Donate to DU!
Democratic Underground Latest Threads
Latest
Greatest Threads
Greatest
Lobby
Lobby
Journals
Journals
Search
Search
Options
Options
Help
Help
Login
Login
Google

Reply #64: Every salvationist religion has varieties, but the crucial similarity remains. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
First thread | Last thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Religion/Theology Donate to DU
greyl Donating Member (1000+ posts)  Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri Nov-17-06 10:34 AM
Response to Reply #43
64. Every salvationist religion has varieties, but the crucial similarity remains.
They all assume humans are divinely flawed using one turn of phrase or another. It's very difficult to see this from inside our culture because it's so pervasive. Salvationist religions only exist within our culture, because they are the product of only our culture.
Everyone in our global culture, East or West, understands what it means when someone tells them "Let me show you how to be saved". Attempt to explain that and the other assumptions of any of the 5 major salvationist religions to the woman in the photo below, and she will probably look at you as if you were quite peculiar - with damn good reason. She isn't leading an unfilling life within the prison of a failing cultural experiment which whispers in her ear from the moment of birth that she is divinely flawed or doomed to endless suffering unless.



Humanity doesn't need some divine salvation from its physiological/biological lot in life.
If anything, it and the rest of the community of life need to be saved from our very young culture.

Faith won't fix our culture, nor will it save the world, because it is the absolutely false tenets of faith which are the problem. Not humanity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  Faith Won't Heal a Divided World Freedom_from_Chains  Nov-16-06 10:27 AM   #0 
   Harris doesn't think faith will  TallahasseeGrannie   Nov-16-06 10:35 AM   #1 
   He provides damn solid reasons for his view.  greyl   Nov-16-06 10:44 AM   #2 
   Every time I post one of these they become damn silent  Freedom_from_Chains   Nov-16-06 11:27 AM   #3 
   Well, arguments against Harris aren't just lying around everywhere, so  greyl   Nov-16-06 11:49 AM   #7 
   You're an optimist!  Freedom_from_Chains   Nov-16-06 11:51 AM   #8 
   Why do anyone of us need to prove anything to you?  kwassa   Nov-16-06 02:37 PM   #15 
   Exactly  kiahzero   Nov-16-06 02:41 PM   #17 
      I'm curious what you think the difference is between spreading beliefs  greyl   Nov-16-06 04:03 PM   #22 
         In the context of religion?  kiahzero   Nov-16-06 05:44 PM   #25 
            No, not in religious context - including it.  greyl   Nov-17-06 10:01 AM   #62 
            It's not a cop-out.  kiahzero   Nov-17-06 11:39 AM   #72 
               Faults seen in Harris's argument can't be replicated for others?  greyl   Nov-17-06 02:10 PM   #83 
                  Wait... what?  kiahzero   Nov-17-06 03:27 PM   #99 
            "there's no need for me to justify that belief to others."  Zhade   Nov-17-06 10:43 PM   #144 
   Explain something to me  TallahasseeGrannie   Nov-17-06 09:19 AM   #59 
      But would you go to a crochet forum and refuse to discuss your techniques? n/t  Finder   Nov-17-06 02:58 PM   #93 
         Ahhhhh "I see, said the blind man!"  TallahasseeGrannie   Nov-17-06 03:38 PM   #101 
            You are always open to discussion...both sides luv ya...  Finder   Nov-17-06 03:59 PM   #104 
               Thank you very much  TallahasseeGrannie   Nov-17-06 07:35 PM   #129 
   The Abrahamic-centric notion that all theists believe in Hell, for one.  kiahzero   Nov-16-06 11:30 AM   #4 
   O.K. so when you look at the major religions of the world  Freedom_from_Chains   Nov-16-06 11:45 AM   #5 
