Imagine there's no religion.

[Unknown Soldier]

Imagine there's no heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us, only sky

Imagine all the people
Livin' for today
Ah

Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion, too

John Lennon imagined a world without anything to kill or die for. The world would be "as one." There would be no need for greed or hunger. We would all share the world in peace.

What is the price of this utopia? Part of that fee would be our giving up religion, but would doing so buy us the world that Lennon imagined? It's hard to say because some places like Japan are well off and are without religion. Other places like North Korea are not so well off without religion. So the results of dispensing with religion are evidently mixed.

My question, then, for religious unbelievers (or anybody) is do you think Lennon is right? Without religion is there nothing to kill or die for? If we dispense with religion can we live in peace sharing all the world as one?

 

[WAB]

Lennon wasn't saying that absent religion there would be nothing to kill or die for. Lack of religion is just one aspect of his dream-world. Notice he also says "no countries". In my view the song is great but Utopia is impossible, given human nature, and nature itself.

I don't think Lennon was naive. The song is simply about imagining such a perfect world, not necessarily bringing one about, hence the title.

Coming back to your question: removing religion would certainly not bring about a world where there was nothing to kill or die for. Nature makes us kill and die, not religion, in and of itself.

Not that religion hasn't caused, directly or indirectly, a lot of killing and dying, of course it has. But so have lots of other things that have nothing to do with religion.

You wrote: If we dispense with religion can we live in peace sharing all the world as one? Good luck with that.

 

[rousseau]

Lennon sang 'imagine no possessions' while being a multi-millionaire, which tells you most of what you need to know.

It's a pretty song, though.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

The issues of Lennon and the meaning of the song are going to result in distractions from the primary, essential question of religion. I think the song is more about people living daily on equal terms, minimal hierarchies and power imbalances, so no governments, no war, no religion, just trying to survive, sharing, loving in peace. An imagined result of an anarchy with people having good intentions. Again, though, I think it's a distraction from the essential question which is being asked independent of other dependencies to make such an imagined world, at least in Lennon's mind.

So, off the top of my head...

Religion is complex, but at the moment--and my opinion changes--I think it's more neutral, like, say, a hammer. It's a tool in some sense that people use for good or ill. Without religion other tools take its place, or at least that is how it seems.

So, if someone is using religion as a means to control other people, other things (such as a system of lies) could also be used in lieu of that. Take your example of North Korea. Dear Leader is mythicized. His ancestry and the country's history is mythicized, too, hyperbole and what, unicorns? Religions are factually false as well, but there would still be false beliefs out there without religion.

Religions seem to be utilized for some good sometimes or have some good features as well: a sense of community, charity, and the ability to look forward to something to keep one surviving in the face of seemingly insurmountable odds. I think when those things can be good, they also can have secular substitutes.

 

[abaddon]

What he's singing is christianity in a nutshell. If you focus on the kind ideas in christianity, you get utopian stuff like this... pretty specifically the sort that Lennon's singing about.

"But he says no heaven and no hell". Yeah, in a perfected world, heaven and earth are one and hell is no more.

"But he says no religion". Yeah, the goal of religion isn't religion. It's to restore "fallen" nature to the garden.

Regardless his conscious intent, even if it's to be irreligious, nevertheless the ideals are there in religions.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Lennon wasn't saying that absent religion there would be nothing to kill or die for. Lack of religion is just one aspect of his dream-world. Notice he also says "no countries". In my view the song is great but Utopia is impossible, given human nature, and nature itself.

I don't think Lennon was naive. The song is simply about imagining such a perfect world, not necessarily bringing one about, hence the title.

Coming back to your question: removing religion would certainly not bring about a world where there was nothing to kill or die for. Nature makes us kill and die, not religion, in and of itself.

Not that religion hasn't caused, directly or indirectly, a lot of killing and dying, of course it has. But so have lots of other things that have nothing to do with religion.

You wrote: If we dispense with religion can we live in peace sharing all the world as one? Good luck with that.

One of the reasons I decided to start this thread is that Lennon's song reminds me of trouble I'm currently having with some Christians that have moved into my hometown. They're former gang members from Philadelphia who have moved here to dry out at the local rehab and "find Jesus." One of them, a "Brother Leroy," is especially zealous. Brother Leroy is BIG and looks like an NFL linesman. He and some of his buddies evidently don't like to take no for an answer from those they evangelize. I told him I wasn't interested in his religion and made the mistake of telling him that I'm an atheist. Now they've made some comments about me that I feel on edge about.

