Recently on facebook I have had the pleasure of arguing the plausibility or religion and whether or not it is a good thing. It is a rather large and long winded argument so I'm just going to display it here for you to read through if you wish. The argument on facebook will probably continue to get responses, so if anything good is posted I will update it here.

Dylan is a militant atheist and wants to know if anyone is confronted by that.

Maximilian Williams at 6:27am November 24
-- Why? Atheists are a misguided minority :)

Dylan McGannon at 6:39am November 24
-- can you elaborate "misguided". Being a minority doesn't make me wrong or a bad person. I am an atheist because it makes logical sense and allows for the further development of science and true provable knowledge and understanding as opposed to the stagnant situation of blind obedience.

Maximilian Williams at 7:05am November 24
-- There is room for both logic and religion...and misguided simply means that due to certain events in ones life, expression and realisation of spirituality is voluntarily stifled...and there are no such things as 'good' people and 'bad' people.

Dylan McGannon at 7:27am November 24
-- I disagree that there is room for both, religion forces society to abandon logic and to make decisions based on faith (that is, based on nothing). For example it is impossible for an atheist to become a member of parliament unless he lied about his religious stance (which would make him a bad MP) regardless of how well he would do his job. Effectively baring both smart and honest people from doing some of the most important jobs. Science inherently decays religion and religion inherently decays science, they cannot coexist without conflict.

-- I do indeed advocate amoralism however I cannot say that this is the view of all atheists. Being amoral does not mean that I don't see the benefit of being "righteous" and the perils of being "evil", it simply means that I do not believe that good and evil are defined by a supernatural being but are defined by ourselves alone and is thus evidence that it does not require religion to do the "right" thing for the sake of society and development.

Dylan McGannon at 7:30am November 24
-- To display the meaninglessness of your argument I could say that religious people are a misguided majority. We could bounce the same point in disguise back and forth but that would achieve nothing. You haven't said exactly how atheists are misguided, only how general people go about being misguided.
Maximilian Williams at 11:07am November 24
-- Science can't disprove religion. Period. And they can coexist. Religious people go to doctors too. And psychologists. And other scientific based occupations. And the same argument could be said of science - Ive never seen an atom nor have I seen gravity. But you believe these things because it a) makes sense, b) you can feel them and c) you have faith in them. Religion is no different. Just cause you cannot physically see God or the Holy Spirit does not disprove their existence. We know they exist due to a) it makes sense, b) we can feel them and c) we have faith in them. What it all comes down to is the question is there a 'God'? If you answer Yes, then the next question is whether he is the God of Scripture. If yes, then do you believe Christ is the son of God. If yes, etc etc. But religious debates of course all hinge on the first of these questions.

-- And we don't invent what it is good and bad. An action is either of God or not of God.

Maximilian Williams at 11:10am November 24
-- Just as something is either light or not light. There is no such thing as darkness after all. God defines 'goodness' because he IS 'goodness'. We make the choice as to whether we follow allow Him into our lives or not. Of course as I said previously, we can't debate this unless you admit there is a God...which it sounds like you won't. I just pray that maybe when you're a little older and less cynical you will open the door that God is knocking at. Until then, this discussion will just become cyclical and pointless. Cheers and God Bless, MAXi xo

Ry Van Veluwen at 1:50pm November 25
-- You can't be serious? In the event you believe in a god, surely you find the obstruction that there have been millions of people just like yourself before and into the future that believe in a different god, ancient greeks right up to scientologists, all with faith that there god is the correct, which is a whole other flaw in itself.

-- But, taking a step back lets presume there is a holy deity that some how controls the whim of every action in this planet and for that matter the entire being which is our universe, can you really believe that your untold devotion to this being grants you the right to a second life? Because you are unhappy with just the one you have been given? And that some how in an infinite universe in which you believe that is governed by a singular force your actions amount to anything which it could possibly care about?

Ry Van Veluwen at 1:55pm November 25
-- I also share concern for the fact that you would allow this to influence your decions, you do something labeled"right" on the fact that this god has decided it to be so, or perhaps of a fear of the hellish alternative for an afterlife or the hope that doing this positive deed earns you the right to alternate reality of which you are blissfully happy? Doesn't that seem almost selfish? And in that regard wouldn't you agree that the atheist view of doing something judged morally right by our society is the right thing to do purely because it is?