   Your estimates appear to be off  kiahzero   Nov-16-06 02:46 PM   #19 
      Didn't notice this earlier.  trotsky   Nov-17-06 02:28 PM   #87 
   Buddhism and Hinduism have the "same" thing.  greyl   Nov-16-06 11:47 AM   #6 
   Yeah, I have been really concerned lately about those Buddhist  Freedom_from_Chains   Nov-16-06 11:53 AM   #9 
   Pol Pot was a Buddhist  kwassa   Nov-16-06 03:14 PM   #20 
      He was raised as one...  catbert836   Nov-16-06 05:54 PM   #27 
      Actually, he attended Catholic School as a child. n/t  Finder   Nov-16-06 06:19 PM   #29 
      The medieval Japanese used Buddhism as an excuse for some pretty  Lydia Leftcoast   Nov-16-06 09:00 PM   #40 
      Well said. (n/t)  kiahzero   Nov-16-06 09:07 PM   #44 
      a central function of the samurai? Guarding crops. nt  greyl   Nov-17-06 10:43 AM   #65 
         And that is germane to the discussion exactly how?  Lydia Leftcoast   Nov-17-06 12:49 PM   #80 
            Locking up the food is a policy that distinguishes our culture  greyl   Nov-17-06 02:13 PM   #84 
      How are you to know he wasn't practicing?  kwassa   Nov-16-06 09:44 PM   #46 
      Interesting thing here, kwassa.  trotsky   Nov-17-06 04:07 PM   #106 
         Though I would agree that he wasn't a practicing Buddhist  Dorian Gray   Nov-17-06 05:01 PM   #114 
         This just devolves into the "No true Scotsman" fallacy.  trotsky   Nov-17-06 05:34 PM   #128 
            Nope...  Dorian Gray   Nov-18-06 02:14 AM   #156 
         Are you calling me a hypocrite?  kwassa   Nov-17-06 05:10 PM   #121 
            Just wanted you to explain the apparent double standard.  trotsky   Nov-17-06 05:27 PM   #125 
   Not at all.  kiahzero   Nov-16-06 01:13 PM   #10 
      On the contrary.  greyl   Nov-16-06 02:25 PM   #12 
         It's not eternal  kiahzero   Nov-16-06 02:29 PM   #13 
         Depends on which variety of Buddhism you're talking about  Lydia Leftcoast   Nov-16-06 09:06 PM   #43 
            Every salvationist religion has varieties, but the crucial similarity remains.  greyl   Nov-17-06 10:34 AM   #64 
               Name the five "salvationist" religions  kiahzero   Nov-17-06 11:49 AM   #74 
                  If Christians aren't afraid of Hell, that's no problem either, correct?  greyl   Nov-17-06 02:09 PM   #82 
                     Strawman  kiahzero   Nov-17-06 03:24 PM   #97 
   Since when is hell an "Abrahamic" notion?  struggle4progress   Nov-17-06 10:03 PM   #135 
      Since about 100 BCE. (n/t)  kiahzero   Nov-17-06 10:09 PM   #136 
         It certainly doesn't seem to be one of Abraham's notions.  struggle4progress   Nov-17-06 10:17 PM   #137 
            That's not what "Abrahamic religion" means.  kiahzero   Nov-17-06 10:20 PM   #138 
               Of course. Incidently, Judaism isn't united on the subject of hell.  struggle4progress   Nov-17-06 10:34 PM   #139 
                  I believe I actually argued that somewhere in this thread.  kiahzero   Nov-17-06 10:38 PM   #141 
                     Ah, yes. #97. Sorry. Didn't see it before  struggle4progress   Nov-17-06 10:42 PM   #143 
                        The thread is growing at a rather rapid pace  kiahzero   Nov-17-06 10:45 PM   #145 
   Actually I kind of like his writings  TallahasseeGrannie   Nov-16-06 01:37 PM   #11 
      You have an internal dialogue which bears fruit, correct?  greyl   Nov-16-06 02:35 PM   #14 
      You are way, way outta my league now,  TallahasseeGrannie   Nov-16-06 02:44 PM   #18 
      What does being a creativity facilitator have to do with it? :)  greyl   Nov-17-06 09:46 AM   #60 
      I'm willing to bet that TG teaches her students truths that can't be  Ron_Green   Nov-16-06 05:17 PM   #24 
      Thank you very much  TallahasseeGrannie   Nov-16-06 05:59 PM   #28 
      What is "maieutic teaching?"  Dorian Gray   Nov-17-06 11:09 AM   #67 
         Quite the opposite, really.  kiahzero   Nov-17-06 11:51 AM   #75 
