Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 02/13/2002 1:35:52 PM PST by JediGirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: JediGirl
I read the original article last month when it came out. Very, very interesting... well worth buying a copy of the magazine.

(There's also an intriguing article on the German "invasion" of the U.S. at the beginning of World War II.)

2 posted on 02/13/2002 1:41:33 PM PST by bcoffey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: *crevo_list
bump. let's all play nice.
3 posted on 02/13/2002 1:41:33 PM PST by JediGirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: JediGirl
When I first opened this post I thought it read: "The Religion of Evolution". but that's a whole other story. I have this bookmarked to read later.
7 posted on 02/13/2002 2:11:40 PM PST by arepublicifyoucankeepit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: JediGirl
Better question, what would Martin Luther think of the modern liberal Lutherin church?

What would Calvin think of the Presbytarian Church?

Another author blinded by liberalism and cultural relativism.

8 posted on 02/13/2002 2:37:27 PM PST by rmlew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LDS_list
To ping or not to ping? That is the question. Ah, why not? Maybe some interesting discussion will follow.
10 posted on 02/13/2002 3:06:32 PM PST by Some hope remaining.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: JediGirl
One of the debates that continually roils the field of NRM scholarship is whether adistinction can really be made between cults and new religions -- after all, many of today's established religious movements began on the fringes of society. Does this mean that the Hare Krishnas or the Wiccans could be the next big religion?

Best distinction I ever read was this -- a cult is a religion, but one without strong, protective political connections.

11 posted on 02/13/2002 6:09:30 PM PST by PatrickHenry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: JediGirl
Why do you think some new religions are successful and others aren't?

Nowhere is the creative genius of man more perfectly exemplified than in the creation of his gods. He is able to take the Scriptures, any Scriptures, it seems, and from them create a God to his liking that he convinces himself and others is the one true God. And once convinced, he and his followers not only feel justified, but righteous jubilation in condemning, excommunicating, and burning at the stake anyone who does not see that their God is the one true God, and they know their God will reward them for it.

This is from: Religion - The Autonomist Notebook

This is from the commentary on the same:

Almost all theology and religious teaching is an attempt to make God apprehensible to man, in some way it is supposed He is not already perfectly apprehensible. The result is that God, when the theologians and religious teachers get through with Him, is always something less than He actually is. This is because the method of making God more approachable and more familiar is to make Him more like man.

Interestingly, when God actually became a man, when he was more approachable than ever, we would think, if the theologians and religious teachers were correct, the world would have flocked to and embrace Him. Did they? Of course not. They hated Him and killed Him and were very glad to be rid of Him, so they could go back to practicing their religion. Most religion today fulfills the same purpose in a more subtle less violent way. Be sure, however, when he returns, the religions will show themselves to be what they are, and will return to their former ways of dealing with Him.

For every question there are an infinite number of possible wrong answers, and one correct answer. That mankind attempting to make a religion that fits what they want, instead of what is true, produces an endless variety of absurd and evil superstitions is not at all surprising. Only an idiot would expect anything else.

Since reason will never be able to justify the life that most people live, all religion is ultimately an attempt to create a belief that will comfort one in their own irresponsibility and rejection of the truth.

Hank

12 posted on 02/13/2002 7:06:30 PM PST by Hank Kerchief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: JediGirl
I think while this author tries to sound worldly and intellectual, he is basically trying to say that religion is always changing, and because of that it's not valid.

The Roman Catholic Church has been essentially unchanged, at least with regards to succession and doctrine, for 2,000 years. We still believe in the Holy Trinity; we still believe in the real presence; we still believe in the Immaculate Conception; we still believe that the only way to salvation is through Jesus Christ; we still believe that Christ was crucified, died and was buried and on the third day he rose again from the dead. Truth doesn't change.

All major doctrines are unchanged. The RCC is still the largest Christian church in the world; and growing.

14 posted on 02/15/2002 10:45:03 AM PST by Gophack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: JediGirl
bump
15 posted on 02/15/2002 10:48:00 AM PST by billbears
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson