3 ms·
The 'badness' in people is supposed to be tempered or mitigated by these 'good communities' though. That's their whole point. If they can't even manage to bet
by ionised 7y ago
The 'badness' in people is supposed to be tempered or mitigated by these 'good communities' though. That's their whole point.
If they can't even manage to better people as part of their church than the average person is then what good is it other than creating cliques and an 'us versus them' mentality?
- bobblywobbles 7y agoA church, or other "good community" doesn't make people better, this is an individual's decision. Of course, it attempts to make good in the world, but the people inside this community make the decision to be good or bad on their own. I say this to protect churches and other good communities.
- ionised 7y ago> A church, or other "good community" doesn't make people better, this is an individual's decision. but the churches we are talking about are religious organisations that claim a monopoly on morality. The whole (claimed) point of their existence is to preach, convert and forge people into better, more virtuous versions of themselves. If it is failing even in that one simple premise, then what good is it?
- bobblywobbles 7y agoAgain, they can preach all they want and try to convert, but it's up to the individual. We can tell all the people we want to be good people, but its ultimately their decision. So, to that end, let's ask ourselves - why don't we find churches interesting? Are they boring, are they full of ceremony? What's the point, we might ask? Do we have other "better" things to do? Do we not trust they are authority on morals, or do we not care about becoming more virtuous?