Study shows religion is a potent force for cooperation, conflict

Wow, social aggregation can cause cooperation... or conflict... *head explodes*

An appreciation of spirituality and logical reasoning is clearly more harmonious and productive than the artificial divisions of religion.

Sigh. Will they ever listen to those who already know we can be good and moral without a boogieman to threaten us. It's just not that hard to do. Loving one another is so much more direct without divisive gods standing in the way.

"Good is better than evil 'cause it's nicer" - Mammy Yokum

Dear commenters: The mere fact that you read phys.org means you're probably more aware of what's going on in cognitive science and religion that the average bear.

Instead of snarking, send this page to everyone in your address book. You may save a world from bad religion!

I do presume, just the religion did the civilization from the half-organized tribes and clans. If you organize many people under common idea, you will defeat all it neighbors both economically, both military. The primitive people don't understand the widespread synergies well (after all, in the same way, like the people don't understand the emergent motivations of dense aether model) - but what they do understand is the idea of common deity, which requires to plan and organize their lives.

Of course, the same ideological cement has become a brake of the further evolution later. After all, in the same way, like so-called the scientific method, which replaced the religion during last two centuries. Every good thing becomes a dinosaur gradually.

Religions tend to get caught up in the act of aiming and forget what they are aiming for.

The primitive people don't understand the widespread synergies well (after all, in the same way, like the people don't understand the emergent motivations of dense aether model)

Will dense aether model make peace and prosperity for humankind? Should we kill non beleivers or convert them?

Instead of snarking, send this page to everyone in your address book. You may save a world from bad religion!

ALL religion is bad. This is stated in the article:

"Moralizing gods, emerging over the last few millennia, have enabled large-scale cooperation and sociopolitical conquest even without war,"

-Cooperation, that is, among people of many disparate groups who adopt the religion, such as the Germanic tribes in Europe. Xianity was the reason Charlemagne could form his empire. Religion can artificially extend tribal identity over large regions.

But this done solely for the purpose if conquest. All religions want to conquer the world and are DESIGNED to do so. The ones which survived are merely BETTER at this.

All believers want you to give up your evil god and accept their obvious source of universal good. To do this they will proselytize, threaten, or wait patiently until they outnumber you and then attack. Or today they can outvote you.

I have been saying for fifty years that the invention of religion was the worst thing humans ever did.

have been saying for fifty years that the invention of religion was the worst thing humans ever did.

In the beginning, it gave us comfort, community and purpose. The down side is it sticks like glue. By now we should know why we need to be compassionate and moral beings. We know so much more about our initial ignorance. Back then it was even fine to think the world was flat! We were nicely comforted by our beliefs. But religion hangs on and sabotages progress. Some of us get it, others are stuck.

I do not have a solution. I think we need to be compassionate and understanding, but we need to fix it before it kills us, the planet, or both.

I violently defend my sacred right to life.

Will we see a study that socialism leads conflict and poverty any time soon?

I have been saying for fifty years that the invention of religion was the worst thing humans ever did.

The problem is not the principles, it's the people who use those ideas to acquire power and control over others.
What part of "love your neighbor as yourself" do you object to?
Which of the ten commandments to you find harmful?
In anticipation, 'you shall have no other gods' can be interpreted secularly to mean one should try not to let animal nature control your life. The second commandment suggests one should not deceive using God's name, and the third, resting on the 7th day has been demonstrated to have a positive influence on productivity.
Of the remaining 7 which ones make you chafe?

What part of "love your neighbor as yourself" do you object to?
Which of the ten commandments to you find harmful?

Well obviously the idea that these things originate exclusively in your particular god, and without belief in him these things would not exist.

This IS the root of religionist power over others and it is an outrageous LIE. Neither your religion nor any other could exist without this LIE to sustain them.

The 10 commandments BEGIN with the insistence to believe in and worship YOUR god alone. Every other religion contains these same caveats. Every one claims that they are the ONLY source of goodness, peace, and morality. They ALL warn that the other religions are sources of evil.

One can imagine the problems this can cause among people.

In anticipation, 'you shall have no other gods' can be interpreted secularly to mean one should try not to let animal nature control your life.

'Can be interpreted'? People read it and believe what it says. It says that your religion is the only source of morality. This is restated throughout your books. Your priests, pastors, rabbis, imams, and gurus all repeat it endlessly. Your songs are full of it.

Exclusivism is a necessity of any religion. Us vs them. You know what happened to the Israelites who wandered from the one true god don't you?

I notice Auto didn't say which commandments he wants to violate.

As a socialist, Auto must want violate the first, Govt is god to the socialist, and all the remaining commandments that prohibit the coveting and theft of property.

I notice Auto didn't say which commandments he wants to violate.

So many... where to start? Heres one I would violate:
"All who curse their father or mother must be put to death. They are guilty of a capital offense." (Lev 20:9 NLT)

This ones a little extreme:
"If a man commits adultery with another man's wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death." (Lev 20:10 NLT)

Or this:
"They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman. (2 Chron 15:12-13 NAB)

I have violated this one many times:
"If a man still prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall say to him, "You shall not live, because you have spoken a lie in the name of the Lord." When he prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall thrust him through." Zech13:3

-So many Laws to break, so little time-

Let's keep it simple Auto. Which of the TEN commandments do you want to violate?
So far, you seem to want to make Govt god of all and you covet everyone's property and want to steal it.

As a socialist, Auto must want violate the first, Govt is god to the socialist, and all the remaining commandments that prohibit the coveting and theft of blahblah.

Ryggy must find this passage particularly inspiring:

"13 When I shut up the heavens so that there is no rain, or command locusts to devour the land or send a plague among my people, 14 if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land. 15 Now my eyes will be open and my ears attentive to the prayers offered in this place. 16 I have chosen and consecrated this temple so that my Name may be there forever. My eyes and my heart will always be there." 2chron7

"Pray for Our Nation"

-No gain without pain eh? His eyes and heart will always be there to send drought and locusts and plague... this must be tough love. He cant heal the land until he messes it up a little?

This is what I like:
10 Samuel told all the words of the Lord to the people who were asking him for a king. 11 He said, This is what the king who will reign over you will claim as his rights: He will take your sons and make them serve with his chariots and horses, and they will run in front of his chariots. 12 Some he will assign to be commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and others to plow his ground and reap his harvest, and still others to make weapons of war and equipment for his chariots. 13 He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. 14 He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive groves and give them to his attendants. 15 He will take a tenth of your grain and of your vintage and give it to his officials and attendants. 16 Your male and female servants and the best of your cattle[c] and donkeys he will take for his own use. 17 He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his slaves.

