RE: Is Allegorical Religion better than Fundamentalism?
March 27, 2022 at 10:59 pm
(This post was last modified: March 27, 2022 at 11:03 pm by Anomalocaris.)
the question isn’t whether the bible holds any truths. the question is was it crafted primarily to sell a lie, and it’s status perpetuated by those who find the lie useful for their own ends.
religion does not exist for any principle. It exists to serve the worldly needs of those who can control the behavior of others with it. When one asks what religion could do, the answer is really to be found in what it will likely do give whose ends it serves.
religion does not exist for any principle. It exists to serve the worldly needs of those who can control the behavior of others with it. When one asks what religion could do, the answer is really to be found in what it will likely do give whose ends it serves.
how would the constructs that makes it a religion remain if it consisted of only a simple and truthful doctrine?
(March 27, 2022 at 8:52 pm)vulcanlogician Wrote:(March 27, 2022 at 8:09 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote: Really? Can a religion not be shit and remain a religion?
I think it could. In principle.
What if there was a religion that consisted of only a simple and truthful doctrine? Take your pick as to what that doctrine might be. Buddhism's Four Noble Truths... something like that... but with no doctrine of reincarnation.
I think that what makes religions problematic is that they are founded on falsehoods, engage in interpersonally destructive practices, and fail to question the truth of their own claims. On paper, it seems possible to remove these aspects from a given religion while still letting it retain something we might call religious in nature but yet not have the problems you listed above. Modern Quakerism (the liberal strains anyway) might come close to matching that ideal.
religion does not exist for any principle. It exists to serve the worldly needs of those who can control the behavior of others with it. When one asks what religion could do, the answer is really to be found in what it will likely do give whose ends it serves.
(March 27, 2022 at 8:52 pm)vulcanlogician Wrote:(March 27, 2022 at 8:09 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote: Really? Can a religion not be shit and remain a religion?
I think it could. In principle.
What if there was a religion that consisted of only a simple and truthful doctrine? Take your pick as to what that doctrine might be. Buddhism's Four Noble Truths... something like that... but with no doctrine of reincarnation.
I think that what makes religions problematic is that they are founded on falsehoods, engage in interpersonally destructive practices, and fail to question the truth of their own claims. On paper, it seems possible to remove these aspects from a given religion while still letting it retain something we might call religious in nature but yet not have the problems you listed above. Modern Quakerism (the liberal strains anyway) might come close to matching that ideal.
religion does not exist for any principle. It exists to serve the worldly needs of those who can control the behavior of others with it. When one asks what religion could do, the answer is really to be found in what it will likely do give whose ends it serves.
how would the constructs that makes it a religion remain if it consisted of only a simple and truthful doctrine?
