Is Religion the Root of All Evil?

[aswitcher]

So your salvation would essentially be a matter of chance and access to communication?

No, salvation is up to us and God. See linky http://www.christianity.net.au/questions/never_heard.html

[skunk]

Hyperthetically can you at least appreciate that Christians accept that God is smarter than us and he has done all he can to allow this free choice?Nonsense. We have free choice because we are gods.

[aswitcher]

[QUOTE=aswitcher]Any competition to Christianity does not serve God as far as I can see.{/quote]Do competing Christian churches?

I dont know. I think they do, because I dont like hugely institutionalised Church structures (sorry Catholics). We all need to be vigilant in our Faith not to become complacent or arrogant etc. Looking at the NT letters to various Churches its apparent that different churches had strengths and weaknesses from a Christian perspective. I think the same exists now, much like different Christians have strengths and weaknesses in their faith..

[skunk]

No, salvation is up to us and God.Put yourself in the hypothetical situation of being a Pacific islander of 1,300AD. You're damned. Forever.

[skunk]

I think the same exists now, much like different Christians have strengths and weaknesses in their faith..Does your church have any weaknesses? How would you rate it on a scale of 1 to 10?

[Sayhey]

You know Sagan was a relgious man, in that he had his own religious outlook concerning the "Cosmos"? In effect this statement contradicts his own outlook on life that is speculative philosophy.

But in respect of this comment, Christianity is about a leap of faith. Without the "need" for that leap - if God/Jesus rocked up and proved to you otheir existence - there would be no free will, no choice seek God out or turn away from him.

Sorry, I didn't actually expect you to respond. :p

It's times like these that I want one of Woody Allen's Marshall McLuhan moments (see Annie Hall), but since the "McLuhan" in question is dead and a quote war of Sagan's works is kinda pointless, we will have to just disagree about Carl's outlook.

To the real point, you're absolutley right that Christianity, and all religion for that matter, is a "leap of faith." If your faith makes you believe that we must accept the unproveable as the source of our understanding of the real world, then, while you are - of course - welcome to it, I'll look elsewhere. I've no real problem with faith giving some a better guide to how to live one's life; I just don't like it when they tell me I must accept their answers because they know.

[solvs]

It is interesting that you brought up the glorious fact that this thread has not turned into a flaming pit of hell, yet you answer me in a way that is so patronising that you are unsuccessfully begging to be flamed.
Sorry, sarcasm doesn't always come across very well over the internet. My point was that I don't know what God is. No one does. If it even exists. But I do have my ideas of what it might be. That's all anyone has. It's the people that are so sure of what God is, and worse, those that want to force others to believe what they do, that are so dangerous. As you mentioned, we are free to discuss such things openly, which is nice.

I just have a feeling that if there is a God, which I think there is (didn't say it was Jehovah/Allah BTW), it's probably not what we would think of as "God", because we couldn't even begin to comprehend it and it's true nature. ;)

[angelneo]

Sorry, sarcasm doesn't always come across very well over the internet. My point was that I don't know what God is. No one does. If it even exists. But I do have my ideas of what it might be. That's all anyone has. It's the people that are so sure of what God is, and worse, those that want to force others to believe what they do, that are so dangerous. As you mentioned, we are free to discuss such things openly, which is nice.

I just have a feeling that if there is a God, which I think there is (didn't say it was Jehovah/Allah BTW), it's probably not what we would think of as "God", because we couldn't even begin to comprehend it and it's true nature. ;)
This reminds me of some theory in physics where we are unable to visualise anything beyond a 3D object (like hypercube), even though in theory there exist n dimension, since we are only a 3D being.

[mactastic]

No, that's not what I'm saying. The Church doesn't get it wrong. Let's take the issue of the earth and the sun and their motion. No where did the Church write out and proclaim: "This is God's word, this is Truth: the sun orbits the earth." At no time was this part of the Church's teaching. It was just the belief of most people at the time.
Well I suppose you'll have to define 'The Church', but...
Sentence of the Tribunal of the Supreme Inquisition against Galileo Galilei, given the 22nd day of June of the year 1633

"It being the case that thou, Galileo, son of the late Vincenzio Galilei, a Florentine, now aged 70, wast denounced in this Holy Office in 1615:

"That thou heldest as true the false doctrine taught by many, that the Sun was the centre of the universe and immoveable, and that the Earth moved, and had also a diurnal motion: That on this same matter thou didst hold a correspondence with certain German mathematicians....