         Thanks Kiahzero  Dorian Gray   Nov-17-06 05:04 PM   #116 
         I was too, and never heard it till later.  greyl   Nov-17-06 02:22 PM   #85 
      Yes, formal logic can prove just about anything, but it's all about the axioms  kiahzero   Nov-16-06 02:39 PM   #16 
         I don't think so. Can you give me an example  greyl   Nov-17-06 09:51 AM   #61 
            I was only discussing validity.  kiahzero   Nov-17-06 11:34 AM   #71 
               Well, that's the rub. That means a better phrasing would be:  greyl   Nov-17-06 02:28 PM   #86 
                  Fallacies generally refer to the validity of an argument, not the soundness. (n/t)  kiahzero   Nov-17-06 03:26 PM   #98 
                     Generally? That means you admit the existence of  greyl   Nov-20-06 09:25 AM   #173 
   Just what I was thinking!  JerseygirlCT   Nov-16-06 03:47 PM   #21 
   Actually, Harris pretty effectively destroyed the tolerant/moderate viewpoint.  trotsky   Nov-16-06 05:08 PM   #23 
      Hardly  kiahzero   Nov-16-06 05:48 PM   #26 
      You misstate his position.  trotsky   Nov-16-06 07:50 PM   #30 
      A number of reasons:  kiahzero   Nov-16-06 08:05 PM   #31 
         So you're saying there is one, agreed-upon, 100% certain interpretation?  trotsky   Nov-16-06 08:40 PM   #34 
            No  kiahzero   Nov-16-06 08:42 PM   #36 
               Why do you have to misstate Harris' position?  trotsky   Nov-16-06 08:48 PM   #38 
                  Maybe I will write him to try and figure out what the hell he means, then.  kiahzero   Nov-16-06 09:05 PM   #42 
                  Alternative interpretations have existed as long as the texts  JerseygirlCT   Nov-16-06 09:12 PM   #45 
                     Well sure they've been arguing.  trotsky   Nov-16-06 10:10 PM   #48 
                        What's the difference between scholarship and  JerseygirlCT   Nov-17-06 08:13 AM   #55 
                           You're misunderstanding.  trotsky   Nov-17-06 08:41 AM   #57 
                           Scholarship is academic and secular...  Finder   Nov-17-06 02:05 PM   #81 
      I should have read yours first!  JerseygirlCT   Nov-16-06 08:17 PM   #33 
      I disagree  JerseygirlCT   Nov-16-06 08:16 PM   #32 
         Nope, he's not doing that.  trotsky   Nov-16-06 08:42 PM   #35 
            He is arguing that only fundamentalists "fully embrace" scripture.  kiahzero   Nov-16-06 08:44 PM   #37 
            Nope.  trotsky   Nov-16-06 08:49 PM   #39 
            I don't think so  JerseygirlCT   Nov-16-06 09:03 PM   #41 
               Sorry, not reading it the same way you are.  trotsky   Nov-16-06 10:08 PM   #47 
               What is he saying about moderates, then?  kiahzero   Nov-16-06 10:11 PM   #49 
                  That you're enabling the extremists.  trotsky   Nov-16-06 10:19 PM   #50 
                     So "at face value" is the only valid way to interpret the texts?  kiahzero   Nov-16-06 10:21 PM   #51 
                     So the Christians in 300CE *didn't* believe in a virgin birth?  trotsky   Nov-16-06 10:24 PM   #52 
                        Your assurances are misplaced  kiahzero   Nov-16-06 11:01 PM   #53 
                           Hold on there.  trotsky   Nov-17-06 08:38 AM   #56 
                              I'm not Christian  kiahzero   Nov-17-06 11:24 AM   #70 
                                 Actually you backed way off.  trotsky   Nov-17-06 11:45 AM   #73 
                                    I think you're misstating the liberal position on the Bible.  kiahzero   Nov-17-06 12:08 PM   #76 
                                       There is no one "liberal" position on the bible.  trotsky   Nov-17-06 12:22 PM   #77 
                                          No, I'm not saying there's only one position.  kiahzero   Nov-17-06 12:29 PM   #78 
