Is Judaic Monotheism Detrimental to Society?

[Arcadius]

By Judaic Monotheism I mean all theologies that originated from Judaism. (Christianity, Catholicism, Islam, etc.) It doesn't matter if you don't agree with that categorization. I'm bringing up a point that many non-believers (myself included) like to speak about. When one looks at the use of religion as an excuse for war, genocide, and torture, not to mention what seems to be a war on rational, logical, and free-thinking, can one really see anything but a negative influence on human progression? I know this isn't at all a new topic, anywhere. I've used it as a point in religious debates plenty of times. But it's never been something I've ever gotten any real feedback on.

Anyways, the questions I'd like to ask are: Do You Believe That Judaic Monotheistism is Detrimental to Society? Do you believe it is something that humanity would benefit from it no longer be followed as a valid ideology? How do you think someone would go about removing it, if at all possible? What do you think would be the end result of it's elimination, or attempted elimination? Feedback, whether you are religious or not, is nice.

P.S. Please keep in mind, I'm not trying to hurt anyones feelings. This is just something I think about a lot because I'm a very odd human being.

 

[spud_meister]

No, religion isn't to blame for all the crap that happens in its name. People would still find an excuse for war, genocide and torture without religion. The elimination of religion would do more harm than good.

 

[digsbe]

No, I don't believe that Judaic Monotheism is detrimental to society. I think militant atheism and the repression of religious freedom is, however. We can look at atheistic societies and atheist governments like the USSR, communist China, and others who have killed tens of millions. Failures lie in human nature. Personally, I feel all faiths besides Christianity is detrimental to society in that other faiths lead people to believe a lie, but politically I also believe that Judaic Monotheism isn't detrimental to society. I believe it's beneficial and many charities and followers of Judaic Monotheistic religions are very charitable and promote peace.

 

[Jetboogieman]

We can look at atheistic societies and atheist governments like the USSR, communist China, and others who have killed tens of millions. Failures lie in human nature.

So what do you say to the millions who have been killed in gods name, you're precisely right, the failure is in human nature, not believing in Christianity or being athiest. People kill, and have killed since the beggining of time, just because you believe in Jesus, does not stop you from killing, in fact for some people, being "holy" and believing in Christ gives you carte blanche to kill...

Personally, I feel all faiths besides Christianity is detrimental to society in that other faiths lead people to believe a lie

Now if you're going to use a blanket statement like that my friend, I will have to ask you to prove to me in detail how Bhuddism is detrimental to society.

Good luck.

 

[spud_meister]

Now if you're going to use a blanket statement like that my friend, I will have to ask you to prove to me in detail how Bhuddism is detrimental to society.

Good luck.

On a sunny day their orange robes hurt my eyes.

 

[Arcadius]

No, religion isn't to blame for all the crap that happens in its name. People would still find an excuse for war, genocide and torture without religion. The elimination of religion would do more harm than good.

I believe without the initial belief in god, people couldn't be persuaded to commit such things in his name. Such blind, undying faith is much harder to incite under the non-metaphysical. It would make religiously motivated violence less abundant, I believe that's a positive effect. I believe I need to clarify. I mean under any means, and in any amount of time. I'm not talking about just kind of killing anyone who talks about god. At the heart of it, the ideology itself is what's to blame, because it's what was used to influence otherwise rational people to commit those actions. I'm not saying that eliminating Judaic Monotheism would eliminate those problems, I'm saying it would cause them to go down in number as it has directly caused them in many cases.

No, I don't believe that Judaic Monotheism is detrimental to society. I think militant atheism and the repression of religious freedom is, however. We can look at atheistic societies and atheist governments like the USSR, communist China, and others who have killed tens of millions. Failures lie in human nature. Personally, I feel all faiths besides Christianity is detrimental to society in that other faiths lead people to believe a lie, but politically I also believe that Judaic Monotheism isn't detrimental to society. I believe it's beneficial and many charities and followers of Judaic Monotheistic religions are very charitable and promote peace.

I don't believe that people should accept there is no god. I think people should accept that they don't know there is a god. I promote modesty. I don't completely agree with Atheism, so I can't speak for it. The USSR and Communist China's actions have nothing to do with being Atheistic societies. Plenty of Christian societies have committed atrocities. All other religious followers say the same thing about Christianity. It's very clear that Judaic Monotheism in all of it's forms has been used as a tool to control people and influence their actions throughout history. It's the ideology that's dangerous.

 

[Jetboogieman]

It's the ideology that's dangerous.

Any idealogy can be dangerous.

Even one about peace and love, which is what Christianity is supposed to be about.

I happen to think humans are dangerous in general no matter what ideaology they attach themselves to. :2razz:

 

[Arcadius]

Any idealogy can be dangerous.

Even one about peace and love, which is what Christianity is supposed to be about.

I happen to think humans are dangerous in general no matter what ideaology they attach themselves to. :2razz:

True, but when you give them something that can be used so easily to control others, nothing good can come out of it.

 

[Jetboogieman]

True, but when you give them something that can be used so easily to control others, nothing good can come out of it.

Again, I think that says more about the people then the ideology.

 

[Guy Incognito]

I am a big believer in religious tolerance, and I think any religion can be beneficial to society, even the religion of atheism.

I do think there is a danger of violent radicals of any religion, but, as has been observed above, this is attributable to human nature, not the substance of the belief itself.

As for Buddhism being dangerous to society, I think any Christian can look into Buddhism and see a veritable mirror of their own faith. All the major religion teaches essentially the same lesson: compassion.

 

[Guy Incognito]

I believe without the initial belief in god, people couldn't be persuaded to commit such things in his name.

No, but they'd just do it in the name of something else, like science.

 

[StillBallin75]

I think a more proper term would be "Abrahamic," rather than Judaic. But i'm just being a smartass here, i could write an entire essay on the subject because it's so complicated. Seeing as Judaism is a non-proselytizing religion, the issues facing it are different than the other two.

 

[spud_meister]

I believe without the initial belief in god, people couldn't be persuaded to commit such things in his name. Such blind, undying faith is much harder to incite under the non-metaphysical. It would make religiously motivated violence less abundant, I believe that's a positive effect. I believe I need to clarify. I mean under any means, and in any amount of time. I'm not talking about just kind of killing anyone who talks about god. At the heart of it, the ideology itself is what's to blame, because it's what was used to influence otherwise rational people to commit those actions. I'm not saying that eliminating Judaic Monotheism would eliminate those problems, I'm saying it would cause them to go down in number as it has directly caused them in many cases.

While eliminating religion may drive down the amount of violence, it would also drive down the number of charities, it would eliminate a venue of comfort for millions of people, and if you were to go back in history, organisations like the Red Cross (founded by a guy who's inspiration for it came from his Calvinistic upbringing) wouldn't've been founded if religion didn't exist. You may rile against the small evils of religion if you like, but think that the two most devastating wars in human history had absolutely nothing to do with religion, the worst genocides in history had to do with racial and economic theories, and nothing to do with religion. And you can make the same argument you're making against religion against any divisive societal factors (gender, sexual attraction, ethnicity, geographic location, wealth, class). Hell, you apply it to race and Hitler comes across as looking for world peace by trying to eliminate racial violence (by eliminating all other races except his favourite, but that's not the point). Arguing for the abolishment of religion to stop violence is akin to cutting off the nose to spite the face, when you consider the amount of good done from religious inspired charity.

 

[Jetboogieman]

Man is inherintly violent, whether you're praying to the sun, god, Allah, Al Gore, or Glenn Beck, we're all equally capable of violence.

Again, any ideaology can be dangerous, it's more the humans behind it that are the problem, not the ideology itself.

 

[Arcadius]

I am a big believer in religious tolerance, and I think any religion can be beneficial to society, even the religion of atheism.

I do think there is a danger of violent radicals of any religion, but, as has been observed above, this is attributable to human nature, not the substance of the belief itself.

As for Buddhism being dangerous to society, I think any Christian can look into Buddhism and see a veritable mirror of their own faith. All the major religion teaches essentially the same lesson: compassion.

I can't really say I don't believe the beliefs are bad. I believe that most religions discourage rational thought. I'm saying that people will always use them to commit bad things. Better to get rid of the tool than allow more people to utilize to cause harm.

No, but they'd just do it in the name of something else, like science.

I don't think I've ever heard of a war in the name of science. Religion is an extremely powerful political device. Without it many leaders that went on to commit major atrocities wouldn't have been able to gain the influence necessary to accomplish them.

