NOM

I've been watching Paganism (ancient religion) on Great courses via Roku. It has been interesting that some of those things parallel modern religion.

Baal was a Phonecian storm deity that was another form of Yahweh who was the Jehovah of the old testament and we are taught in Mormonism is Jesus Christ.

Oracles=prophets or patriarchs

Sacrifices=contrite heart and tithing and fast offering, missions

mythology=scriptures

Omens=tender mercy

Temples=Temples (house where a god dwells)

Anything else?

stuck wrote: ↑Fri Feb 17, 2023 11:35 am Anything else?

I think both groups had a fondness for BBQ and funeral potatoes.

stuck wrote: ↑Fri Feb 17, 2023 11:35 am...
Anything else?

Winter Solstice = Saturnalia = Yule = Christmas

The Sun = Kolob?

It's all the same thing.

It started going downhill, in my opinion, when they started inventing gods that were like kings. They should have stuck with animism and cosmic universal consciousness, but it lacks the kind of leverage you need to extract blood, sweat and money from people.

I think ancient religion was a likely very remunerative profession in most cultures. Priests were probably high in the power structures of most societies. Hmmm.... kind of like today. I'll bet there was an underclass of follower/believers who made the system go too.

deacon blues wrote: ↑Wed Feb 22, 2023 3:59 pmI think ancient religion was a likely very remunerative profession in most cultures.
...

I have heard many, many times that prostitution was one of the "very first" professions.

Personally I'm gonna toss religion in there too as maybe the second profession? Of course if prostitution is a profession, the

someone

(religion) has to tell them that "they" are profession-ing wrong, and of course the leader of that religion needs your money!

deacon blues wrote: ↑Wed Feb 22, 2023 3:59 pmI think ancient religion was a likely very remunerative profession in most cultures.
...

I have heard many, many times that prostitution was one of the "very first" professions.

Personally I'm gonna toss religion in there too as maybe the second profession? Of course if prostitution is a profession, then someone (religion) has to tell them that "they" are profession-ing wrong, and of course, as always: The leader of that religion needs your money!

What is your ultimate desire for religion? Should all religions fall and people recognize that all religion is man made? Without religion, what would humankind replace religion with?

Why does it need to be replaced? People can get on with other activities and organizations of interest in the freed up time and money

2bizE wrote: ↑Mon Feb 27, 2023 8:23 pm What is your ultimate desire for religion? Should all religions fall and people recognize that all religion is man made? Without religion, what would humankind replace religion with?

What if humankind spent more time with science and reality and less time with religion and make believe?

Less ignoring reality, less wallowing in confirmation bias, less tribalism?




Sign me up!

There are cultures that seem to do well without religion. The Piraha tribe has no concept of a god. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirah%C3%A3_people.

More modern societies based on atheism seem to be authoritarian in order to stop religious practice. I don't want to see that. I hope that we are shifting to a society that values science and inquiry as well as compassion and respect. Some days I fear that we are just becoming a set of tribes trying to live side-by-side, though.

blazerb wrote: ↑Tue Feb 28, 2023 8:12 am
More modern societies based on atheism seem to be authoritarian in order to stop religious practice. I don't want to see that. I hope that we are shifting to a society that values science and inquiry as well as compassion and respect. Some days I fear that we are just becoming a set of tribes trying to live side-by-side, though.

I disagree. Scandinavian countries have pretty low belief but they're not authoritarian. Russia is steeped in belief and very authoritarian. Through out Africa, extreme Christianity rules of the day in government forcing punishments on homosexuals and others who don't think the right way. Same throughout Islam. There are far more authoritarian religious regimes than there are atheist.

dogbite wrote: ↑Tue Feb 28, 2023 9:09 am

blazerb wrote: ↑Tue Feb 28, 2023 8:12 am
More modern societies based on atheism seem to be authoritarian in order to stop religious practice. I don't want to see that. I hope that we are shifting to a society that values science and inquiry as well as compassion and respect. Some days I fear that we are just becoming a set of tribes trying to live side-by-side, though.

I disagree. Scandinavian countries have pretty low belief but they're not authoritarian. Russia is steeped in belief and very authoritarian. Through out Africa, extreme Christianity rules of the day in government forcing punishments on homosexuals and others who don't think the right way. Same throughout Islam. There are far more authoritarian religious regimes than there are atheist.

