Why Religion/Church is Better than Atheism

Discussion in 'Religion and Spirituality' started by FortuneTeller, Apr 22, 2021.

  1. Try to change my mind.

    The best documented relationship is between church at- tendance and crime rates. At least among church members, the evidence consistently indicates that frequent church attenders have lower crime rates than infrequent attenders, especially regarding victimless offenses.

    Does religion affect crime?

    In general, available empirical evidence suggests an inverse relationship between religion and crime. According to over 40 years of empirical research summarizing the relationship between religion and crime, findings indicate that religion decreases propensities for criminal behavior (Adamczyk et al.Jun 18, 2018

    What are the 3 positive effects of religion?

    Most studies have also found a positive association between religiosity and other factors associated with well-being such as optimism and hope (12 out of 14 studies), self-esteem (16 out of 29 studies, but only one with a negative association), sense of meaning and purpose in life (15 out of 16 studies), internal locus ...Jul 28, 2017

    Why religion is a good thing?

    Purpose of Religion

    Religion can be a source of comfort and guidance. It can provide a basis for moral beliefs and behaviors. It can also provide a sense of community and connection to tradition. Some research even suggests that it may have an effect on health.

    The Positive Effects of Religion on Mental Illness | Institute for Family Studies (ifstudies.org)

    Studies: Religion linked to fewer violent crimes; being ‘spiritual but not religious’ tied to increased risk - Ahead of the Trend Ahead of the Trend (thearda.com)

    In Theory: Does going to church keep people honest? - Los Angeles Times (latimes.com)

    Send your kids to church. Believe in them. Give them a chance.

    Talking To Jesus | Elevation Worship & Maverick City - YouTube

    Talking To Jesus - Elevation Worship & Maverick City Music (Lyrics) - YouTube
     
  2. Overnight

    Overnight

    You do know that "religion" does not equal a Godhead, right?

    Better you learn this later than never, I suppose.

     
  3. Good1

    Good1

    What do you mean 'religion'?

    Here's a thought experiment that replaces [your brand of religion here] with Islam/mosque/Muslim in the sentences posited:

    It's important to note that Islam is a version of Judaism + Judeo-Christianity [itself being a version of Judaism].

    If 'religion' is a generic good, then you should be able to support the thought experiment posited above.

    =====
    Here is one possible definition of religion:

    The aggrandizement of faith versus knowledge, toward the behavioral modification of the greatest number of peoples, with the smallest police force. Church as psychological reinforcement of the value of faith, support group, and lobby, for the benefits of what is believed.
    =======

    Here is another possible definition of religion:

    The work of discerning reality versus illusion, of distinguishing faith versus knowledge, of sorting out truth versus sins [seriously insane notions about reality], and an effort to make a new choice based on the newest, best information. Church as a support group in this endeavor.
    ========

    What the first definition does offer is predictable behavior. Statistics could be gathered if the studies were honest. Currently, in many places, it is not allowed to gather statistics, or profile, a certain religion versus it's crime rates.

    Going by predictable behavior, i would prefer to live in a Christian-esque neighborhood, or a Quaker neighborhood, or a "Unity" type neighborhood. Yes, i think i could benefit from the effects of the first definition of religion, if the behavior is modified toward general fairness in relations between peoples, providing the most peace possible in an otherwise impossible situation (hell)...until a better understanding could be accepted by the majority.

    But i don't condone the promulgation of fear for the modification of behavior. That is, i don't think it is worth it to get behavioral predictability in favor of a fear factor, the idea that Gosh* is reading your mind and making a database of thoughts to be judged upon one's death, to determine future placement in a hierarchy. *a neuro-linguistic alternative to the over-played term God, used too much in vain.

    I feel there is downside, too much downside in the aggrandizement of the value of faith (the worshipping of faith) in a carrot** and stick*** environment...where there is this concept of **rewards versus ***punishments in the future. This includes the concept of 'karma', even though i chuckle whenever i see a tip jar with the sign "tip for good karma". While i appreciate the living conditions a prevailing concept of karma could reward me with, i still think it is better to discern the truth/reality, and face it, even if it means joining a support group (church/ashram) that is intended to face it.

    There was a teacher who said, "Fear not". This should be the qualifying condition for the validity of any given religion, on any given Saturday or Sunday. I would say that fear, or the promulgation of fear (fear mongering) completely disqualifies a religion, even before the race is run (before we look at statistics).

    So, for example, if i hold up a crucifix and say that unless you modify your behavior, the same Gosh that crucified his Son will do the same or worse to you...if i did that, my religion should be disqualified from consideration as anything remotely legitimate. That's called terrorism, which is what Pontius Pilatus had intended to inflict upon the Jews, in order to modify their behavior (don't revolt). But now, in addition to Pontius Pilatus intending to terrorize Jews, social media influencers (ie. priests, preachers, parents) use the very same technique/method/strategy to modify the behavior of the largest numbers of peoples with the smallest police force. This illegitamizes the Messianic version of Judaism known as Judeo-Christianity, just based on the maxim: "FEAR NOT". Likewise, the fear factor de-legitamizes the Mahdi version of Judaism known as Islam. The fear factor disqualifies every religion that descends from a man, Abraham, who was willing to knife his own son, based on his faith in the voices in his head, or the voice around his body.

    So no, even though i might benefit from certain brands of terrorism upon the psychology of peoples in general, i don't condone it. This can be summed up in another maxim mentioned by a good teacher: "Violence begets violence".

    As violence begets violence, Judaism begot Judeo-Christianity, and they, together, begot Islam. Were it not for the concept of animal sacrifice (violence) nobody would have thought to interpret Jesus' voluntary demonstration of mastery over pain and the injustice of violence (the crucifixion, violence) as a basis for actual terrorism (using it to further terrorize peoples into behavioral modification). Were it not for both these religions, no illiterate nomad from the desert, with a taste for plunder and booty, would have thought to posit his own (plagiarized) book, or make himself out to be any kind of prophet (let alone the last prophet), using fear (terrorism) to promulgate his own religion.

    So there are downsides to using terrorism to promulgate anything. Karma will come back to bite you with an even more virulent religion, using even more potent attacks upon the psychology of more peoples.

    I cannot even condone the world's softest terrorism, the concept of karma, except to simply face the facts as they play out in experience. Sins have their own police force, their own courts, and their own pitchforks (punishments). That is, if we keep thinking the way we've always thought, we'll keep getting what we've always got (You can even find this in the Self-Help book section of Barnes and Nobles). And it could get worse! This is all that is meant by the concept of future "hell", as acknowledged by a very good teacher. We are currently in hell because of the way we think about reality/Christ/truth. If you think it's bad now, it could get a lot worse, if we continue to ignore reality/Christ/truth. This is all Jesus meant by "sin no more". The effects of ignoring reality/Christ/truth get progressively worse as the mind wanders further and further out into the darkness of democracy.

    This is not to invoke a fear factor, but rather a face-it factor. Any reasonable mind should be able to recognize that if your social media influencers are all telling lies, your neighborhood might soon be at war with your neighbors. Karma is a way of thinking about justice that helps preserve mental health...to keep people from going crazy over the effects of living a lie. Karma, like re-incarnation, is a phenomenon that is in effect. Re-incarnation, like incarnation (in the first place) is a phenomenon that is in effect: for those who believe erroneous "facts" about reality/Christ/truth. We don't have to believe in karma, nor do we have to believe in re-incarnation, AND, we do not have to believe in incarnation (in the first place).