 

[Arcadius]

While eliminating religion may drive down the amount of violence, it would also drive down the number of charities, it would eliminate a venue of comfort for millions of people, and if you were to go back in history, organisations like the Red Cross (founded by a guy who's inspiration for it came from his Calvinistic upbringing) wouldn't've been founded if religion didn't exist. You may rile against the small evils of religion if you like, but think that the two most devastating wars in human history had absolutely nothing to do with religion, the worst genocides in history had to do with racial and economic theories, and nothing to do with religion. And you can make the same argument you're making against religion against any divisive societal factors (gender, sexual attraction, ethnicity, geographic location, wealth, class). Hell, you apply it to race and Hitler comes across as looking for world peace by trying to eliminate racial violence (by eliminating all other races except his favourite, but that's not the point). Arguing for the abolishment of religion to stop violence is akin to cutting off the nose to spite the face, when you consider the amount of good done from religious inspired charity.

I'm not saying we should just abolish religion. I personally believe it should be slowly influenced out of our society over many generations. I think if religion was to just disappear from society right now it would have a negative impact. It's something that would need to extend far beyond your or my life span. Religion discourages rational thought and encourages blind faith. That kind of faith is what causes the public to easily be taken in by a leader or organization and commit those atrocities, no matter what the reason it's always the blind faith that they're doing they're are working for a righteous cause. What needs to be promoted is rational and logical thinking to combat these crimes. Religion directly opposes both logic and reason in asking someone to believe in something without any viable evidence. I agree that many charities are religious. But, that doesn't mean without religion people won't still do that charity work. Off topic, I believe there needs to be a much more massive undertaking to help these people who cannot help themselves. When you really get down to it, I just believe humanity needs to evolve, and religion by it's nature is incapable of evolving, it's something that will always just hold us back.

 

[Guy Incognito]

I believe that most religions discourage rational thought.

And what's so great about rational thought? There is value in irrationality as well.

I don't think I've ever heard of a war in the name of science. Religion is an extremely powerful political device. Without it many leaders that went on to commit major atrocities wouldn't have been able to gain the influence necessary to accomplish them.

Perhaps wars haven't been fought in the name of science, yet. But anything can function as a justification for violence. It is not the belief that makes people violent. I disagree with you that religion is particularly more power than political beliefs or any other sort of ideology.

 

[scourge99]

No, religion isn't to blame for all the crap that happens in its name. People would still find an excuse for war, genocide and torture without religion. The elimination of religion would do more harm than good.

Right.....:roll:

Because without religion I'm sure that a leader whose words are considered indisputable would dictate to this followers that condoms cause AIDs and shouldn't be used.

Because without religion I'm sure that highly educated men would fly passenger planes into buildings in the hopes of receiving 70 virgins.

Because without religion I'm sure that humans would have come to the conclusion that cutting off the end of their child's penis is an appropriate and healthy endeavor.

Because without religion....

Lets get something straight here. Religion is NOT the sole cause or ONLY cause of bad things that happen in the world. Look at Jaine's for example. A Jain Extremist is as harmless as a fruitfly. But a Muslim extremist is something quite different.

Religions are often the source of stupid ideas. And stupid ideas make for stupid actions. See above for examples of insanity brought to us by religion. We can't get rid of religion nor should we. We can only vigilantly battle the stupid ideas that religion (and other things) perpetually spawn.

 

[Arcadius]

And what's so great about rational thought? There is value in irrationality as well.

Without rationality there would be no reason. Without reason we have nothing but chaos.

Perhaps wars haven't been fought in the name of science, yet. But anything can function as a justification for violence. It is not the belief that makes people violent. I disagree with you that religion is particularly more power than political beliefs or any other sort of ideology.

I suppose science could be a cause for war at some point. But I feel that economic and ideological reasons will always be the most prominent. If you truly believed that god needed you to do something, wouldn't you do it no matter what the cost?

 

[Arcadius]

Right.....:roll:

Because without religion I'm sure that a leader whose words are considered indisputable would dictate to this followers that condoms cause AIDs and shouldn't be used.

Because without religion I'm sure that highly educated men would fly passenger planes into buildings in the hopes of receiving 70 virgins.

Because without religion I'm sure that humans would have come to the conclusion that cutting off the end of their child's penis is an appropriate and healthy endeavor.

Because without religion....

Lets get something straight here. Religion is NOT the sole cause or ONLY cause of bad things that happen in the world. Look at Jaine's for example. A Jain Extremist is as harmless as a fruitfly. But a Muslim extremist is something quite different.

Religions are often the source of stupid ideas. And stupid ideas make for stupid actions. See above for examples of insanity brought to us by religion. We can't get rid of religion nor should we. We can only vigilantly battle the stupid ideas that religion (and other things) perpetually spawn.

