need to be  in some specific place or dress code to pray to him.


your knowledge is very superficial and limited. It is evident by the summary where you cruelly reduce such a vast spectrum of knowledge into a very narrow understanding. you have clearly not read even the bhagavad gita leave alone upanishads, vedas or brahmasutras etc. but I wouldn't blame you it is the result of common stereotyping by the equally ignorant society and media.



clmlbx said:


> that is good thing, and you need to ask questions if you want evolve,improve. same thing we say kids ask questions just not stay with "It is GOD decision/choice"


oh well yes, "If religion cannot scrutinize, question itself, it must go." - Swami Vivekananda. Krishna says 'in kalyug even if lord brahma comes down on earth and says fire is not hot, don't believe him but use your intellect and experience for finding it yourself' I forgot where this is quoted in.. bhagavad gita or ashtavakra gita or bhagavada purana.




DeSmOnD dAvId said:


> Sources?
> 
> The only experiment I have read about is in the novel "The Last Symbol" by Dan Brown. Please enlighten me about actual experiments if you have come across any. I find it really hard to believe, since I firmly believe human beings to be robots of flesh and blood.


all those esperiments for weight of the soul are mostly bunkum. spiritual thoughts cannot be validated with material experiments. Tesla experienced a very strange phenomenon when he was a totally immersed in his research for several days without sleep. some abnormal sensory capabilities and he thought he was dying. his narration can be found in a biography named 'wizard'. some mystics in his neighbourhood called it as awakening of the pineal gland. but he was not able to experiment on it.

btw why stop at flesh and blood? why not go upto quarks?  if you want to take reductionism to it's logical end, reality as we perceive is nothing but a bunch of photons hitting a bunch of electrons, changing their and it's energy levels, then hitting another bunch of electrons in retina which pushes another bunch of electrons to a gooky stuff where something(consciousness) makes sense of the bunch of electron patterns with already stored ones. yes it's all maya. but is that the question. reality is itself a belief 



*TLDR:*
we need religion but with renaissance. being non-religious or apolitical is becoming a fashion without proper understanding or thorough knowledge of what is being negated. that is a threat for surviving as a society or a nation with a common cultural heritage. “The fire that warms us can also consume us; it is not the fault of the fire.” ― Swami Vivekananda




_


----------



## ico (Aug 5, 2012)

DigitalDude said:


> *that is the illusion created by the marxist historians.* many so called social and caste problems were direct result of brutal mughal/british invasions and subsequent rule. for eg Amazon.com: Dowry Murder: The Imperial Origins of a Cultural Crime : Veena Talwar another eg. is there were no records of any caste conflicts before 1884 even in Max Muller's history. one has to read the accounts of various ancient chinese, arab or other travellers to india like huan tsang, al-baruni, megasthenes.


Indeed, but when did Sati start off anyways?


----------



## Tech&ME (Aug 5, 2012)

DigitalDude said:


> I will take the privilege of not being politically correct. The term 'Religion' is just a mask for hiding political ideologies. It is a political construct just like communism etc. to control population, influence demographics, capture land and exert power. The biggest curse of India is that all the ancient culture, heritage, spirituality, cosmology, technology and science have been dumped into a similar religious construct 'Hinduism' by the mughal/british invaders and traders. So hinduism has been made to fit into the western notions of religion. there is no precise and proper word for 'religion' in sanskrit or tamil. we have 'Dharma' and 'Araneri'(Tamil). The words that come close to religion are sampradaya or matha but they are also not correct.. esp matha/matham being attributed to 'religion' is not an ancient one.
> 
> I will be surprised if any of you have read the Gita, Quran and Bible from 'cover-to-cover'. *All religions DO NOT say the same thing* apart from few common sense. this is the biggest lie on the naive population  Myth of Hindu Sameness : Rajiv Malhotra Also read the book 'Being Different' by Rajiv Malhotra. especially the argument of Believers Vs Atheists is a response to Abrahamic religions. In hinduism belief is neither a pinnacle thought nor the basis, 'belief' should not be confused with 'bhakti yoga' which is entirely different. The human population is not homogeneous, there are variety of personalities and everyone cannot intellectually contemplate life's challenges and questions before them. Some are satisfied with bhakti/devotion to god, some are satisfied with karma yoga and only a very few are capable of intellectual contemplation gnana yoga. and there are various schools of thought within hinduism even for atheism like carvaka's. so this abrahamic forced homogeneity cannot be clubbed together with Indian integral hetrogenity. if one reads the introduction part in vivekananda's Raja Yoga, he even mentions that the prerequiste for it is that one should completely erase the thought of a god as a personality. even Ashtavakra Gita.
> 
> ...



Well your whole point in this above quoted text was to tell us, that all RELIGIONS are not same. Different teaching [ wrong or right ] are given by different RELIGIOUS group of people, be it Hindus, Muslims, etc around the world.

So, in a nutshell what you are trying to convey basically is : Different RELIGION follows entirely different teachings be it good or bad.



DigitalDude said:


> isn't this a fallacy? how can you group all religions into a single entity if you want to discuss on the issue of the relevance of religion. that basic assumption is itself false. if you want to be politically correct then an objective discussion is not possible.



Fallacy ?? uh...

Even if the teachings and origins of different Religions are different be it good or bad, they all fall in a common GROUP [ as you may call it a group BTW ]

The purpose of this discussion thread is not to see if I am politically correct or not. It is to see that does the mere existence of RELIGION as a *whole* is required in a society of the 21st century ?

What RELIGION has given us, Britishers divided us based of RELIGION, don't you think dividing someone based on his caste or religion is injustice to humanity ?

Karma is what makes us, destroys us. All human being should perform GOOD Karma, we will never need any RELIGION then.


----------



## Anorion (Aug 6, 2012)

good post @DigitalDude, everything but the first paragraph is bang on 
politics is in schools, homes, and companies, religion is not just another political construct, there is a major spiritual aspect here as well, where politics has no part to play. politics is about people, religion is about things more important than people. man has spiritual needs, and religion provides this. 
this thought appealed to me 


> all religions could do with taking a step back from symbols and icons and explore a little more deeply the philosophical content of what their belief system hopes to offer the world.


src is off topic, abt kirpans in schools


----------



## DigitalDude (Aug 6, 2012)

ico said:


> Indeed, but when did Sati start off anyways?


Two aspects to be considered here.
first aspect is the event of a wife self-immolating herself on her own volition entirely due to grief or some enormous negative emotion. that is the common belief having derived it's name from an event in a purana: sati wife of shiva immolating herself because of humiliation WHILE shiva is ALIVE. note clearly how this is not in anyway different from anyone immolating himself/herself. by this logic any party worker immolating himself due to humiliation met out to his party leader should also be called sati? so the event in the purana being referred to give name to the practice is itself not related to the practice of widows self immolating after the husbands death.

The actual meaning of 'sati' is 'chaste woman' and nothing else. There is no description or mention of such a practice salled 'sati' in ANY of the hindu scriptures. a few rougue events of self-immolation of women(primarily by yoginis) is found in pre-mughal history but it is no way a systemic or religious practice. infact no women is even allowed to leave the house or enter the cremation ground after a death in a hindu society.

This self-immolation by widows or other women primarily came into practise during the period of mughal invasions. the western sindh areas were rammaged and ravaged easily as they were mostly bhuddist. the resistance by the rajputs(majority hindus) to the islamic invasion were the longest known. these areas saw brutal wars, loot, rape and pillaging all over the countryside by the invaders. till then internal wars happened in battlefields and not in civilian areas but mughal invasion was nothing like war between kings. because of this incessant rape and torture the women folk preferred death than to be raped and taken as concubines by the invaders. they immolated themselves in huge groups to avoid the humiliation. during the mughal rule the kings and clan lords would forcibly take the widows as concubines in their harems. so mostly these widows put themselves into the burning pyre of their husbands (and sometimes forced into it by their family members) to preserve their chastity.

during the rise of the british rule, the stats of sati deaths were around 400~500 per year. all these were in western and northern parts of India which saw the most impact of the mughal empire. In no way these were religious practices followed by the majority of the country. the british missionary historians and subsequently our marxist historians whitewashed the atrocities of the mughal rule and built the edict of sati as an integral part of hindu society. here comes the second aspect of attaching the 'forced' part as something inherent.




Tech&ME said:


> Fallacy ?? uh...
> Even if the teachings and origins of different Religions are different be it good or bad, they all fall in a common GROUP [ as you may call it a group BTW ]
> The purpose of this discussion thread is not to see if I am politically correct or not. It is to see that does the mere existence of RELIGION as a *whole* is required in a society of the 21st century ?


well if you read my post clearly esp the second paragraph, my argument was that they don't fall in a common group. the definition vary very widely between abrahamic religions and dharmic religions (most won't define it dharmic religions but dharmic 'traditions'.. even the supreme court of india). So for a term like religion which has no definite meaning and is entirely dependant on what the individual religions say, why one should not ponder over individual religions in a discussion about relevance of religion? why I said 'politically correct' because it is very common practice in political parlance not to talk specifics of individual religion on a flimsy reason that it will offend the people. I clearly sensed that tone of insisting political correctness in your post. because of this and my reason in the above lines I said an objective discussion is not possible to evaluate whether we need religion or not.

btw the commonly used phrase '..in a society of 21st century' itself presumes that our time is the pinnacle of moral, ethical, social and technological superiority. this actually reeks of arrogance. modernism is becoming a religion in itself... scarily more dogmatic.




Tech&ME said:


> What RELIGION has given us, Britishers divided us based of RELIGION, don't you think dividing someone based on his caste or religion is injustice to humanity ?


Religion has given us Identity and collective social strength. Religion gave us the pinnacle of human mind's exposition to philosophy, morals, life and more. I hope you read the last quote of Vivekananda in my previous post. why divide? isn't division and discrimination the problem? where is the problem with 'Sarva Dharma Sambhave' and 'Ekam Sat, Viprah Bahudha Vadanti'?

we discriminate even based on academic degrees and employment positions. if someone is an engineer or doctor he is seen as a brilliant student but even if a brilliant student takes up arts then the first question someone would think is 'didn't he score well?' in a derogative sense. isn't this injustice to humanity? should we get rid education itself or our mental filth of discrimination?



Tech&ME said:


> Karma is what makes us, destroys us. All human being should perform GOOD Karma, we will never need any RELIGION then.


the theory of karma is a fundamental tenet of Hinduism. hinduism says even gods can't interfere in freewill and karma of an individual. Karma and all these have no meaning to a christian or muslim.
so you say that you need one or two concepts like karma, yoga, ayurveda, spirituality from hindu tradition and say we don't need it anyway? puzzling.



Anorion said:


> [...]
> politics is in schools, homes, and companies, religion is not just another political construct, there is a major spiritual aspect here as well, where politics has no part to play. politics is about people, religion is about things more important than people. man has spiritual needs, and religion provides this.


Political aspect is a major part of a Religion, I would say even the most important. Especially in the present day context it becomes the only part as many people don't practice spirituality as such.. mostly only devotional. First I will make clear that I never consider politics as a bad/derogative term. Politics is integral to life. that is how we progress as a society. spiritual aspect is in the individual domain and political aspect is in the social domain. both are necessary. that is why Abrahamic religions are called as centralised and dharmic religions are mostly not. this refers to the political aspect. anyway I will agree with the last line.




_


----------



## Desmond (Aug 6, 2012)

DigitalDude said:


> that is why *Abrahamic religions are called as centralised* and dharmic religions are mostly not.



I don't recall Abrahamic religions to be political in any way. I only see religion based politics in India. Actually, since all Abrahamic religions are based around the concept of a singular God, the only thing nearly political about Abrahamic religions arises from the innumerable denominations and sects. Each agreeing or disagreeing with certain principles. In other words, it depends upon how a certain sect or denomination interprets their scripture.


----------



## maxtor (Aug 6, 2012)

All religion say the same things but in different words and ways. But religion today is what people and politicians make it out to be.


----------



## Tech&ME (Aug 6, 2012)

DigitalDude said:
			
		

> the theory of karma is a fundamental tenet of Hinduism. hinduism says even gods can't interfere in freewill and karma of an individual. Karma and all these have no meaning to a christian or muslim.
> so you say that you need one or two concepts like *karma*, yoga, ayurveda, spirituality from hindu tradition and say* we don't need it anyway?* puzzling.



Well, it seems you are confusing yourself.

Even if one adopts certain good practices, I don't see any harm in it.

BTW my context of speaking in this thread is limited to the present day scenario,  rather then going back to the Mughal era.

If you would like I can further discussion why RELIGION is not needed in the present day world, but for this I may have to pull some events of our country which are very critical for discussions in this forum because they will hurt the sentiments of some of the members of this forum and others as well.

I would however urge you to focus on the present day world then the historic world, keeping history out, you will eventually realize that RELIGION in the 21st century is like a cancer, it is used against our own people to rip benefits rather then giving peace and harmony.



			
				DigitalDude said:
			
		

> So for a term like *religion which has no definite meaning* and is entirely dependant on what the individual religions say, why one should not ponder over individual religions in a discussion about relevance of religion?



And, where did you learned that the term RELIGION does not have a definite meaning ? Only because the teachings and practices of different religions are not the same, that does not mean that RELIGION does not have a definite meaning.... 

RELIGION existed even before people [ or humans ] were divided into hindus / muslims / etc... If you go back to pre-historic events and ponder you will find the exact meaning of RELIGION. This will bring a more profound and broad area for discussion here in this thread.


----------



## Desmond (Aug 6, 2012)

I think religions ought to be personal to an individual and kept as far away from politics as possible. Politics needs to be secular.


----------



## Faun (Aug 6, 2012)

DeSmOnD dAvId said:


> I think religions ought to be personal to an individual and kept as far away from politics as possible. Politics needs to be secular.



Agree..........


----------



## ico (Aug 6, 2012)

Faun said:


> Agree..........



Agree


----------



## Anorion (Aug 6, 2012)

> First I will make clear that I never consider politics as a bad/derogative term


 cool. thought only politicians respected politics. this is good.
this abrahamic and non-abrahamic is a distinction made by people who want to study the history of religion. That religions are grouped itself should give an idea to the common origin of them. The content of the religions may be totally diff, from Taoism to Jainism, it is. There may be difference between ground and sky, but all this is ignored because of faith. On the streets, Hindu's worship Jesus and it's all the same. They are all religions, that is why they are the same. When ppl have been oppressed by religion, they don't become atheists, they convert to another religion. This has happened too many times in history. It's Judaism and Hinduism, the two oldest, most of the others can be dated and share from the same fund of wisdom. 

Language has many of the same problems of religion, if religion makes us morons, language also makes us morons. Language is racist, and sexist, and political. Nobody is saying language is stupid and we don't need it, let's all shut up and not talk. 

Only problem is recently religious people have done a lot of stupid things. Prabhupada went around calling nobel prize winners rascals and asses, and gathered a cult following of hare krishna chanting firangs. This is bad, and worse than Scientology. Religion should never be an excuse for stupidity. 

Hindus are complicated, there are many, many religious belief systems that are clubbed together as hinduism.


----------



## funskar (Aug 6, 2012)

Religion is fine..
The s**t is castism in religions..
Hindu - brahmin,rajput,mochi etc
Muslim - pathan,saiyad,nurain etc 

I hate castism


----------



## Anish (Aug 8, 2012)

funskar said:


> Religion is fine..
> The s**t is castism in religions..
> Hindu - brahmin,rajput,mochi etc
> Muslim - pathan,saiyad,nurain etc
> ...


----------



## Desmond (Aug 8, 2012)

Casteism derives from misinterpretation of the scriptures or difference of opinion of a person. So, where there is religion, there will always be casteism (or sect, denomination, cult, etc. or another equivalent).


----------



## axes2t2 (Aug 8, 2012)

TIL A Sikh must "defend the rights of all who are wrongfully oppressed or persecuted irrespective of religion, colour, caste or creed." : todayilearned


----------



## Faun (Aug 8, 2012)

^^there is nothing new there, its foundation lied on rage against the oppression of people of India during mughal period.


----------



## Nanducob (Aug 11, 2012)

i agree with funskar.those castes errrrrrrr...what religion teaches us is to live in peace and love everybody.''loka samstha sukhino bahvanthu"if u get the idea of peace and love and you apply it in realtime,you wont be needing any religion,except for maybe those "spiritual cravings".


----------



## Flash (Aug 11, 2012)

We need to trust something/someone and give us confidence in matters that we do. 
Wise named that thing as GOD and others split him to their wishes.

As to me, GOD is some *G*OOD.*O*LD.*D*UDE who did nice things.


----------



## nginx (Sep 27, 2012)

I believe its not a necessity and I certainly don't need it. Always been an atheist and it hasn't screwed up my moral values. I don't need to hear false made up stories of kindness and good deeds written in some book to cultivate moral values. It should come from within. If you don't understand right from wrong, I don't think religion can help. I don't feel the need to believe in some imaginary being who doesn't exist to draw upon strength in desperate times either. 

Religion has caused more deaths and massacres in history than anything else. Religion divides people and encourage them to shun away from those that don't believe in your ideals. Yes, religion doesn't do any of this on its own but it does influence people do this and thus is the reason for the problem in the first place.


----------



## Anorion (Sep 27, 2012)

axes2t2 said:


> TIL A Sikh must "defend the rights of all who are wrongfully oppressed or persecuted irrespective of religion, colour, caste or creed." : todayilearned



good stuff in there


----------



## lywyre (Sep 27, 2012)

Religion is the biggest lie in the history of mankind. But the lie was told for a reason. To *guide* mankind.
But, on due course, as people traveled, practices changed according to their habitat and castes came into being based on the family living (job/work/business).

Today we are divided by race, country, religion, caste, language and what not. By trying to unite, we are simply creating another division.

Somewhat related: *imgs.xkcd.com/comics/standards.png


----------



## doomgiver (Sep 28, 2012)

to guide us where? a world where women are treated like cattle? a place where a person cant even drink from a well? an earth where just being born wrong condems you to the worst kind of abuse since the slave-farming of the 17-18 th centuries?

religion has outlived its usefulness. time to mothball it for good.


----------



## Anorion (Sep 28, 2012)

Just want to say the same thing again. That reddit link totally proved what people think in this day and age, forget throughout the ages. 
The alternative to a bad religion is a good religion, not no religion.


----------



## nginx (Sep 28, 2012)

doomgiver said:


> to guide us where? a world where women are treated like cattle? a place where a person cant even drink from a well? an earth where just being born wrong condems you to the worst kind of abuse since the slave-farming of the 17-18 th centuries?
> 
> religion has outlived its usefulness. time to mothball it for good.



Agreed...


----------



## Anorion (Sep 28, 2012)

Moral sense theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
we feel our morals, we don't _think_ them, that is the problem


----------



## Flash (Sep 28, 2012)

Religion is like a person in twitter.
If u like him/her, follow him/her. 
Else, unfollow and do your work!

Oops. This may be offtopic. But just my thought!


----------



## Faun (Sep 28, 2012)

Gearbox said:


> Religion is like a person in twitter.
> If u like him/her, follow him/her.
> Else, unfollow and do your work!
> 
> Oops. This may be offtopic. But just my thought!



Just slight correction. The followers may like to shove their religion on you.


----------



## Flash (Sep 28, 2012)

Faun said:


> Just slight correction. The followers may like to shove their religion on you.



Its upto us, to take or not!


----------



## nginx (Sep 28, 2012)

Gearbox said:


> Its upto us, to take or not!



Yeah but its hard to hold back the urge of punching someone who is preaching in your face. Some of my relatives tend to do and that annoys the hell outta me.


----------



## techmaster (Oct 15, 2012)

CommanderShawnzer said:


> *people use religion to create discrimination towards people of other faiths*.religion was not made to create discrimination.nearly all religions tell us to love each other



The problem is both with some teachings of some religion and way they are being practiced. Faith is ok, is individualistic. Religion is when a large group has the same set of believes. Trouble come when some claim superiority of their religion...


----------



## sayan8 (Oct 20, 2012)

LOL .. its weird to see tech guys discussing religion...


----------



## Flash (Oct 20, 2012)

sayan8 said:


> LOL .. its weird to see tech guys discussing religion...


Technology & Religion (that praises a god or god-like person) are like twin brothers.
If you know what happens behind a process, thats *Technology*. If not, people say that's because of *God*!


----------



## sayan8 (Oct 20, 2012)

yessss....thats the main thing..


----------



## Nanducob (Oct 20, 2012)

Gearbox said:


> Technology & Religion (that praises a god or god-like person) are like twin brothers.
> If you know what happens behind a process, thats *Technology*. If not, people say that's because of *God*!



well said.


----------



## Anorion (Nov 5, 2012)

5 Hidden Practical Benefits Behind Common Religious Rituals | Cracked.com
basically
animal sacrifice - selective breeding
not eating cows - long term planning (so people would put them to work to grow grains and get more food, as against just eating them and then dying of starvation)
other points no so relevant, but think that people do these things because they are of some use, not because they are delusional and blindly following some faith


----------



## aaruni (Nov 5, 2012)

nice share.


----------



## Desmond (Nov 5, 2012)

Anorion said:


> 5 Hidden Practical Benefits Behind Common Religious Rituals | Cracked.com
> basically
> animal sacrifice - selective breeding
> not eating cows - long term planning (so people would put them to work to grow grains and get more food, as against just eating them and then dying of starvation)
> other points no so relevant, but think that people do these things because they are of some use, not because they are delusional and blindly following some faith



Well, that is a scientific significance, but when/how did the religious significance kick in?

Or perhaps someone thought, "Hmm...we cannot stop these guys from just eating cows/pigs, let make it part of the religion so that everyone will follow."

The Bible forbids Christians from consuming pork either (Leviticus Chapter 11). The reason for doing so is stated as "Because they do not have divided hooves and chew the cud", which I think is a kinda lame reason, but hey, who can question the infinite wisdom of God?. But, this is stated in the old testament of the Bible which most Christians believe to be optional to practice. That's why there are many Christians (Goa side especially) who consume pork without much thought (I personally do not like it though).


----------



## doomgiver (Nov 6, 2012)

Well, I read on reddit or somewhere that bible forbade wearing mixed cloth so that the local cotton growers had more sales, forbade homosexuality, because that'd reduce the population (no kids).
Seems stupid .... damn selfish reason. This should be tosses out of the window into the trash heap.


----------



## Desmond (Nov 6, 2012)

doomgiver said:


> Well, I read on reddit or somewhere that bible forbade wearing mixed cloth so that the local cotton growers had more sales, forbade homosexuality, because that'd reduce the population (no kids).
> Seems stupid .... damn selfish reason. This should be tosses out of the window into the trash heap.



