A perfect world without religion

[Hamza123]

Without religion.. Well.. So much would be missed, yet so much could have been accomplished if I am correct.

I wouldn't think Arabs we be as united as they were segregated by Europeans before finding faith. Therefore I don't think Chemistry (Al-Chemy in Arabic) or Algebra (Al-Gebra in Arabic) wouldn't be as advanced or exist at all. Or even the Alphabet (Al-Phabet in Arabic) wouldn't exist. Perhaps we could have found another way, just I don't think we would be advanced.

When gold became money, it all changed. Africa was almost robbed naked. People were making slave ships... Kush, Timbuktu, Black teachers who taught Arabs and Asians... All gone when gold became money.

http://www.egypttourism.org/New Site/places/bibliotheca_alexandrina.htm

 

[papabryant]

WRONG. INCORRECT. HORSESHIT. NOT!!!

We might have landed on the moon 100 years ago if it were not for the Xtian crucifiction of scientists. Galaleo Was imprisoned in his own home by order of the church when he refused to stop star gazing.

Its so sad when people don't know history and resort to believing rumors and lies.

Galileo was opposed by the leading scientists of his day, who were advisors to the Pope. All of them were Aristotelian scientists, and held that the Earth was the center of the Universe.

Galileo had succeeded in convincing the Pope to abandon the Aristotelian view, and the Church was drafting documents to that effect. BUT THENGalileo had to write a dialogue explaning his discoveries USING THE POPE AS ONE OF THE CHARACTERS IN THE DIALOGUE. It did not cast the Pope in a sympathetic eye - in the dialogue the Pope was portrayed as being lead by the nose by his advisors, who were savaged by Galileo. Galilieo relied on his friendship with the Pope to protect him from any ramifications of his insult.

Of course the Pope's advisors used the document to drive a wedge between Galileo and the Pope and turn the Pope's opinion back in favor of the Aristotelian view of the universe.

IT WAS SCIENTISTS WHO CRUXIFIED GALILEO, NOT THE CHURCH! And it was Galileo HIMSELF who gave them the ammunition to do it!

I wish people would investigate before repeating these urban rumors. ((shakes head))

 

[Jhony5]

The church in the 1600's had sucked in many scientists whom supported the churchs theories. They are the scientists whom battled Galileo. His writtings against the copernican theories in his writting of the "Sunspot Letters" upset the church itself. If the catholic church had its way, sceince would never move to disprove the churchs own mandates.

I used Galileo as an example of the churches methods of using politics to combat 'new' thinking. I based what I posted not on "urban mythology" but a well known fact. In those times of old, science was a risky venture, as any writtings not approved by the Vatican were considered acts of hierecy. I cannot see how you could argure agaisnt that with what seems a purley catholic slant. Remember, this thread is about how the abscense of religion would effect the world as we know it, and without the presense of religion many scientist would have gone on unimpeded.

Galileo was wrong in some of his findings and i'm not trying to argue the validity of his claims. I only provided the breif mention of Galileo to serve as example of church interference in science. You cannot argue that he was not impeded by the CHURCH without reducing yourself to retardation.

Thank you and have a shity day.

 

[Lethalfind]

Have you guys been into a Catholic church and looked at all the trappings that your tithe dollars buys them??? Rather then feeding people who are hungry, funding schools alot of your money goes to feeding the bloated cow that is the governing end of the Catholic church. A bunch of men in dresses who are either molesting your children, trying to figure out how to get near enough to molest your children or figuring out how to help their friends molest your children by moving them around the map to hide their past trangressions.

Past transgressions = felony behavior

 

[papabryant]

The church in the 1600's had sucked in many scientists whom supported the churchs theories. They are the scientists whom battled Galileo. His writtings against the copernican theories in his writting of the "Sunspot Letters" upset the church itself. If the catholic church had its way, sceince would never move to disprove the churchs own mandates.

This is so patently false I don't know where to begin to refute it. Let me start by saying if it were not for the Catholic Church, modern science as we know it WOULD NOT EXIST. The fundamental reality is that Christian theology was essential for the rise of science—a fact little appreciated outside the ranks of academic Medievalists.