    Karma (religions promulgate elaborate versions of karma) is best thought of as a balance of experiences within the domain of self-sabotage. The domain of self-sabotage is entirely imaginary. It has an effect only upon a mind filled with faith. The domain of imagination is intent upon combining exclusive opposites into one thing, one world, symbolized by one tree comprised of opposites (ie. good and evil) expressing as one fruit. Incarnation, re-incarnation, and karma, are an expression of that fruit. You might be man in one experience, and woman in another. You might be both man and woman (a hermaphrodite) in a single experience. You might be black in one experience, and white in another experience, or you might be brown (mulatto) in the same experience. You might be a victim in one experience, and a victor in another, or you might be both victim and victor in the same experience. All of this experience is within the realm of imagination, given over to self-sabotage, as it ignores a Self that is reality/Christ/truth. All of these experiences are only experienced by that mind (the proverbial prodigal son) that has given itself over to wandering out into the unknown, into a land (foreign) ruled by faith. It's important to note that faith and sin is the same thing.

    Therefore i am in favor of my second stated definition of religion, no matter what you may fear will be the consequence. Better to face reality, than ignore it, even if you need a support group to help you. My version of religion states that there are no victims, as a truth we must face (accept). This can only be true if each person walking the face of the earth starts out as an omnipotent, as well omniscient being. I like to call that being Christ, to personalize it as a Self, with a capital S. This religion promotes the concept of total responsibility. Think how much better, how much more peaceful the world would be if nobody blamed anybody for anything? What would you fear if you knew that you were responsible for everything that happens to you, including the experience of being "born"? You wouldn't fear anything except self-sabotage.

    If you knew how to stop self-sabotage, you would not fear anything at all. This, i say, is the religion advocated by Jesus. A religion derived from ancient Jewish traditions goes against the religion advocated by Jesus.

    We should not fear Gosh, because anything Good cannot be responsible for self-sabotage. It was, after all, the idea of the proverbial prodigal son to leave a good land in favor of a foreign land. Likewise, it needs to be the idea of the prodigal son to decide he has nothing to fear except fear itself, upon his return to the good land.

    There are no victims. There is only one thing (i prefer to call it the proverbial prodigal son) that is harming its s/Self with it's imaginations about it's own Self/Reality/Truth/Christ. This is the basis for forgiveness, that is, a healing brand of forgiveness that actually has a positive (healthy) effect. If you knew you could not be harmed except by your own hand, you would be more psychologically healthy. If you knew how to actually stop harming yourself by your own hand, your mind would be even healthier. This is the only religion the world really needs right now.

    We need another fear based religion like we need cerebral cancer. Look how many Judeo-Christians are involved in politics, which is what "gnashing of teeth" is all about. Look how much Shawn Hannity has to gnash his teeth to have any effect upon the neighborhood/nation he lives in? Why is this? Even if he we talking to the most prominent social media influencer in his neighborhood/nation, he would still interrupt him (Trump) with so much gnashing of teeth. This would be less painful if you one would get paid well to gnash (be a talking head), or listen to the gnashing. It would be better, for example, if i got paid $60 an hour to sort out the deficiencies of fear based religions. Hannity gets paid to gnash about how to make hell a better place to live. The problem being, hell is inherently dysfunctional, and can never be made into a utopia for all. Hannity's religion denies he is in hell, and won't tell him why (won't explain the basis of self-sabotage). So, Hannity must gnash his teeth to make hell a better place to live. This is because his religion doesn't explain how hell is not, nor can it ever be, a "home" for the Self/Reality/Truth/Christ. If Hannity accepted the truth of what i am explaining, he would be motivated to keep quiet, very very quiet...and 'listen', so-to-speak. Its tempting to agree with the policies Hannity proposes, and often i do. But that is only when i tempted to make hell (this world) a "home" to be fixed up and protected by conventional/traditional means. The more i try to protect it, the more emotional somatic pain i will feel ("think the way always thought, get what always got").

    Our safety, in hell, is not dependent upon any governmental policy. So we don't need to be involved in politics. To the extent that a religion compels us to get involved in politics, as to how society should be run, it compels us to gnash our teeth, and feel as though we are burning inside, until we can establish good policy that everyone can abide by. This delays the revelation of actual cause-and-effect: how, why hell ("this world") functions. Without the revelation, you will not be able to solve any of the problems that hell presents to faith compromised minds, which are going crazier and crazier by the day. If we think the way we've always though, we will get what we have always got, or possibly even worse.

    The idea that "all men were created equal", has arguably improved mankind's living/experiential conditions. First proposed during the peak of the slave trade, many types of slavery have been abolished wherever the concept of equality has prevailed. I appreciate this. But problems remain. There is still an endless gnashing of teeth needed to improve conditions even one step more, with an endless uphill climb over centuries to overcome.

    If, for example, you knew that you could only harm yourself by your own hand, would we have anymore gnashing of teeth about the right to carry a gun? If what you knew prevented you from being shot would we be having a debate about the need to carry arms? Would we be funding a police department if we knew that no robbers would ever bother us? Would we be arguing about funding the police if, when we were shot, we would feel no pain, or, after feeling no pain we would not drop dead, and the wound would heal immediately? Would we be gnashing our teeth if we could not be shot in the first place?

    My religion, as posited, guarantees invulnerability, until we are delivered from the land of imagination and its effects upon the faith-full. It states that knowledge prevents from any more self harm, by ending harm to one's True Self, by replacing imagination (and it's antecedent faith) , with the acceptance of Reality/Self/Christ as it is, without change. With knowledge of one's Self, one could volunteer to be crucified, and not feel any pain. And after not feeling any pain, one could even walk out of a tomb after being left for dead for three days. With knowledge, you could not be hurt by crucifixion at all, and would need to volunteer for it to be arrested in the first place.

    To help forward my case i will propose looking at the phenomenon known as the market, as in the stock market, the forex market, the cryptocurrency market. You can only be hurt by any of these markets by your own ignorance of the future. Why don't you know the future? If you knew even one day into the future, you would soon be a billionaire. You are vulnerable to the extent you do not know anything. Now, it's possible to gain greatly in the markets, even if you don't know anything. This is due to the fluctuations of random chance. Even in a 50/50 chance game, you could experience 12 wins in a row, knowing nothing. But sooner or later, you will have a balance of experiences where you lose it all, or even more, harmed by your own participation in the process. You might be able to do a little better by looking at predictable behavior, and, for example, cash in on implied volatility, which is a measure of the way people are fearing or greeding in the market.

    Here's the kicker (continuing the above analogy). If everyone had knowledge of tomorrows price, there would actually not be any price to be had. There would be no more market. Likewise, if everyone had knowledge of Self/Reality/Now/Truth/Christ/Good, there would be no more domain of imagination. Without the domain of imagination, there would be no more stars, planets, trees, bees, seas or "me"s. There would be no more men, no more women, no more babies, no more slaves (victims), no more Jews, no more Greeks, no more faith, no more nations, no more galaxies, and no more crashing of galaxies. There would be no more platform for any other "me" to exist other than an omniscient being, like Christ! Knowing, in other words, completely eliminates any domain that depends upon ignorance (faith) to operate and function.

    As another analogy, look at the phenomenon of "drama". Every movie you ever watched depends upon ignorance for it's emotional effects. First of all, you, the observer, cannot know what is going to happen next. This leaves your emotions vulnerable to plot twists. Next, the actors themselves must be ignorant to participate. For example, an actor receives new information which causes them to take new actions. Very dramatic. But if the actor already knew all the information, already knew the plot, so-to-speak, he would not be able to participate, unless he was ignorant of his role as an actor.

    So it is with those of us abiding in the domain of imagination. We do not realize we are actors on a platform (stage to be observed), and are in need of non-knowledge (faith, ignorance) to perpetuate the painful play in a land of vulnerabilities. Without ignorance of what will happen next (as if it was happening independent of our own self-sabotage), there would be no more drama with which to participate.

    There are no vulnerabilities in the land of knowledge/omnipotence. Therefore, there is no birth, no growth, no eating, no breathing, no drinking, no changing, and no dying in Christ (Reality/Truth/Self/Knowledge). These are vulnerabilities dependent upon ignorance of Reality. If you don't drink, for example, for even five days, you will "die". But even death itself is a sin dependent upon faith in ignorance for it's perpetuation.

    Thus, the more you "know thy Self" the less vulnerable you are to conditions around you. The less vulnerable you are, the less you will feel inclined to gnash your teeth (get involved in politics) to improve the conditions around you. The more you know, the more the conditions around you disappear, and/or become ineffectual, including threats to your wealth or your person. The more you know, the more anything that is vulnerable to conditions around you disappears. Thus, your very person, the the thing you thought you were (within the ignorant domain of imagination) disappears, in favor of the only Being that actually exists, Christ (Reality/Truth/Knowledge/Self).

    So, no, there is only one kind of religion that really promulgates mental health and safety of being.

    Even the soft, seemingly fearless faith/religion of Tony Robbins has problems that could be pointed out in another thread, for reasons explained in this thread. As Robbins faith might appeal to more atheists, more and more "churches" are modeling their modality on his style of faith. In another thread i could argue how Judeo-Christians are as atheistic as Jews.
     
    Last edited: Apr 24, 2021
  4. Good1

    Good1

    Introducing, Dr. Turek.



    I had never heard of Dr. Turek before i saw this video today, and was surprised he carries it on his own channel, as if he had something to be proud of, or that he made a good point.

    One thing i notice is an inconsistency where he tells the atheist that without gOsh, he has no place, no basis to make a moral judgement about whether it is good or evil for gOsh to direct Abraham to knife his son...or whether it is good or evil for Abraham to obey such a directive to prove some kind of loyalty to either gOsh, or to faith itself.

    But at other times, Turek tells his audience they have a moral compass, regardless about how much information they have about gOsh, or don't have, even those who never had a bible that tells them about gOsh. It's because they had a (gOsh given?) moral compass that gOsh was justified in flooding away everyone except for Noah, long before there were any scriptures to educate people on morality. It's because of a gOsh given moral compass that gOsh was justified in directing Moses band of monotheists to wipe out various cultures populating a piece of land promised to Abraham. Justified also to spare virgins for Moses' tribes, while executing every other breathing thing, a morality later to me imitated by Mohammed.

    This is inconsistent, because by the very same gOsh given moral compass that Dr. Turek asserts all atheists posses, they should rightly be able to conclude that collective punishment is immoral, or that initiating battle on a general population, only to save virgins for wifery, or other variations of booty, is also "wrong".

    Dr. Tureks argument is that the atheist cannot know the rightness or wrongness of anything gOsh might think, say, do or direct, contradicted by his own assertions that atheists are responsible for making correct moral judgements about various conditions. Thus, if a culture succumbs to the practice of sacrificing children to their gOsh/idol (which is what gOsh directed Abraham to do), it cannot be redeemed, reformed, informed, or otherwise spared, as were the Israelite tribes, despite their own tendency toward gOsh/idols. This is inconsistent, because presumably, in battle, many children would be killed for Moses' gOsh, along with many other civilians who might feel themselves intimidated by the priests who were conducting the child sacrifices. It would be equivalent to assuming the culture of North Korea is so corrupt it is irredeemable and must be completely wiped out, regardless of nuance which would suggest that the people are captives of a corrupt class of priests.

    It's scary to see a "Dr." say, on stage, he does not know what he would do in Abraham's situation, and try to turn it around on the atheist, saying he has no moral compass upon this occasion, but that he must have a moral compass on every other situation.

    So this is introducing "Dr." (like "Dr." Jill Biden) Turek. Here he debates Christopher Hitchens back in the day, themed, "What Best Explains Reality, Theism or Atheism?"



