Polytheish vs. Monotheism , Capitalism vs. Communism

[Cort Haus]

The same formula can be applied to the Great Green Arkelseizure theory:

I just went our and bought myself a cheap religion to experiment with, and I proudly proclaim that the Universe was in fact sneezed out of a being called the Great Green Arkelseizure.

I urge my fellow humans to join me in cowering fear of the time we call "the coming of the great white hankerchief".

Further, I hereby dennounce anyone who denies the possibility of The Hanky as an irrational fanatic!

[Atahualpa]

Indeed it's unreasonable to assume we were not be sneezed out of a being called the Great Green Arkelseizure.
Ofc that doesn't make it reasonable to assume the opposite

[Az]

Originally posted by molly bloom



I'd prefer it if a child could be left until they'd received some scientific instruction they could understand (though of course you'd still get the likes of Bush, Reagan and Blair), say until they were about 16 or 17, then let them choose what religion (if any) they'd like.

Of course that's just pie in the sky (the Holy Pi In The Sky ? ) because one reason religion succeeds is its grounding in communities and families, from cradle to grave.

As an ex-Catholic I'm well aware of the all encompassing pervasive nature of religion, and how difficult it is to reject it without necessarily being cut off from one's family or community.

For me, the experience of relinquishing religion's hold on me certainly made coming out somewhat easier.

I think it comes down to reason and doubt being harder and less attractive options than faith in the unprovable- mind you, I still claim Behzad, Bach, Tallis, Caravaggio and Michalengelo as my heritage too- why should religion get all the best painters and tunes ?

Yes, but pie-in-the-sky, or not, ( going on a slight threadjack here) Don't you think that a society in which children are indoctrinated from birth is, in fact, undemocratic by definition? ( if democracy is defined as a free market of ideas, and an individual's control and responsibility of their own destiny )

[Heresson]

education is always a form of indoctrination. You can not raise children without giving them any moral code "until they grow up and will be able to chose one". It's fantasy.

[Az]

education is always a form of indoctrination.

I disagree. It's a BAM, really. Everyone says this, but isn't really true. My parents educated me through discussion, never through indoctrination.

[Heresson]

You have to have some knowledge to discuss (unless You're at OT, Apolyton).
And You can not just deny that You're borned into some language, into some state, and also into some culture and religion.
A child has to learn some language, and You can not discuss with it whether it should be English or French. The same, You don't have to teach your child your religion, but then, You're simply teaching him/her agnosticism - and, actually, if You don't consider your (nominal) religion true, you're agnostic yourself.

[Az]

language isn't indoctrination because it's by far mainly a vessel to convey thought, and it's influence on thought is negligble ( although not completely non-existant, Chomsky was wrong, it's still minimal ).

On the issue of not teaching your child religion being the same as forcing atheism on them ( not agnosticism, since agnosticism is teaching that we don't know whether god exists or not, and god doesn't have to appear in a discussion without the parents forcefully introducing it ):

It's not forcing atheism - the reason why god usually comes out is an answer to a child's "who made the world" question - the real answer is "We don't know" but one should preempt this question with the simple fact that not all things have to be made by someone. plenty of things just appear, on themselves ( due to the laws of physics, of course, but you shouldn't burden your kid with them just yet ).

Forcing atheism would be this: Imagine your coming out of their room one day, and saying they think their imaginary friend made the world - you forcing your belief on them would be saying: NO HE DIDN'T AND THAT'S IT.

The right approach would be to ask the kid: How do you know this?

[Barnabas]

Pope Eugene IV and the Council of Florence (A.D. 1438 - 1445): "[The most Holy Roman Church] firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart `into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels' (Matt. 25:41), unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fastings, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church."

[Bereta_Eder]

considering christianity (orthodoxy) was catholic (all encompasing) long before the schismatics broke away and named themselves catholics that's rich
loonies say the same from all sides of course. so better not laugh.

[Barnabas]

If the eastern orthodox are the one true church, then, why is Hagia Sophia a Mosque/Museum now?

God clearly likes Roman Catholics more.

[Bereta_Eder]

I don't know. We're working on that

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Odin
Neither hard Atheism nor Theism are falsifiable, therefore, Agnosticism is the only logical choice.

Then only math can be believed in. What a miserable universe you chose to live in.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Brachy-Pride
If the wastern orthodox are the one true church, then, why is Hagia Sophia a Mosque/Museum now?

God clearly likes Roman Catholics more.

They failed to embrace incoclasm, and thus were damned. As for the Roman Church, look what happened to it.

[Bereta_Eder]

Damn right. If you want to break away from the mothership do it all the way like the protestants. not half arsed measures.

[Barnabas]

when? After the fall of constantinople? they lost northern europe, but won central and south america