Stop teaching morons that Christianity has a monopoly on virtue

Organized religion is not belief


It’s a club excluding nonbelievers


And to twist Jesus’s (or other philosophers) words to fit some aim of the organization


It exists to promote its existence
 
Believe whatever is in your heart


Then live that as example as best you can


We will know them by their deeds
 
apparently the atheists around here mistakenly believe the church is intended as a place for the non-sinners, while Christians realize that the church is a place where the sinners gather if they want to experience God's grace......
 
PoliTalker said:
I agree there is not end to religion in the near future.

I disagree that religion is changing. New printings of religious scriptures contain the same text. Nothing has been revised.

The only thing that changes about religion is how it is practiced.

There were no televangelists 100 years ago, for instance.

I don't see religion going away because people don't participate in religion to affirm their beliefs. They already believe. At least most of them do. I am convinced there are many who participate in religion, even religious leaders, who have their doubts about the basic existence of a creator being. But mostly these doubts are not discussed. To do so would violate the scriptures.

Many people participate in religion mostly for the social aspect. By maintaining a church membership, they are part of a club, part of an organization, part of something bigger than themselves. It gives them an automatic set of friends, people who share something in common, a group to identify with. That's probably more important for most church members than reaffirming belief.
Click to expand...


You appear to be conflating' "religion" with "Christianity", and in particular the American Protestant fundamentalist strain of Christianity. Only in Protestantism is biblical literalism and biblical inerrancy held to be tenets of the faith.

There are five billion religious people in this world, at least. And only a small minority of the are Protestants.

What I am mostly disagreeing with you is the assertion that religion will disappear at some point in the coming decades, and that anyone professing to be Christian will be laughed at.

I do not think there is any data to support that outcome.

Pentecostals and Baptists scare me. But I not blind to the data. Christianity, and particularly Protestantism, is growing rapidly in Asia and Africa.

Islam has been growing rapidly for decades and will continue to do do according to projections.

Hinduism and Buddhism are holding their own.


To me at least, the moral of the story is that I do not think religion is going to fade away, either in our lifetimes or the lifetimes of our grandkids.

Humans are probably always going to be attracted to formal, systematic approaches to a metaphysical moral vision perceived to be based on some higher truth.
 
Cypress said:
I have more threads than most people mocking religious reactionaries...


But on the flipside, every aspect of human culture changes over time. Most of the science of 500 years ago we laugh at. We laugh at the foolishness of some Medieval religious beliefs.

Science, religion, culture, change over time. Religion and science are asking different questions. I don't think any genuine religious person is looking to Christianity to solve the mysteries of the Higgs boson and dark matter. Outside of American Protestant fundamentalism, I do not even thiink christians are looking to their church to provide scientific explanations of evolution and genetics.

On the other hand, I do not think science is studying or proposing a systematic system of morality or publishing studies on how to live an authentic life.

I think there is always going to be room in humanity for a community of people to practice ritual and a systematic metaphysical moral vision that is accepted as binding because it reflects a higher truth.

I just don't see that completely going away.
Click to expand...

There is only room for the "practice of ritual and metaphysical moral vision" or any practice when power does not prescribe and proscribe an alternate one.
US protestant fundamentalism has infiltrated the US government intending to do both, and like all superstitious religions impinges on humans freedom to think.

I therefore softly push back your implied framing of the alternatives "science" versus "religion"
Superstitious religion is hogwash and should really enjoy no protection or rights at all except to the extent we protect the right of delusionals
to consort with one another and mumble.

Rather I would taxonomize and separate for academic discussion only, science and ethics/human morality. Obviously I would hope that ethics permeates all science
in its practices and conversely, that science permeates the sociological implementation of ethical precepts. Superstitious religion does exist, but aspirationally
it should not exist. It should not even be a thing. It is nothing more than a mistake of reason, and with it attempts of its leaders and writers to supplant or incorporate ethics
and behavior modification.

