What is the worst religion in existence?

[Neo-Scholastic]

Dr. Cornel West:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DEbcjXLj7k&t=5s

"Whatever forms of intellectual critique, that's fine with me. But in the end, I know where I stand. I stand on a love that lifted me, I stand at the bottom of a cross––of a blood––that transformed me so that I could try to love my crooked neighbor with my crooked heart."

To me this sounds neither transactional nor barbaric. Quite the opposite.

Reminded me of the hymn lyric, "Nothing in my hand I bring / Only to the Cross I cling."...and wondering what it means to have the Man of Sorrows as the central image of worship.

[Jehanne]

Dr. Cornel West:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DEbcjXLj7k&t=5s


To me this sounds neither transactional nor barbaric. Quite the opposite.

Reminded me of the hymn lyric, "Nothing in my hand I bring / Only to the Cross I cling."...and wondering what it means to have the Man of Sorrows as the central image of worship.

NS, I would love to hear your thoughts on my climate thread.  As I see it, this is the problem with religion and the religious crowd, in that we have two fundamental groups here (don't want to be accused of black/white or binary thinking; there are probably more columns to this table); on the one hand, we have the, "In God We Trust" group, and on the other, we have the "Shut up and calculate" group, which I count myself amongst.

And, so, here's the deal -- If there is no God and we, as Homo sapiens sapiens, continue to emit greenhouse gases into our atmosphere, crossing (perhaps, silently), a "tipping point" or some other "point of no return", who or what will save Us?  The futurists claim that technology will save us and the "can doers" are not specific in the exact mechanics of survival, but, they just know that it will happen.

If there is no God, then religious faith, while empathetically consoling and comforting, is just bad for our species, for, if there is no divine being who is going to save Us from Ourselves, then, that means that such a task falls on Us, exclusively.  Don't you agree?

[LinuxGal]

And, so, here's the deal -- If there is no God and we, as Homo sapiens sapiens, continue to emit greenhouse gases into our atmosphere, crossing (perhaps, silently), a "tipping point" or some other "point of no return", who or what will save Us?  The futurists claim that technology will save us and the "can doers" are not specific in the exact mechanics of survival, but, they just know that it will happen.

When airplanes stall they tip over and pick up enough speed to resume flight at a lower altitude. If our present economy starts killing us, the reduced economy of a smaller population will certainly be less lethal.

[Jehanne]

And, so, here's the deal -- If there is no God and we, as Homo sapiens sapiens, continue to emit greenhouse gases into our atmosphere, crossing (perhaps, silently), a "tipping point" or some other "point of no return", who or what will save Us?  The futurists claim that technology will save us and the "can doers" are not specific in the exact mechanics of survival, but, they just know that it will happen.

When airplanes stall tip over and pick up enough speed to resume flight at a lower altitude. I'm in the latter camp.  If our present economy starts killing us, the reduced economy of a smaller population will certainly be less lethal.

Estimates of the half-life of CO2 in the atmosphere vary, with the lower bound being around a century and the upper bound being around a millennium.  And, so, even with a reduced economy with a much smaller population there will not be an immediate impact.  When the worst arrives, there will be even worser things to come.

[Anomalocaris]

Dr. Cornel West:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DEbcjXLj7k&t=5s


To me this sounds neither transactional nor barbaric. Quite the opposite.

Reminded me of the hymn lyric, "Nothing in my hand I bring / Only to the Cross I cling."...and wondering what it means to have the Man of Sorrows as the central image of worship.

it means theft from the spirit of men and infantilization of the minds of men.

[Angrboda]

Reminded me of the hymn lyric, "Nothing in my hand I bring / Only to the Cross I cling."...and wondering what it means to have the Man of Sorrows as the central image of worship.

NS, I would love to hear your thoughts on my climate thread.  As I see it, this is the problem with religion and the religious crowd, in that we have two fundamental groups here (don't want to be accused of black/white or binary thinking; there are probably more columns to this table); on the one hand, we have the, "In God We Trust" group, and on the other, we have the "Shut up and calculate" group, which I count myself amongst.

And, so, here's the deal -- If there is no God and we, as Homo sapiens sapiens, continue to emit greenhouse gases into our atmosphere, crossing (perhaps, silently), a "tipping point" or some other "point of no return", who or what will save Us?  The futurists claim that technology will save us and the "can doers" are not specific in the exact mechanics of survival, but, they just know that it will happen.

If there is no God, then religious faith, while empathetically consoling and comforting, is just bad for our species, for, if there is no divine being who is going to save Us from Ourselves, then, that means that such a task falls on Us, exclusively.  Don't you agree?

The Christian God gave dominion over aspects of earth to man. It's argued he, therefore, has a duty of stewardship. So, Christianity doesn't necessarily entail being laissez-faire about AGW.

[LinuxGal]

The Christian God gave dominion over aspects of earth to man.  It's argued he, therefore, has a duty of stewardship.  So, Christianity doesn't necessarily entail being laissez-faire about AGW.

Genesis 1:28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

Their idea of subduing the earth calls up images of whips and chains.

[Angrboda]

The Christian God gave dominion over aspects of earth to man.  It's argued he, therefore, has a duty of stewardship.  So, Christianity doesn't necessarily entail being laissez-faire about AGW.

Genesis 1:28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

Their idea of subduing the earth calls up images of whips and chains.

Your point?

[LinuxGal]

Genesis 1:28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

Their idea of subduing the earth calls up images of whips and chains.

Your point?

Wow, it's a hornet's nest I'm cleaning up today.

[Nay_Sayer]

Do we need to acknowledge God or do we turn our backs to him?

Kind of hard to acknowledge something that is even less detectable than a neutrino.

Why can't people just be nice?

Why does an opinion or belief or lack thereof in a god matter.

A decent person is a decent person regardless.

I don't think so. What if your child treats you nicely, but  fails to acknowledge that you're their father or mother? They don't acknowledge you to you or anybody else. If there is no God then just being nice might be OK, but if there is a God, then we need to acknowledge him.

I don't think so. What if your child treats you nicely, but  fails to acknowledge that you're their father or mother? They don't acknowledge you to you or anybody else. If there is no FSM then just being nice might be OK, but if there is a FSM, then we need to acknowledge Xim.