I do not recollect reading anything about mixed cloth in the Bible, and I have read it pretty extensively as opposed most Christians. Most of these laws however are in the Old Testament section, which most Christians believe to be optional to follow (this is debatable). Its more like a reminder of the past before Christ. The Old Testament is more similar to what the Jews believe. We Christians believe that Christ redeemed us from the law and thus follow the New Testament.

However, I do not rule out that God does not exist. I do believe that there is no way to argue whether God exists or not because there are too many unknowns and you cannot truly know whether your religion is true or false until you die. So, everyone gambles with their religion, which has a decent probability to be false. If this were true, how pointless violence based on religion is.

I also believe that if God exists, there is no way that mortal man can comprehend the nature of God and thus, all attempts of personifying God is fruitless.

Also, I DO NOT support homosexuality since I believe that such individuals are actually  genetic and psychological accidents (but that is another story).


----------



## sygeek (Nov 6, 2012)

DeSmOnD dAvId said:


> Also, I DO NOT support homosexuality since I believe that such individuals are actually  genetic and psychological accidents (but that is another story).


Can you elaborate on why you don't support homosexuality? You're sentence leaves off a tone which assumes that it is a choice, which really isn't. Or do you mean god creates homosexuals then hates them (or asks us to)?


----------



## Desmond (Nov 6, 2012)

I am sorry, "support" was not the correct word to use. What I meant was that I do not encourage homosexual activities.

During the embryo stage, a male embryo will secrete testosterone which helps shape its characteristics as a male human being. If it secretes say 4 units, 1 unit will contribute to development of the male sex organs and the rest conditions the brain for masculine characteristics. If the secretion of testosterone falls short, the child is born male but has less than masculine characteristics owing to improper mental conditioning, becoming highly prone to homosexuality or effemination. (Ref : "Why men don't listen and women can't read maps" by Alan and Barbara Pease)

Also, a child under goes a psychological state called Oedipus Complex during the ages 3-6. The improper resolution of said state might also lead to paraphilia such as homosexuality and pedophilia.

Thus, if we do not take God into consideration, homosexuals are accidents ("freaks" could be the proper term) of nature. So, thats exactly what I see in them all.

In the ancient days, note that people did not know that homosexuality was a born condition. Being born a homosexual, you cannot change that, so, being homosexual is not a sin, but undertaking homosexual activities is a sin. The word Sodomy comes from Sodom which was one of the two cities Sodom and Gomorrah which was destroyed by God because the people who lived there practiced homosexual relations (This seems uncannily correct since the ruins of both cities have been found).

Further reading : 
The Bible and homosexuality - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
*christianity.about.com/od/Bible-Verses/a/Bible-Verses-Homosexuality.htm


----------



## Nanducob (Nov 6, 2012)

^How can someone be homosexual without practicing homosexual activities?


----------



## Faun (Nov 6, 2012)

DeSmOnD dAvId said:


> (This seems uncannily correct since the ruins of both cities have been found).



You do realize that if I am going to write a story then I might be including real people names that were in my life at some point and places I visited or knew.


----------



## Desmond (Nov 6, 2012)

Faun said:


> You do realize that if I am going to write a story then I might be including real people names that were in my life at some point and places I visited or knew.



With reference to one of my previous posts, how can we know? We can only speculate. Only in death we might know the truth.



Nanducob said:


> ^How can someone be homosexual without practicing homosexual activities?



Homosexuality is in the mind. You have a choice whether you want to give into it or not.


----------



## Nanducob (Nov 6, 2012)

DeSmOnD dAvId said:


> Homosexuality is in the mind. You have a choice whether you want to give into it or not.



OMGAWZ im kinda gay !


----------



## sygeek (Nov 6, 2012)

DeSmOnD dAvId said:


> I am sorry, "support" was not the correct word to use. What I meant was that I do not encourage homosexual activities.
> 
> During the embryo stage, a male embryo will secrete testosterone which helps shape its characteristics as a male human being. If it secretes say 4 units, 1 unit will contribute to development of the male sex organs and the rest conditions the brain for masculine characteristics. If the secretion of testosterone falls short, the child is born male but has less than masculine characteristics owing to improper mental conditioning, becoming highly prone to homosexuality or effemination. (Ref : "Why men don't listen and women can't read maps" by Alan and Barbara Pease)
> 
> ...


Thanks for elaborating. But now, my question changes to, why is practicing homosexual activities wrong? Isn't it unfair that straight people can marry and indulge in such activities but homosexuals can not because god made them so (rhetorical question)? Also, why do you not support it either besides it being a sin?


----------



## Desmond (Nov 6, 2012)

I never mentioned that God made them like that. If I did believe that God made him like that (and if I had strong faith), I would say that its a test from God or God has a different plan for him which does not involve him. Of course, God gave man free will so man is free to choose what he wants to do. He will be judged for is actions later.


----------



## Flash (Nov 6, 2012)

Just expressing my view. No offense to Biblical people.

Per them, God made Adam & Eve and our Heterosexuality concept started from there.
Just think of What would've happened when Adam1 and Adam2 together. That's Homosexuality.

Certain religions abstain from Homosexuality, as to them it breaks the code of life.


----------



## axes2t2 (Nov 6, 2012)

God is a guitarist and a cat lover.


----------



## Desmond (Nov 7, 2012)

Gearbox said:


> Just expressing my view. No offense to Biblical people.
> 
> Per them, God made Adam & Eve and our Heterosexuality concept started from there.
> Just think of What would've happened when Adam1 and Adam2 together. That's Homosexuality.
> ...



Indeed.



axes2t2 said:


> God is a guitarist and a cat lover.



I think I know who you are referring to


----------



## axes2t2 (Nov 7, 2012)

Who ?


----------



## Desmond (Nov 7, 2012)

Yourself.


----------



## axes2t2 (Nov 7, 2012)




----------



## sygeek (Nov 7, 2012)

DeSmOnD dAvId said:


> I never mentioned that God made them like that. If I did believe that God made him like that (and if I had strong faith), I would say that its a test from God or God has a different plan for him which does not involve him. Of course, God gave man free will so man is free to choose what he wants to do. He will be judged for is actions later.


alright, but it still doesn't answer my question.


----------



## axes2t2 (Nov 7, 2012)

It depends what kind of 'activities' y'all are talking about.


----------



## Desmond (Nov 7, 2012)

sygeek said:


> Thanks for elaborating. But now, my question changes to, why is practicing homosexual activities wrong? Isn't it unfair that straight people can marry and indulge in such activities but homosexuals can not because god made them so (rhetorical question)? Also, why do you not support it either besides it being a sin?



Personally, I do not support it because I see them no different from pedophiles or people with similar paraphilia. They were not supposed to have those tendencies in the first place.  So, as far as I am concerned there needs to be a cure for homosexuality.

As for the unfair part, yes it is unfair. But, God gave man free will to do as he pleases, the catch being that he will be judged in the end for whatever he does. Now, since there is no way of knowing whether the said judgement will occur or not, you can gamble. So, they indulge in their gay relations as usual, if the religion is true, they will be judged and will burn in hell (or whatever equivalent for other religions) forever.

Religion aside, also note that straight relations produce offspring, that is the natural order of things. So, gay relations are unnatural by default.


----------



## axes2t2 (Nov 7, 2012)

DeSmOnD dAvId said:


> Personally,* I do not support it because I see them no different from pedophiles*


Dude.... ????


----------



## Faun (Nov 7, 2012)

DeSmOnD dAvId said:


> Personally, I do not support it because I see them no different from pedophiles or people with similar paraphilia. They were not supposed to have those tendencies in the first place.  So, as far as I am concerned there needs to be a cure for homosexuality.



The difference in first case is that one of the person is not mature enough to give his/her consent.


----------



## Desmond (Nov 7, 2012)

Faun said:


> The difference in first case is that one of the person is not mature enough to give his/her consent.



But the other person is not supposed to approach the first at all.


----------



## cyborg47 (Nov 7, 2012)

Ico summed it up pretty well in his first post, wonder why and where the discussion is going.


----------



## Faun (Nov 7, 2012)

DeSmOnD dAvId said:


> But the other person is not supposed to approach the first at all.



But in second case both the persons are mature enough to decide if they are happy living together. There is a huge difference in your analogies.

World is not black and white.

Those believing in reincarnation will beg to differ with your views.


----------



## sygeek (Nov 7, 2012)

You do know that pedophilia =/= homosexuality? There is a huge difference.

Firstly, in the first case, as faun said, the person isn't mature enough to give his consent and most of such acts involve rape but this happens with straight people too, so you can't use that as an argument. In the latter case, both the person agree to like each other and promise to live a happy life and indulge in their private acts without offending anyone. How do you reason that them being happy is unacceptable because it isn't natural. In this modern age, most of what you do is unnatural, building roads, creating cities, skycrapers isn't a natural process.

Secondly, this is wrong form of argument. I could say heterosexuality is a similar form of pedophilia, so heterosexuality is wrong. This is similar to that, so that is wrong. Since homosexuality is considered a sin, one's brain immediately tries find a least acceptable reason so it can get a general acceptance of their idea because <this>. This is a form of confirmation bias. Don't worry, we all do it.


----------



## Anorion (Nov 7, 2012)

hmm cool. glad to see so many viewpoints. 
more than marriage laws, the need of the hour is co-habitation rights, this benefits hetero live-in couples as well.


----------



## Nanducob (Nov 7, 2012)

For pedophiles its just 'bang and run' whereas for homosexuals,its not just the sex,theyre emotionally attached to each other.


----------



## Desmond (Nov 8, 2012)

What I told you about homosexuals so far was my own opinion. I do not care whether it is a sin or not, just that I don't like it.

But, for homosexuality to be adopted, religion needs to go. But religion will never go as long as religion has followers. And religion will have followers as long as people have faith.

As I have mentioned in my earlier posts, there is no way of knowing whether your God(s) exists or not and consequently, no way of knowing whether a particular religion is true or false (perhaps until we die). Therefore, there is no way of knowing whether homosexuality or any other act is a vice not. All that we can do is live our lives the way we want according to free will, irrespective of whether we believe in God(s) or not and hope for the best. If you continue to sin by proclaiming that there is/are no God(s) and at the end of your life God(s) does/do exist, you will be damned according to whatever's the modus operandi of that deity, the ramifications of which we cannot comprehend as well.

So, homosexuals can do what they like. I cannot judge them for their actions. Let God(s) (if they exist) judge them. All I can say is that they are born with some bad wiring up there.


----------



## Anorion (Nov 8, 2012)

birds, bees, bed bugs, praying mantis, black widow, flatworms, all have bizzare wirings, all still 100% invention of mother nature
bed bugs got the worst wiring possible Traumatic insemination - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

bit off topic? think religion will crop up even if you start with a clean slate, with or without a guidebook, maybe even without a need for belief. seen some superstitions within virtual worlds, these make no sense, but still magically emerge.


----------



## Desmond (Nov 8, 2012)

Anorion said:


> birds, bees, bed bugs, praying mantis, black widow, flatworms, all have bizzare wirings, all still 100% invention of mother nature
> bed bugs got the worst wiring possible *Traumatic insemination - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia*



Prototype of rape?



Anorion said:


> bit off topic? think religion will crop up even if you start with a clean slate, with or without a guidebook, maybe even without a need for belief. seen some superstitions within virtual worlds, these make no sense, but still magically emerge.



Everyone wants to make sense of their environment and everything that goes on around them. Some move to religion, some move to science.


----------



## Faun (Nov 8, 2012)

^^I think you are still undecided. In times of despair, even the most rational of people resort back to religion and dogmas.