Science and religion cannot logically coexist except in the sense that religion is understood as complete fiction. Empiricism is the whole game, and ethics can be seen
as a method decided upon for organization of human behaviors towards each other and the natural world. Those latter should be governed by a decision of what is
both "good" and also forwards survival of life on our planet. These two can also be in tension.
 
Last edited:
Micawber said:
There is only room for the "practice of ritual and metaphysical moral vision" or any practice when power does not prescribe and proscribe an alternate one.
US protestant fundamentalism has infiltrated the US government intending to do both, and like all superstitious religions impinges on humans freedom to think.

I therefore softly push back your implied framing of the alternatives "science" versus "religion"
Superstitious religion is hogwash and should really enjoy no protection or rights at all except to the extent we protect the right of delusionals
to consort with one another and mumble.

Rather I would taxonomize and separate for academic discussion only, science and ethics/human morality. Obviously I would hope that ethics permeates all science
in its practices and conversely, that science permeates the sociological implementation of ethical precepts. Superstitious religion does exist, but aspirationally
it should not exist. It should not even be a thing. It is nothing more than a mistake of reason, and with it attempts of its leaders and writers to supplant or incorporate ethics
and behavior modification.

Science and religion cannot logically coexist except in the sense that religion is understood as complete fiction. Empiricism is the whole game, and ethics can be seen
as a method decided upon for organization of human behaviors towards each other and the natural world. Those latter should be governed by a decision of what is
both "good" and also forwards survival of life on our planet. These two can also be in tension.
Click to expand...

If you narrowly define religion as the fundamentalist American Protestant version of biblical literalism and biblical inerrancy, I agree that version is generally an anathema to scientific inquiry.

My point is that religious traditions are far more broad and nuanced than the typical caricature of the bible thumpers we would like to hold out for ridicule and punishment
.
Religious faith can be rational. Rational does not mean it has to be objectively true. It just means it is a belief that is rational to hold based on life experience, even if empirical data is absent.

Francis Collins, the head of the Human Genome Project and one of the world's leading geneticists is a devout Christian, and I do not doubt he is a reasonable and rational person.

Max Stackhouse defined religion as:

"A comprehensive worldview or 'metaphysical moral vision' that is accepted as binding because it is held to be in itself basically true and just even if all dimensions of it cannot be either fully confirmed or refuted"
Click to expand...

^^ I believe that type of religious conviction is going to be with humans for a long time, and I do not see it as fundamentally at odds with scientific inquiry.

I just believe Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus are going to be around for a very long time.
 
PoliTalker said:
I agree there is not end to religion in the near future.

I disagree that religion is changing. New printings of religious scriptures contain the same text. Nothing has been revised.

The only thing that changes about religion is how it is practiced.

There were no televangelists 100 years ago, for instance.

I don't see religion going away because people don't participate in religion to affirm their beliefs. They already believe. At least most of them do. I am convinced there are many who participate in religion, even religious leaders, who have their doubts about the basic existence of a creator being. But mostly these doubts are not discussed. To do so would violate the scriptures.

Many people participate in religion mostly for the social aspect. By maintaining a church membership, they are part of a club, part of an organization, part of something bigger than themselves. It gives them an automatic set of friends, people who share something in common, a group to identify with. That's probably more important for most church members than reaffirming belief.
Click to expand...

There are a lot of elements of truth in what you wrote, even though my take on it is a little different.
 