"18 When that day comes, you will cry out for relief from the king you have chosen, but the Lord will not answer you in that day.

19 But the people refused to listen to Samuel. No! they said. We want a king over us. 20 Then we will be like all the other nations, with a king to lead us and to go out before us and fight our battles."
http://www.bibleg...search=1 Samuel 8&version=NIV

Socialist Auto worships the State and cannot abide a God who says he can't steal the property of others.

Auto should like this passage as God abandoned those who want to be taken care of by the State.

Socialist Auto worships the State and cannot abide a God who says he can't steal the property of others.

Youre way off-topic dweeb. Your tribal affiliations are preventing you from clear and concise thinking I think.

Socialist Auto worships the State and cannot abide a God who says he can't steal the property of others.

Youre way off-topic dweeb. Your tribal affiliations are preventing you from clear and concise thinking I think.

Auto claims to be a socialist and atheist. His tribal affiliations (or religion), or personal desires, promote control of other people and their property.

More conniving by New World Orde God haters. Misrepresneting situations, even lying about situations.
Among other things, the "researchers" describe Iranians as seeing it as a "sacred" right to have their own atomic bomb. They see it as a national right. If Americans are asked if they felt the U.S. had a right to nuclear weapons and they said "yes", would that be interpreted as their feeling it was a "sacred" right? And why not condemn, then, the assertion of "inalienable rights" referred to as "endowed" by the "Creator"?
And, again, religion never caused any wars, it was always greed and craven machination. Religion did not start the Korean War, the Falklands Islands War, the Revolutionary War, the Spanish Civil War, the War of 1812, the Korean War, the invasion of Panama, the Spanish-Amercan War, World War I, Vietnam.
As proof the corporatist NWO hates God, note that the alternative given to religious motivation is "business-like" operation, based on profit.

i don't hate god, i cant hate something that don't exist.
i have no problem with god.
my problem are the believers, the followers of all those archaic religions and ways of thinking involving magic and miracles and martyrs and stuff.
all those believers who are unable to adapt their morale standards to the time they live in but insist to live like 2000 or 3000 years ago.
all those believers who insist to replace science with some divine magic, and who insist to teach divine magic in science classes as if it were science and indoctrinate young childrens in to their religious ways to close their young minds to all reason and destroy their curiosity .
all those believers who insist that their religion is the best of all religions and only true one and try to impose it on everyone else by proselytizing it everywhere at every moment by any mean.

stop trying to impose religious dogma on scientific observations and no problem anymore.
problem with god ? no
problem with believers ? yes

problem with believers ? yes

But you don't have a problem with those who believe in atheism or believe in a utopian socialist society?

As for science, why do you believe science? Why do you believe the process will give you the same results today and tomorrow? Planck stated we have no reason to expect physical 'laws' to be the same today as they are tomorrow.

But you don't have a problem with those who believe in atheism

well its impossible to believe in atheism, since atheism is simply lack of belief in gods. personally i define my self as polyatheist, since there is many gods i don't believe in, it just happens that yours is also on the list. health is not disease, its just absence of of disease. atheism is not religion, just absence of it.
utopia is impossible, no mater how you take it, thats why paradise cant exist since paradise of ones is hell of others, no mater if we talk about material life or some hypothetical afterlife.
i believe in results that science have provided since always, agriculture, architecture, engineering, medicine, ....since always it helped us to make our life better and richer and easier... and we are just scratching the surface. so much wonders waiting for us.
why expect laws of physics to be same ?

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Albert Einstein

well its impossible to believe in atheism,

You BELIEVE no gods exist. Where is the data to support your CERTAIN belief in the face of data from those who believe God does exist?
The only honest position is uncertainty which is referred to being agnostic.

why expect laws of physics to be same ?

"We have no right to assume that any physical laws exist, or if they have existed up until now, that they will continue to exist in a similar manner in the future."
Max Planck
Read more at http://www.brainy...7SmR1.99

well its impossible to believe in atheism,

You BELIEVE no gods exist. Where is the data to support your CERTAIN belief in the face of data from those who believe God does exist?
The only honest position is uncertainty which is referred to being agnostic.

no, i don't believe that he doesn't exist.
i just lack belief that he do. since there isn't any reason that he should exist. why should i believe that he exist ? there is no reason to believe something like that.
its like believing that there is an asteroid in alpha of century and that on that asteroid live an pink elephant who can red my mind and see what i think . i don't have faith or believe that he doesn't exist. i just lack the believe that he do, in the start, unless you can demonstrate me that he do. can you demonstrate me that pink et elephant or your god exist ? no you cant, so the notion it self of those 2 entities is irrelevant to me, my life, this planet, science,...

As for science, why do you believe science? Why do you believe the process will give you the same results today and tomorrow? Planck stated we have no reason to expect physical 'laws' to be the same today as they are tomorrow.

The ability of scientific inquiry to produce consistent results gives us increasing confidence that it will continue to do so. Science has also uncovered all the many ways that religion DOES NOT produce results. It has shown us how religions are all based on fabricated history, psychological exploitation, sociopolitical necessity, etc.

Science has given us dependable tools with which we can begin to dismantle all superstition for good.

You BELIEVE no gods exist. Where is the data to support your CERTAIN belief in the face of data from those who believe God does exist?

What is the point in believing in something that science has shown us has absolutely no effect on the world and is completely unnecessary to explain it? Why believe in the gods described in your books, if they are proven to be constructed of lies? Why believe in gods which cause only misery, conflict, and ignorance?

Why reject reality for gods which are entirely superfluous? Because they make you FEEL good? That is certainly not a sufficient excuse for all the trouble they cause.

You ask silly questions.

What is the point in believing in something that science has shown us has absolutely no effect on the world

Science has shown religious faith has NO effect on the world?
The success of Western Civilization is just a coincidence?

"Science cannot solve the ultimate mystery of nature. And that is because, in the last analysis, we ourselves are a part of the mystery that we are trying to solve."
"Whence come I and whither go I? That is the great unfathomable question, the same for every one of us. Science has no answer to it."
http://www.brainy...nck.html

The Bible was written thousands of years ago yet the Book of Genesis qualitatively agrees with the Big Bang theory. Lucky guess by ignorant desert nomads?

