The more I think about it the more I understand how logical religion is...


Not that religious claims are correct, not that God exists, not that religion is a "good" thing, but it is logical that religion exists and evolves.

We are a species that is curious and intelligent(for the most part), we seek answers to question that we do not know and we have a mind that is efficient at survival. In our intellectual infanty our ancestors didn't know the stars were enormous masses of burning nuclear fire, nor did we know that disease was caused by microscopic organisms. The minds of our ancestors attempted to find answers to questions which were beyond their understanding and they created stories, myths and religion to create a world that made sense, a world that helped them to survive. Religion is a logical outcome in a species that has consciousness and curiosity.

But just as religion had evolved to help formulate our understanding of the world it is evolving now. Our understanding of the stars and bacteria begin to peel back the superstition of ancient history and we have new ways to think about the world. We have harnessed nuclear fire and we have vaccines against bacteria. And just as we can vaccinate against harmfull viruses we should now vaccinate ourselves and our society from the harmfull ideas within religion.

Think of religion as a vital part of our ecosystem that has been around for millenia, like the misquito. The misquito feeds off our bodies, generally leaving only small marks but feeding other parts of the world that need food for survival. However religions often carry harmfull ideas that can infect our minds and take control of us. We need to oppose these ideas wherever they exist. We must do it rationally, with emotion and with care. Not all religions are equal in their benifits and detriments but they are a natural part of all culture. And as a part of our cultural ecosystem the good ideas must evolve and the bad ideas must be vaccinated against.

Do you have evidence that they had the opportunity to recant?

Also, lots of people have believed things that weren't true throughout history. Every religion has its martyrs. Jesus' apostles are the most likely people to erroneously believe in his divinity.

They certainly didn't think it was a lie - they just made it up as they went along, and scarfed down their own stories like a freshly-fried churro. It's called self-delusion. All cults have it.

But to deny that those who saw it for themself....would be so willing to be tortured and sacrificed for what they KNOW to be a lie is quite a stretch.....

Why be tortured and die for a peasant from Nazareth if it was all a lie?

The standard defintion of knowledge is 'justified true belief' (plus a clause or two to avoid some odd counterexamples to this).    You use KNOW to mean BELIEF.    As for 'those who saw it for themselves'...  there are no eye-witness reports. 

Why don't you believe the Ancient Greek account of the supernatural? It has the same reliance on word of mouth  legally called 'hearsay').  Or Buddhism?  Or Hinduism.   Islam has an 'better' account than Christianity - why don't you embrace that religion?  Or Mormonism?

"It doesn't matter how obvious the truth is if it means you'll never escape. It doesn't matter how big the lie is if it is your only hope of escape"  --  Gorky Park


I think you are appreciating the utilitarian aspects of organized religion while being a bit sanguine about the bad. It sounds like a happy medium that lets you come to terms with the beauty of the Spanish Church without feeling like a hypocrite.

 


Utilitarian value has no bearing on the truth of a religion's claims, but there's a lot of utilitarian value in religion. Hubris, for example, can get out of hand in a wealthy society and rot it to the core. Society needs an ethical value structure other than the free market, religion conveniently provides a heuristic.

The pursuit of truth and beauty, and the relief of suffering are noble goals, I think atheists just disagree with the methods of antireason, fear and superstition.

Many of them drank the poison willingly. Some mothers even knowingly fed it to their children. And you yourself admitted that many Christians denouced their faith when faced with torture... seems like Christianity and the People's Temple are pretty much on even ground.

Furthermore, the psychotic devotion (it seems that, depending on what faith you follow, it's either "psychotic fanatacism" or "brave martyrdom") of ancient Christians prove nothing other than that Christianity fits neatly into the definition of a cult, albeit a widely-accepted cult. How can you say that the Christian martyrs are holy, courageous, and of a true faith while the numerous Muslim suicide "martyrs" and comet-riding cultists all worship false idols and so on? I struggle to see how your argument makes any damn sense.

Koooooombaaaayaaaa!