3 ms·

> everyone could stand to listen to Christ on this topic Yup. The new thing is that we’re too smart and cool for all the things religion teaches, while we scr

> everyone could stand to listen to Christ on this topic Yup. The new thing is that we’re too smart and cool for all the things religion teaches, while we scratch our heads trying to solve all the problems it gives you the solution for.

unethical_ban 4y ago
I think my intense aversion to Christianity originates from knowing only those people who take the Bible literally and have true faith in the stories that are told. Hell actually exists, gay people go there, divorce is fine though, oh don't worry about that line, etc. It's all very pick and choose. I think I would have had much more interest in faith/religion if they acknowledged the myth component of their stories, and acknowledged the utility of abiding by the framework nonetheless.
- user3939382 4y ago
  IMHO faith can only exist and have meaning (including to God) when juxtaposed with doubt. If God manifested in Times Square as a 2,000 foot glowing being, would admitting your belief in His existence mean anything? If any theist says they have no doubt, I’d first say they’re possibly lying, maybe to themselves.
  - mattgreenrocks 4y ago
    It feels taboo to say, but doubt is probably critical for the formation of an authentic faith. Kierkegaard calls it a leap of faith for a reason, after all. I posit that some are able to believe with minimal doubt, but circumstances will eventually force the issue.
krapp 4y ago
>The new thing is that we’re too smart and cool for all the things religion teaches, while we scratch our heads trying to solve all the problems it gives you the solution for. First of all, that isn't new. The Renaissance, when philosophy, science and law began to divorce themselves from religion, started about 700 years ago. Second, nothing useful taught by religion actually requires religion itself. You don't need to believe in salvation through faith, or the Holy Trinity, or Hell and brimstone for the teachings of Jesus to be useful. That isn't religion, that's philosophy.
- dropit_sphere 4y ago
  >Second, nothing useful taught by religion actually requires religion itself. This hinges very much on your definition of "useful;" if you don't believe in God or the resurrection of the dead, then talk concerning them is of course pointless. But if you do, they are very useful indeed.
  - krapp 4y ago
    My definition of useful in this case is humanistic. The utility of "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" doesn't depend on belief in the supernatural, nor do concepts like grace and forgiveness.
hellfish 4y ago
Sometimes the illness is better than the cure

unethical_ban 4y ago

I think my intense aversion to Christianity originates from knowing only those people who take the Bible literally and have true faith in the stories that are told. Hell actually exists, gay people go there, divorce is fine though, oh don't worry about that line, etc. It's all very pick and choose. I think I would have had much more interest in faith/religion if they acknowledged the myth component of their stories, and acknowledged the utility of abiding by the framework nonetheless.

user3939382 4y ago
IMHO faith can only exist and have meaning (including to God) when juxtaposed with doubt. If God manifested in Times Square as a 2,000 foot glowing being, would admitting your belief in His existence mean anything? If any theist says they have no doubt, I’d first say they’re possibly lying, maybe to themselves.
- mattgreenrocks 4y ago
  It feels taboo to say, but doubt is probably critical for the formation of an authentic faith. Kierkegaard calls it a leap of faith for a reason, after all. I posit that some are able to believe with minimal doubt, but circumstances will eventually force the issue.

krapp 4y ago

>The new thing is that we’re too smart and cool for all the things religion teaches, while we scratch our heads trying to solve all the problems it gives you the solution for. First of all, that isn't new. The Renaissance, when philosophy, science and law began to divorce themselves from religion, started about 700 years ago. Second, nothing useful taught by religion actually requires religion itself. You don't need to believe in salvation through faith, or the Holy Trinity, or Hell and brimstone for the teachings of Jesus to be useful. That isn't religion, that's philosophy.

dropit_sphere 4y ago
>Second, nothing useful taught by religion actually requires religion itself. This hinges very much on your definition of "useful;" if you don't believe in God or the resurrection of the dead, then talk concerning them is of course pointless. But if you do, they are very useful indeed.
- krapp 4y ago
  My definition of useful in this case is humanistic. The utility of "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" doesn't depend on belief in the supernatural, nor do concepts like grace and forgiveness.

hellfish 4y ago

Sometimes the illness is better than the cure