Science indeed uses the synergy of subjectively accepted religion in the same way, like the medieval monarchs. For example, the intersubjective belief in predictability power of string theory at the beginning of 70's enabled to concentrate money for theoretical research and for raising of interest about extradimensions (which was good) and finding of few interesting abstract theorems and concepts like the E8 Lie groups topology, supersymmetry and Maldacena duality (which is indeed good as well). But the same intersubjective belief became a brake of the further evolution and the source of controversies and conflicts, whenever the experiments revealed, that even the string theory approach is not as omnipresent and omnipotent, as its proponents originally preached. The analogy with whatever religion of your personal preference is quite apparent here.

"Did God create the universe in six days, resting on the seventh? Or was it born in a fiery "big bang" billions of years ago?

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth," reads the story of creation described in Genesis, the first book of the Bible. Schroeder, who earned two Ph.D.s from MIT, says those opening chapters are descriptions of the big bang itself. They are, as he says, "identical realities."

His thesis hinges on the fact that time is not a constant: It's relative, at least according to Albert Einstein. Schroeder insists that the biblical calendar begins with the appearance of Adam on the sixth day, not with the creation of the world. "Relativity," he says, "has proven the flexibility of time during those six pre-Adam days of Genesis."

Read more: http://www.foxnew...vQ4N0kUJ

Schroeder insists that the biblical calendar begins with the appearance of Adam on the sixth day, not with the creation of the world

Such a calendar doesn't fit the archaeological findings and their dating anyway. It could point to some extraterrestrial visits before six thousands of years and the genetic manipulation of the human civilization - but we have no evidence for it - rather against it. The oldest archaeological findings are nearly eleven thousands of years old and they already point to some form of primitive religion. http://www.smiths...epe.html

Science has shown religious faith has NO effect on the world?
The success of Western Civilization is just a coincidence?

More propaganda. Sorry it is pretty clear that the west succeeded DESPITE superstition. It succeeded only because it began to throw off the superstition which was preventing it from doing so. It prevailed over other cultures which could not do this.

Re; your Planck quote; since you don't watch vids you won't get to see niel tysons convincing explanation of why these guys used to tend to invoke god for the things that science hadn't gotten to yet. Shameful really.
http://www.youtub...a_player

-What do you think a thing such as 'the ultimate mystery of nature' could be ryggy? What makes you think it is a real or informative or useful concept at all? What else could such a nonsense concept be, but the ultimate nonsense concept of all, which is god?

We need no such religionist crap to explain anything.

The Bible was written thousands of years ago yet the Book of Genesis qualitatively agrees with the Big Bang theory. Lucky guess by ignorant desert nomads?

And as you know there are 2 descriptions of creation in the bible which contradict each other in both sequence and activity. How do I know you know this? Because I remember when it was explained to you.

What is the point in your participating here if you insist on posting lies? I know - this is what religionists do. This is how religionists think. You are an informative demonstration of this ryggy - keep up the good work. You make the world a little saner every time you post insanity.

Science has told us that religions as a whole begin to lose their grip in multicultural societies. You're performance shows us how this works.

"potent force for cooperation"
Who has measured the impact of the millions of individuals of faith who have positive effects of the lives of those they interact with?
There is an insurance commercial showing a chain reaction of positive acts that were inspired by the observation of other positive actions.
Napoleon Hill wondered what made people successful and with the support of Andrew Carnegie spent 20 years interviewing and documenting how individuals of his day achieved success. One common thread was a powerful faith, in God, and in their ability to succeed.
Where are the scientific studies that follow millions of individuals who are inspired and motivated by MLK, a Christian minister?

as you know there are 2 descriptions of creation in the bible which contradict each other

How many scientific theories and hypotheses of the creation of the universe contradict?

And I understand why socialists must attack God as their socialism is a religion and the idea and philosophy of God threatens their collective view. The axiom stated in the US Declaration if Independence, motivated by the authors' faith in God, is that humans have inherent and unalienable rights to life, liberty and property from a Creator not from a tyrant or tyrannical mob now called the State.

The Bible was written thousands of years ago yet the Book of Genesis qualitatively agrees with the Big Bang theory. Lucky guess by ignorant desert nomads?

And as you know there are 2 descriptions of creation in the bible which contradict each other in both sequence and activity. It also differs from the Sumerian version which is obviously where bible authors stole it from. How do I know you know this? Because I remember when it was explained to you.

What is the point in your participating here if you insist on posting lies? I know - this is what religionists do. This is how religionists think. You are an informative demonstration of this ryggy - keep up the good work. You make the world a little saner every time you post insanity.

Science has told us that religions as a whole begin to lose their grip in multicultural societies. You're performance shows us how this works.

How many scientific theories and hypotheses of the creation of the universe contradict?

Science is a work in progress. Conflicting theories struggle to explain a common phenomena. God on the other hand ought to know how things work. Why does he contradict himself?

Why does the book he wrote say one thing while the world he created says something completely different? More unresolvable conflict. Conclusion: no god, just audacious men in power.

audacious men in power.

Who wrote the book?

audacious men in power.

Who wrote the book?

?? The gilgamesh creation myth? Sumerians? Your question is ambiguous. We do know that much of the bible was not written by the people it says wrote it. Paul for instance did not write 40% of his stuff. Science tells us this.

Hey shouldn't you be in church? You're not sitting in a pew typing on your iPhone are you? Shame shame.

and i understand why religion must attack science, cause when faced to reality all those myths become laughable and don't stand rigorous scrutiny, and that directly affect power and influences of priests and alike over masses and lower the flow of cash flowing in to the pockets of priests. so attacking science and showing it as enemy is logical reaction of all religious groups. only thing that made western civilization a success from always was science and technology , from ancient greeks , and romans , trough enlightenment till now. while they had parlamant and some form of deomcracy they were successful , as soon as christianity overtoook rome, and was ruled by pope and some kings, it failed, and stayed a fail till enlightenment, abolition of power of church and kings.
theocracy is a total fail, no mater where no mater when, it just don't work, cause its against human nature. against our fundamental right to QUESTION EVERYTHING. and your religion don't stand questioning.

Anorion's words ring hollow with respect to not hating God. Because Anorion's actions are filled with hate. One of the most specific, the insistence on writing God's name with a lowercase "g". That is an act of patent disrespect. Anorion asks how can you hate something that doesn't exist, but how can you disrespect something that doesn't exist? God is the name applied to an individual and, in English, is always summarily represented as capitalized. There are few who insist on writing the name of God with a lower case "g" who feel Sherlock Holmes necessarily existed, or Captain Kirk, but where do they complain about them being written with capital letters? Anorion likely will change their practice now, to "make a point", but, left to themselves, they would capitalize those others' names. And Anorion won't even admit that they are driven by this proven viciousness. They have as little regard for others as they have for God.