-- Not because of fear of punishment but because given up your seat on the bus for an older gentlemen is the right thing to do?

-- I could go on, but you should see my point and why i believe that claiming this kind of thought process is a misguided one is rather absurd, when logically its a far cleaner and selfless approach.

Joel Van Veluwen at 6:12pm November 25
-- Atheists are hardly a minority, that status is reserved for mourmans, johovahs witnesses and satanists.

Maximilian Williams at 7:15pm November 25
-- Yes, atheists are a minority. According to global statistics, only 1.1 billion people are atheists. Over 5 billion are religious. That makes atheists a minority. And you do not do the right thing because you want to stay out of a furnace lol although some religions no doubt believe this, according to Christ's teachings, salvation and hence eternal life is through faith and faith alone. "Right" acts merely are the manifestation of one's faith, achieved through the Holy Spirit. You cannot earn salvation, it is a gracious gift. And what makes our God different to all the other "gods" is that a) he's still worshipped by the huge majority today, b) the close and communicative relationship that His followers have unlike any other religion and c) He is a loving God unlike say the Ancient Greek Gods who were to say the least perverse humans on a larger scale. And to continue the debate on ethics, if you believe the "right" thing is not defined by a higher being

Maximilian Williams at 7:19pm November 25
-- (which Aristotle himself acknowledged as a force called "the form of the greater good") then who defines what is "right" and "wrong"? What you define as the "right" thing may not be what another thinks and another thinks etc. If we do not have an objective higher standard than we can really just do whatever the heck we want provided we think or feel it is "right" (which many in todays society do eg. rapists, murderers, doctors, priests, teachers, prime ministers and soldiers etc.) Just because you think something is right does not mean it is right. There needs to be an objective standard, whether it is the Bible, the Quran, Torah, Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy etc.

Joel Van Veluwen at 7:19pm November 25
-- 1.1 billion people is definitely not a minority. "A racial, religious, political, national, or other group thought to be different from the larger group of which it is part." Seeing that religions often go as far as arguing that the opposing religion is false means that that 5 billion religious people do not consider themselves a collective "religion" makes each sub-group of religion pretty small.

Maximilian Williams at 7:26pm November 25
-- No, a minority in the true sense of the word is defined as opposite to the majority, both of which are defined by numbers. If we are simply debating religious views versus atheist views then atheists are the minority as the majority are religious people. It matters not how "big" a minority is, as long as it is significantly smaller than the majority. A few billion smaller is definitely significant. But we digress, the debate as such is not on who is bigger...size does not matter all the time after all ;)

Joel Van Veluwen at 7:34pm November 25
-- Well, i still think your stretching the definition of minority, because in the context of it, i don't think i know many christians/other religious people. So i mean you could say minority in the sense of a smaller sector of 2 groups, but you can hardly lump in religious as one group considers most of those people don't acknowledge eachother as religious...?

-- anyway, you keep fighting the good fight? or the bad fight im not even going to dare touch this large argument.

Ry Van Veluwen at 7:41pm November 25
-- If your only real defense is that since the majority believe it MUST be true then i feel sorry for you. Ignoring the fact that out of a rather large selection of points and key notes you managed to select something as poor as "But there are more of us" it seems a little daft. And thats forgoing the fact that if you were to total the religious views of our species, you would find that totally the amount of Hindu followers in India alone over the past few decades would far exceed that of Christians over the same thousand or two years. Perhaps you should become Hindu?

-- But hey, good luck with your blind faith and devotion, i really hope for your sake your right, because all the time spent kissing the metaphorical ass of this god in this life would suck to be wasted if the time came and you discovered that that this life given to you here on earth, which you deemed unsatisfactory in the grand scheme, was the only one you were permitted.

Dylan McGannon at 7:48pm November 25
-- The matter of being a majority or not is irrelevant, what is important is the fundamental failing of religion in society, there are many cases where religion has caused otherwise normal people to take benefit on acts that could only be considered madness and consider it holy. ala 9/11 Galileo racism homosexuality.