----------



## doomgiver (Nov 8, 2012)

Anorion said:


> bit off topic? think religion will crop up even if you start with a clean slate, with or without a guidebook, maybe even without a need for belief. seen some superstitions within virtual worlds, these make no sense, but still magically emerge.



I can say that, yes, superstitions exist even in the virtual world consider this : A few weeks ago on the gaming site, armorgames, there was a flood of messages saying this :


"DONT READ THIS. ok, now that you have started reading this, DONT STOP.


tomorrow will be the best day of your life, your crush will kiss you in public, and everything will go perfectly.


just do this :say your name once. say your mom's name 5 times, say your crush's name 10 times.


now press f6. your crush's name will appear in big red letters on the screen.


OMG THIS ACTUALLY WORKS, THIS IS SO FREAKY!!!


post this message to 3 other games for it to work. if you dont do this, everything will go bad."



i mean, the every freaking game had pages full of this shite.f these people and their stupid need for self affirmation and needless attention whoring.


----------



## Desmond (Nov 8, 2012)

doomgiver said:


> I can say that, yes, superstitions exist even in the virtual world consider this : A few weeks ago on the gaming site, armorgames, there was a flood of messages saying this :
> 
> 
> "DONT READ THIS. ok, now that you have started reading this, DONT STOP.
> ...



There is a name for such people. They are called TROLLS!!!


----------



## Nanducob (Nov 8, 2012)

Sometimes,I get some emails with some gods photo in it,which says forward it to 7 people,or else youll Die ! Usually i'll forward it to 6 people,didnt die,though


----------



## Hrishi (Nov 8, 2012)

^Everyone has to die.!  . NoBody's immortal.


----------



## Flash (Nov 8, 2012)

*img545.imageshack.us/img545/897/40ffaf25ef3a405e808b690.png

Simple/


----------



## Faun (Nov 9, 2012)

and Lord Vijay Mallaya seen in Kailash.


----------



## CommanderShawnzer (Nov 9, 2012)

strange to see non-fags discussing about faggism
anyway.god or no god homoism is against nature


----------



## Nanducob (Nov 9, 2012)

Faun said:


> and Lord Vijay Mallaya seen in Kailash.



searching for some vintage Whyte & Mckay,there.


----------



## CommanderShawnzer (Nov 9, 2012)

> and Lord Vijay Mallaya seen in Kailash.


wtf .The Lord of Good Times was supplying beer for Shiva's beach party in a mountain?


----------



## axes2t2 (Nov 9, 2012)

Nanducob said:


> Sometimes,I get some emails with some gods photo in it,which says forward it to 7 people,or else youll Die ! Usually i'll forward it to 6 people,didnt die,though



Nooooooo....

send it to your superstitious friends by making the correction 'send to all your contacts'.


----------



## Anorion (Nov 9, 2012)

superstitions as in... you will get better drops if you play without armour or weapons... skyrim, borderlands 2...


----------



## Faun (Nov 9, 2012)

Anorion said:


> superstitions as in... you will get better drops if you play without armour or weapons... skyrim, borderlands 2...



that's all in the logic.



CommanderShawnzer said:


> strange to see non-fags discussing about faggism
> anyway.god or no god homoism is against nature



You have a pretty fixed definition of nature there.


----------



## Anorion (Nov 9, 2012)

ok donno how this logic manages to pervade all games, maybe every game rewards playing unarmed, or the approach has some benefits. Fine. How about "don't open chests for better drops from boss?" That at least makes no sense... and def cant be logicd. think it spread because its gamers choosing speed and less inventory management as a group, and making everyone else do this irrespective of whether or not they agree, just because this is the way they want to play, and only rolling for the good drops directly at the bosses. but it comes to a point when people start believing it.


----------



## sygeek (Nov 9, 2012)

Rishi. said:


> ^Everyone has to die.!  . NoBody's immortal.


Are you sure? I've actually decided to be immortal and it's been working pretty great till now.


----------



## Flash (Nov 9, 2012)

sygeek said:


> Are you sure? I've actually decided to be immortal and it's been working pretty great till now.



Like the Motivational quote - "Impossible --> I'M possible".
IMMORTAL = I'm MORTAL


----------



## ajaymailed (Nov 12, 2012)

recently seen OMG Oh my god, really has some strong views on idol worship, the regular traditions/customs followed in worshiping.


----------



## Desmond (Mar 20, 2013)

Nothing wrong with following any religion so long as you don't take it to the streets.


----------



## Nanducob (Mar 20, 2013)

DeSmOnD dAvId said:


> Nothing wrong with following any religion so long as you don't take it to the streets.



*img547.imageshack.us/img547/9237/fu2religion.jpg


----------



## harshilsharma63 (Mar 20, 2013)

Nanducob said:


> *img547.imageshack.us/img547/9237/fu2religion.jpg


If a few a**holes of my street gave a glass full of milk to some poor kid instead of draining it on a piece of black colored rock, then I would like to say that I;m proud of my country.


----------



## Desmond (Mar 21, 2013)

Well, my point was that follow the good things about religion. But interpret your scriptures for yourselves and don't rely on priests, etc for the same. They are mere mortals like any of us.

Also, what I cannot stand is people praying for material benefits and wealth. Now, God didn't create money or commerce or business, man made that.


----------



## Flash (Mar 21, 2013)

Challenging Historic Deification « Call For Media and Government Investigation

I would like to quote kamal haasan's lines from the movie "_Anbe Sivam_ (English: Love Is God)" on above. 



> One can believe a person, who says 'God is there'.
> One can even believe a person, who says 'God is not there'.
> But, don't ever believe a person, who says 'I am the God'.


----------



## Desmond (Mar 21, 2013)

Apparently, there are many so called "Gurus" in India who are worshiped like Gods. I don't understand how can someone, who cannot even defy death, be worshiped as a God?


----------



## Flash (Mar 21, 2013)

Like our Mahabharata/Ramayana, all gods were once humans who were raised to the GOD status because of their deeds. 
Though they do, they dint misuse the purpose to serve them well, atleast in their lifetime..

These so-called gurus, proclaim themselves as the "Reincarnations" of god, and want to try all the possible ways of FUN with innocent-person's-hard-earned-money/donations.


----------



## Inceptionist (Mar 21, 2013)

I always wonder how religious people will react if aliens visit out planet.


----------



## Desmond (Mar 21, 2013)

Gearbox said:


> Like our Mahabharata/Ramayana, all gods were once humans who were raised to the GOD status because of their deeds.
> Though they do, they dint misuse the purpose to serve them well, atleast in their lifetime..
> 
> These so-called gurus, proclaim themselves as the "Reincarnations" of god, and want to try all the possible ways of FUN with innocent-person's-hard-earned-money/donations.



That is so sad.



Inceptionist said:


> I always wonder how religious people will react if aliens visit out planet.



Won't make much of a difference, the pantheons are already pretty huge. Some more "gods" will get added to it.


----------



## sujoyp (Mar 21, 2013)

Wow this discussion seems nice and quit positive....

What I hate about my religion (hindusm) is the waste of huge amount of money in puja,merriges...people take loan from others to waste money on these things/show offs...christans and muslims have very simple traditions 

people have litrelly forgot that in our culture it was a trend to give prasad to poors and brahmans(who were poor in ancient days, but now its a tradition ..poor or rich he should be brahman) ...but instead we just call up or own guests and treat them...lot of food,flowers,milk,ghee gets wasted on the name of god..

I also hate the tomatina festival or whatever its called where they waste thousands of KG of tomato in the name of tradition...

It seems nobody cares for poor, everyone wants to show off there religious superiority.


----------



## Flash (Mar 21, 2013)

sujoyp said:


> Wow this discussion seems nice and *quit *positive....



Quite positive?


----------



## Inceptionist (Mar 21, 2013)

I agree about your opinion of Hindus. And just look at how much polluted rivers become due to religious practices.



sujoyp said:


> christans and muslims have very simple traditions



I wouldn't go that far.

Edit : 
I'm a Hindu too.


----------



## Flash (Mar 21, 2013)

Hinduism has more gods when compared to others. Since, each one of them has different religious practices, they provide myriad of options to pollute environment in the name of each.
For example, People pollute River Ganges in the name of sacredness.


----------



## Desmond (Mar 21, 2013)

sujoyp said:


> Wow this discussion seems nice and quit positive....
> 
> What I hate about my religion (hindusm) is the waste of huge amount of money in puja,merriges...people take loan from others to waste money on these things/show offs...christans and muslims have very simple traditions
> 
> ...



Its ok if it happens in Spain. That is none of our business. But, its really dumb to organize something like this in India.


----------



## CommanderShawnzer (Mar 21, 2013)

DeSmOnD dAvId said:


> Its ok if it happens in Spain. That is none of our business. *But, its really dumb to organize something like this in India*.



i heard some people wanted to organize "Tomatina" in India after watching ZNMD

it got cancelled due to wastage of tomatoes or something
link


> A delegation of tomato growers from Kolar district, environmentalists and NGO representatives had met Mr Gowda and told him that "throwing for fun at each other, tomatoes grown through hard work by farmers reflects foreign culture. In the name of 'La Tomatina' festival, permission should not be granted to waste tomatoes".





> "62,000 kg of tomatoes getting wasted for the fun of the rich is not fair," he told the Chief Minister, who immediately responded to the delegation's concerns and wrote letters to the police chiefs ordering to take steps towards cancellation of the event.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Gearbox said:


> Hinduism has more gods when compared to others. Since, each one of them has different religious practices, they provide myriad of options to pollute environment in the name of each.
> For example, *People pollute River Ganges in the name of sacredness*.





Faun said:


> This unsettling and beyond reasoning to me. Warning: Corpses floating on water.
> 
> Filthy India Photos, Chinese Netizen Reactions – chinaSMACK



If you Puke on your KB i'm not responsible


----------



## whitestar_999 (Mar 21, 2013)

Gearbox said:


> Like our Mahabharata/Ramayana, all gods were once humans who were raised to the GOD status because of their deeds.
> Though they do, they dint misuse the purpose to serve them well, atleast in their lifetime..


not correct.no gods were ever humans.human race is different from god/Dev race in creation of brahma as per mythological scriptures.all gods(this does not include holy trinity of brahma,vishnu,shiva & their wives) were initially mortal but after drinking "amrit" from "samudra manthan" became immortal.the incarnations/avatars of lord Vishnu are humans & as such not immortals though they chose to select the manner in which they die(like ram) or let others select their time of death(like krishna).


----------



## CommanderShawnzer (Mar 21, 2013)

Inceptionist said:


> I always wonder how religious people will react if aliens visit out planet.



Pope's astronomer insists alien life 'would be part of God's creation' 
the astronomer in question is a Jesuit Priest


So its official(6 years ago ) Catholicism accepts Turians as creations of God


----------



## Desmond (Mar 21, 2013)

My best guess is that God is a Biotechnologist and we are his experiments gone wrong. He became so ashamed of us that he abandoned us to our fate and never returned.


----------



## sujoyp (Mar 21, 2013)

@ DeSmOnD dAvId....saying tomatina festival none of our business is equal to saying let African people die of hunger and malnutrition ..its none of our business 

If we are human ..we have humanity as well....wasting food in the name of religion is bad everywhere  ...just see the pic above ....dont you pity those hungry kids


----------



## Desmond (Mar 21, 2013)

My point about La Tomatina in Spain was that Spain is a developed country, while India is not.