​

Recent historical research has debunked the idea of a “Dark Ages” after the fall of Rome. It was, in fact, an era of rapid technological progress, by the end of which Europe had surpassed the rest of the world. Moreover, the so-called “Scientific Revolution” of the sixteenth century was a result of developments begun by religious scholars starting in the eleventh century.

The Catholic Church had supported scientific endeavors for centuries. During Galileo’s time, the Jesuits had a highly respected group of astronomers and scientists in Rome. In addition, many notable scientists received encouragement and funding from the Church and from individual Church officials. Many of the scientific advances during this period were made either by clerics or as a result of Church funding. In exchange, it was the scientists of the day who advised the Church as to what was scientificly acceptable and set the policies concerning theological implications.

The truth is, centuries earlier, Aristotle had refuted heliocentricity, and by Galileo’s time, nearly every major thinker subscribed to a geocentric view. Copernicus refrained from publishing his heliocentric theory for some time, not out of fear of censure from the Church, but out of fear of ridicule from his colleagues.

It is the consensus among contemporary historians, philosophers, and sociologists of science that real science arose only once: in Europe. It is instructive that China, Islam, India, ancient Greece, and Rome all had a highly developed alchemy. But only in Europe did alchemy develop into chemistry. By the same token, many societies developed elaborate systems of astrology, but only in Europe did astrology lead to astronomy. And these transformations took place at a time when folklore has it that a "fanatical" Christianity was imposing a general ignorance on Europe—the so-called Dark Ages.​

Granted, the era of scientific discovery that occurred in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries was marvelous, the cultural equivalent of the blossoming of a rose. But, just as roses do not spring up overnight, and must undergo a long period of normal growth before they even bud, so too the blossoming of science was the result of centuries of intellectual progress.

Science consists of an organized effort to explain natural phenomena. Why did this effort take root in Europe and nowhere else? Because Christianity depicted God as a rational, responsive, dependable, and omnipotent being, and the universe as his personal creation. The natural world was thus understood to have a rational, lawful, stable structure, awaiting (indeed, inviting) human comprehension. Remember, it was in the University that the heliocentric view came to light - and it was the Christians who invented the University.

I used Galileo as an example of the churches methods of using politics to combat 'new' thinking. I based what I posted not on "urban mythology" but a well known fact.

No, you are wrong; it is an urban myth that can be traced to its point of origin in anti-Catholic literature. This was based on a book called A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom, by Andrew Dickson White, a noted anti-Catholic who was the founder and first president of Cornell University. IT IS ONE BIG FAT LIE.

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/science/sciencesbook.html for a list of primary sources from Latin Christendom concerning science, compiled by Paul Halsall, one of the World's leading Medieval Scholars - and one of my teachers.

In those times of old, science was a risky venture, as any writtings not approved by the Vatican were considered acts of hierecy. I cannot see how you could argure agaisnt that with what seems a purley catholic slant. Remember, this thread is about how the abscense of religion would effect the world as we know it, and without the presense of religion many scientist would have gone on unimpeded.

As the list of primary sources and the facts concerning the Church's attitude towards science show, without the Catholic Church, THERE WOULD BE NO SCIENCE!

Galileo was wrong in some of his findings and i'm not trying to argue the validity of his claims. I only provided the breif mention of Galileo to serve as example of church interference in science. You cannot argue that he was not impeded by the CHURCH without reducing yourself to retardation.

I can and do argue. And before you even suggest it, I am a Protestant Pentacostal.

The only "retarded" view would be for you to hold on to your proven false beliefs concerning science and Catholicism in the face of the facts presented here.

 

[Jhony5]

without the catholic church, THERE WOULD BE NO SCIENCE.

How utterly narrowminded. If this is what you paid to learn in college, then you need to find your receipt.
It is true that to a point the catholic church supported scientific research, unless it would go against the written word of god. Just the mention of a round planet was seen as spitting in the face of the church. To this very day religion battles with scientific fact. Many Xtians/catholics still reject the idea that the word is millions of years old. To this day many still combat, using politics, the fact that evolution takes place in nature.