                                          Sure you are.  trotsky   Nov-17-06 12:37 PM   #79 
                                          And again, entirely possible  JerseygirlCT   Nov-17-06 02:40 PM   #91 
                                          Sounds to me that such a god  trotsky   Nov-17-06 03:10 PM   #95 
                                          I don't think it's God's choice -- I think it's our human limitations  JerseygirlCT   Nov-17-06 04:32 PM   #109 
                                          So, god doesn't know about these limitations?  trotsky   Nov-17-06 05:31 PM   #127 
                                          If God manipulated events in the way you suggest, there  JerseygirlCT   Nov-17-06 08:26 PM   #131 
                                          Ah yes, the old free will conundrum.  trotsky   Nov-17-06 10:41 PM   #142 
                                          You continue to base you view on the idea that God  JerseygirlCT   Nov-18-06 08:11 AM   #162 
                                          An active god is not necessary to see the problem.  trotsky   Nov-18-06 11:37 AM   #166 
                                          The short version: "All believers pick and choose what they believe...  Zhade   Nov-17-06 11:03 PM   #149 
                                          Yup!  trotsky   Nov-18-06 11:47 AM   #169 
                                          "They all prayed to god and got different answers?"  JerseygirlCT   Nov-17-06 02:33 PM   #89 
                                             And then they went and killed each other over those different answers.  trotsky   Nov-17-06 03:11 PM   #96 
                                             You really don't think people would find plenty of other things  JerseygirlCT   Nov-17-06 04:29 PM   #108 
                                             Stay on topic, please.  trotsky   Nov-17-06 05:28 PM   #126 
                                             You branched off here, I just responded.  JerseygirlCT   Nov-17-06 08:28 PM   #132 
                                             Right. Limitations.  trotsky   Nov-17-06 10:37 PM   #140 
                                             It's a sneaky way of blaming God, isn't it? nt  greyl   Nov-18-06 07:40 AM   #158 
                                             Yeah, interesting, isn't it?  trotsky   Nov-18-06 11:39 AM   #167 
                                             The necessary flip-side of free will nt  JerseygirlCT   Nov-18-06 08:12 AM   #163 
                                             "humanity's limitations" ! Goddammit.  greyl   Nov-18-06 07:31 AM   #157 
                     Reasoning isn't the same thing as "secular" you know  JerseygirlCT   Nov-17-06 08:10 AM   #54 
                     See post #57. n/t  trotsky   Nov-17-06 08:44 AM   #58 
                     Pardon me, may I butt in here?  cosmik debris   Nov-17-06 08:10 PM   #130 
                        Clarify which remark?  trotsky   Nov-17-06 10:51 PM   #146 
                           Actually, the Free Exercise clause does privilege religious exercise (n/t)  kiahzero   Nov-17-06 10:55 PM   #147 
                           It enumerates it as a right, sure. Like the right to bear arms, or speak freely.  trotsky   Nov-17-06 11:02 PM   #148 
                              That's a secular law, though.  kiahzero   Nov-17-06 11:04 PM   #150 
                                 Um, yes?  trotsky   Nov-17-06 11:05 PM   #151 
                                    It was a joke.  kiahzero   Nov-17-06 11:09 PM   #152 
                                       Okey dokey.  trotsky   Nov-17-06 11:12 PM   #153 
                           This remark:  cosmik debris   Nov-17-06 11:37 PM   #154 
                              Read Harris' full article.  trotsky   Nov-18-06 11:42 AM   #168 
               But isn't the book supposedly the word of God?  WakingLife   Nov-17-06 10:13 AM   #63 