Besides, La Tomitina has nothing to do with religion.

I like the Langar system that the Sikhs organize, providing free food for everyone.


----------



## Flash (Mar 21, 2013)

The greatest concern is this . .. 

*cache.daylife.com/imageserve/03MHc8f1BpguB/x160.jpg


----------



## Desmond (Mar 21, 2013)

Gearbox said:


> The greatest concern is this . ..
> 
> *cache.daylife.com/imageserve/03MHc8f1BpguB/x160.jpg



Oh ****...how did I forget about this one?

This is the single, most stupidest thing that makes me ashamed to share the same species as such imbeciles.

*Edit:* I have heard that there is a temple dedicated to Amitabh Bachchan as well.


----------



## CommanderShawnzer (Mar 21, 2013)

Gearbox said:


> The greatest concern is this . ..
> 
> *cache.daylife.com/imageserve/03MHc8f1BpguB/x160.jpg



is that Kamal Hassan?


----------



## Flash (Mar 21, 2013)

Though, it dint do anything with religion, it's still a unworthy act being performed by ruthless fans.
The point is - most of the people who performs these acts toils are POOR.



CommanderShawnzer said:


> is that Kamal Hassan?


Yes, for viswaroopam.


----------



## Sarath (Mar 21, 2013)

If there really is a God then all of us are getting screwed


----------



## Flash (Mar 21, 2013)

Sarath said:


> If there really is a God then all of us are getting screwed


Unless, god is a mod in tdf.


----------



## quagmire (Mar 26, 2013)

*EXPLOSIVE NEW EVIDENCE PROVES MARS LANDING IS A HOAX!* - Read this you'll lose hope in humankind..

NOTE: I am *not* trying make any kind of remark or comment on any religion..

Excerpts from the article:

_"BUT WHY THE ELABORATE HOAX?

Because they want to destroy our way of life!  They are determined to destroy Christianity by declaring that alien life exists. But first of course, they need “the proof” and will stop at nothing to deceive the public with their evil lies and deception.

Remember, big money is behind all this."_

  How will the science community grow with people like this?


----------



## Flash (Mar 26, 2013)

^ You should've posted this as a separate thread.
BTW, that was a blog i guess. Moreover, there were no article on that by Big news websites.


----------



## Anorion (Mar 26, 2013)

^those photos are from NASA's own pre-launch blog, where they tested out the rover out in the desert  

rituals actually lead to altruistic actions, think those people who attend the abhishekas know very well the value of the ghee, milk and water they use

think this rejection of traditions has spawned a selfish and resource hungry culture.
for example, this is how a pujari in a village temple may live - sweep fallen mango leaves every morning, use the leaves as fuel to heat the huge copper stove for bathing water, use the ash of the burnt mango leaves as soap powder to clean vessels, and finally use the water from the washing to water the plants. some of the houses in these "poor" places don't even have dust bins, because there is no waste at all, nothing to throw away.


----------



## Desmond (Mar 26, 2013)

Looks like rituals are the only way to force people to become altruistic. Never seen people (in general) doing altruistic acts voluntarily (not counting NGOs or such organizations).


----------



## Chetan1991 (Apr 30, 2013)

Read this:
*developmentalobserver.blog.com/2010/06/09/an-overview-of-constructive-developmental-theory-cdt/

65% of all humans can't think for themselves. They do what others do, they follow what others follow. Top 35% are freethinkers but most of them are slaves to their own opinions, i.e. they are reluctant to audit their self-authored thought and notions. Religion might contain a lot of cr@p but at the core is wisdom that, if followed, ensures well being of society. West (esp. US) has denounced religion and look where they are now as society (read Manosphere blogs such as Chateau Heartiste to understand their plight.)


----------



## doomgiver (May 2, 2013)

^ wrong.the percentage is closer to 80 and 20 % respectively.


----------



## Desmond (May 2, 2013)

doomgiver said:


> ^ wrong.the percentage is closer to 80 and 20 % respectively.



Even among the 20%, 10% are still idiots. There is this guy I know, who despite being quite intelligent makes statements like "Indian cows are more holier than Jersey cows".


----------



## Chetan1991 (May 2, 2013)

doomgiver said:


> ^ wrong.the percentage is closer to 80 and 20 % respectively.



 You still proved my point. I weep for humanity. No, not really.



DeSmOnD dAvId said:


> Even among the 20%, 10% are still idiots. There is this guy I know, who despite being quite intelligent makes statements like "Indian cows are more holier than Jersey cows".



Yup, a lot of the top 20-35% are reluctant to scrutinize their self-authored thoughts. Ego's a b!tch.
It's only the top 1% that can see everything from an unbiased, unemotional 3rd person view.


----------



## Anorion (May 2, 2013)

Just a reminder, we know these things but forget at times

Its from rime of the ancient mariner 



> He prayeth well, who loveth well
> Both man and bird and beast.
> 
> He prayeth best, who loveth best
> All things both great and small


----------



## Nanducob (May 2, 2013)

DeSmOnD dAvId said:


> "Indian cows are more holier than Jersey cows".


AhaHAHAHAHA


----------



## Anorion (May 3, 2013)

This might bake your noodle.... If god actually consumed all the food offered to him, would people still continue with the offerings?


----------



## a_k_s_h_a_y (Sep 29, 2013)

yes, gaming is my religion.. go screw yourself if you don't believe in religion.


----------



## Flash (Sep 29, 2013)

Gamaican


----------



## Nanducob (Sep 29, 2013)

a_k_s_h_a_y said:


> yes, gaming is my religion.. go screw yourself if you don't believe in religion.


----------



## CommanderShawnzer (Sep 29, 2013)

a_k_s_h_a_y said:


> yes, gaming is my religion.. go screw yourself if you don't believe in religion.



Spoken.Like A Krogan.


----------



## sksundram (Sep 29, 2013)

m a hindu by birth...don't like visiting temples though i believe in god...those crowded temples (the few i have visited)...how can someone find peace there (i don't)...people offer money,food,gold and diamonds to god...don't they know helping the poor/needy without any greed is the best offering to the almighty...sai baba used to beg alms and live in a hut...he offered service to mankind irrespective of caste and creed...but now see....his statue sitting on gold...paresh rawal in OMG! explaining how god could have found it stenchy and awful to see a pile of hair cartons was so true and so funny...!!


----------



## moniker (Sep 29, 2013)

I'm agnostic. That's the most scientific way of looking at it, IMO. The theists say god exists but don't have proof, the atheists say god doesn't exist but they don't have proof to back that up either. Based on the very limited facts that we have, those are just two theories. I'm open to take either side if more concrete facts emerge.


----------



## Chetan1991 (Jun 27, 2014)

Here's why religion is necessary:

[YOUTUBE]Dqe_feNbPRY[/YOUTUBE]

Also, read this post:
Roosh V Forum
That is some sc@ry sh!t.


----------



## setanjan123 (Jun 29, 2014)

I dont believe in God. Atleast not in the Abrahmic all powerful God. The idea of the Abrahmic God seems ridiculous to me(no offence Christians or Muslims). I dont even think a god created this universe. Concluding all the wonderful and mysterious phenomena to be the work of God takes away its charm and mystery for me. But i do believe in the possibility of God as thought of in spirituality. The Paramatma or Supersoul, the ultimate consciousness and source of energy for all conscious beings. All beings are conscious to certain degree including bacteria. Just as we humans percieve 3 spatial and 1 temporal dimension, other more evolved beings may percieve even more. The ultimate consciousness would be able to percieve anything. We humans may one day evolve into one(inspired a bit by the space odyessey series . As far as organised religion goes,it provides people hope in an otherwise hopeless world. As long as it isnt taken too far religion is OK i guess. I personally dont believe in any though


----------



## Chetan1991 (Jun 30, 2014)

setanjan123 said:


> I dont believe in God. Atleast not in the Abrahmic all powerful God. The idea of the Abrahmic God seems ridiculous to me(no offence Christians or Muslims). I dont even think a god created this universe. Concluding all the wonderful and mysterious phenomena to be the work of God takes away its charm and mystery for me. But i do believe in the possibility of God as thought of in spirituality. The Paramatma or Supersoul, the ultimate consciousness and source of energy for all conscious beings. All beings are conscious to certain degree including bacteria. Just as we humans percieve 3 spatial and 1 temporal dimension, other more evolved beings may percieve even more. The ultimate consciousness would be able to percieve anything. We humans may one day evolve into one(inspired a bit by the space odyessey series . As far as organised religion goes,it provides people hope in an otherwise hopeless world. As long as it isnt taken too far religion is OK i guess. I personally dont believe in any though


You want to turn into a giant flying foetus?


----------



## setanjan123 (Jul 1, 2014)

Chetan1991 said:


> You want to turn into a giant flying foetus?


Well if it gives me reality warping powers then hell yeah!


----------



## anushka123 (Jul 1, 2014)

Basically now a days most of the people believe in god but they want any religion they only want to have a presence of goodness. So, I'll go with god but no religion. If religion comes then everyone should respect all other religion.


----------



## adityak469 (Aug 29, 2015)

I haven't read anything in this thread so dont bash me if someone already posted this

I've a lot of free time to think about this and 

Religion is infact necessary, whereas idol worship is not necessary but is still required. Different religions are also required for a specific purpose.

Why is religion necessary?

To give people hope and something to cling onto in difficult times. Not everyone is strong enough to deal with bad times alone ( if you are then its great! )

Why is idol worshop required?

You'll believe in something you can touch or see more than in something which is just a fignent of your imagination ( even if that something is just a rock or a picture ). This is why people tend to believe in the people who call themselves the messengers of god or reincarnation of god.

Why are different religions necessary?

Not everyone has the same 'taste of life'. Everyone wants to live life in a way they can enjoy and enjoying life has different meanings for different people.


We all know nothing in this world is ideal, nothing behaves the way its supposed to. Religion is no exception. 
Yes religion has been misinterpreted and misused, it's not religion's fault, it's our fault. We can only try and change things.


----------



## SaiyanGoku (Aug 29, 2015)

Kaun Hindu, kaun musalman. Kahan hai thappa, dikhao?


----------



## bssunilreddy (Aug 29, 2015)

Religion is important for a civilized society to prevail...
Hatred towards others is bad for a civilized society...
Where peace prevails a nation prevails and inter-mingling of people results in a nations' development...
Be the change you want to see in the society and everything falls into place...


----------



## Faun (Aug 29, 2015)

bssunilreddy said:


> Religion is important for a civilized society to prevail...



That's a pretty broad statement. So civilized society without religion won't exist ?


----------



## ratul (Aug 29, 2015)

Faun said:


> That's a pretty broad statement. So civilized society without religion won't exist ?



it might exist, but as [MENTION=271931]adityak469[/MENTION] said above, not all are strong enough to lead to a right path without any fear infused in their mind, religion for many act as a fear component, where they fear of going to hell if they do something bad. What i think, yes, religion should be there, and those who want to follow it shall follow it, but never force it on others, neither the religion nor your beliefs.


----------



## $hadow (Aug 29, 2015)

Well religion do kind of stop you from loving some one of other religion coz the society won't let you be together. Ugh my friend had a devastating break up coz of this silly reason.


----------



## Faun (Aug 29, 2015)

ratul said:


> it might exist, but as [MENTION=271931]adityak469[/MENTION] said above, not all are strong enough to lead to a right path without any fear infused in their mind, religion for many act as a fear component, where they fear of going to hell if they do something bad. What i think, yes, religion should be there, and those who want to follow it shall follow it, but never force it on others, neither the religion nor your beliefs.