Oh well--it's probably nothing. I suppose I worry too much. But I'd feel better knowing that "there's nothing to kill for."

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Lennon sang 'imagine no possessions' while being a multi-millionaire, which tells you most of what you need to know.

It's a pretty song, though.

That's an interesting observation. Lennon evidently saw communism as an ideal, but in practice, he opted for private property--LOTS of private property.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

The issues of Lennon and the meaning of the song are going to result in distractions from the primary, essential question of religion. I think the song is more about people living daily on equal terms, minimal hierarchies and power imbalances, so no governments, no war, no religion, just trying to survive, sharing, loving in peace. An imagined result of an anarchy with people having good intentions. Again, though, I think it's a distraction from the essential question which is being asked independent of other dependencies to make such an imagined world, at least in Lennon's mind.

Yes. I agree that the anti-religious sentiments in the song are only a minor part of Lennon's message. I think a bigger factor in what Lennon saw as the world's problems is nationalism and the wars that result from jingoism. If there was one united world, then there would be no nations rising up against other nations.

So, off the top of my head...

Religion is complex, but at the moment--and my opinion changes--I think it's more neutral, like, say, a hammer. It's a tool in some sense that people use for good or ill. Without religion other tools take its place, or at least that is how it seems.

I used to think that religion makes people bad, but now I think that it's more correct to say that bad people make religion. Religious belief is just a set of ideas that people may or may not adopt as a rationalization or description of what they would do anyway. Ideas in and of themselves have no causal power, and that includes religious ideas. No peace-loving people, for example, will go on the war path just because they read that Jesus said He came to bring a "sword."

So, if someone is using religion as a means to control other people, other things (such as a system of lies) could also be used in lieu of that. Take your example of North Korea. Dear Leader is mythicized. His ancestry and the country's history is mythicized, too, hyperbole and what, unicorns?

North Korea's government is very similar to a religion. The North Koreans treat Kim Jong-un literally as a God.

Religions are factually false as well, but there would still be false beliefs out there without religion.

Sure. I've debated many atheists who hold destructive ideas and dangerous ideas that are based on misinformation and faulty reason.

Religions seem to be utilized for some good sometimes or have some good features as well: a sense of community, charity, and the ability to look forward to something to keep one surviving in the face of seemingly insurmountable odds. I think when those things can be good, they also can have secular substitutes.

There are some "secular substitutes" for religion, but I've yet to see one that's much better than religion.

 

[TomC]

Lennon wasn't saying that absent religion there would be nothing to kill or die for. Lack of religion is just one aspect of his dream-world. Notice he also says "no countries". In my view the song is great but Utopia is impossible, given human nature, and nature itself.

I don't think Lennon was naive. The song is simply about imagining such a perfect world, not necessarily bringing one about, hence the title.

Coming back to your question: removing religion would certainly not bring about a world where there was nothing to kill or die for. Nature makes us kill and die, not religion, in and of itself.

Not that religion hasn't caused, directly or indirectly, a lot of killing and dying, of course it has. But so have lots of other things that have nothing to do with religion.

You wrote: If we dispense with religion can we live in peace sharing all the world as one? Good luck with that.

One of the reasons I decided to start this thread is that Lennon's song reminds me of trouble I'm currently having with some Christians that have moved into my hometown. They're former gang members from Philadelphia who have moved here to dry out at the local rehab and "find Jesus." One of them, a "Brother Leroy," is especially zealous. Brother Leroy is BIG and looks like an NFL linesman. He and some of his buddies evidently don't like to take no for an answer from those they evangelize. I told him I wasn't interested in his religion and made the mistake of telling him that I'm an atheist. Now they've made some comments about me that I feel on edge about.

Oh well--it's probably nothing. I suppose I worry too much. But I'd feel better knowing that "there's nothing to kill for."

That does sound like an uncomfortable situation.

I don't know you, your situation, or Brother Leroy. I'm not really giving you advice, exactly.

But a technique I've found useful is asking for a favor. Something tiny, but practical.
"Man, I could really use some milk. Just enough for coffee. I don't feel up to going to the store.
If I gave you a couple bucks, would you pick me up a little carton while you're out?"
See what happens.

You might be surprised by how much you can learn about people by asking for something, like a small favor.
And you might be surprised by how many people like you better because they've done you a tiny something without needing to for any particular reason.
Tom

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Oh well--it's probably nothing. I suppose I worry too much. But I'd feel better knowing that "there's nothing to kill for."