Yet more demonstration of New World Order quisling practices by the "researchers" mentioned in the article. Things like patriotism have also been used to create senses of cooperation and breed conflict! When George W. Bush wanted to promote the NWO program of eternal war, how many bumper stickers did he have printed that talked of God and how many showed the American flag and bald eagle? Which plays up another cause for conflict, engineered fear! There were no banned weapons systems in Iraq, but the Bush Administration fabricated "evidence" and sold it. Likewise for beliefs of affronts of "decency", which preceded things from the French Revolution to the Spanish-American War! Or claims of assault, as with the overblown or non-existent events involving Ft, Sumter, the U.S.S. Maine and the Gulf of Tonkin! And conflict helps is you have a nation composed mostly of the kind of imbeciles who insist they don't hate God, yet spitefully write His name with a lowercase "g".

Julian, for a believer your fairly ignorant, not that it surprise me, god(s) is a concept not his name, now if i insisted writing Zeus, Thor, Yahweh, Allah, Ra, Anubis,.... with lower letter , then your accusations would be valid, but as you did put it , its void. It just shows that your an unquestioned bigot who think that only his god is a God , but i don't have any preference for one god other other, if i name in a discussion some specific god, ill type his name with upper letter. And no i wont change and start typing god with upper later neither to do you pleasure, nor to do pleasure to thousands of years of theocratic tyranny who imposed that rule, and also to not implicitly reconise existence of your god Yahweh , witch could mislead you about my beliefs or absence of belief in this case.

what ? new world order ? illuminati ? alien invasion ?
what are you talking about ?
George W Bush is a famous christian and he invoked his belief in many speeches.

And conflict helps is you have a nation composed mostly of the kind of imbeciles who insist they don't hate God, yet spitefully write His name with a lowercase "g".

A late 2009 online Harris poll of 2,303 U.S. adults (18 and older)[57] found that "82% of adult Americans believe in god", the same number as in two earlier polls in 2005 and 2007. Another 9% said they did not believe in god, and 9% said that they were not sure.
if George W Bush was under influence of some external power then its religion, wasn't he republican ? , religion exist, on other hand nwo, illuminati , ....and stuff like that....please give me a break

What is amusing is how 'scientists' attempt to use science to attack religion.
Religion by definition is based upon faith.
It is also interesting how those who claim to be 'scientists' believe in socialism. Especially after Carl Popper, inspired by the scientific failures of Marxism, developed his theory of falsifiability, which many 'scientists' claim as the standard for any science.
What must really bother hard core atheist/scientists is that science is limited and cannot explain all.

QUESTION EVERYTHING.

Except for your faith is science?

Anorion's actions are filled with hate. One of the most specific, the insistence on writing God's name with a lowercase "g". That is an act of patent disrespect.

If your god were real or moral or a good book writer or a reliable wish-granter then he would be worthy of some respect. But he is none of those things, and so he warrants no respect.

But if you, as a believer, actually respected your god you would type his name G_d. For as we know destroying the word god is disrespecting him, whether this is burning the quran or deleting type on your computer. Ask any haredi or wahabbi.

You trash your god every time you type his name. I think you should stop this.

Julian doesnt even respect himself enough to capitalize his own name, which tells us a lot about his character. Self-deprecators for jesus, who is god. The almighty.

Hey dweeb, church let out? Did the vicar give you back your iphone?

Religion by definition is based upon faith.

Yes as defined by religionists who seek to make it untouchable. Meanwhile science and reason continue to dismantle it.

It is also interesting how those who claim to be 'scientists' believe in socialism.

You say this like it is a bad thing. But I doubt your implication that all scientists are socialists. That seems a little ridiculous dont you think?

What must really bother hard core atheist/scientists is that science is limited and cannot explain all.

What makes you think that? Wishful thinking/faith? It only means that you are disappointed every time science explains something new. This must make your visits to physorg unpleasant.

But I doubt your implication that all scientists are socialists.

It's that socialists claim to use science and rationality to dismantle religion but don't apply the same standards to their faith, socialism.
Rand was an atheist and a capitalist who had a huge ego that allowed no room for humility.

reliable wish-granter

For your sake, that is probably a good thing as atheists would have been reliably wished away by now. Do you believe children should have every wish reliably granted by their parents?

As is the way with all liars, such like as Anorion must rely on pettinesses and inconsequentialities.
Bloomberg is mayor of New York, but is addressed as "Mr. Mayor". When you address a judge, you rerefer to them as "Judge", as well as "Your Honor", even though "your" and "honor", under other circumstances, are written differently. And, among house staff, for example, "Chef" and "Driver" are common uses. It's not certain, though, whether the name God came from an honorary reference to a particular role or whether the word "god" came from God, but the fact that that God haters don't ever go this deep into the discussion strongly demonsrates that they do it only out of petty spite. It is no more bigoted to say that God is the name of the Deity than it is to say that you think Bloomberg is the only mayor since your use a capitalized form referring to him. But liars commonly use the tactic of taking a legitimate point of view and pretending it's wrong.

What is amusing is how 'religious' attempt to always associate and put in same bag atheism / science / communism / socialism.

What must really bother hard core believers is that science actually help humanity , in tangible , material way, via medicine and architecture and engineering, in this life, witch is real, contrary to religion who only make void promises of some hypothetical paradise in some hypothetical afterlife. and that each time there is conflict between science an religion , its science who win; flat / round earth, geo / helio centrism , age of the earth ,...
i don't have FAITH in science, i just trust information, found by observation, logic, rationality,...(science) more than those provided by some old mythology book explaining everything by magic.

and you talk about socialism as if it were worst thing in universe...
flash news, we are humans, not bears, bears live alone, each one by them self.
humans are social beings, we live in groups, familys, clans, nations... we help each other, humans are social beings, that's why they live together and take care of young and old and incapacitate fellow humans, aka human society. its default human social organization.
what is not normal is wild cold capitalism when each work just for his own profit and leave his fellow humans to die cause they cant afford medicine or food or shelter.

It's that socialists claim to use science and rationality to dismantle religion but don't apply the same standards to their faith, socialism.

Blah. Sometimes socialism is a good thing you know? Like when rampant waste and corruption are not worth the benefits of accelerated Progress?