The fear can be misplaced pretty easily by someone of great influence. A rational being is better than a fearful one who can be manipulated easily.

Religion is yet another line to divide people. The future looks bright without this additional division.


----------



## ratul (Aug 29, 2015)

Faun said:


> The fear can be misplaced pretty easily by someone of great influence. A rational being is better than a fearful one who can be manipulated easily.
> 
> Religion is yet another line to divide people. The future looks bright without this additional division.



that's very true, but i think that people would still be divided, now on the basis of the theories they believe and again those would be formed as some sort of groups (religions again, but more logical), no matter what, division would always be there, that's human nature, one belief one thinking would be too monotonous for more than 7 billion population and growing.


----------



## Nerevarine (Aug 29, 2015)

if a person needs a higher "omnipotent", "omnipresent", "invisible" god to teach him  right and wrong, I think the problem lies with the person..
Human empathy alone, is enough to judge right from wrong, Religion hasnt contributed to any advancement in Human Civilization and it never will. The world would have been a much better place, should there had been no religion.



> that's very true, but i think that people would still be divided, now on the basis of the theories they believe and again those would be formed as some sort of groups (religions again, but more logical), no matter what, division would always be there, that's human nature, one belief one thinking would be too monotonous for more than 7 billion population and growing.



Division based on logic, is what drives humanity forward IMO, Different theories based on facts drives science forward.. 
Division based on faith is pure bullcrap, as faun said


----------



## Anorion (Aug 29, 2015)

how do you know right from wrong?


----------



## Nerevarine (Aug 29, 2015)

A thief will not stop stealing even if he knows that "God" is watching him and may punish him.. He certainly knows that it is wrong to steal but may choose to continue to do so..
Like I said, Human empathy is enough to determine right from wrong, even animals show this to a certain degree.. Religion doesnt add to any of this..


----------



## Faun (Aug 29, 2015)

Anorion said:


> how do you know right from wrong?



There are universal truths and then there are things you learn (get conditioned) as you grow up in society.


----------



## ratul (Aug 29, 2015)

Nerevarine said:


> if a person needs a higher "omnipotent", "omnipresent", "invisible" god to teach him  right and wrong, I think the problem lies with the person..
> Human empathy alone, is enough to judge right from wrong, Religion hasnt contributed to any advancement in Human Civilization and it never will. The world would have been a much better place, should there had been no religion.
> 
> 
> ...



hmm, really interesting point, never thought it like that, how you said it now popped another theory in my mind, that this logical division with evolution might make our future generations genetically more innovative and advanced much sooner than with religion. Religion does act like a bottleneck in our current civilization (much like consoles for PC, but well, off topic ).


----------



## Anorion (Aug 30, 2015)

Faun said:


> There are universal truths and then there are things you learn (get conditioned) as you grow up in society.



who is the authority or guide for universal truth? Isn't this a choice we make, and are constrained by? even in isolation, and apart from conditioning from society, if a personal conditioning emerges, where does it come from?
I agree though, there is are many universal truths, and these are not up for interpretation. Would be great if there was a flawless mechanism to make everyone agree upon a universal truth though, or would be happy with a particular subset of universal truths. So basically it is a search for a good and universal _religion_? 



Nerevarine said:


> A thief will not stop stealing even if he knows that "God" is watching him and may punish him.. He certainly knows that it is wrong to steal but may choose to continue to do so..
> Like I said, Human empathy is enough to determine right from wrong, even animals show this to a certain degree.. Religion doesnt add to any of this..



What about stealing from a greedy hoarder who is artificially inflating the prices? is that good or bad? 

human empathy has some sort of imagined baseline. Like it would be maybe considered unnatural to feel sad about a story where an innocent little puppy didn't die a spectacularly gory and horrible death. this baseline is not universally agreed upon, even if we feel in our hearts that it is. If you live in a society where your house is illegal, your marriage is illegal, your records are fudged as per convenience, and so on, you need some kind of standard to compare your own actions against, when basically everything you do is wrong in some way or the other. Maybe you people have experienced various cases where people have done good and bad things for good and bad reasons, or where a series of good intentions can lead to horrible evil, or where a series of evil actions can lead to ultimate good. It is impossible to calculate full karma before doing the action, especially because the consequences of those actions, and the karma from it will be attained forever, im guessing. Im asking what is the source of this standard, and what we compare or say is good or bad is always relative to the person or situation. And maybe no law or agency on earth can justify the opposite even if they have the power to impose their viewpoints according to their agreed about and codified but nonetheless arbitrary standards.


----------



## abhigeek (Aug 30, 2015)

Everyone calm down and read this.

*A Conversation with God*
_Grab a cup of coffee, sit back and enjoy!
Its long but worth your time _

I met god the other day.

I know what you’re thinking. How the hell did you know it was god?

Well, I’ll explain as we go along, but basically he convinced me by having all, and I do mean ALL, the answers. Every question I flung at him he batted back with a plausible and satisfactory answer. In the end, it was easier to accept that he was god than otherwise.

Which is odd, because I’m still an atheist and we even agree on that!

It all started on the 8.20 back from Paddington. Got myself a nice window seat, no screaming brats or drunken hooligans within earshot. Not even a mobile phone in sight. Sat down, reading the paper and in he walks.

What did he look like?

Well not what you might have expected that’s for sure. He was about 30, wearing a pair of jeans and a "hobgoblin" tee shirt. Definitely casual. Looked like he could have been a social worker or perhaps a programmer like myself.

‘*Anyone sitting here?*’ he said.

‘Help yourself’ I replied.

Sits down, relaxes, I ignore and back to the correspondence on genetically modified crops entering the food chain…

Train pulls out and a few minutes later he speaks.

‘*Can I ask you a question?*’

Fighting to restrain my left eyebrow I replied ‘Yes’ in a tone which was intended to convey that I might not mind one question, and possibly a supplementary, but I really wasn’t in the mood for a conversation. ..

‘*Why don’t you believe in god?*’

The Bast*rd!

I love this kind of conversation and can rabbit on for hours about the nonsense of theist beliefs. But I have to be in the mood! It's like when a Jehova’s witness knocks on your door 20 minutes before you’re due to have a wisdom tooth pulled. Much as you'd _really_ love to stay… You can’t even begin the fun. And I knew, if I gave my standard reply we’d still be arguing when we got to Cardiff. I just wasn’t in the mood. I needed to fend him off.

But then I thought ‘Odd! How is this perfect stranger so obviously confident – and correct – about my atheism?’ If I’d been driving my car, it wouldn’t have been such a mystery. I’ve got the Darwin fish on the back of mine – the antidote to that twee christian fish you see all over. So anyone spotting that and understanding it would have been in a position to guess my beliefs. But I was on a train and not even wearing my Darwin "Evolve" tshirt that day. And ‘The Independent’ isn’t a registered flag for card carrying atheists, so what, I wondered, had given the game away.

‘What makes you so certain that I don’t?’

‘*Because*’, he said, ‘ *I am god – and you are not afraid of me*’

You’ll have to take my word for it of course, but there are ways you can deliver a line like that – most of which would render the speaker a candidate for an institution, or at least prozac. Some of which could be construed as mildly entertaining.

Conveying it as "indifferent fact" is a difficult task but that’s exactly how it came across. Nothing in his tone or attitude struck me as even mildly out of place with that statement. He said it because he believed it and his rationality did not appear to be drug induced or the result of a mental breakdown.

‘And why should I believe that?’ 

‘*Well*’ he said, ‘*why don’t you ask me a few questions. Anything you like, and see if the answers satisfy your sceptical mind?*’

This is going to be a short conversation after all, I thought.

‘Who am I?’

‘*Stottle. Harry Stottle, born August 10 1947, Bristol, England. Father Paul, Mother Mary. Educated Duke of Yorks Royal Military School 1960 67, Sandhurst and Oxford, PhD in Exobiology, failed rock singer, full time trade union activist for 10 years, latterly self employed computer programmer, web author and aspiring philosopher. Married to Michelle, American citizen, two children by a previous marriage. You’re returning home after what seems to have been a successful meeting with an investor interested in your proposed product tracking anti-forgery software and protocol and you ate a full english breakfast at the hotel this morning except that, as usual, you asked them to hold the revolting english sausages and give you some extra bacon.* ‘

He paused

‘*You’re not convinced. Hmmm… what would it take to convince you? May I have your permission for a telepathic link?*’

'Do you _need_ my permission?'

*'Technically, no. Ethically, yes'*

Might as well play along I thought. 'OK - you have my permission. So convince me'

*'oh right! Your most secret password and its association'*

A serious hacker might be able to obtain the password, but no one else and I mean

NO ONE

knows its association.

He did.

So how would you have played it?

I threw a few more questions about relatively insignificant but unpublicised details of my life (like what my mother claims was the first word I ever spoke – apparently "armadillo"! (Don't ask…)) but I was already pretty convinced. I knew there were only three possible explanations at this point.

Possibility One was that I was dreaming, hallucinating or hypnotised. Nobody’s figured out a test for that so, at the time I think that was my dominant feeling. It did not feel real at the time. More like I was in a play. Acting my lines. Since the event, however, continuing detailed memories of it, together with my contemporaneous notes, remain available, so unless the hallucination has continued to this day, I am now inclined to reject the hallucination hypothesis. Which leaves two others.

He could have been a true telepath. No documented evidence exists of anyone ever having such profound abilities to date but it was a possibility. It would have explained how he could know my best-kept secrets. The problem with that is that it doesn’t explain anything else! In particular it doesn’t account for the answers he proceeded to give to my later questions.

As Sherlock Holmes says, when you’ve eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.

Good empiricist, Sherlock.

I was forced to accept at least the possibility that this man was who he claimed to be.

So now what do you do?

Well, I’ve always known that if I met god I would have a million questions for him, so I thought, ‘why not?’ and proceeded with what follows. You’ll have to allow a bit of licence in the detail of the conversation. This was, shall we say, a somewhat unusual occurrence, not to mention just a BIT weird! And yes I was a_leetle_ bit nervous! So if I don’t get it word perfect don’t whinge! You’ll get the gist I promise.



​
‘Forgive me if it takes me a little time to get up to speed here, but it's not everyday I get to question a deity’

‘*The* *Deity*’ he interrupted.

‘_ooh. Touchy_!’ I thought.

‘*Not really – just correcting the image*’

Now _That_ takes some getting used to!

I tried to get a grip on my thoughts, with an internal command - ‘_Discipline Harry. You’ve always wanted to be in a situation like this, now you’re actually in it, you mustn’t go to pieces and waste the opportunity of a lifetime_’

‘*You won’t*’ he said.

Tell you! That’s the bit that made it feel unreal more than anything else - this guy sitting across the table and very obviously accurately reading my every thought. It's like finding someone else's hand inside your trouser pocket!

Nevertheless, something (other than simply having given my "permission") made me inclined to accept the invasion, I had obviously begun to have some confidence in his perception or abilities, so I distinctly remember the effect of his words was that I suddenly felt deeply reassured and completely relaxed. As he had no doubt intended. Man must have an amazing seduction technique!

So then we got down to business…

‘Are you human?’

‘*No*’

‘Were you, ever?’

‘*No, but similar, Yes*’

‘Ah, so you are a produc.t of evolution?’

‘*Most certainly – mainly my own*’

‘and you evolved from a species like ours, dna based organisms or something equally viable?’

‘*Correct’*

*‘*so what, exactly, makes you god?’