My issue with what your claiming is that your giving all the credit to the church itself, and not the scientists, many of whom lived in a time when religious beliefs were mandatory. If you did not claim the religion of your respective ruler, then you were a heratic.

The OP of this thread was to use your imagination and depict how society would evolve in the complete abscense of religious belief. That means you have to forget everything that was accomplished by the church and test it to understand if mankind could have brought structure to their society. I maintain that without the mythology and fairytale beliefs that were forced onto the populas by church mandate, mankind would have relied upon fact alone to advance science. Humans have a lust for knowledge and I don't attribute that, as you do, soley to the churchs teachings. During the same time period of 16th and 17th century, your beloved church was throughout the world burning witches at the stake and participating in barbaric acts of zealous persecution of free thinking. Thinking outside the box is how science advances, and thinking outside the box during this time was punishable by death.

 

[papabryant]

How utterly narrowminded. If this is what you paid to learn in college, then you need to find your receipt.

This is just plain silly of you.

It is true that to a point the catholic church supported scientific research, unless it would go against the written word of god. Just the mention of a round planet was seen as spitting in the face of the church.

This is also just plain silly, and not supported by the facts. All educated persons of Columbus

 

[Jhony5]

You be makin me lookin dumb. I be not want argue anymore cuz you are cheater with large brain make mine hurt.

 

[papabryant]

You be makin me lookin dumb. I be not want argue anymore cuz you are cheater with large brain make mine hurt.

LOL!!!!!!!!

 

[builder]

You be makin me lookin dumb. I be not want argue anymore cuz you are cheater with large brain make mine hurt.

You dirty ****in' turncoat. Take your google monster in hand, and jiggle it up and down. You can't go wrong.

 

[hugo]

The world would probably also be better off without sex. We would never have heard Brittney Spears sing. If you can call that singing. The human animal, like all other animals, competes for resources. With or without religion conflict is inevitable.

 

[italiano_Pride]

As mushc as I hate religion I believe that there are certain people whom it can be good for. Some people need structure & something to stand on, if you will, to keep them from going crazy but the matter is more how long do you need religion for rather than the world dosen't need it at all.

 

[Hamza123]

without the Catholic Church, THERE WOULD BE NO SCIENCE!

Hmm... Well, Ken kinda answered that one for me. But I bet you don't know where Chemistry was created? Notice the word Al-Chemy.

http://www.levity.com/alchemy/islam.html

When the Muslim State ruled Asia Minor, the Syrian scholars were patronized by the
Caliphs, were employed in influential positions as physicians, as tronomers,
mathematicians, engineers, etc., and the Syrian manuscripts of Greek and Alexandrian
authors were translated into Arabian. The early Muslim culture was more hospitable to
these ancient sciences and philosophies than the early Christian, and thus Arabians
became in medieval times the best trained scholars in mathematics astronomy, medicine
and chemistry. As the wave of Muslim culture in the seventh and eighth centuries
swept over Egypt and Morocco to Spain, Spain became the seat of a high degree of Muslim
culture which endured until the final expulsion of the Moors in 1492 put an end to the
Muslim rule in Western Europe. From Spain, however, the classical culture preserved by
Syrian scholars and by them transmitted to Arab scholars, found its way to Europe, and
Arabian mathematicians, physicians, alchemists, were held in high esteem as scientific
experts. Arabian translations, elaborations and commentaries from ancient Greek and Greek-Egyptian authors received from Syrian versions and finally translated into Latin in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, became the great authorities in natural science. So completely had the original Greek writings disappeared from sight in the middle ages of Europe that later centuries quite generally assumed that the Arabians were originators of very much that they had acquired and transmitted from original Greek and Alexandrian writers through Syrian and Arabic translations. Particularly was that true in the field of chemical knowledge, though modern research has made it clearer that the additions in that domain to the knowledge possessed by Alexandrian writers of the third and fourth centuries is of very subordinate significance. In the history of chemical science in Europe, Arabian influence is of importance because it 1was through this channel that interest in the science was again introduced to Latinized
Europe.