Or like when the people DECIDE that they want socialism. Like in france. Whats that you say? You dont think the people know what is best for them do they?

Well now that is a very curious statement for you to make. If the people cannot be relied on to decide what is best for them, then what good is democracy? What good is a system in which the people are allowed to determine its course based on short-term personal interests rather than on what might be best for society as a whole?

This is why I personally think that experts should be deciding these things.
http://en.wikiped...hnocracy

-Which is most likely the Way it already is.

What must really bother hard core believers is that science actually help humanity

It must really bother hard-core atheists that it was true believers that developed modern science and did so be better understand God and His creation.

i don't have FAITH in science

Of course you do, if you are a scientist.

"Anybody who has been seriously engaged is scientific work of any kind realizes that over the entrance to the gates of the temple of science are written the words: 'Ye must have faith.'"
Max Planck

This is why I personally think that experts should be deciding these things.

Right, you want to be god.
You don't support the axiom that every human being has an inherent right life, liberty, and property.
So please, use science to demonstrate that command and control, top down tyrannies benefit individuals.

Note The GhostofOtto1923's insistence that, in order to be respected, God must be "a good book writer", "a reliable wish-granter". The level of TheGhostofOtto1923's pettiness, that God is only to respected if He grants all wishes. Mendacity and greed. God grants, but only if you deserve it. Cravenness and undeserving lead the God haters to hating God. They know He exists, anger about not measuring up makes them vicious. How many wishes did TheGhostofOtto1923 grant? How many good books did they write? Where is the proof that they are good and moral and not a vicious, bullying blowhard? And destroying the name God is wrong when it is done for a contemptuous reason, out of hate or spite, not when it is in an innocent process as, say, removing the name from a computer screen! But don't expect God haters to admit that. Those who have no "argument" often say anything! And I use lower case for my user name, not my regular writing of my name, to avoid "camel back" writing.

It must really bother hard-core atheists that it was true believers that developed modern science and did so be better understand God and His creation.

it dont bother me at all, all those people were victims of their times, indoctrinated since very young age and never proposed alternative and until recently in occident , saying not believing in god, was punished by torture and death or social exclusion or prison ... its still case in some islamic countrys.
inquisition in the past, religious police today.
it makes those people even more amazing, since even they were indoctrinated all their life, they were able disband all those myths and superstitions and to see that real world observation counter explanation from religious fanatics.

For your sake, that is probably a good thing as atheists would have been reliably wished away by now.

That would leave only religions who would feverishly be wishing that each other would go away. And acting to make that wish come true.

Do you believe children should have every wish reliably granted by their parents?

Sorry your analogy does not apply. We expect the natural world to operate consistently for believer and non-believer alike. Imagine the absurdity of a scientist praying that an experiment would turn out one way or another.

This is CONFIDENCE in natural laws as opposed to FAITH in some vaporgod who would decide to alter these laws in your favor just because you ask him nicely.

You see the difference? Confidence is a sign of maturity. Faith is only an indication of a desire to CHEAT. 'If I believe HARD enough then god will make things turn out the way I want them to...' -with endless respectable and admirable variations. Youve all had SO much practice.

Mendacity and greed. God grants, but only if you deserve it.

Exactly. It is the mendacious and greedy believer who thinks things will change in his favor because he so obviously DESERVES it. Because he loves god so much. Because he does everything god asks. Because he thinks of nothing BUT god all day. This is what god WANTS isnt it?

moral and not a vicious, bullying blowhard?

You mean like jehovah? The ineffable yhwh of the OT?

And I use lower case for my user name, not my regular writing of my name, to avoid "camel back" writing.

Sorry your debility has already been exposed. Your god knows what is in your heart.

"Anybody who has been seriously engaged is scientific work of any kind realizes that over the entrance to the gates of the temple of science are written the words: 'Ye must have faith.'"
Max Planck

-Yeah and ryggy still has not watched the neil tyson vid. Too bad. Neil explains why scientists tended to invoke god when they ran out of answers. And when those answers invariably came they looked a little stupid.

But they were human. Not like god, who will never admit that he had NO IDEA how the universe was created. Obviously. Nor can we expect him to amend his book to conform to the world he apparently created, now that we have a better understanding of it.

Why is that? It should be in god the father almightys power to change text in billions of copies if his book without us ever being the wiser; or at least republishing. Where is his integrity?

Yet more reasons not to respect god.

Bloomberg is mayor of New York, but is addressed as "Mr. Mayor". When you address a judge, you rerefer to them as "Judge", as well as "Your Honor", even though "your" and "honor", under other circumstances, are written differently. And, among house staff, for example, "Chef" and "Driver" are common uses.

You must realize that this is all extremely neurotic. And funny. What a clown.

'If I believe HARD enough then god will make things turn out the way I want them to...' -

That may be what you want faith to be, but that is not what Christians consider to be be faith.
Christian faith is quite difficult, probably too difficult for socialist wanna-be tyrants like Auto. Christian faith demands faith regardless of what the faithful wants or demands.
Faith would not be required if all your wishes were fulfilled.

all those people were victims of their times,

No, they were not.
Nobel laureate William Phillips is a victim of his time (1997)?
http://www.nobelp...bio.html
Or Paul Davies? http://cosmos.asu.edu/

That may be what you want faith to be, but that is not what Christians consider to be be faith.

Like I say youve all had so much practice in making wishdreaming into something respectable and honorable... something to teach kids to do. Not at all like this, oh no:
http://www.youtub...=related

Christian faith demands faith regardless of what the faithful wants or demands.

Xian faith demands the sort of nonsense convolution that this sentence represents.

all those people were victims of their times,

No, they were not.
Nobel laureate William Phillips is a victim of his time (1997)?
http://www.nobelp...bio.html

and ? i said until recently in the occident. that means until enlightenment, it changed only when church lost its power. and apostasy is still punished by death in some islamic country, and even if not, in those country an non muslim don't have any chance to come in some important job or anything...
and fact that there are believers today, doesn't mean they werent brain washed as kids and indoctrinated in religions.
and even those religious scientist have mostly very large faith, aka place god very far away in creation, somewhere around big bang and such, and don't read bible literally like all trolls who come preach on this site.

you didn't disproved anything i said earlier.
and if your so sure that religion is so awesome, stop talking about religion to kids before they 20-30 years old, and only then talk them about religion and make them read those supposedly holy books and let them choose if they wanna be believers or not , you will see how many will choose to become part of religion ...

It used to be said of statistics, "figures can lie and liars can figure". In the same way, providers of doggerel are skilled at twistuing statements, even if it only means pretending a statement is false and relying on their target audience of dullards to resonate to it.
It is deceitful in the extreme to say that pointing out that terms of position or employment, when related to specific individuals, are typically capitalized, is "neurotic", The GhostofOtto1923 has nothing to mock in what I say, so, rather than prove something is wrong, they just call it names.
TheGhostofOtto1923 proves their personal greed by saying only being a wish answerer would make God worthy of respect, then they turn it around and accuse those who make wishes greedy.
And, of course, they would refuse to take the sensible answer I gave for my username. Ignoring that cowards refuse giving their real names.

you didn't disproved anything i said earlier.
and if your so sure that religion is so awesome, stop talking about religion to kids before they 20-30 years old, and only then talk them about religion and make them read those supposedly holy books and let them choose if they wanna be believers or not , you will see how many will choose to become part of religion ...

Then you must support the end of socialist/global warming/'progressive' indoctrination in schools.

"Positive thinking helps with stress management and can even improve your health. Practice overcoming negative self-talk with examples provided. "
http://www.mayocl.../SR00009
"Gratitude is more than saying thank you. It's a sense of wonder, appreciation and, yes, thankfulness for life."
http://www.mayocl...NGROUP=2
"Spirituality has many benefits for stress relief and overall mental health."
http://www.mayocl.../SR00035

apostasy is still punished by death in some islamic country,

Issac Newton was Muslim?
In Newton's day, what power did the Church of England have?

Ever hear of Mendel?
"The monastery had a well-earned reputation for cultural and scientific achievement... Its monk-scholars were in many cass authorities in their fields. Among them was Cyril Franz Napp, the prelate of St. Thomas and a noted Old Testament scholar... "http://www.adhere...del.html

TheGhostofOtto1923 proves their personal greed by saying only being a wish answerer would make God worthy of respect, then they turn it around and accuse those who make wishes greedy.

No sir your god promises to grant wishes but never follows through beyond the probabilities of random chance. Further he cannot describe how the universe he supposedly created actually WORKS.

He would be a liar and a con artist if he actually existed but he does not, as the only things which describe him, the holy books, are the obvious creations of people inspired only by the possibility of making others do what these charlatans want them to.

These are some of the reasons why your god does not warrant respect.

"One immediate connection can be seen in the fact that Descartes was arguing that reasoning was an ability all people have, and that this ability we all have is exactly what we need in order to learn about the world. We don't need a special upbringing or education or religion (Descartes reached out to people of all religions that he knew). And Descartes made sure that every human who could read French would have a chance to try. In this way, he was very egalitarian. This was very much different from the way most institutions worked in his time, where only a small number of people had any political power or religious authority, and others did not have a chance to try for it. "
"It is important to note that some Catholic theologians saw nothing wrong with what Galileo was doing, and even supported it. However, the ones who supported Galileo were not the most powerful politically. "
http://classweb.g...srfr.htm

"The Pythagoreans had tremendous success with their mathematical systems. Unfortunately, success often breeds arrogance. They became more and more dogmatic in their beliefs. According to the myth, the society suffered a spiritual crisis when they realized that hypotenuse of the unit square (the square root of two) could not be expressed as a ratio of two numbers. The legends have the Pythagoreans doing horrible things to the mathematicians who crumbled their world view by discovering an incommensurable. Because the Pythagoreans held a dogmatic view, a simple "irrational" number shattered their faith."
http://descmath.c...nts.html
"A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."
Max Planck

Max Planck

Another tactic of the liar, to claim the other side is saying something they are not saying, disprove that non-existent statement, then pretend that they proved the other side wrong.
TheGhostofOtto1923 "proves" God does not deserve respect because He "promises to grant wishes but never follows through". That is a patent falsehood! Nowhere does God say that He will give anyone whatever they ask for! The GhostofOtto1923 is a liar. Peoiple are exhorted to pray to God, but, in the end, if you have acted to make the world worse, you do not deserve God's beneficence beyond what normally occurs, and maybe not even that totally. But The GhostofOtto1923 could not win arguing from truth.

Newton never said he stopped believe in god or that bible if false, gotta wonder what would happen to him if he did.
maybe just like Galileo , who almost got killed by promoting heliocentrism , and he had to retract him self to save his life.

The Inquisition, Inquisitio Haereticae Pravitatis (inquiry on heretical perversity), was the "fight against heretics" by several institutions within the justice system of the Roman Catholic Church. It started in the 12th century, with the introduction of torture in the persecution of heresy. Inquisition practices were used also on offences against canon law other than heresy.
Witch hunting and burning, tortures, crusades,.... ?

most recently, church hiding pedophiles,.... just confess them and switch them to another region...

and julian , if you read your bible you would see that your god killed millions, childrens of Egypt and much more....
your god should be executed for crimes against humanity.

The Inquisition, Inquisitio Haereticae Pravitatis (inquiry on heretical perversity), was the "fight against heretics" by several institutions within the justice system of the Roman Catholic Church.

I think it's important to note that the current pope was, before he became pope, head of "The Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith". That organization was renamed in 1904. Before that it was called "The Inquisition".

The Inquisition, Inquisitio Haereticae Pravitatis (inquiry on heretical perversity), was the "fight against heretics" by several institutions within the justice system of the Roman Catholic Church.

I think it's important to note that the current pope was, before he became pope, head of "The Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith". That organization was renamed in 1904. Before that it was called "The Inquisition".

Hey well the Jesuits are good guys now (I assume?) Things change. Von braun was SS you know-

most recently, church hiding pedophiles,.

Its much better that they are out in the open, NAMBLA, and demand govt protection and the right to molest children.

That is a patent falsehood! Nowhere does God say that He will give anyone whatever they ask for! The GhostofOtto1923 is a liar.

Ignorance of your book is no excuse sinner. Jesus guarantees to deliver:
http://www.evilbi...Lied.htm

-But like you he lies.

"Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you.  For everyone who asks, receives; and the one who seeks, finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened."  (Matthew 7:7-8 NAB)

Translation: 'Believe and serve the way you are supposed to and god will give you whatever you want.' This is what it SAYS, not what you might want it to say. And millions have taken Jesus on his word, and have been disappointed, but have held on in the hope that he would at least deliver on that greatest Gift of all: immortality.

The thing that your buddy the lovegod never actually has to prove, if his minions can promise it with enough Authority. The perfect bribe.