Given that the all the Scandinavian countries have some form of Lutheranism as their state religion, I would argue that they are not *based* on atheism. As a practical matter, I agree with you. They are largely secular and doing great.

I'm not sure that I would rather live in China or Myanmar that in some authoritarian Christian state. Would I rather be killed by being thrown in boiling water or being thrown in acid? They're both pretty bad. I think more people have been killed by atheist governments in China, the Soviet Union, etc. (I'll check the stats if you like) than by religious governments. That isn't to say the religious authoritarians are better. They just had less opportunity to kill, in my opinion.

My point about Scandinavian Countries is that they are very low belief cultures. They don't have religion at the core the of their government and operation though they may still have state churches mostly for historic tradition,

As to the atrocities places at the feet of atheistic regimes, is the atrocitiy because of their atheism. Historically no, it's been for other personal hates and disregards of the individual leaders rather than for a policy of unbelief. I can show more on that later.

However, in the case of religion, the atrocities are usually shown to be a policy of the belief itself.

dogbite wrote: ↑Tue Feb 28, 2023 10:36 am https://michaelsherlockauthor.wordpress ... -hitchens/

I will just say that I disagree with many of the points that Michael Sherlock asserts, but I'm no expert. I'd need to see how others who have studied this more might respond or comment. Atheism is a core component of Marxism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxism_and_religion). Trying to separate it out seems fallacious to me. It feels the same as when Christians tell me that the Crusades weren't about religion but about power. Authoritarians of all stripes are bad. They will use religion or antipathy to religion to achieve their ends. I don't see the difference. But, look, I'm just quoting Wikipedia. I don't believe that I know much about this. Maybe a separate discussion of this would be better?

I don't think society needs religion. But will societies leave religion completely behind once it's established? Scandinavian countries are interesting. They seem as close to secularization as any other country. But they still have state religions, and they give state money to religious groups.

The US has no state religion and does not provide direct state support to religious groups. But we have some of the most fundamentalist religious groups in the Western world. The Christian nationalist movement scares me. I hope we move to a more healthy way of living and leave that behind.

The reason I disconnect atheism from the atrocity is because atheism itself isn't about any particular moral value. It's about one's belief in God.

To associate atrocity to atheism but downplay it in theism is essentially a divine command theory claim, that god is the source of morality. What God commands is automatically right. So the genocide of Canaan is proper, Smashing babies skulls is proper (psalms 137:9) and so on.

Marxism while rejecting God isn't a handbook of human elimination. It took other beliefs people tied to Marxist practice to become murderous. And those beliefs were based in the lack of valuing certain populations as human.

This is the same practice that Christianity uses to penalize the Jews for Christ's death. Or that it's not murder to kill someone not baptized.

Death's for Mao's policies aren't about whether or not god exists, but that humans are worth less than particular interpretation and implementation of (Marxist) ideals. This isn't a tenet of atheism or even Marxism itself. Rather it is a personal moral failing and all too common in humans regardless of their belief in or about god.

dogbite wrote: ↑Tue Feb 28, 2023 1:35 pm To associate atrocity to atheism but downplay it in theism is essentially a divine command theory claim, that god is the source of morality. What God commands is automatically right. So the genocide of Canaan is proper, Smashing babies skulls is proper (psalms 137:9) and so on.

Right here is where we seem not to be communicating. I associate atrocities with all sorts of ideologies. I don't downplay violence with theism at all. Christianity and other religions have been the cause of many horrible acts. I also think atheists have killed a lot also in furthering an ideology that has atheism as a core belief. I condemn the violence. As I said, I don't claim to know much about this. I am open to learning more.

To me they're all forms of in and out group thinking. It's ok, even proper to kill the out group. All the atrocities are against the out group.

Atheism doesn't address grouping at all. It's just that some use it for that purpose.

Religion is explicitly about being the in group.

dogbite wrote: ↑Tue Feb 28, 2023 3:15 pm To me they're all forms of in and out group thinking. It's ok, even proper to kill the out group. All the atrocities are against the out group.

Atheism doesn't address grouping at all. It's just that some use it for that purpose.

Religion is explicitly about being the in group.

I agree that in group and out group thinking is dangerous. Thanks for indulging my comments.