Why is Bill O'Reilly now promoting the loony idea that Christianity is not a religion?

[Syrinx]

I've made the mistake of watching his show twice already this week, and I'm kind of puzzled by this.

I don't think I ever heard him "opine" this before this week.

But he's suddenly pushing the line that Christianity is definitely not the largest religion in the world, nor a religion at all, but merely a "philosophy." The one true, correct philosophy, mind you, but absolutely not a religion.

:wtf:

Wednesday night, he mocked an e-mailer for saying that Christianity is indeed a religion.

It's quite strange, and I smell the strong scent of an ulterior motive, but I'm not sure what it is.

[rfranklin]

1. Because you cannot invoke separation of church and state against a "philosophy"

would be my guess. Using that evasion the "Christian nation" proponents can force it into government as the national "philosophy."

[HereSince1628]

3. That may be correct...but Billo isn't clever enough to have thought

such a thing up on his own.

[Capitalocracy]

6. Then it's about time their little philosophical clubs started paying taxes, what what? nt

[HereSince1628]

2. I think it's because he sees it as being made up of multiple religions

rather than multiple sects of even more diverse denominations.

[malaise]

4. Well then the churches should pay their taxes

retroactively

[Scuba]

5. always one step ahead, aren't you?

[malaise]

9. LOL

:hi:

[Javaman]

7. It's his "rope a dope" in his mission against the war on christmas.

jeez, it's so obvious! :rofl:

[FarCenter]

8. Christianity owes more to Greek and Roman philosophy than anything else

It was heavily influenced by Neoplatonism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoplatonism

It was not until the Reformation that the scriptural roots in a Middle Eastern sect were taken so seriously.

[MakingSense]

10. I could see the point he is making

if you assume that each Christian denomination are themselves a religion thus the over laying philosophy would be Christianity. There are some pretty significant differences between denominations some don't even consider some or all the others to be part of Christianity as such there is some basis of logic at work here. However, IMO this seems like a play on words for the sake of stirring the pot. From a purely technical perspective the statement works but it isn't entirely honest either.