-- "I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts

Maximilian Williams at 10:24pm November 25
-- I never said that having a majority was solely significant in whether it was true or not...when the Christian movement first started it was a minority after all. And I do not think this life is unsatisfactory, au contraire, because of spirituality it is very satisfactory. And life is full of "blind faith"...when you fly on a plane, are you 100% certain it won't crash? I think not. No, you take that leap of faith because based on the balance of probability and other factors. Whilst Christianity is not 100% certain, based on the large amount of evidence on Christ from both Scripture and other sources, as well as evidence from both the experiential and other sources, Christianity makes the most logical sense unlike ANY OTHER religion. And that's a fact. As for the social utility of religion, as has been previously said, to group all religions together is ridiculous. I won't bother discussing other religions' faults as it is obvious I think them to be false, but as for Christianity

Maximilian Williams at 10:27pm November 25
-- Sure there have been those who have done horrible things in the name of Christianity, but that does not make Christianity "bad" for society. That is entirely man's fault for misusing and misinterpreting Scripture. A gun is -- not wrong. It is the man who yields it who is wrong. And to focus on all the bad that religion has "done" would be de-emphasising the great good it truly has done. One only has to look at people like Mother Theresa to see this.

Ry Van Veluwen at 11:28pm November 25
-- Mother Theresa did not need the influence of a god to do the things she did, only to do them. Unfortunately, looking at our history, the bad outweighs the good and nine times out of ten Christianity, especially during its popular uprising during the crusades was a powerful method to control people. Nothing more. And no, there is no logical superiority between "My higher power that controls all and he is Christian" then "my higher power who controls all is Muslim" its the same preface with a different name.

Dylan McGannon at 2:21am November 26
-- Likening christianity to a gun probably wasn't a great move but ill see past that. What I'm against isn't just christianity, but all of religion, it inhibits the advancement of society and condemns the race to stagnation. A common example being the notion that the earth was flat, this idea was enforced by religion and all attempts to oppose it where sternly dissolved. It was only when the people were free from the religious strangle that the earth was found to be round.

-- Another flaw in religion is that it evolves its beliefs with time to suit new trends and to "stay in fashion". Racism, sexism, slavery and justified violence were all unquestioned norms of the time until people realised that it was barbaric and immoral that scripture was freely adapted to accommodate for the changes simply to remain the popular thing to be a part of.

-- This casual changing of the religion just shows how the laws of religion are not set in stone and is not enforced by a god. It also shows that the...

Dylan McGannon at 2:23am November 26
-- definition of morality does indeed come from humanity and the evolutionarily built in feelings towards certain subjects that evolved due to the benefits they provided in developing a society that would prosper and accommodate for as much life as possible.

Dylan McGannon at 2:47am November 26
-- To tackle one of your previous points: "Science can't disprove religion. Period.", sure, we can't, but not period, we need to continue to gather evidence and to dig for data and eventually come up with a proof that god cannot exist, this is not impossible, very difficult yes, but not impossible.

-- "[both] can coexist. Religious people go to doctors too. And psychologists. And other scientific based occupations.", yes I am aware of how hypocritical most religious people are, but their use of scientific based services doesn't mean anything, i don't even know what point you were trying to make.

-- "Ive never seen an atom nor have I seen gravity. [makes sense, can be felt, faith]" You are always looking at atoms, there has never been a moment when you are not, they are simply too small to distinguish between each other which is where science comes in, with electron microscopes and from experimentally witnessing their effects under certain conditions it has been proven that they exist.

Dylan McGannon at 2:56am November 26
-- Faith doesn't come into the picture at all, if it had not been proven I would not take it as fact that it has. All your teachings of religion has been to circumvent the need for proof, so that you can blindly believe that god exists without any evidence. In fact what is faith but exactly that, believe in what may not be true and to stick to it when it is criticised for no other reason but for the sake of faith itself. Faith is to be illogical.

-- "What it all comes down to is the question is there a 'God'? If you answer Yes, then the next question is whether he is the God of Scripture. If yes, then do you believe Christ is the son of God. If yes, etc etc.", so what you are saying is that religion is layer upon layer of possibly false ideas? thats a very bad foundation for a lifetimes devotion.

-- "An action is either of God or not of God.", that means nothing, I am referring to that using the terms right and wrong, which is exactly what it equates to.

Dylan McGannon at 3:09am November 26
-- oh and the definition of majority is greater than 50%, christianity (as separate from other [also] false religions) accounts for at most one third.

