• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Does Religion do more harm than good?

Does religion do more harm than good?

  • Yes

    Votes: 23 37.1%
  • No

    Votes: 22 35.5%
  • I don't know

    Votes: 17 27.4%

  • Total voters
    62

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
hebrew said:
For all people out there who deeply believes in religion and hold there own to there hearts will possilby find this upsetting. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS RELIGION. The word religion(which is the greek word religios) means to seperate.
There's no need to shout ... particularly when you're wrong:
c.1200, "state of life bound by monastic vows," also "conduct indicating a belief in a divine power," from Anglo-Fr. religiun (11c.), from O.Fr. religion "religious community," from L. religionem (nom. religio) "respect for what is sacred, reverence for the gods," in L.L. "monastic life" (5c.); according to Cicero, derived from relegare "go through again, read again," from re- "again" + legere "read" (see lecture). However, popular etymology among the later ancients (and many modern writers) connects it with religare "to bind fast" (see rely), via notion of "place an obligation on," or "bond between humans and gods." Another possible origin is religiens "careful," opposite of negligens. Meaning "particular system of faith" is recorded from c.1300.

"The equal toleration of all religions ... is the same thing as atheism." [Pope Leo XIII, Immortale Dei, 1885]

Modern sense of "recognition of, obedience to, and worship of a higher, unseen power" is from 1535. Religious is first recorded c.1225. Transfered sense of "scrupulous, exact" is recorded from 1599.

- see Online Etymology Dictionary
Religion is an ubiquitous and, on balance, positive instrument for cohesion and service.
 

CaptainXeroid

Following Christ
michel said:
...There is a vast number of truly Religious people who do good, as there is a vast number of atheists who do good. Unfortunately the very devout are the ones who make all the noise, attract publicity, and do more harm than good to their own cause.:eek:
I concur, yet this was my rationale for voting 'No'. Blaming Religion as a whole for the bad deeds of a few extremists is, IMHO, wholly unfair and does a great disservice to those who strive to do good.:)
 

Halcyon

Lord of the Badgers
Deut. 32.8 said:
There's no need to shout ... particularly when you're wrong:
Religion is an ubiquitous and, on balance, positive instrument for cohesion and service.
Deut, this thread is about 9 months old, i don't think hebrew is going to reply :eek:.
 

roli

Born Again,Spirit Filled
Religion,actually is the worst form of fundamentalism ever implemented into human history,destroying everything and everyone in it's path.
Religion is Leading people down a delusional,deceptive and destructive path of religious,traditional practices.
The very essence of what Jesus came to do, was to eradicate and expose sin and man's endeavors to attain salvation through self imposed works.
The most religious people in Jesus day were the scribes,pharisee, priests who actually falsified the reports of Jesus leading to his crucifixtion because of the fear of an uprise
Religion ,teaches that you must ,bow,wash, where beads,recite,,abstain from certain clothes,foods,drink,and practices,such as marriage, sexuality
Jesus taught relationship not religion, that you must confess,believe, recieve and be saved and Christ will reside within you, a supernatural encounter, quite different then self imposed rules and performances which is the premisis for religion
 

scitsofreaky

Active Member
I would say religion itself doesn't, but the people do cause more harm than good it seems. Most religions don't teach killing people just because they don't agree with you, yet people do it any way in the name of their god/religion. People take what they want from religion, and ignore everything else.
 

michel

Administrator Emeritus
Staff member
NetDoc said:
You know...

Religion doesn't hurt people... people hurt people! :D
I agree, but it has suddenly occurred to me that Maize did'nt qualify 'harm' and 'good' - as in social harm or good, or harm or good 'to the soul'.:)
 

Pah

Uber all member
NetDoc said:
You know...

Religion doesn't hurt people... people hurt people! :D
The gun doesn't kill people - the bullet does.

Maybe religion ought not be comprised of people

Not changing the subject but only answering with comparision
 
For those of you who think that religion does not teach killing..or that religion doesnt hurt people..

"Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live." (Exodus 22:18)
Leviticus 20:13

"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."

Leviticus 18:22

"Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."
 

linwood

Well-Known Member
Do you not think these people who show kindness to others do so only because of their religion? Are there not many people who are kind and compassionate, who do not profess a certain religion?

Looking at history, how much damage has been done in the name of religion?

Certainly religious organizations have done good, but is that because of the religion, or because of the people's desire to do good?


I voted yes considering the history of religion.

However it is true as Maize says that these people who do good within their religion would most probably do good without their religion.
They use their religion as the vehicle for doing good.

The flip side of this is also a consideration.

Have a look at that violent history of religion again.
Is it not possible and even probable in many cases that those who cauysed such great harm were only using religion as the vehicle to gain power, money, glory?

Makes you think.
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
Reverend Jeremiah said:
For those of you who think that religion does not teach killing..or that religion doesnt hurt people.
And there are teachings that speak of love and social responsibility as well. You've demonstrated nothing other than your ability to cherry-pick verses to support your presuppositions. That you are no less capable of this than are religious fundamentalists was never in doubt. At issue is not whether the Bible is a flawed text of human origins reflecting human backwardness, but whether or not religion - including the one based on the Tanach - has 'done more harm than good', and your 'answer' seems to have little to do with this question.
 

scitsofreaky

Active Member
For those of you who think that religion does not teach killing..or that religion doesnt hurt people..
No one has claimed that religions don't teach punishment. Also, Leviticus 18:22 says nothing about killing, it is just stating a "fact." Christianity really teaches that only God can judge us because he is righteous, and from what I have read and learned about Islam, it teaches the same.
 
Deut. 32.8 said:
And there are teachings that speak of love and social responsibility as well. You've demonstrated nothing other than your ability to cherry-pick verses to support your presuppositions. That you are no less capable of this than are religious fundamentalists was never in doubt. At issue is not whether the Bible is a flawed text of human origins reflecting human backwardness, but whether or not religion - including the one based on the Tanach - has 'done more harm than good', and your 'answer' seems to have little to do with this question.
Im sorry, I shouldnt respond to you like that deut. It was wrong of me and I apologize.
 
scitsofreaky said:
No one has claimed that religions don't teach punishment. Also, Leviticus 18:22 says nothing about killing, it is just stating a "fact." Christianity really teaches that only God can judge us because he is righteous, and from what I have read and learned about Islam, it teaches the same.
You pick the verse that doesnt require the immediate slaying in its words, when the verse above it DEMANDS that homosexuals be killed for their love for each other...yet you brush this strong language off as "punishment". Do you consider killing someone who is in a homosexual love affair as "punishment". I dont, I consider it murder. I see no where in those verses I posted that say "god will do the judging and punishing"..No..It SPECIFICALLY say that YOU (thou) shalt not suffer a witch to live...you have been COMMANDED by this religion to specifically kill if you are a beleiver in this religion.

These verses are OBVIOUSLY immoral, and for anyone to defend them, or try to soften the strong conviction in their words is disgusting to me. And also for someone to say that "hey, the bible also has good things in it as well." Is guilty of cherrypicking and ignoring the complete contradiction he posited to defend this dogma with.

Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live
...and...
Thou shalt not kill

God wrote both of those verses...LOL...dont insult my intelligence.
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
Reverend Jeremiah said:
Deut. 32.8 said:
Reverend Jeremiah said:
For those of you who think that religion does not teach killing..or that religion doesnt hurt people.
And there are teachings that speak of love and social responsibility as well. You've demonstrated nothing other than your ability to cherry-pick verses to support your presuppositions. That you are no less capable of this than are religious fundamentalists was never in doubt. At issue is not whether the Bible is a flawed text of human origins reflecting human backwardness, but whether or not religion - including the one based on the Tanach - has 'done more harm than good', and your 'answer' seems to have little to do with this question.
Im sorry, I shouldnt respond to you like that deut. It was wrong of me and I apologize.
Out of curiosity, where did you think you were responding to me, to what were you responding, and what was that response?
 
out of a fit of emotion I posted that I didnt want you to respond to me anymore about this subject..But I am not the censoring type..so I admit that was wrong of me, I edited it so that it would not be seen, and I retract that idea. It was wrong of me to try to stifle your freedom of speech.
 

ayani

member
i think a religion's capacity for good or bad depends on the humans with who that faith and teachings are intrusted. some will chose to see teachings encouraging love and non-violence in texts, others will see justification for violence and intolerance. truth is, religious texts have both "good" and "bad" in them. what makes sense to one believer may alienate and confuse another. one can ultimately trust that religious texts will ultimately speak to that which is loving and compassionate in humans, or that which is not. whether religion does more good than bad is, i feel, in how you see it.
 

arthra

Baha'i
I think religion overall is a positive bonding force in human society and can be progressive as well... Unfortunately, unscrupulous people try to exploit it and distort it's meaning for ther own ends.

Also I believe religion is progressive... that is it responds to peoples' needs and can grow to accomodate the issues facing humanity.

Revelations from God I believe have occurred in human history through significant prophets and messengers that have brought needed teachings for humanity.
 
Top