Generally religion is virtuous and a good thing - but the people who practice are not all enlightened/"saved"
The one very good thing about religion is you are not the be all and end all - it's not egocentric, and gawd knows we could use some more sense of community in this country

I cant imagine just going thru life and not considering our place in the universe
are we nothing more then protoplasm evolved from the primordial swamp?
~~
I think, I think I am, therefore I am, I think.
[Establishment:] Of course you are my bright little star,
I've miles
And miles
Of files
Pretty files of your forefather's fruit
And now to suit our
Great computer,
You're magnetic ink.
I'm more than that, I know I am, at least, I think I must be.
[Inner Man:] There you go man, keep as cool as you can.
Face piles
And piles
Of trials
With smiles.
It riles them to believe
That you perceive
The web they weave
And keep on thinking free.
 
anatta said:
Generally religion is virtuous and a good thing - but the people who practive are not all enlightened/"saved"
The one very good thing about religion is you are not the be all and end all - it's not egocentric, and gawd knows we could use some more sense of community in this country

I cant imagine just going thru life and not considering our place in the universe
are we nothing more then protoplasm evolved from the primordial swamp?
.
Click to expand...

Either the basic tenets of religion are true, or they aren't. It's understandable that people would believe because it's comforting and the alternative is too bleak to comprehend - but that doesn't make the idea of a creator truthful.

I used to think religion was a real positive overall, because of what you stated and that it was a force for good for most people. I no longer think that. It has been co-opted by too many people with too many agendas.

It should be private, and a "to each his own" thing. It's not that anymore.
 
BartenderElite said:
Either the basic tenets of religion are true, or they aren't. It's understandable that people would believe because it's comforting and the alternative is too bleak to comprehend - but that doesn't make the idea of a creator truthful.

I used to think religion was a real positive overall, because of what you stated and that it was a force for good for most people. I no longer think that. It has been co-opted by too many people with too many agendas.

It should be private, and a "to each his own" thing. It's not that anymore.
Click to expand...

Jesus taught people should pray in public. Is there a single Christian on the planet who believes that?!
 
BartenderElite said:
Either the basic tenets of religion are true, or they aren't. It's understandable that people would believe because it's comforting and the alternative is too bleak to comprehend - but that doesn't make the idea of a creator truthful.

I used to think religion was a real positive overall, because of what you stated and that it was a force for good for most people. I no longer think that. It has been co-opted by too many people with too many agendas.

It should be private, and a "to each his own" thing. It's not that anymore.
Click to expand...
so Ill put you down for the protoplasm that evolved from the primordial swamp. nothing more.
Your life has no more meaning then a slug - same primordial slime.
You eat sleep shit and fuck and die, that is all you are.

You are not a wondrous being breathed life and an ability to see a universal perspective.
There is no right and wrong -just legal and illegal
 
anatta said:
so Ill put you down for the protoplasm that evolved from the primordial swamp. nothing more.
Your life has no more meaning then a slug - same primordial slime.
You eat sleep shit and fuck, that is all you are.

You are not a wondrous being breathed life and an ability to see a universal perspective.
There is no right and wrong -just legal and illegal
Click to expand...

Bad philosophy. Absolutism is bad thinking.
 
Micawber said:
This Marjorie Taylor Greene meltdown reveals an uncomfortable truth about Christianity (msn.com)

[FONT="]“You should practice the basic thing you're taught in church: respect your neighbor,” Dingell shouted. Greene blasted back, “Taught in church, are you kidding me? Try being a Christian and supporting life!" Dingell responded, “You try being a Christian... and try treating your colleagues decently!”[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#333333][FONT="]Dingell thinks being a Christian means being neighborly and civil. Greene thinks being a Christian means attacking anyone who supports abortion rights. But they both agree that being a Christian is morally good, and that Christianity is virtuous.[/FONT]
Click to expand...

Child torture and sacrifices are not virtuous. Have a good day.
 
BartenderElite said:
Either the basic tenets of religion are true, or they aren't. It's understandable that people would believe because it's comforting and the alternative is too bleak to comprehend - but that doesn't make the idea of a creator truthful.

I used to think religion was a real positive overall, because of what you stated and that it was a force for good for most people. I no longer think that. It has been co-opted by too many people with too many agendas.

It should be private, and a "to each his own" thing. It's not that anymore.
Click to expand...

So what do you want done about it?

Anything?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top