Dylan McGannon at 4:28am November 26
-- you said:"If we do not have an objective higher standard than we can really just do whatever the heck we want provided we think or feel it is right", so what? this has nothing to do with the debate on religion. It may be better to have a higher standard, but that higher standard doesn't have to be the belief in a being that is somehow always right simply because what he says is what is defined to be right.

-- This whole idea that atheists are moral because they see the benefit of it is true, but we don't even have to be moral by the standards of religion, it really doesn't make a difference to whether god exists or not, it is merely an argument that in this regard society will remain unchanged if religion was abolished. My own belief is that I can get ahead in life by exploiting the kindness in others and manipulating their compassion to benefit myself, it's harsh but thats me. My difficulties in putting that ideology into practice is strong evidence that humans are inherently moral.

Maximilian Williams at 7:14am November 26
-- "Mother Theresa did not need the influence of a god to do the things she did, only to do them"...I agree that Mother Theresa needed God to do them. And the crusades are not an example of what bad religion can do, but what bad man can do. Just because man has used it in the wrong way does not make it "bad". It would be a different story if Jesus told us to go around killing people who did not believe in Him, but He most certainly did not. And I think saying the bad outweighs the good or vice versa is too impossible to definitively measure. But if you were hypothetically to ban/disprove religion, the detrimental effect this would have on the world would be tremendous. Suicide, depression, crime etc. would rise dramatically. Putting aside the truth in Christianity, its social use is to provide strength, love and hope to millions and billions of people around the world. Take that away and you've got a crisis worse than the current economic one. As for the difference between God

Maximilian Williams at 7:34am November 26
-- and Allah, whilst they have the same derivative, they are infact very different. God is an infinite being who has been constantly revealing Himself throughout history to us. Christ and the gospels are the most (so far) that God has revealed Himself and His nature to us. Therefore, Christianity has the most acurate depiction of Him so far. The Muslim God whilst starting at the same point, has gone off on a different path in neglecting Christ who is the true reflection of God's nature. ANd I didn't liken Christianity to a gun so much as use the same principle. Because man (mis)uses something does not make it "bad". Christianity is not stagnant, it is growing AND it is growing people. But that said, it is not an unconcrete fluid that can be changed to suit a purpose. The Word of God is unchanging and definitive. When God says "love your neighbour", he does not mean go and have sex with your nextdoor neighbour. Man's misuse and misinterpretation of Scripture throughout history

Maximilian Williams at 7:41am November 26
-- has come from a lack of Scriptural knowledge and integruous analysis. Don't judge Christianity on those who have misued it and were ignorant of its true meaning. For example, with "earth is flat" case, there has never been any Scriptural basis for this belief. I myself still do not understand not only how and why religious people believed this to be supported by Scripture, but why they cared so much to persecute Galileo. Beats me. Just emphasises the folly in man, not in God. The higher standard is important and must come from somewhere...anywhere. To decide morals for oneself is too subjective. And God can never be disproven, he won't allow it...and it is impossible to disprove someone's existence. But the fact that effort will be put into trying to just furthers the need for God in people's lives. Put the effort into something more constructive like helping others. ANd faith has everything to do with this debate for if there was no such thing as faith, there would be no

Maximilian Williams at 7:46am November 26
-- such thing as religion. Faith is not only exclusive to religion however, it is a human action which permeates all our lives. Faith is simply not knowing everything but doing based on strong evidence and other factors. If we did not take leaps of faith everyday, we would be confined to our beds, too scared to do anything. Christianity is not a "blind faith" either. If it were, there would be no Bible. Or experiential sources. But there are which means it is faith based on SOMETHING, so it is not entirely blind. But it comes from the acknowledgement that we as humans son't know everything but from what we do know, we believe the things we do. Such is the human experience.

Dylan McGannon at 8:00am November 26
-- ok, first of all i think you need to re-read Ry's comment on mother Theresa, i believe that he was saying that she did what she did because she herself was motivated to do it and not because god thought it good.

-- Second, by supposing that there is a world without religion is to suppose that no-one believes in a religion, not that it is disproved spontaneously and the believers shocked into despair. There is a proper way to migrate to logic and rational. For example the generational gap provides a good starting point, there are more Atheists now then there was in the last generation, If religion becomes less believable and is exposed for what it is then the new generations won't be so game to adopt it. So any ill effects from abolishing religion straight away are void and cannot be used as a good thing for maintaining religion.

