cholland wrote:
we are heading into an impenetrable darkness.
https://stream.org/atheists-in-praise-of-christianity/While studying the ancient world, Holland writes, he realized something. Simply, the ancients were cruel, and their values utterly foreign to him. The Spartans routinely murdered "imperfect" children. The bodies of slaves were treated like outlets for the physical pleasure of those with power. Infanticide was common. The poor and the weak had no rights.
In fact, Holland points out that without Christianity, the Western world would not exist. Even the claims of the social justice warriors who despise the faith of their ancestors rest on a foundation of Judeo-Christian values. Those who make arguments based on love, tolerance, and compassion are borrowing fundamentally Christian arguments. If the West had not become Christian, Holland writes, "no one would have gotten woke."
Holland's passionate defense of Christianity is fascinating because it appears to be part of a trend. As the West becomes definitively post-Christian, many secularists are suddenly realizing that Christianity may have been more valuable than they thought. While many including Holland cannot quite bring themselves to believe Christianity is true, they are starting to believe that Christianity might be necessary.
Douglas Murray, the conservative author and columnist, is also an atheist. In recent years, however, he has started to warn that the decline of Christianity is a dangerous thing. Society now faces three options. First, Murray says, is to reject the idea that all human life is precious. "Another is to work furiously to nail down an atheist version of the sanctity of the individual." And if that doesn't work? "Then there is only one other place to go. Which is back to faith, whether we like it or not."
"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful."
Lucius Annaeus Seneca - c. 4 BC – AD 65
Jehovahs Witness has evidenced this further for us with the explanations in his post.
Why humans throughout the entire earth have created religions:
- gives people a sense of purpose
- Not only does it give a sense of belonging, but one that some are willing to die for (hurray for suicide bombers).
- gives people the strength to defy
Therefore, to pick one religion to believe on faith that it is true, is nonsensical.
Yet many do it for the reasons listed above as well as many more that were not listed.
No biggie right? The problems come when one group of believers accuses another of following the wrong god concept.
Rulers, if they wanted the land or riches of neighboring people need to do no more than convince the believers that their god wants them to rid the world of their evil ways or what have you. As Seneca is thought to have said, such power over your subjects is far to useful. You can litteraly control people that are willing to die for the cause.
As JW said: "Tyrants and dictators have long recognized the strength of the man or woman that doesn't fear death"
He also mentioned how religions can help to hold societies together. This of course is only true if you disregard the division most religions cause.
I understand that some people really do need a religion to provide them with somewhere to go when they die and/or a way to see loved ones again and such. For these types of people, humans have invented all sorts of god concepts. I just wish said people understood that not everyone is like them. It seems like this fact is incomprehensible to them though and charges of rejecting gods get leveled instead.
You can give a man a fish and he will be fed for a day, or you can teach a man to pray for fish and he will starve to death.
I blame man for codifying those rules into a book which allowed superstitious people to perpetuate a barbaric practice. Rules that must be followed or face an invisible beings wrath. - KenRU
It is sad that in an age of freedom some people are enslaved by the nomads of old. - Marco
If you are unable to demonstrate that what you believe is true and you absolve yourself of the burden of proof, then what is the purpose of your arguments? - brunumb