Apparently so.

The issue is not literalism, but fundamentalism. Fundamentalism is a dangerous thing whether it’s religious or not. Religions itself is harmless when fundamentalism is prevented through education.

Literalism can exist without fundamentalism and as far as I’m concerned this is mostly harmless. But at best I feel religion should avoid literalism.

Religions can’t ‘do’ things, only people. So the question is, have people done more good than bad in the name of Religion? That is a statistical question that can’t be quantitively answered. Or maybe it can…

Argh, this whole topic makes me very anger. Not because of the fact I’m set on any one religion but because Religion has caused us harm. It’s why I believe nothing but at the same time believe all. I get told all the time I’m going to hell for disgracing god. What about all the murders, rapists, the presidents that go to war for falsified reasons. It’s all because of religion and discrimination and freakin beliefs that people don’t want to understand. Religion is more of a way to seperate people than bring them together. I mean if you think about it christians hate other christians because no one christian believes exactly the same. So, in reality there is really not one religion but billions and billions of personal religions. Which leads to the point of why do even kid ourselves that religion exists, that god or jesus exists, that hell or satan exists. Is there really any truth behind it all. I mean couldn’t the bible just be one big story that someone wrote a long time ago and left it to be found. Couldn’t it all be a lie anyway. I mean it’s caused enough problems and yet we allow it to cause more. It’s simply a way to create more hate.

There’s so many ideas of God out there. Some have inspired great acts of benevolence. On the otherside, they have also been noted for horrible violence and acts of aggression. These acts are committed in the name of religion, but they were committed by INDIVIDUALS none the less. It’s all of these different concepts of God that cause the conflict. The concepts of God have only failed us when one view is held above another. So is it really the religion itself, or is it the people that think of themselves higher.

To me it’s not the relgion itself that is the problem but the people inside of the relgion. The bible or other relgious text sais this or that but not many of the followers don’t follow. So is it the relgions fault or the people itself that follow.

Are we forgetting each day how many people are saved through religion? Regardless of which religion it is, people are pulled from their sadness into a world of joy and optimism. Of course, none of us are blind to the bad it brings too but I think the bad just sticks in our minds therefore, we think there is more of it. Personally, I went through a hard experience and the only thing that got me through it was religion. I know Im not alone.

I think religion itself is basically good. Yes, it has had some corruption in the past and has caused people to go into wars with other religions, but I think without religion we wouldn’t have survived as a human race. Religion gives us morals to live by, no matter what religion we are. It gives us a direction in life, and I think without it, there would be complete chaos.

Religion it self is not the enemy. the enemy is man. Religion is no more real than a comic book, but every one has a bible. God is real because God is the sum total of everything in existance. within and without. religion say either we can eat or drink a certain way. religion says my sister who is very smart can never be called to do the will the body, but are allowed to deal with men and all of our ways. religion shows us a God who is tyranical, petty, and just as evil as man; because we were describing ourselves. when has a blade of grass or summer breeze ever harm any. the God men are trying to decribe is himself : as is himself described as the beast in those same scriptures. So we can’t blame religion for being the tool it was created to be, only the men who greedily take from the poor, who hold cotempt, lust after everything in a hurry to go no where. God aint comming!!!! he been here!!! he never left. religious misunderstanding is the cause of the chaos.

I think that is very possible… Think of the cavemen.. Do you think they were religious? I think it’s possible Religion was created to keep people in control in some way. Instill fear so they would not “misbehave” so to speak. And I do agree that religion has caused harm, maybe not intentially – but in the name of religion a lot of harm was caused, and that continues today.

Not my religion at least; my religion is pro-pacifism and very peaceful and loving.

well... the biggest war in the history of man-kind was based on religion... i'd say thats more than a little harm... in fact... i'd go as far as to say thats more harm than good...

The practice of Muhammedism unified a religious leader with a military leader. Muhammed advanced Arabism universally until the Arabs of Syria were dethroned after the Umayyad Dynasty succumbed to the Abbasid and the establishment of a new center of power in Baghdad under the second Abbasid Caliph. One might reasonably ask if militarized religions are more effective than are regular militaries, or if militarized religions do harm to the faith of their votaries, or if militarized religions are more secular than transcendent based religions.

***

It seems the essential problem isn't in the stars but in ourselves regarding the definitions regarding the nature of religions. It probably is the case that at least like some political parties some religions differ in secular performance, and that they differ in various locales even in the same religion.

It may also be of use to consider that some religions are politically based, and that some political organizations become religious (such as the Nazi Party and the Bath Party of Iraq during the rule of Saddam Husain). Some religions are entirely faith based and are necessary for the believers well being in relation to a transcendent Creator, and have little need for secular political or military affiliations.

There is the phenomenon of negative anti-religions maybe such as Nietzsche’s 'The Anti-Christ, Beyond Good and Evil, and Thus Spake Zarathustra represent in seeking to create an empirical, non-deistic yet transcendent morality based on a recurrent ontology (derived from faulty subjective psychological perception of the space-time continuum...it may be possible than human consciousness can 'step back' from the flow of space-time because of entropy and it's implicit disorganizing principle and thereby perceive what exists in an infinite 'telescope' momentarily and therein create the deja vous phenomenon Nietchze experienced one night at Lake Geneva) that imposes a universal a priori disbelief in a transcendent creator  of the Universe. Believers in the religion of atheism renormalize perpetually to an atheistic religious devotion.

***

The atheist devotion might have an infinite number of fractalized pieces to create a sort of subconscious semi-pagan whole. Many scientific tracts regarding the nature of material reality are adduced in the atheist liturgy of Anti-Christianity to 'prove' the non-existence of God, which of course isn't a sound practice. Science can remark meaningfully about probabilities regarding the nature of physical reality placed within selected determinate constructs and not at all about a transcendent Creator nor even about teleological, eschatological or other philosophical constructs not dependent or contingent upon purely physical causation at all.

Unfortunately votaries of atheism using science for their doctrine must place science into a sort of anti-podal relation finding contradiction with Biblical 'facts' where they can. It is really quite remarkable that after hundreds of years of effort there is little or nothing in the Bible found by atheists distinctly in contradiction with scientific data. Generally the arguments are of ships passing in the night rather than upon a collision course (stay awake you captains out there). Humanity and Biblical 'authorities' have created there own weltanschauung drawn from Biblical interpretation of course that differ with scientific theory sometimes, however that is a problem of the criterion of interpretation rather than of the material written in the Bible itself.

I haven't written too much about the secular good religions have done in the west...t should not be necessary after all. When the Roman Empire moved east to Constantinople eventually the Church was the bulwark and unifier of Europe that led the people to civilization. Religious reform helped stimulate further growth...secular historical considerations do differ from the meaning of religion as mentioned above. I will note that the Muhammedist beliefs have done more harm to the people of the middle east than good, yet they may have been even worse people without Muhammedism if that is possible to imagine...one cannot stand out of history and examine hypothetical scenarios in that sort of rerun and reediting.