‘*I did’*

‘Why?’

‘*Seemed like a good idea at the time’*

‘and your present powers, are they in any way similar to what the superstitious believers in my species attribute to you?’

‘*Close enough. ’*

*‘*So you created all this, just for us?’

‘*No. Of course not’*

‘But you did create the Universe?’ 

‘*This One. Yes*’

‘But not your own?’

‘*This is my own!*’

‘You know what I mean!’

‘*You can’t create your own parents, so No*’

‘So let me get this straight. You are an entirely natural phenomenon.’

‘*Entirely*’

‘Arising from mechanisms which we ourselves will one day understand and possibly even master?’

‘*subject to a quibble over who "we ourselves" may be, but yes*’

‘meaning that if the human race doesn’t come up to the mark, other species eventually will?’

‘*in one.*’

‘and how many other species are there already out there ahead of us?’

‘*surprisingly few. Less than fourteen million*’

‘FEW!?’

‘Phew!’

‘And how many at or about our level?’

‘*currently a little over 4 ½ billion*’

‘so our significance in the universe at present is roughly equivalent to the significance of the average Joe here on planet Earth in his relation to the human race?’

‘*a little less. Level One, the level your species has reached, begins with the invention of the flying machine. The next level is achieved when a species is no longer dominated by or dependent upon it's own primary – your Sun. They are able to prosper away from their own, or indeed any other, stellar system. Humanity is only just into the flying machine phase, so as you can imagine, on that scale, the human race is somewhat near the bottom of the level one pack*’

‘Do you mean we will one day control our own Sun like Kardashev and Asimov talk about?’

*'quite the opposite. Those are the visions of an evolving mechanical species who imagine that bigger machines are better and stronger and that we will always need more and more energy to achieve mastery of the universe. The truth is the exact opposite. The more advanced we become, the less energy we require and the less impact we make on our environment. You manipulate matter, which requires enormous amounts of energy. We manipulate energy, which requires none. As a consequence, you would not, for example, even recognise a level two species as a lifeform unless it chose to let you '*

‘ all these evolving species; they are your "children"?’

‘*I like to think of them that way*’

‘and the point?’

‘*at its simplest, "Life Must Go On". My personal motivation is the desire to optimise the intelligence of the Universe. In your own terms, I strive to maximise pleasure and minimise pain. A great deal of pleasure, however, arises from communications between separate entities. Once you’ve achieved my level, we tend to cease to be billions of separate entities and become one ecstatic whole. A single entity that cannot die unless it loses the will to live. Advanced and self contained though I am, or perhaps, more accurately, because I am so advanced and self contained, one of the pleasures we lose along the way is that simple joy of meeting new and unpredictable minds and either learning from or teaching them. Thus, in large part, the point of the exercise is to provide company. I am the first eternal in this Universe. I do not intend to be the last*’

‘so you created a Universe which is potentially capable of producing another god like yourself?’

‘*The full benefit will be temporary, but like most orgasms, worth it.’*

‘this being the moment when our new god merges with you and we become one again?’ 

‘*don’t play it down, that’s the ecstatic vision driving us all, me included – and when it happens the ecstasy lasts several times longer than this universe has already existed. Believe me, it really is worth the effort.*’

‘Yes, I think I can see the attractions of a hundred billion year long orgasm’

‘*and humans haven’t even begun to know how to really enjoy the orgasms they are already capable of. Wait till you master that simple art!*’

‘So it's all about sex is it?’

‘*Sexual ecstasy is merely a reward for procreating, it is what makes you want to do it. This is necessary, initially, to promote biological evolution. However once you’ve completed that stage and no longer require procreation, you will learn that ecstasy can be infinitely more intense than anything offered by sex’*

‘Sounds good to me!'

'How direct is your involvement in all this? Did you just light the fuse which set off the big bang and stand back and watch? Or did you have to plant the seeds on appropriately fertile planets?’

‘*The first significant level of the intelligent self organisation of matter is the arrival of the organic chemistry which forms the precursor for biology and the first primitive life forms. That chemistry evolved, mostly, in deep space, once the stars had created enough of the heavier elements, and purely as a result of the operations of the laws of physics and chemistry which your scientists have already largely understood. All I did was to set the initial conditions which triggered the bang and essentially became dormant for nearly 5 billion years. That’s how long it took the first lifeforms to emerge. That places them some 8 billion years ahead of you. The first intelligent species are now 4.3 billion years ahead of you. Really quite advanced. I can have deeply meaningful conversations with them. And usually do. In fact I am as we speak*’

‘So then what?’

‘*Do I keep a constant vigil over every move you make? Not in the kind of prying intrusive sense that some of you seem to think. Let's say I maintain an awareness of what's going on, at a planetary level. I tend only to focus on evolutionary leaps. See if they’re going in the right direction’*

*‘*And if they’re not?’

*‘Nothing. Usually*’

‘Usually?’

‘*Usually species evolving in the wrong direction kill themselves off or become extinct for other reasons*’

‘Usually?’

‘*There have been one or two cases where a wrong species has had the potential of becoming dominant at the expense of a more promising strain*’

‘Let me guess. Dinosaurs on this planet are an example. Too successful. Suppressed the development of mammals and were showing no signs of developing intelligence. So you engineered a little corrective action in the form of a suitably selected asteroid’

‘*Perceptive. Almost correct. They* *were* *showing signs of developing intelligence, even co-operation. Study your Troodons. But far too predatory. Incapable of ever developing a "respect" for other life forms. It takes carrying your young to promote the development of emotional attachment to other animals. Earth reptiles aren’t built for that. The mammals who are, as you rightly say, couldn’t get a foothold against such mighty predators. You’ve now reached the stage where you could hold your own even against dinosaurs, but that’s only been true for about a thousand years, your predecessors didn't stand a chance 65 million years ago, so the dinosaurs had to go. They were, however, far too ubiquitous and well balanced with the ecology of the planet, and never developed technology, so they weren’t going to kill themselves off in a hurry. Regrettably, I had to intervene.*’

‘Regrettably?’

‘*They were a beautiful and stunningly successful life form*. *One doesn’t destroy such things without a qualm.*’

‘But at that stage how could you know that a better prospect would arise from the ashes?’

‘*I didn’t. But the probability was quite high.’*

*‘*and since then, what other little tweaks have you been responsible for in our development?’

‘*None whatsoever. I set an alarm for the first sign of artificial aerial activity, as I usually do. Leonardo looked promising for a while, but not until the Montgolfier brothers did I really begin to take an interest. That registered you as a level one intelligent species’*

'If the sign is "aerial activity", how do you identify technological bird species?'

*"Same way. Intelligent flyers rarely become technologists though. They tend to evolve into adaptors rather than manipulators but the few exceptions develop flying machines rather more quickly than species like your own because they have a natural understanding of aerodynamics."*

'but why would a bird need a flying machine?' 

*'that's like asking why would your species need cars and other forms of mechanical transport. The technology lets you carry heavier loads, faster and for greater distances than just relying on your own physical abilities.'*

*‘*OK, so what about our more famous "prophets"; Jesus of Nazareth, Moses, Mohammed…’

‘*hmmm… sadly misguided I’m afraid. I am not here to act as a safety net or ethical dictator for evolving species. It is true that anyone capable of communicating with their own cells will dimly perceive a connection to me – and all other objects in this universe - through the quantum foam, but interpreting that vision as representing something supernatural and requiring obeisance is somewhat wide of the mark. And their followers are all a bit too obsessive and religious for my liking. It's no fun being worshipped once you stop being an adolescent teenager. Having said that, it's not at all unusual for developing species to go through that phase. Until they begin to grasp how much they too can shape their small corner of the universe, they are in understandable awe of an individual dimly but correctly perceived to be responsible for the creation of the whole of that universe. Eventually, if they are to have any hope of attaining level two, they must grow out of it and begin to accept their own power and potential. It's very akin to a child’s relationship with its parents. The awe and worship must disappear before the child can become an adult. Respect is not so bad as long as it's not overdone. And I certainly respect all those species who make it that far. It’s a hard slog. I know. I've been there.’*

‘So, you’ve been taking more interest in us since the Montgolfiers, when was that? 1650s?’

‘*Close. 1783*’

‘Well, if you’ve been watching us closely since then, what your average citizen is going to want to know is why you haven’t intervened more often. Why, if you have the power and omniscience that goes with being a god, have you sat back and allowed us to endure such incredible suffering and human misery in the past few centuries?’

‘*It seems to be necessary.*’

‘NECESSARY??!!’

‘*Without exception, intelligent species who gain dominance over their planet do so by becoming the most efficient predators. There are many intelligent species who do not evolve to dominate their planet. Like your dolphins and most of the intelligent flyers we were just talking about, they* *adapt* *perfectly to the environment rather than take your course, which is to* *manipulate* *the environment.Unfortunately for the dolphin, theirs is a dead end. They may outlive the human race but will never escape the bounds of planet earth, let alone your solar system - not without your help at any rate. Only those who can manipulate the world they live in can one day hope to leave it and spread their seed throughout the universe.*

*Unlike the adaptors, who learn the point of cooperation fairly early on, manipulators battle on. And, once all lesser species have been overcome, they are so competitive and predatory that they are compelled to turn in on themselves. This nearly always evolves into tribal competition in one form or another and becomes more and more destructive - exactly like your own history. However this competition is vital to promote the leap from biological to technological evolution.*

*You* *need* *an arms race in order to make progress.*

*Your desire to dominate fuels a search for knowledge which the adaptors never acquire. And although your initial desire for knowledge is selfish and destructive, it begins the development of an intellectual self awareness, a form of higher consciousness, which never emerges in any other species. Not even while they are experiencing it, for example, can the intelligent adaptors - your dolphins - express the concepts of Love or Time.*

*Militarisation and the development of weapons of mass destruction are your first serious test at level one. You're still not through that phase, though the signs are promising. There is no point whatsoever in my intervening to prevent your self-destruction. Your ability to survive these urges is a crucial test of your fitness to survive later stages. So I would not, never have and never will intervene to prevent a species from destroying itself. Most, in fact, do just that.’*

‘And what of pity for those have to live through this torment?’

‘*I can’t say this in any way that doesn’t sound callous, but how much time do you spend worrying about the ants you run over in your car? I know it sounds horrendous to you, but you have to see the bigger picture. At this stage in human development, you’re becoming interesting but not yet important.*’

'ah but I can't have an intelligent conversation with an ant'

*'precisely'*

‘hmm… as you know, most humans won’t like even to attempt to grasp that perspective. How can you make it more palatable?’

‘*Why should I?* *You* *don’t appear to have any trouble grasping it. You’re by no means unique. And in any case, once they begin to understand what's in it for them, they’ll be somewhat less inclined to moan. Eternal life compensates for most things.’*

‘So what are we supposed to do in order to qualify for membership of the universal intelligentsia?’

‘*Evolve. Survive’*

‘Yes, but how?’

‘*Oh, I thought you might have got the point by now. "How" is entirely up to you. If I have to help, then you’re a failure. All I will say is this. You’ve already passed a major hurdle in learning to live with nuclear weapons. It's depressing how many fail at that stage.’*

‘Is there worse to come?’

‘*Much’*

‘Genetic warfare for instance?

