The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Christianity as mother of western liberalism > Comments

Christianity as mother of western liberalism : Comments

By Peter Sellick, published 6/10/2015

Siedentop gives us an accessible journey through the transformations of the self from the preclassical Western family, through ancient Greece and Rome and the rise of the church in Europe to the sixteenth century.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. Page 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. All
.

I wrote (page 4 of this thread) :

« While the church fully recognizes the possibility of free will and individual responsibility, at the same time, it actively promotes the image of a Christ shepherding his faithful flock of docile sheep all along that Gaussian lifeline, leaving no room whatsoever for the expression of any form of individuality. »

The implication is that sheep-like behaviour is righteous and independent behaviour is sinful.

This is epitomised by the Abrahamic religions’ creation myth of Adam and Eve disobeying God and eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge. Their act of independence was deemed to be sinful.
And it was on the foundation of this myth that Irenaeus, the 2nd century Bishop of Lyon in France, built the Christian doctrine of “original sin” of which Augustine of Hippo (Saint Augustine) became an ardent advocate during the 4th century.

Wikipedia:

« Augustine of Hippo (354–430) taught that Adam's sin is transmitted by concupiscence, or "hurtful desire", resulting in humanity becoming a massa damnata (mass of perdition, condemned crowd), with much enfeebled, though not destroyed, freedom of will. When Adam sinned, human nature was thenceforth transformed. Adam and Eve, via sexual reproduction, recreated human nature. Their descendants now live in sin, in the form of concupiscence, a term Augustine used in a metaphysical, not a psychological sense.

Augustine insisted that concupiscence was not a being but a bad quality, the privation of good or a wound. He admitted that sexual concupiscence (libido) might have been present in the perfect human nature in paradise, and that only later it became disobedient to human will as a result of the first couple's disobedience to God's will in the original sin. In Augustine's view (termed "Realism"), all of humanity was really present in Adam when he sinned, and therefore all have sinned ... As sinners, humans are utterly depraved in nature, lack the freedom to do good, and cannot respond to the will of God without divine grace. »

Not much room for the "individual" in that Christian doctrine !

.
Posted by Banjo Paterson, Thursday, 8 October 2015 12:15:03 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Bravo david_f, bravo! Read your comments with interest and learned a lot. Thanks.
Posted by JKUU, Thursday, 8 October 2015 12:39:45 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear David,

<<Marxism was a quasi-religion>>

Marxism was a horrible thing, but the fact that it had some terrible things in common with certain organisations (e.g. churches) that were presumed to promote religion, is merely free association and does not imply that it had anything in common with religion itself.

<<and other religions based on belief in a supernatural>>

The basis of religion is God, not beliefs, so if you see an organisation that is instead based on beliefs, then you can tell that it has decayed and falls short of its purpose.

Yes, religions happen to employ all kinds of beliefs, including in the supernatural, because those beliefs assist [some] people on their road to God - however, those beliefs are just tools rather than the essence of religion. It is quite possible for one to be religious without having any particular beliefs.

<<It is my hope that the mass of humanity will be educated in science and critical thinking>>

Why is that your hope? Is it because you consider the above to be good?

Science can find the facts, it can tell for example what exists and what doesn't, but the idea as if it is good to find such answers doesn't stand up to scientific scrutiny. Unlike science which asks "what is?", it is religion which asks "what is good?" - science has no say there.


What then, in your view, renders researching (and finding) "what is" a good thing?

(I can see one answer - perhaps it helps those who are already curious by nature to develop their powers of concentration and keep them out of mischief, but that's my answer, not yours...)
Posted by Yuyutsu, Thursday, 8 October 2015 1:50:52 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
//Marxism was a horrible thing, but the fact that it had some terrible things in common with certain organisations (e.g. churches) that were presumed to promote religion, is merely free association and does not imply that it had anything in common with religion itself.//

Churches (the organisations, not the buildings) don't just 'promote' religion, they are religions. You seem to be thinking of organisations like the Centre for Public Christianity, who promote Christianity without being a Christian denomination themselves.

//The basis of religion is God, not beliefs//

God is a fairy-tale who doesn't exist outside of people's imaginations. The belief that he does is the basis for religion.

//Science can find the facts, it can tell for example what exists and what doesn't, but the idea as if it is good to find such answers doesn't stand up to scientific scrutiny.//

Yes it does. Since the scientific revolution, standards of living have increased dramatically. And that can be attributed to science, not a bunch of people gazing at their navels and saying 'om' for the last two thousand years which achieves absolutely nothing of any value. Science makes real and significant improvement in people's lives; religion just gives them a warm fuzzy feeling.
Posted by Toni Lavis, Thursday, 8 October 2015 7:16:22 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Tony,

<<Churches (the organisations, not the buildings) don't just 'promote' religion, they are religions.>>

So they claim, so can anyone claim, but are they truly so? Perhaps they have once been, long ago but not any more.

<<God is a fairy-tale who doesn't exist outside of people's imaginations>>

Not even there. Anything which exists is limited and inferior, not worthy of the name 'God'.

<<The belief that he does is the basis for religion.>>

In my last comment I explained that this is where churches decayed to, into belief-systems, teaching people to believe (in whatever) rather than to actually come closer to God.

<<standards of living have increased dramatically>>

Which you happen to judge as "good". The above can be verified (or refuted) scientifically, but the claim that it is good is not a scientific statement, but of what you subjectively value.

<<gazing at their navels and saying 'om'>>

Where have you seen people gazing at their navels lately? I haven't!
(and it sounds narcissistic rather than religious)

Repeating the syllable 'Om' is a great technique to concentrate and purify the mind and direct it away from one's senses.

<<for the last two thousand years which achieves absolutely nothing of any value.>>

Nothing of any value for you - and of course they haven't even tried to achieve the same as what you personally aspire for. As I said, values are subjective choices, they are not mandated by nature.

<<Science makes real and significant improvement in people's lives; religion just gives them a warm fuzzy feeling.>>

Science is the best tool for achieving material success, if that's what one wants. To call this "improvement" is your personal preference. Scientists often get a warm fuzzy feeling when they discover something, so do sports-people when they win a game.
Posted by Yuyutsu, Thursday, 8 October 2015 8:18:59 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear JKUU,

I appreciate your thanks.
Posted by david f, Thursday, 8 October 2015 9:40:16 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. Page 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy