That was actually well-presented, but I don't think you've been very thorough- but then, spurring conversation may be the point, and well-done, sir!
I disagree on certain points, but that may be due to you not explaining your opinion fully enough.
I DON'T believe that religions are products of authoritarian mindsets of governance whether "civil" or "clerical", but they certainly have been co-opted as tools for the nearly-exclusive use by such mentalities, to the point of substantial rewrites of various scriptures, and certainly lots of "authorized" commentaries. If these mentalities WERE the source, I'd suggest re-examining every single one of those "so many lessons on how to become a better human being"- which, I might add are typically nearly identical in every developed scriptural religion.
I'd also argue the best of us AREN'T bound by moral codes because their very existence embodie(d)(s) those moral codes- not that they couldn't (can't) "sin" , but that "sin" simply cannot exist in their internal universes.
I'd also differentiate real honest, thoughtful people who won't bring themselves to believe in a Supreme Being- even though, from cosmology down to the Plank level, data point after data point fills in a completely entangled picture unbound by time, from the rabid anti-theists . Theirs is just another attempt at mind-control through "reason" (always incomplete) and scientism .
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I made the distinction of "organized religion" which supports exactly what you wrote, in that, it means the state organizing, which, in the case of Christianity, was an oral tradition with very little and scattered written gospel.
First caveat- I do not call myself a Christian.
A religion really becomes a religion THROUGH organization, though, and that starts with very small groups, or even just one expanding group (in more modern times of effective communication over long distances)- I understand your aversion to the state's subversion of that, as I agree with you, but long before Constantine got involved with the early Christian church, there was a developing orthodoxy, nebulous and unwritten as it mostly was, the most important organizing principle of all for any religion- not much gets past your individual sphere of influence if you don't enunciate some base of philosophy that is communicable. To defuse any of the "by faith alone" rejoinders, I'm using the word philosophy in the most basic sense. In other words, ALL religions are organized. Somehow. The sticking points should be HOW they're organized, and to what end.