Mankind has rarely ever been at a state of existence where it struggled to find an excuse for killing.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Yes. I agree that the anti-religious sentiments in the song are only a minor part of Lennon's message. I think a bigger factor in what Lennon saw as the world's problems is nationalism and the wars that result from jingoism. If there was one united world, then there would be no nations rising up against other nations.

Don't know what was in Lennon's brain but the problem is inequality.

Lennon wasn't saying that absent religion there would be nothing to kill or die for. Lack of religion is just one aspect of his dream-world. Notice he also says "no countries". In my view the song is great but Utopia is impossible, given human nature, and nature itself.

I don't think Lennon was naive. The song is simply about imagining such a perfect world, not necessarily bringing one about, hence the title.

Coming back to your question: removing religion would certainly not bring about a world where there was nothing to kill or die for. Nature makes us kill and die, not religion, in and of itself.

Not that religion hasn't caused, directly or indirectly, a lot of killing and dying, of course it has. But so have lots of other things that have nothing to do with religion.

You wrote: If we dispense with religion can we live in peace sharing all the world as one? Good luck with that.

One of the reasons I decided to start this thread is that Lennon's song reminds me of trouble I'm currently having with some Christians that have moved into my hometown. They're former gang members from Philadelphia who have moved here to dry out at the local rehab and "find Jesus." One of them, a "Brother Leroy," is especially zealous. Brother Leroy is BIG and looks like an NFL linesman. He and some of his buddies evidently don't like to take no for an answer from those they evangelize. I told him I wasn't interested in his religion and made the mistake of telling him that I'm an atheist. Now they've made some comments about me that I feel on edge about.

Oh well--it's probably nothing. I suppose I worry too much. But I'd feel better knowing that "there's nothing to kill for."

That does sound like an uncomfortable situation.

I don't know you, your situation, or Brother Leroy. I'm not really giving you advice, exactly.

But a technique I've found useful is asking for a favor. Something tiny, but practical.
"Man, I could really use some milk. Just enough for coffee. I don't feel up to going to the store.
If I gave you a couple bucks, would you pick me up a little carton while you're out?"
See what happens.

You might be surprised by how much you can learn about people by asking for something, like a small favor.
Tom

That's an excellent tactic. Even in conversation it's productive to change subjects when things need defused. And in this case you are asking for help and cooperation, immediately making yourself the non-stranger. Brother Leroy likely never met someone who identified with atheism. It happens.

 

[TomC]

That's an excellent tactic. Even in conversation it's productive to change subjects when things need defused. And in this case you are asking for help and cooperation, immediately making yourself the non-stranger. Brother Leroy likely never met someone who identified with atheism. It happens.

It's not as morally beautiful as it might look.

I've gotten rid of people I preferred never to see again with $5 or less. Simply by pretending to trust them with $5.
Money well spent.

You can't say, "Oh you poor thing. Here's $5 for your benefit."
Not if you want to understand them or get rid of them.

You say "Here's $5. See ya after while..."

Often, you never see them again. That works too.
More often than not.
Tom

 

[steve_bank]

To make a point on what constitutes modern religion and mythology.

Imagine that 2000 years rom now John Lennon will be quoted as a prophet, Walked on water.

Not knowing he was an alcholoic and drug addict. A rich entertainer.

 

[Learner]

To make a point on what constitutes modern religion and mythology.

Imagine that 2000 years rom now John Lennon will be quoted as a prophet, Walked on water.

Perhaps not, as shown in the last part of your statement:

Not knowing he was an alcholoic and drug addict. A rich entertainer.

I can imagine too, people would stumble across the last part of your statement, archived, which 'denies' the notion that John Lennon was ever a ,"prophet and walked on water", 2000 years from now.

 

[steve_bank]

Learner

Christians have absolutely no idea who an historical Jesus may have benn, or even what his name msy have been.

I look around today and cast back 2000 years. Jim Jones and David Koresh on the extreme religious zealot scale.

My favorite example is Bob Dylan, not even his real name. He stated out ytying to mimck Woody Guterie. The so called counter cultureof the day turned him into a prophet. At a 60s Newport Folk Festival he went electric with a backup band. His devotees were literally horrified.

He was an entertainer putting on an act, and he was actually quite honest about it. As a symbol of the anti bourgeois materialism of the middle class, when asked about his getting rich he said 'what's wrong with getting rich?'.