In the words of the evilbible website author;

" A lot of Christians ignore what Jesus actually says in the Bible.  They also tend to add things to the actual words to make them say something else.  If you honestly and truthfully read these quotes, without adding to them, it is very easy to see that Jesus is not saying that God will think about your prayers.  He says God will grant all your prayers.  Clearly, God doesnt grant all prayers and this proves that Jesus was a habitual liar."

-You might not like his tone but what he says is true. Conversely you might love jesus' tone but what he says is the basest of deception.

More to the matt7 quote above:

"9 Which of you, if your son asks for bread, will give him a stone? 10 Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a snake? 11 If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him!"

-Well of course. If satan existed (he doesn't either) he wouldn't be the frightful leering demon in the pictures. No he would be much smarter than any of us. He would be the epitome of goodness and kindness, healing a few blind lepers here and there, throwing free fishfrys and the like, maybe flying to montana to walk among the ojibways or somesuch; and promising the most wondrous and impossible gifts.

It would only be in what he required of his followers, what his minions DEMANDED of believers, which would inform us of his true Nature. This is true of any guru or prophet who has claimed to speak for god.

Auto apparently asked God for something, but God had other plans.
Now Auto is mad at God for not giving him what he wanted.
Wa,wa,wa,....

Auto apparently asked God for something, but God had other plans.
Now Auto is mad at God for not giving him what he wanted.
Wa,wa,wa,....

Yes I asked god to stop causing things like this:

Al Qaeda claims deadly Yemen attack
http://www.abc.ne.../4024902

-And:
Will Iran Take the Next Step?
http://www.nytime...tep.html

-And:
A Spasm of Violence
http://www.time.c...tsmodule

-And:
Catholic Church Attacks Birth-Control Mandate in Court
http://www.bloomb...urt.html

-And:
Jerusalem Day
http://www.haaret...1.431602

-But he said it wasnt him it was you idiot religionists making this mess and anyways it was up to us to solve our own problems. Good luck he says.

Maybe if Auto didn't want to be a tyrant like those tyrants he claims to oppose, God might consider his request.

What you mean a religionist tyrant like this?

"The events in Srebrenica in 1995 included the killing of more than 8,000 Bosnian Muslims as well as the mass expulsion of another 25,00030,000 Bosnian Muslims, in and around the town of Srebrenica in Bosnia and Herzegovina, committed by units of the Army of Republika Srpska (VRS) under the command of General Ratko Mladi"

-currently on trial for genocide, many regard him as a hero.

Maybe you would like to read through this website for enlightenment on xian fervor?
http://rosarubico...ide.html

-The only good heathen is a dead heathen eh?

Auto has stated he wants to be a tyrant to force everyone to do what he thinks is best.
A tyrant is a tyrant regardless of intention.

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
C. S. Lewis"

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
C. S. Lewis"

yeah that describe religion perfectly

hmm... I read ghost's comments and cannot stop asking myself: does the devil read the holy book? ruggesogn could certainly answer. he's so knowledgeable...

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
C. S. Lewis"

yeah that describe religion perfectly

Only the STATE can 'legally' use force to tyrannize its victims.

BTW, anyone notice that incinerated aborted baby remains are being smuggled out of socialist China?

In the USA no one is forced to join or belong to a church or a religion. Where is the tyranny? And anyone who doesn't like the religion he was born into, or joined, is free to quit.

In the USA no one is forced to join or belong to a church or a religion.

but USA is not an theocracy, its an democracy with separation of church and state. in theocracy you don't have that liberty.

Only the STATE can 'legally' use force to tyrannize its victims.

false. religious have always and still are oppressing others while justifying their deeds by their so called holy book, witch they believe is word of their god and as such ultimate and indisputable law. ex; forbid sex without have an marriage approved by religious authorities, forbid marriage of people of same sex, denies right of womans to control their bodys and have / not have as many kids as they want, punish by death adultery (mostly womans, mans are rarely punished for that),....so on, so on... if you recognize your god as supreme leader, your holy book as his word, then you live in an theocracy and its LEGAL to use force to tyrannize no believers or different religions followers, since your god say so.

Auto has stated he wants to be a tyrant to force everyone to do what he thinks is best.
A tyrant is a tyrant regardless of intention.

So ryggy who was the tyrant... Hitler who wanted his Nazis to rule Europe or Churchill who wanted to prevent them from doing that?

Only the STATE can 'legally' use force to tyrannize its victims.

Indeed so much the better when the religion not only legitimizes the state, but it IS the state, as in Iran or Nazi Germany. 'In god we trust'

In the USA no one is forced to join or belong to a church or a religion.

Not at the moment. But many religions would wish that it were so.

BTW, anyone notice that incinerated aborted baby remains are being smuggled out of socialist China?

No I'm pretty sure you made that up.

But many religions would wish that it were so.

Especially the socialist religion.

But many religions would wish that it were so.

Especially the socialist religion.

What you mean like jebus taught?
http://en.wikiped...ocialism

The only way socialism can be successful is with 100% volunteer participation. Monasteries are only places I can think of where this has occurred.
As soon as one individual does not want to 'share', the state must use force to take his property or kick him out.

The only way socialism can be successful is with 100% volunteer participation. Monasteries are only places I can think of where this has occurred.
As soon as one individual does not want to 'share', the state must use force to take his property or kick him out.

any "primitive" tribe is a socialism, just observe tribes in amazonia or bushman in africa, or nomad tribes in siberia or mongolia,...they all live together, share everything, everyone take care of everyone childrens, when hunter kill an animal everyone get its share, when womans gather fruits or so, everyone get its share, womans who can lactate do it so for all babys who need it,...american indians used to live like that too before christian colonization,.... aka socialism in its purest form. nothing to do with monastery who actually are financed by population who give them money or gifts , pay for religious 'services' , buy products of monks no mater of its quality to support them...

any "primitive" tribe is a socialism, just observe tribes in amazonia or bushman in africa, or nomad tribes in siberia or mongolia,...they all live together, share everything, everyone take care of everyone childrens, when hunter kill an animal everyone get its share, when womans gather fruits or so, everyone get its share, womans who can lactate do it so for all babys who need it,...american indians used to live like that too before christian colonization,.... aka socialism in its purest form. nothing to do with monastery who actually are financed by population who give them money or gifts , pay for religious 'services' , buy products of monks no mater of its quality to support them...

This is what socialists want? To kill off billions of people and return to tribal living?
And your tribal analogy is the same as the monastery, 100% voluntary participation.
How successful are the tribes you describe?