    It starts with the question: What is reality?

    I noted, first of all, that Dr. Turek does not equate Christ with Reality, and immediately begins asserting that the environment that surrounds him, starting with the "big bang" and continuing under the laws of thermo dynamics, sometimes called "the world", is real, is reality, and what's more, that Dr. Turek himself truly exists within it. Thus, he asserts both he, and his environment, are reality, utterly ignoring the fact that truth and reality are the same thing, and that both qualities belong exclusively to Christ. Here then, see the emperor steal his clothes from Christ. Note well he does not give a damn for what precedes the "big bang", does not include it in his definition of "reality", and even goes so far as to call it "super-natural", as if the world around him is "natural", as if what went prior (Christ) is not natural.

    Of note, for the theme of this thread, is Hitchens assertion that given a faith in gOsh, religious people are capable of the most immoral actions. Thus, it is quite debatable whether religion, as suggested by the OP, is really a force for good, so-to-speak...or at least better than atheism. I find myself aligned more often with the morality of an atheist. Is it because i have a Good-given sense of morality?

    I also note that Dr. Turek seems to enjoy hearing the echo of his voice booming off the walls of a room filled with an audience. He keeps asserting he is from New Jersey, and not from a Reality that precedes the concepts of space and time, as was claimed by Jesus, presumably his leader, who insisted that everybody's prehistoric (before time) "Father" was the same. Dr. Turek only really gives a damn about the beginning of the world he thinks is "reality", in which he thinks he exists.

    My use of the term gOsh is a way to describe the god of the big "O", so-to-speak, versus Good, which did not create man, nor man's environs (man's "world", so-to-speak). As the maker of man's world, gOsh is the intelligent principle which designed the orgasm, known on the street as "the big O". Some argue that orgasm contains heroin-like chemicals, making it functionally addictive.
     
    Last edited: Apr 25, 2021
  5. The idea of polytheism is quite fun, just pick the most appropriate god to worship based on the outcome you want. E.g. got a rusty, squeaky hinge? Best light a candle for Carda, Roman god of hinges. Door not closing properly? Time to pray to Janus, god of doors. All very practical.

    Whether any of these gods had a positive "moral" impact is difficult to know, but at least there can't have been too many problems with DIY.
     
  6. piezoe

    piezoe

    And what if it's not?
     
  7. Good1

    Good1

    I may have rambled, or otherwise expanded too much on the points i made. So let me try to summarize.

    Clubs could be a generic good, if social connections help maintain a healthy/healthier state of mind, until new information arrives where people can make better choices about reality and it's corollary, knowledge, versus the illusions and delusions of ignorance (the domain of faith) .

    Any time fear presides over a club, i would argue it cannot be a generic good, as the effects of fear work their way through society. For one thing, the generic mind cannot learn properly in an environment of fear. This is catastrophic if learning is needed for salvation. The inability to learn prolongs one's experience of hell. Every hour spent in hell puts one's person at risk for overt pain and suffering, and rapid radical change (another death). Every hour spent in hell maintains a subtle, covert level of pain and suffering that walks right up to the threshold of tolerability. Whenever anyone commits overt suicide, it indicates they spent too much time over the threshold of tolerability. Every other death is a covert suicide. Fear precludes the freedom of mind needed to establish a way out of hell.
     
  8. Pekelo

    Pekelo

    Of course religion is better than atheism. I learnt this at the People's Temple church. Their summer camp at Jamestown was a little, well, extreme to my taste though, so I switched to the Heaven's Gate group. I do like science fiction.
    I also like my balls, so... I will just catch the next comet...

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2021
  9. When there is no one around you, when you are in need. Whom do you talk to?? What do you actually do? You pray! Isn’t it! This does not apply to an atheist who would stay helpless in such a case.

    There is no proof that God exists and it is just a matter of belief, but this does not mean that you would feel better being an atheist.
     
  10. vinc

    vinc