 

[WHATEVER]

I think the world today definately needs religion -otherwise there will be an increased amount of athiests, heathens, devil worshipers and the like and obviously more hate and increased number of sick phsycotic freaks and so on...but it is obvious that this is what 'they' are trying to achieve whilst they're taking out religion in schools and televsion and promoting the wrong things and allowing gay rights,marriages,adoption and all the rest of the total mayhem...sad times..

 

[RoyalOrleans]

I think the world today definately needs religion -otherwise there will be an increased amount of athiests, heathens, devil worshipers and the like and obviously more hate and increased number of sick phsycotic freaks and so on...

Are you dull or something?

Atheists can not exist without religion. Heathens won't exist as religious beliefs dictates. Devil worshipping is consider by many a religion and the devil, himself can not exist without his polar opposite.

Hate is an innate human trait, whether religion is in the world or not. Sick, psychotic freaks will always be sick, psychotic freaks. So on and so on.... yadda yadda.

'they'

"They" do some evil ****, huh?

taking out religion in schools

Until all schools become privatized, religious tolerance should be taught. In respect to divination and the latter, more reasonable, evolution theories.

televsion

You Jesus-freaks have TBN to turn to. Ohh.. and the syndicated 700 Club. You can watch them assholes all you want.

I have Sportscenter.

promoting the wrong things

Could you be a little more vague? If the wrong things include drinking, fornicating, smoking, shitting, pissing, eating... etc etc... "they" are only sensationalizing basic human functions and needs.

allowing gay rights,marriages,adoption and all the rest of the total mayhem

How can two men or women getting married possibly hurt you? What two consenting adults do behind closed doors, is their own business.

Yeah... adoption by Gays or Straight parents is sooooooooo wrong! Children should not be given a happy, loving family. **** the children. Please note: Sarcasm.

Total mayhem?

sad times

For who? You? In your little world, maybe. Not here. I enjoy being alive and I do it everyday without the thought of God. Life is happier, simpler when you answer to no one.

 

[papabryant]

Hmm... Well, Ken kinda answered that one for me. But I bet you don't know where Chemistry was created? Notice the word Al-Chemy.

http://www.levity.com/alchemy/islam.html

No, alchemy dates much earlier than that; it dates to ancient Egypt, where the first alchemists developed it as a combination of chemistry and metallurgy. Egyptians alchemists used their art to make alloys, dyes, perfumes and cosmetic jewelry, and to embalm the dead.

The Arabs gave us the term 'alchemy', from the Arabic term 'alchimia', which loosely translated means 'the Egyptian art'.

When the Muslim State ruled Asia Minor, the Syrian scholars were patronized by the
Caliphs, were employed in influential positions as physicians, as tronomers,
mathematicians, engineers, etc., and the Syrian manuscripts of Greek and Alexandrian
authors were translated into Arabian. The early Muslim culture was more hospitable to
these ancient sciences and philosophies than the early Christian, and thus Arabians
became in medieval times the best trained scholars in mathematics astronomy, medicine
and chemistry. As the wave of Muslim culture in the seventh and eighth centuries
swept over Egypt and Morocco to Spain, Spain became the seat of a high degree of Muslim
culture which endured until the final expulsion of the Moors in 1492 put an end to the
Muslim rule in Western Europe. From Spain, however, the classical culture preserved by
Syrian scholars and by them transmitted to Arab scholars, found its way to Europe, and
Arabian mathematicians, physicians, alchemists, were held in high esteem as scientific
experts. Arabian translations, elaborations and commentaries from ancient Greek and Greek-Egyptian authors received from Syrian versions and finally translated into Latin in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, became the great authorities in natural science. So completely had the original Greek writings disappeared from sight in the middle ages of Europe that later centuries quite generally assumed that the Arabians were originators of very much that they had acquired and transmitted from original Greek and Alexandrian writers through Syrian and Arabic translations. Particularly was that true in the field of chemical knowledge, though modern research has made it clearer that the additions in that domain to the knowledge possessed by Alexandrian writers of the third and fourth centuries is of very subordinate significance. In the history of chemical science in Europe, Arabian influence is of importance because it 1was through this channel that interest in the science was again introduced to Latinized
Europe.