"That the Sun is the centre of the universe and doth not move from his place is a proposition absurd and false in philosophy, and formerly heretical; being expressly contrary to Holy Writ: That the Earth is not the centre of the universe nor immoveable, but that it moves, even with a diurnal motion, is likewise a proposition absurd and false in philosophy, and considered in theology ad minus erroneous in faith.....

"Invoking then the Most Holy Name of Our Lord Jesus Christ, and of His most glorious Mother Mary, ever Virgin, for this Our definite sentence, the which sitting pro tribunali, by the counsel and opinion of the Reverent Masters of theology and doctors of both laws, Our Counsellors, we present in these writings, in the cause and causes currently before Us, between the magnificent Carlo Sinceri, doctor of both laws, procurator fiscal of this Holy Office on the one part, and thou Galileo Galilei, guilty, here present, confessed and judged, on the other part:

"We say, pronounce, sentence, and declare, that thou, the said Galileo, by the things deduced during this trial, and by thee confessed as above, hast rendered thyself vehemently suspected of heresy by this Holy Office, that is, of having believed and held a doctrine which is false, and contrary to the Holy Scriptures, to wit: that the Sun is the centre of the universe, and that it does not move from east to west, and that the Earth moves and is not the centre of the universe: and that an opinion may be held and defended as probable after having been declared and defined as contrary to Holy Scripture; and in consequence thou hast incurred all the censures and penalties of the Sacred Canons, and other Decrees both general and particular, against such offenders imposed and promulgated. From the which We are content that thou shouldst be absolved, if, first of all, with a sincere heart and unfeigned faith, thou dost before Us abjure, curse, and detest the above-mentioned errors and heresies and any other error and heresy contrary to the Catholic and Apostolic Roman Church, after the manner that We shall require of thee.

"And to the end that this thy grave error and transgression remain not entirely unpunished, and that thou mayst be more cautious in the future, and an example to others to abstain from and avoid similar offences,

"We order that by a public edict the book of DIALOGUES OF GALILEO GALILEI be prohibited, and We condemn thee to the prison of this Holy Office during Our will and pleasure; and as a salutary penance We enjoin on thee that for the space of three years thou shalt recite once a week the Seven Penitential Psalms, reserving to Ourselves the faculty of moderating, changing, or taking from, all other or part of the above-mentioned pains and penalties.

"And thus We say, pronounce, declare, order, condemn, and reserve in this and in any other better way and form which by right We can and ought.

Ita pronunciamus nos Cardinalis infrascripti.

F. Cardinalis de Asculo.
G. Cardinalis Bentivolius
D. Cardinalis de Cremona.
A. Cardinalis S. Honuphri.
B. Cardinalis Gypsius.
F. Cardinalis Verospius.
M. Cardinalis Ginettus.
I would submit that The Church has indeed written out and proclaimed that "This is God's word, this is Truth: the sun orbits the earth."

I would also note that The Church has also written out and proclaimed that homosexuality is wrong, that using birth control is wrong, that witches are evil etc.

But the Church has said, in essence: "Jesus is the Son of God, so says God. It is True." And I believe that to be true. It is not just the opinion of the majority of the clergy. At some point, they all got together and discussed things and in the end decreed that Jesus is the Son of God. At no time did they all get together and say that the sun orbits the earth. At no time did they decree that heretics deserve the Inquisition and death. But people in the Church believed these things and acted on them. Now if the Church had gotten together and held a council and decreed that the Inquisition was moral and then later recanted, I'd reject the infallibility of the Church. But they never did this.
Look up Pope Gregory IX, or Pope Innocent III. They were instrumental in providing the justification for the Inquisition. I don't know if they've ever recanted for what those guys did in the name of Christ.

Similarly, the Church cannot take credit for good things its members have done that it did not decree. The Church is only infallible when officially proclaiming doctrine.
Get ready to be a member of a fallible Church then, that's my best advice.