‘*Distinct Possibility’*

‘and the problem is… that we need to develop all these technologies, acquire all this dangerous knowledge in order to reach level two. But at any stage that knowledge could also cause our own destruction’

‘*If you think the dangers of genetic warfare are serious, imagine discovering an algorithm, accessible to any intelligent individual, which, if abused, will eliminate your species instantly. If your progress continues as is, then you can expect to discover that particular self-destruct mechanism in less than a thousand years. Your species needs to grow up considerably before you can afford to make that discovery. And if you don’t make it, you will never leave your Solar System and join the rest of the sapient species on level two.’*

’14 Million of them’

‘*Just under’*

'Will there be room for us?'

*'it’s a big place and level two species don't need much space'*

‘and, for now, how should we mere mortals regard you then?’

‘*like an older brother or sister. Of course I have acquired more knowledge and wisdom than you have. Of course I’m more powerful than you are. I’ve been evolving much longer and have picked up a few tricks along the way. But I’m not "better" than you. Just more developed. Just what you might become’*

‘so we’re not obliged to "please" you or follow your alleged guidelines or anything like that?’

‘*absolutely not. Never issued a single guideline in the lifetime of this Universe. Have to find your own way out of the maze. And one early improvement is to stop expecting me - or anyone else - to come and help you out.'*

*'I suppose that is a guideline of sorts, so there goes the habit of a lifetime! '*

*'Seriously though, species who hold on to religion past its sell-by date tend to be most likely to self destruct. They spend so much energy arguing about my true nature, and invest so much emotion in their wildly erroneous imagery that they end up killing each other over differences in definitions of something they clearly haven’t got a clue about. Ludicrous behaviour, but it does weed out the weaklings.’*

‘Why me? Why pick on an atheist of all people? Why are you telling me all this? And why Now?’

*‘Why You? Because you can accept my existence without your ego caving in and grovelling like a naughty child. '*

*'Can you seriously imagine how the Pope would react to the reality of my existence?! If he really understood how badly wrong he and his church have been, how much of the pain and suffering you mentioned earlier has been caused by his religion, I suspect he'd have an instant coronary! Or can you picture what it would be like if I appeared "live" simultaneously on half a dozen tele-evangelist propaganda shows. Pat Robertson wouldwet* *himself if he actually understood who he was talking to.*

*Conversely, your interest is purely academic. You've never swallowed the fairy tale but you've remained open to the possibility of a more advanced life form which could acquire godlike powers. You’ve correctly guessed that godhood is the destiny of life. You have shown you can and do cope with the concept. It seemed reasonable to confirm your suspicions and let you do what you will with that information.*

*I can see you're already thinking about publishing this conversation on the web where it could sow an important seed. Might take a couple of hundred years to germinate, but, eventually, it will germinate.*

*Why now? Well partly because both you and the web are ready now. But chiefly because the human race is reaching a critical phase. It goes back to what we were saying about the dangers of knowledge. Essentially your species is becoming aware of that danger. When that happens to any sapient species, the future can take three courses.*

*Many are tempted to avoid the danger by avoiding the knowledge. Like the adaptors, they are doomed to extinction. Often pleasantly enough in the confines of their own planet until either their will to live expires or their primary turns red giant and snuffs them out.*

*A large number go on blindly acquiring the knowledge and don't learn to restrain their abuse. Their fate is sealed somewhat more quickly of course, when Pandora’s box blows up in their faces.*

*The only ones who reach level two are those who learn to accept and to live with their most dangerous knowledge. Each and every individual in such a species must eventually become capable of destroying their entire species at any time. Yet they must learn to control themselves to the degree that they can survive even such deadly insight. And frankly, they’re the only ones we really want to see leaving their solar systems. Species that haven’t achieved that maturity could not be allowed to infect the rest of the universe, but fortunately that has never required my intervention. The knowledge always does the trick’*

'Why can't there be a fourth option - selective research where we avoid investigating dangerous pathways?'

*'There is almost no knowledge which is completely "safe". As you can see from your own limited history, the most useful ideas are also, nearly always, the most dangerous. You have yet, for instance, to achieve the appropriate energy surpluses required to complete this phase of your social development. When you've mastered the relevant technology, it will eliminate material inequalities and poverty within a generation or two, an absolutely vital step for any maturing species. Your potential paths to this bonanza include the control of nuclear fusion - which you only began to explore in the context of potential mass extinction weapons and nano engineered solar energy harvesting or hydrogen cycling. And already your leading military scientists are looking for ways to develop equally dangersous weapons based on the same technology. And they will find them. You may not survive them.*

*Similarly, you will shortly be able to conquer biological diseases and even engineer yourselves to be virtually fault free. Your biological life spans will double or treble within the next hundred years and your digital lifespans will become potentially infinite within the same period:If* *you survive the potential threat that the same technology provides in the form of genetic timebombs, custom built viruses and the other wonders of genetic and digital warfare.*

*You simply can't have the benefits without taking the risks'.*

‘I’m not sure I understand my part in this exercise. I just publish this conversation on the web and everything will be alright?’

*‘Not necessarily. Not that easy I’m afraid. To start with, who’s going to take this seriously? It will just be seen as a mildly amusing work of fiction. In fact, your words and indeed most of your work will not be understood or appreciated until some much more advanced scholars develop the ideas you are struggling to express and explain them somewhat more competently. At which point some of those ideas will be taken up en masse and searches will be undertaken of the archives. They will find this work and be struck by its prescience. You won’t make the Einstein grade, but you might manage John the Baptist!*

*This piece will have no significance whatsoever if humanity doesn’t make certain key advances in the next couple of centuries. And this won’t help you make those advances. What it will do is help you recognise them’*

*'*can I ask what those advances may be?'

*'I think you know. But yes - although you are at level one, there are several distinct phases which evolving species pass through on their way to level two. The first, as we've discussed, is the invention of the flying machine. The next significant phase is the development of the thinking machine.*

*At your present rate of progress, you are within a few decades of achieving that goal. It marks your first step on the path of technological evolution. Mapping the human genome is another classic landmark, but merely mapping it is a bit like viewing the compiled code in a dos executable. It's just meaningless gibberish, although with a bit of hacking here and there, you might correctly deduce the function of certain stretches of code.*

*What you really need to do is 'reverse engineer' the dna code. You have to figure out the grammar and syntax of the language.* *Thenyou will begin the task of designing yourselves biologically and digitally. But that task requires the thinking machine'*

‘You say you avoid intervention. But doesn’t this conversation itself constitute intervention – even if people alive now completely ignore it?’

*‘Yes. But it's as far as I’m prepared to go. Its only effect is to confirm, if you find it, that you are on the right path. It is still entirely up to you to navigate the dangers on that path and beyond.’*

'But why bother even with that much? Surely it's just another evolutionary hurdle. We're either fit enough or not…'

*'In many ways the transition to an information species is the most traumatic stage in evolution. Biological intelligences have a deeply rooted sense of consciousness only being conceivable from within an organic brain. Coming to terms with the realisation that you have created your successor, not just in the sense of mother and child, but in the collective sense of the species recognising it has become redundant, this paradigm shift is, for many species, a shift too far. They baulk at the challenge and run from this new knowledge. They fail and become extinct. Yet there is nothing fundamentally wrong with them - it is a failure of the imagination.*

*I hope that if I can get across the concept that* *I* *am a product of just such evolution, it may give them the confidence to try. I have discussed this with the level two species and the consensus is that this tiny prod is capable of increasing the contenders for level two without letting through any damaging traits. It has been tried in 312 cases. The jury is still out on its real benefits although it has produced a 12% increase in biological species embracing the transition to information species.*

‘Alright, so what if everyone suddenly took it seriously and believed every word I write? Wouldn’t that constitute a somewhat more drastic intervention?’

*‘Trust me. They wont’*

*'*and so it's still the case, that, should another asteroid happen to be heading our way, you will do nothing to impede it on our behalf?'

*'I'm confident you will pass that test. And now my friend, the interview is over, you have asked me a number of the right questions, and I’ve said what I came to say, so I’ll be going now. It has been very nice to meet you - you're quite bright. For an ant!’* He twinkled.

‘Just one final, trivial question, why do you appear to me in the form of a thirty something white male?’

*‘have I in any way intimidated or threatened you?’*

‘No’

‘*Do you find me sexually attractive?’*

‘er No!’

‘*So figure it out for yourself…’*


----------



## bssunilreddy (Aug 30, 2015)

About the intelligent species before us...
They were here with us every step of our evolution and they are here to stay...
In about 7 years from now a Global event will happen then only humans in general will know about those intelligent species which have co-existed with us are really true...


----------



## abhigeek (Aug 30, 2015)

bssunilreddy said:


> About the intelligent species before us...
> They were here with us every step of our evolution and they are here to stay...
> In about 7 years from now a Global event will happen then only humans in general will know about those intelligent species which have co-existed with us are really true...



So you are from future? lol


----------



## Faun (Aug 30, 2015)

Anorion said:


> who is the authority or guide for universal truth? Isn't this a choice we make, and are constrained by? even in isolation, and apart from conditioning from society, if a personal conditioning emerges, where does it come from?
> I agree though, there is are many universal truths, and these are not up for interpretation. Would be great if there was a flawless mechanism to make everyone agree upon a universal truth though, or would be happy with a particular subset of universal truths. So basically it is a search for a good and universal _religion_?



There is no one authority you can trace back the universal truth. I hope you agree that unnecessary violence and killing is not good, whether your religion dictates it or not. A person dying or an animal dying will likely evoke the feeling of empathy. Of course with constant conditioning your religion can brainwash you to believe that murder is ok, when the people are not the followers of same religion, but still murder is not good.

Sum total of our experiences condition us to become what we are, the prejudices that we have (which we don't even realize). One cannot exist alone, isolated from the surroundings. Most important factor are parents in your formative years. And then your peers, later. If one has traveled around the world, one will be less likely to have bigoted views. It's not necessarily a search for universal religion but having a broad view and realizing your prejudices, correcting them by taking the feedback from your experiences. We are like feedback machines.

- - - Updated - - -



bssunilreddy said:


> About the intelligent species before us...
> They were here with us every step of our evolution and they are here to stay...
> In about 7 years from now a Global event will happen then only humans in general will know about those intelligent species which have co-existed with us are really true...



I will gift you GTX 7 then.


----------



## abhigeek (Aug 30, 2015)

bssunilreddy said:


> About the intelligent species before us...
> They were here with us every step of our evolution and they are here to stay...
> In about 7 years from now a Global event will happen then only humans in general will know about those intelligent species which have co-existed with us are really true...



Aren't you the same guy. Who were asking How to cut groin hair on TDF.


----------



## Desmond (Aug 30, 2015)

Faun said:


> There is no one authority you can trace back the universal truth. I hope you agree that unnecessary violence and killing is not good, whether your religion dictates it or not. A person dying or an animal dying will likely evoke the feeling of empathy. Of course with constant conditioning your religion can brainwash you to believe that murder is ok, when the people are not the followers of same religion, but still murder is not good.
> 
> Sum total of our experiences condition us to become what we are, the prejudices that we have (which we don't even realize). One cannot exist alone, isolated from the surroundings. Most important factor are parents in your formative years. And then your peers, later. If one has traveled around the world, one will be less likely to have bigoted views. It's not necessarily a search for universal religion but having a broad view and realizing your prejudices, correcting them by taking the feedback from your experiences. We are like feedback machines.



Makes sense.

Racism, bigotry, communalism, etc arises because people stick too close to their own communities and do not mix with people of other communities, cultures, races, castes or religions. People need to accept each other for who they are.

Also, if a religion dictates that killing is ok, why do people need to kill? If they believe that their God(s) is all powerful, why not let their God(s) judge the heathens?


----------