I think we're going to get along. I had thought of putting things in such a blunt manner but decided not to.

 

[Guy Incognito]

Without rationality there would be no reason. Without reason we have nothing but chaos.

Having irrational thought does not preclude the possibility of rational thought. There is a domain for rationality and a domain for irrationality. To everything a season, no? There is no chaos, the two domains compliment each other.

I suppose science could be a cause for war at some point.

I agree with you that a war would probably not be fought for science as such, but for some sort of scientific ideology.

But I feel that economic and ideological reasons will always be the most prominent. If you truly believed that god needed you to do something, wouldn't you do it no matter what the cost?

Yeah, but you can substitute God with "my country" or "the good of humanity" or whatever. It's not something unique to religion.

 

[spud_meister]

Right.....:roll:

Because without religion I'm sure that a leader whose words are considered indisputable would dictate to this followers that condoms cause AIDs and shouldn't be used.

Yeah, so find me the religious passages that refer to AIDS and condoms? Or could that be due to stupidity and not religion?

Because without religion I'm sure that highly educated men would fly passenger planes into buildings in the hopes of receiving 70 virgins.

'cause socio-political factors had nothing to do with that, and it was purely religious. :roll:

Because without religion I'm sure that humans would have come to the conclusion that cutting off the end of their child's penis is an appropriate and healthy endeavor.

So show me proof that circumcision came about because of religion, and not that the religious mandate came from a society that laready practised it.

Because without religion....

Lets get something straight here. Religion is NOT the sole cause or ONLY cause of bad things that happen in the world. Look at Jaine's for example. A Jain Extremist is as harmless as a fruitfly. But a Muslim extremist is something quite different.

Religions are often the source of stupid ideas. And stupid ideas make for stupid actions. See above for examples of insanity brought to us by religion. We can't get rid of religion nor should we. We can only vigilantly battle the stupid ideas that religion (and other things) perpetually spawn.

So show me an atheist that founded an organisation that has half the impact of the Red Cross, show me an atheist organisation that helps and many people as religious ones do, show me a religious government that slaughtered 20,000,000 of it's citizens, show me two religious wars combined that caused the deaths of over 90,000,000 people. Seems to me that religion is comparatively a lot better than non-religion.

 

[Arcadius]

Having irrational thought does not preclude the possibility of rational thought. There is a domain for rationality and a domain for irrationality. To
everything a season, no? There is no chaos, the two domains compliment each other.

Yes, my point is that there is too much irrationality, and not enough rationality.

I agree with that a war would probably not be fought for science as such, but as some sort of scientific ideology.

Perhaps. I can't speculate about something that doesn't exist yet.

Yeah, but you can substitute God with "my country" or "the good of humanity" or whatever. It's not something unique to religion.

I don't think you'd find the same kind of blind faith in something else. I also don't think you'd find it as easy to invoke those concepts in people.

 

[Guy Incognito]

Yes, my point is that there is too much irrationality, and not enough rationality.

Honestly I feel that it is the opposite. Rationality is selfishness. Irrationality is selflessness and altruism.

The young man who stood against the tank in Tianamen square wasn't behaving rationally, but he was nonetheless a great hero.

Society needs irrationality sometimes.

Perhaps. I can't speculate about something that doesn't exist yet.

There is a South Park episode about super-intelligent otters that you should see, then.

I don't think you'd find the same kind of blind faith in something else. I also don't think you'd find it as easy to invoke those concepts in people.

I disagree, as we have empirical evidence that people can be led to the heights of brutality for concepts that involve no deity, such as communism.

 

[Arcadius]

Honestly I feel that it is the opposite. Rationality is selfishness. Irrationality is selflessness and altruism.

The young man who stood against the tank in Tianamen square wasn't behaving rationally, but he was nonetheless a great hero.

Society needs irrationality sometimes.

One can be a rational human being yet still care about others more than they cares about themselves. I think you don't understand the concept of irrationality. Irrationality is the rejection of reality essentially. It's behaving without reason, and on pure emotion. We don't have super computers in our head just to ignore them.

There is a South Park episode about super-intelligent otters that you should see, then.

I've seen it multiple times. I'm agnostic by the way, not Atheist.

I disagree, as we have empirical evidence that people can be led to the heights of brutality for concepts that involve no deity, such as communism.

I never said these concepts do not exist. I simply believe that religion is a stronger force at influencing will.