This is what socialists want? To kill off billions of people and return to tribal living?

dishonest and lame reply from you , since i was only replying to your claim that monastery are only socialist humans societies, witch is false. they not socialist organizations and even if, they not only ones.

This is what socialists want? To kill off billions of people and return to tribal living?

Heehee NO this is what you religionists want! One universal tribe, the Chosen People, the Remnant, of Volunteers right? THEN we could live like Jesus intended.

All others can rot in hell with their golden calves correct? Those who stray will be CULLED as the bible describes, over and over and over again. Even Moses and Aaron didn't make the cut. Billions would of course have to die today wouldn't they? Just like the Rapture .

There is no competition in heaven. There is no money in heaven. There is no CAPITALISM in heaven.

Heaven on earth would be exactly as Jesus described it and as you yourself have admitted - a socialist state. Maybe it IS the only correct religion... there can only be at most ONE you know. All others should be paying taxes like any social club.

Hey buddy can I borrow your chainsaw? Hah!

NO this is what you religionists want!

Like the AGWites and other environuts who want to depopulate the earth to save Gaia?

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
Nothing here is inconsistent with what Jesus said.
What God said in 1 Samuel8:11-20 condemns the socialist state.
Anyone who believes Jesus advocated a coercive state, aka socialism, is more a socialist than a Christian.

What God said in 1 Samuel8:11-20 condemns the socialist state.

?? There are no kings in socialism. Yeah I know the bible is allegory whenever it is convenient. In xian socialism jesus is king. Because he SAYS so.

Anyone who believes Jesus advocated a coercive state, aka socialism, is more a socialist than a Christian.

But thats just it - with xian socialism everybody would love everybody equally and so everything could belong to everybody. Infinite property rights. And killing all non-compliers is not coersion, it is only what god would do if he existed (he does not)

"Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel." Deut 17:12

-Nothing coercive about this at all, is there? And of course priests and prophets arent KINGS are they? There is a difference of some sort. Different raiments. Priests get to eat burnt offerings, kings need cooks. Something.

There are no kings in socialism.

Of course there are.
A socialist state is defined by how much control it wields over private property.
It does not matter who the leader is or how the leader(s) are chosen.

There are no kings in socialism.

Of course there are.
A socialist state is defined by how much control it wields over private property.
It does not matter who the leader is or how the leader(s) are chosen.

Socialism is govt by committee. If by 'king' you mean 'party' then you are correct.

"Former British Labour leader Tony Blair is a member of the Christian Socialist Movement"

Prominent xian socialist - Francis Bellamy, original author of the Pledge of Allegiance

Socialists plunder.

I challenge anyone, Christian or not, to find where Jesus supports plunder.

Socialists plunder.

I challenge anyone, Christian or not, to find where Jesus supports plunder.

Well as you know robin hood and his merry men were fashioned after Jesus and his merry band. Little John? Maid Marion/Mary Magdalene?

Rob from the rich to give to the poor. Somebody was trying to tell you that Jesus was a socialist. Jesus was not materialized to replace the law but to FULFILL it. And that would include by extension all the plundering committed by joshuas merry band of sturmtruppen.

Jesus also convinced the rich to give up everything and follow him. Plunder by deception.

Anything else you need to know about the grand robber baron? Did you know that there is a good chance the Hebrews - Habiru of Egyptian lore - were thieves inhabiting the hilltop village of Jerusalem during the purported time of Solomon and davids mighty kingdoms, which in fact never existed. These merry plunderers invented a glorious past for themselves indeed.

So when did Jesus advocate or support plunder?
Why does Auto compare a fictional character, Robin Hood, to Jesus, who Auto believes is also fictional?

But in any event, Robin Hood, real or not, returned the wealth, stolen by the state, to the people.

But in any event, Robin Hood, real or not, returned the wealth, stolen by the state, to the people.

-Which is exactly what jebus told the rich man to do; give to the poor.

So we've concluded that heaven would necessarily be a socialist environment. Whatever few things you might need in heaven (sackcloth, confetti?) would be supplied by st Peter/the state.

And so if xians truly want heaven on earth, why wouldn't they be creating the kind of environment that Jesus would be proud of? If I never returned your chainsaw or tried cutting barbed wire with it, wouldn't it be better if it wasn't yours to begin with? Wouldn't it be easier to 'turn the other cheek', 'go the extra mile', if this was the case ?

Your property rights are based on mistrust of your fellow humans. Jesus would say it also signifies an unhealthy attachment to worldly goods. You should WELCOME socialism as it is one step closer to the RIGHT hand of god.

"Jesus said to him, "If you want to be perfect, go and sell what you own and give the money to the destitute, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come back and follow me.""
http://bible.cc/m...9-21.htm

Note the various translations all say to voluntarily SELL and voluntarily GIVE what you own and follow Jesus.

Socialists don't believe in buying or selling.

"One of the simplest lessons from this parable is that it is not immoral to profit from our resources, wit, and labor. The alternative to profit is loss, and surely the loss of wealth, especially when due to a lack of initiative, does not constitute good stewardship."
"God commands us to use our talents towards productive ends. The parable emphasizes the need for work and creativity as opposed to idleness."
"Critics link capitalism with greed, yet the fundamental nature of the entrepreneurial vocation is to focus on the needs of customers. To succeed, the entrepreneur must serve others."
"God commands all people to use the talents they have been given, yet in the name of charity our welfare system encourages people to let their natural skills atrophy, or keeps them from discovering their talents at all."
http://www.thefre...reneurs/

"Christianity is often blamed for the failed socialist projects the world over. And in many cases misguided Christians have been involved in building socialist constructs. The lesson of the Parable of the Talents needs to be better understood. The socialist dream is not a moral one. It simply institutionalizes the condemned behavior of the lesser servant. Where God commands creative action, socialism encourages laziness. Where He demands faith and hope in the future, socialism promises a base form of security. Where the Parable of the Talents implies the morality of freedom to trade, invest, and profit, socialism denies it."
http://www.thefre...reneurs/

"One of the simplest lessons from this parable is that it is not immoral to profit from our resources, wit, and labor.

No, 'profit' in this case is the spurious promise of getting into heaven and avoiding hell. You cannot serve god and mammon. You don't work to make enough money so you can afford to get into heaven by feeding enough poor people.

The parable is saying that profiteers CANNOT get into heaven unless they give away what they accumulated. The mans wealth is a liability. Better to have remained poor all your life.