What this document glosses over is the Syrian Scholars (as I highlighted above) were Christian Monks. The Arabs certainly ran with the knowledge they pilfered from Coptic monistaries, and what they did with that knowledge was remarkable, but make no mistake - the Christians in Egypt were already preserving the writings of the Greeks and Romans before the Arabs got there.

 

[WHATEVER]

Total mayhem?



For who? You? In your little world, maybe. Not here. I enjoy being alive and I do it everyday without the thought of God. Life is happier, simpler when you answer to no one.

WELL DUH!! You do it without the thought of God! Your just another sad heathen then and as for me personally no- life isnt sad but unlike you I dont just care about myself and I was saying that in general so don't try to be a smart ass. mayhem? maybe not quite but close enough. If you had an ounce of compassion, soul, conscience, brain, ...then maybe just maybe you would understand.

 

[eisanbt]

WELL DUH!! You do it without the thought of God! Your just another sad heathen then and as for me personally no- life isnt sad but unlike you I dont just care about myself and I was saying that in general so don't try to be a smart ass. mayhem? maybe not quite but close enough. If you had an ounce of compassion, soul, conscience, brain, ...then maybe just maybe you would understand.

If you honestly think that humanitys good trats wouldn't exist without religion then you'd stop vamping jesus blood and start thinking with a little rationality. Any of the good human characteristics promoted by anyone or anything (religion included) are promoting what is already there.

Did/do I go to church? -Nope

Do I believe in a god or any other fourm of mysticism? -Nope

Do I help the less fortunate, offer them my roof on a rainy night, give what I can, support and participate in programs such as "Food Not Bombs" ? -Yes

Is it simpily logically to treat others well, even if your approching the question from a selfish perspective? -Yes.


And as for your little list of "Divient behaviour" They are for the most part (And Especially ANYTHING bad said about homosexuality) simply the poor, bullshit human characteristics that lead to suffering, bigotry, hunger, war etc...etc...

If you want to live a life of peace (ignoring the BS rooting in all religions) and have a enough sense to leave people alone to live peacful lives as well then fine. But if you ever feel the need to 'enlighten' somebody or try to advocate religious legislation then let me be the first to personally hit you in the face with the back of a hammer.

 

[Crazywumbat]

WELL DUH!! You do it without the thought of God! Your just another sad heathen then and as for me personally no- life isnt sad but unlike you I dont just care about myself and I was saying that in general so don't try to be a smart ass. mayhem? maybe not quite but close enough. If you had an ounce of compassion, soul, conscience, brain, ...then maybe just maybe you would understand.

You claim to be compassionate person and "you don't care just about yourself" but you seemed to have to problem trampsing all over the opinions and beliefs of anyone who does not agree with you. As for someone who's critisizing others of their lack of "brain"...well, perhaps you'd like to amend your damn near countless gramatical errors before you make any such claim.

You claim us Athiests and our ilk are destroying the world, well would you mind explaining to us then why the level of suffering and destruction increases proportionately with the level of religious fanatacism of the person(s) in charge? Regardless of relgious affiliation, history has proven again and again that when the extremely religious are in power things rarely improve, indeed they often take steps backwards.

With a "compassionate", "self-less", and "intelligent" person such as you on his side, what harm could us "sad heathens" possibly do to your "god".

 

[Silmaril39]

Much better off. All religion does is take small arguments and focus them into large ones.

Does anyone rember the Simpsons episdoe where Marge asks Lionel Hutz to envision a world without lawyers?

He sees everyone on earth holding hands and dancing together with flowers in a hippy fantasy. Ask a religious man the same thing and I think something similar would be produced.