The "Existence of God" debate

[Der_Trihs]

@Farin

I could make the argument that since science has it’s sacrosanct theories that are inviolate “until we achieve a higher technology” that it, too, is a religion. After all, aren’t we just exchanging a “betterment of ourselves” as espoused in most religions for a “betterment of our technology”?

That’s a silly comparison. Science is based on evidence and reason, not faith and irrationality like religion; science and religion are opposites. Nor does science have any “sacrosanct theories”; on the contrary, there’s nothing any ambitious scientist would like more than to tear down some well known or important theory - it would make his or her name in scientific history.

@Farin

Stalin stole many devices of the religious segments to embed his political ambitions into the USSR.

Which is normal for religions; Christianity stole a great deal from other religions as well.

@Farin

Not all religions are like that. Jewish beliefs do not hold a “Hell” and yet when they were a monarchy in ancient times, they had no trouble waging war for the glory of both God and state. They didn’t really have a concept of “Afterlife” until after the monarchy was crushed and the first Temple destroyed. So what propelled those first warriors?

All the other things that propel warriors, I expect.

@Farin

People are “moral” versus “amoral” on their own.

No; they are strongly influenced by outside forces. And religion is a powerful force for corruption, both moral and intellectual.

@Farin

That’s a ridiculous generalization.

It’s an acknowledgement of history. Christianity got to its present position through bloodshed, terror and destruction. All of its benevolent claims have throughout history overwhelmingly been empty rhetoric.