-- We have split into two different arguments here, that god exists and that religion is a good thing. But regardless I will speak on both topics.

Dylan McGannon at 8:08am November 26
-- Leaving the goodness of religion aside I wan't to stress that the mere premise of a supernatural being, talking snakes global floods and people rising from the dead is simply ridiculous and people need to start to thing rationally and live there lives with a purpose that better serves humanity. I am simply saying that nothing good can come from believing something that is so obviously false, that as much good (if not so much more) can be achieved by looking at situations from a logical standpoint and to reason out the best method to proceed without the restricting conditions of abiding by a religion.

-- Many atrocities are perform in the name of religion, without religion those atrocities and surely many future ones will not (have) occur(ed). No atrocity has been done in the name of atheism, people like Stalin only happened to be an atheist. Just like a murder may just happen to be religious but did not do it in the name of religion.

Dylan McGannon at 8:09am November 26
-- I'm not saying that the world would be a utopia without religion, but it would certainly be much better off.

-- Sorry i kind of strayed back to the other argument lol.

Nadine Patmore at 12:33pm November 26
-- I totally concur.

Maximilian Williams at 5:08pm November 26
-- Well, I believe Mother Theresa wouldn't and couldn't have done the things she did without God's help. And Im sure if she were here shed agree with me if you asked her. As for breeding out religion, its a moot point. You think it would be eradicated, I however think it would eventually come back. Religion fills a hole in humans, whether you believe its man made or truly divine. As for talking snakes (not sure thats in the bible), global floods (which there is both strong scientific and cultural evidence for) and people rising from the dead may indeed be illogical. That does not mean they are false. Im sure if you explained the concept of TV to a prmitive tribe with no understanding of technology, to them it would appear illogical. But TVs exist. Logic is not a concrete thing. It is value laden and changes amongst different cultures, people etc. And to say NOTHING good can come from religion is quite frankly a little ignorant. Sure, bad things have been and will be done in

Maximilian Williams at 5:16pm November 26
-- the name of religion, but that AGAIN does not make it "bad" itself. For example, if I started killing people in the name of Dylan McGannon, does that make you bad? Should we eradicate you? Unless you yourself condoned it, it would be ludicrous to do so. By using that same logic, we should probably eradicate Youtube, Facebook, Alcohol, Food in general because it causes obesity and Scissors cause they poke people's eye out etc. Im sure you can concede that this would be silly. Whether religion is true or false, whether there really is a God, as you have accurately stated, these questions have seemingly become irrelevant in this discussion. What the discussion is really about is RELIGION - WHAT IS IT GOOD FOR? Well, Im sure that Atheists and Theists alike can at least agree that religion has its benefits for society, both on an individual and a social level. To argue otherwise is pointless. If you want to look for the bad, you will find it. You want to look for the good (and

Maximilian Williams at 5:23pm November 26
-- believe you me, theres a lot of it) then you will also find that. I admit that unfortunately bad has occurred in the name of religion. It is only fair you concede otherwise. To focus on only one side is biased. ANd there is another side. Unfortunately there are a lot of religious people out there who call themselves religious and act a total opposite way. Religion is not meant to oppress free thought. Jesus did not come to condemn, he came to save. Those who do not wish to be saved can do what they want. The choice is there. No where does it say you must force others to conform to Christian ways of thinking. Unfortunately though, a lot of Christians do and Im dreadfully sorry for it. They misrepresent the true essence of Christianity - which is primarily to serve mankind. Doesn't matter how hard you pray, worship, sing etc. if you're not serving others, questions as to whether you're really Christian must be asked.

Maximilian Williams at 5:23pm November 26
-- Now a life of service to mankind - no matter for what reason - surely this is a benefit to mankind as a whole.

Nadine Patmore at 8:43pm November 26
-- Max you're absurd. The point you make about killing is just nonsensical. I'm not even go into it but you're truly digging a hole and further proving that religion makes people do crazy things. If I wasn't tired I'd argue with you until I passed out but after reading the points you've made it's not worth anyones time. I agree that faith is an amazing and wonderful thing but religion as a whole is most certainly not. Every addiction has it's ups and downs, religion just happens to be the most acceptable and most publicly annoying one of all, bar smoking. Now, please desist in such contradictory rantings, you're spamming my notifications list. Thank you, and good night.