PHD theses were done on Dylan, books written.

Christians in a narrative which evolved by Christians, it is not based on any factual knowledge of what kind of person he may really have been.

Sorry for the derail Soldier.

 

[TomC]

What he's singing is christianity in a nutshell. If you focus on the kind ideas in christianity, you get utopian stuff like this... pretty specifically the sort that Lennon's singing about.

I definitely agree.

If you condense Jesus's moral and ethical teachings to their essence and you've got the same thing.

Return kindness for anger.

The Golden Rule

Prioritize "what you do for the Least" over "store up treasure the moth and rust will destroy".
Etc. Etc. Etc...

I've long suspected that what Jesus meant by "The Kingdom of God" wasn't a magical place in the sky. It's life here on earth with everyone operating on high quality moral principles and ethical standards.

Just like Lennon's song.
Tom

 

[Unknown Soldier]

One of the reasons I decided to start this thread is that Lennon's song reminds me of trouble I'm currently having with some Christians that have moved into my hometown. They're former gang members from Philadelphia who have moved here to dry out at the local rehab and "find Jesus." One of them, a "Brother Leroy," is especially zealous. Brother Leroy is BIG and looks like an NFL linesman. He and some of his buddies evidently don't like to take no for an answer from those they evangelize. I told him I wasn't interested in his religion and made the mistake of telling him that I'm an atheist. Now they've made some comments about me that I feel on edge about.

Oh well--it's probably nothing. I suppose I worry too much. But I'd feel better knowing that "there's nothing to kill for."

That does sound like an uncomfortable situation.

I don't know you, your situation, or Brother Leroy. I'm not really giving you advice, exactly.

But a technique I've found useful is asking for a favor. Something tiny, but practical.
"Man, I could really use some milk. Just enough for coffee. I don't feel up to going to the store.
If I gave you a couple bucks, would you pick me up a little carton while you're out?"
See what happens.

You might be surprised by how much you can learn about people by asking for something, like a small favor.
And you might be surprised by how many people like you better because they've done you a tiny something without needing to for any particular reason.
Tom

Thanks, Tom, but it looks like the problem is moot. I haven't heard anything from the "Brothers Leroy" for a while, so I think I'll be OK.

Anyway, getting back to the OP, if we can imagine there were no people like Brother Leroy in the world, would it make much difference? People like Leroy might find reasons to intimidate people that have nothing to do with religion. It's very possible that Leroy is just using religion to convince people that he's reformed his life or that he's using religion as a rationalization to continue his ways.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Oh well--it's probably nothing. I suppose I worry too much. But I'd feel better knowing that "there's nothing to kill for."

Mankind has rarely ever been at a state of existence where it struggled to find an excuse for killing.

As you know I'm well aware that many people don't need to struggle to find an excuse for killing.

 

[TomC]

It's very possible that Leroy is just using religion to convince people that he's reformed his life or that he's using religion as a rationalization to continue his ways.

Again, I don't know anything about the situation beyond the tiny bits you've mentioned.

But maybe, Leroy(hulking gangster in rehab) hasn't ever been shown any real kindness by anyone but the Christians running his rehab place.
Maybe he just doesn't know any other way to act?
Tom

 

[Unknown Soldier]

It's very possible that Leroy is just using religion to convince people that he's reformed his life or that he's using religion as a rationalization to continue his ways.

Again, I don't know anything about the situation beyond the tiny bits you've mentioned.

But maybe, Leroy(hulking gangster in rehab) hasn't ever been shown any real kindness by anyone but the Christians running his rehab place.
Maybe he just doesn't know any other way to act?
Tom

I don't know if any Christians run the WHITE DEER RUN ALLENWOOD rehab. I'm not even sure if Leroy actually spent time there. I live in Williamsport, PA which some refer to as "Little Philly." Back in the 1980s one of Williamsport's mayors decided to have the drug and alcohol rehab located nearby in Allenwood. Since then the locals blame her and the "influx" from Philadelphia for the rise in crime in Williamsport. That's why some call Williamsport "Little Philly." Most of that influx is black, and it's resulted in some racial tensions here. Leroy fits that profile of the black trouble-maker from Philly.

Actually, I feel bad for Leroy. I hear he got into trouble in Philadelphia, and like most people, I think he just wants to put those troubles behind him. Unfortunately, his trying to solve his problems with religion is not too likely to succeed. So like you say, he may not know how else to act, at least not yet, and he thinks violence in the Christian context is justified.