yes sir, in our modern world, dalawa na lang talaga. those who believe there is a supreme being and those who dont believe. siguro, long long ago tatlong klase pa: God-fearing people, atheists, and those who practice Idolatry - yun mga tao nag-worhip ng statues, heavenly objects, animals, nature etc ... but of course, bec. of the discoveries in science, unti-unti na nawala mga ganito.
yes sir I understand that there are sub-groups. pero still bali-baligtadin natin sila, dalawa pa din: one group who believes there is a God and another group who believes there is none.
Just as there are Religious Fundamentalists, there are Atheistic Fundamentalists, who will preach to you till they are blue that "there is no God". But there are moderates, also, who are firm in their belief that there is no God, but they don't go around bothering everyone with their theories.
Then there are the low-level atheists and agnostics, who are only thus because they are dissatisfied with religion.
In religion, you have the Fundamentalists, who preach fire and brimstone and death to all unbelievers.
You have the moderates, the faithful who can accept the existence of other people.
You have the low-level faithful, who are vaguely religious but think about it as often as you or I think about going to the dentist to have a tooth pulled. These people are susceptible to other religions, too.
So... where do you draw the line? What if the person who plants the rice is a low-level faithful? What if he's an agnostic? How do you know that all farmers are religious? That all advances in science or culture were inspired by religion? And what's the difference between science and religion? What if a scientist's religion is the worship of knowledge? What if the atheist worships justice or ethics?
I didnt mean in that way sir. I didnt say that Religion inspired inventors.
what I am saying is that religion or a community/nation of divine believers made it possible for our civilization to prosper. and with civilization, there is peace. and when there is peace and order, there is productivity. and when there is productivity, well yun na nga, the mind gets to work full-blast .
now, let's run this scenario in a godless society but practices equality among men. how long do you think can they survive? how long can one atheist respect/endure another atheist with "superiority complex"so power-tripping that he's almost playing God over the ordinary atheist. and did I mentioned the term God - the most controversial term for an atheist.
so far, the only successful atheistic ideology in our world right now are the communists. but they were wise enough to get "equality among men" out of the picture.
can you cite an example of a community like this?
Harmony in a community is not a result of whether or not the community has a religion. It's a function of the common will of the community, and how well they get along, regardless of religion.
barangays, village associations, sports organizations, laywer/doctor/engineer associations, corporations, towns, cities, most nations in the world, always mention the word "God" either in their profile, background or even in their preamble.
And I beg to differ on the point of view regarding religious war and killing. Those happen precisely because the faith of the followers is so strong that they believe anything is justifiable if done in the name of God. Thus, terrorists aren't afraid of death or killing children, because their leaders tell them it's in the name of God. The leader may be a terrible example of a religious person, using religion as merely a propaganda tool, but the followers can be perfectly faithful and never know the difference.
it's very simple lang naman sir. almost, if not all, religions preach that it is wrong to kill and to harm another person. but there is also a commandment in most religions: defend the faith.
so therefore it's very easy to know those who dont fear to use the name of God in vain, they are always on the offensive . is being offensive a characteristic of God?
It's interesting to note however that most atheists are offensive bec. they attack and disprove our religious beliefs even to the extent of ridiculing it.





so power-tripping that he's almost playing God over the ordinary atheist. and did I mentioned the term God - the most controversial term for an atheist.