               This is the problem...  Dorian Gray   Nov-17-06 11:24 AM   #69 
               That's just it -- we're absolutely not  JerseygirlCT   Nov-17-06 02:29 PM   #88 
                  I'd love it if  greyl   Nov-17-06 02:50 PM   #92 
                  You know, if I had exhibited even a part of the disdain for  JerseygirlCT   Nov-17-06 04:26 PM   #107 
                  If I've torn your view apart, fantastic.  greyl   Nov-18-06 07:51 AM   #159 
                  But I don't want to.  Dorian Gray   Nov-17-06 05:13 PM   #123 
                     All liberal Christians I'm aware of talk about "identifying bullshit"  greyl   Nov-18-06 07:54 AM   #160 
                  How do you know Paul existed?  Finder   Nov-17-06 04:45 PM   #111 
                  You don't know what we do accept and what we don't  kwassa   Nov-17-06 04:54 PM   #113 
                  The response is to post 88. n/t  Finder   Nov-17-06 05:05 PM   #118 
                  What do you accept? n/t  Finder   Nov-17-06 05:07 PM   #119 
                  No, I accept that within what is written, truth can be found  JerseygirlCT   Nov-17-06 08:33 PM   #133 
                  Exactly, JerseygirlCT  Dorian Gray   Nov-17-06 05:09 PM   #120 
                  But the official Catholic definition of 'inspired' goes beyond that  muriel_volestrangler   Nov-18-06 08:09 AM   #161 
                     Well, having grown up RC, I think it's pretty safe to say  JerseygirlCT   Nov-18-06 08:15 AM   #164 
                        Actually, the RCC discourages reading the scriptures without a guide...  Finder   Nov-18-06 11:01 AM   #165 
                           How do you know that is what Harris meant?  kwassa   Nov-18-06 12:07 PM   #170 
                              What do you think "Scriptural ignorance" means? n/t  Finder   Nov-18-06 03:10 PM   #171 
                                 Sorry, but I think this is your own personal interpretation of Harris  kwassa   Nov-18-06 10:03 PM   #172 
               Especially when you take the  Dorian Gray   Nov-17-06 11:17 AM   #68 
                  I agree. And I find the idea that using literary tools  JerseygirlCT   Nov-17-06 02:37 PM   #90 
                     The End of Faith was never sold as a Perfect Book, yet  greyl   Nov-17-06 03:01 PM   #94 
                     I'm disagreeing with the argument presented.  kiahzero   Nov-17-06 03:31 PM   #100 
                        First of all, what is the premise you are calling false?...  Finder   Nov-17-06 03:49 PM   #102 
                           This premise:  kiahzero   Nov-17-06 03:54 PM   #103 
                           This premise is false:  kwassa   Nov-17-06 04:02 PM   #105 
                              Not at all...let me ask you....  Finder   Nov-17-06 04:33 PM   #110 
                                 Required by who?  kwassa   Nov-17-06 04:51 PM   #112 
                                    Does it matter which God? n/t  Finder   Nov-17-06 05:02 PM   #115 
                                       There is no God but God  kwassa   Nov-17-06 05:05 PM   #117 
                                          What do you base that on?  Finder   Nov-17-06 05:12 PM   #122 
                     You and I are on the same page in this discussion  Dorian Gray   Nov-17-06 05:17 PM   #124 
                        Thank you!  JerseygirlCT   Nov-17-06 08:36 PM   #134 
   That one caught be off guard, too, Grannie!  Dorian Gray   Nov-17-06 11:03 AM   #66 
   I don't think faith itself will heal it.  Elrond HubbardDU Moderator   Nov-17-06 11:47 PM   #155 
      Love, and only Love? No, that's woefully inadequate as stated.  greyl   Nov-20-06 09:42 AM   #174 
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Religion/Theology Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals  |  Links  |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2009 Democratic Underground, LLC