Relda,

"Religious belief is not detached from reality: It is about motivating behavior and should be studied as such"

... YES, AGREE, BUT motivation needs to be considered in context of learning and reinforcement schedules. The created reality is a response to internal (greenfireld) and external factors.

"Rationality is not the key to this healthy functioning; adaptation is the key."

... Suggest depends on the nature of adaptation in relation to the environment. Adaptation can be appropriate or can be inappropriate.

"Evolution is about trade-offs in which becoming better in some respects requires becoming worse in others."

... AGREE at a biological level. Religion, in the frame of anthopology, needs to be considered cultural. Culture can be held as a reponse to the ecology. Biological evolution sets parameters on culture, while cultures generally would change --witin parameters set-- more often than biological factors. Eg.. What civilzations and accompanying belief systems we adpot is limited by our brains, but, there is flexibility within that domain, ...sharmanism, polytheseism, hentheism (own tribal god superior), compromised (trinity) montheism (Christianity), monotheism (Islam) and secularism. [Maybe, I need to change my Internet name to Hegel ;-)]

There also seems to a "rough" parallel/civilizationsal development; primitive nomads (shrmans, animism), city-state (priesthoods, polytheism), tribes (tribal gods), countries( inter-religional wars, inter-denominational conflicts) and advanced natonal states (secularism) and globalisation (inter-relional wars, hetero-denomination unity against other religions, religions under pressure from secularism & response to the same)

All,

Seasons greetings

aqvarivs,

Feeding secularism to religionists, is like giving water to a person to much, and, there is a risk the patient (metaphorically) will die.

Franklin and Washington were pretty heavy into the Masons. There was a Masonic cerimony for the founding of the first White House (destroyed 1812). Today, if my friends are typical, Americans, even religionist Americans, accept the idea of the separation of Church and State. But, in its own sphere religionism is accepted valid. Tend to agree. I wouldn't want to deprive Sells of his Christmas Tree or private beliefs about Jesus, Moses and the crew. He can even believe that Adam and Eve were contemporaneous with the dinosaurs in 4004 BCE. It is a right. It Sells' right. But, it is a puzzlement, just the same.

I only wish Sells would be more rational in assessing how gods come to exist (known to anthropology), before making his claims to the public domain.

He knows the history/rules, but suspends its application, to his religion. A bit like saying, yes, ..2,4,6,10,12.. are even numbers, but my special number "8", is not, it is whatever, I say it is. In this Forum, saying he would only discuss narrow topics like the nature of Jesus as god, is a little like the young person, who will play THEIR favourite game. One can't ignore what is known the creation of gods, when assess, "how god exists" and "the rise of secular religion". What abot Mohammed who says, "8" is an even number, but, "10" is what I say it is. We need Sally to point out Pete and Moh, all even numbers are even numbers. Still hear those ducks quacking ;-).

typo:

Feeding secularism to religionists, is like giving water TO a THIRSTY person TOO much, and, there is a risk the patient (metaphorically) will die

Relda please do not take anything I say as an attack nor offence. Bottom line I don’t care what anybody believes as long as they don’t let it interfere with others. I don’t care if my neighbours are Christians or Cannibals as long as they don’t bible bash or eat other people.

I merely pointed out that when Darwin is brought into debate by Christians they present two environmental fallacies. The first is personality cult based in which a person especially a scientist becoming superstitious means a god exists. The other also based on the personality cult is that somehow if a scientist is discredited then the discovered phenomenon is discredited.

I do understand why they do it. Christians have no argument to support their beliefs and their back is up against the wall. The basis of their beliefs is fiction which is set in concrete by history. This thread is concerned with the Christian lust for power to dominate and control all people, to destroy liberty, freedom and justice all of which Christian philosophy is at polar opposites with. This too has been proved by history. Christians when arguing to support their claims have to resort to dishonesty. Wether motivated from malice or ignorance the result will always be the same as we have seen the blue prints from the tyranny of Christian Europe, the Taliban , Iran and now Iraq to name a very few examples.

I was unaware that Darwin died burdened with superstition, I know the quote you gave but could you please direct to me where he wrote that he “never been an atheist, in the sense of denying the existence of a god “. It would be interesting to see if he did indeed write that or wether it is a case of urban myth such as Bertrand Russell’s alleged death bed conversion to Christ. I ask not because I don’t believe you but I find the Christian personality cult interesting.

May you and all
Have a wonderful Xmas/ Saturnalia/ Koronia / Sacaia / festival of Mead or whatever agri-tradition your tribe celebrate :)

West

Relda was not taking offence. She was simply calling you a goose (to use the vernacular) for not taking care to what is being written and going off on a tangent in reply.

I observe much of your abuse is based on the “fact” that Christians think the world is only 4000 years old and it was made in 7 days.
Now for some news. Not all Christians reject Darwin’s Theory of Evolution..

You need to understand there are Christian denominations with deep roots in human history and search for knowledge and truth with solid scientific heritage.

And there are many noisy others who are Bible literalists ranging from Evangelicals of mainstream Churches to the plethora of Reform and new Pentecostal churches. I may stand corrected here.

I am a Catholic and I stand comfortably with the theory of evolution, and indeed that of the Big Bang. Can I pass on a quote from a theological meditation from the International Theological Commission in the Vatican, signed of by Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI) in 2003?

64: “Pope John Paul II stated some years ago that “new knowledge leads to the recognition of the theory of evolution as more than a hypothesis. It is indeed remarkable that this theory has been progressively accepted by researchers following a series of discoveries in various fields of knowledge”(“Message to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences on Evolution”1996). ……. Mainly concerned with evolution as it “involves the question of man,” however, Pope John Paul’s message is specifically critical of materialistic theories of human origins and insists on the relevance of philosophy and theology for an adequate understanding of the “ontological leap” to the human which cannot be explained in purely scientific terms……. The implication of these remarks is that theories of evolution and of the origin of the universe possess particular theological interest when they touch on the doctrines of the creation ex nihilo and the creation of man in the image of God.

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20040723_communion-stewardship_en.html

Take some time out and have a read. The question still is: are we of God, or not?

Boxgum,

1. Do you maintain Papal infallibility in matter ex cathedra?
2. Is the Bible infallible, as interpreted by Man?
3. Or do you see the Pope as one like the whom wants to understand,
can make mistakes, even on "religious" topics?
4. Where the Protestant wrong to break with the Universal Church?
5. Whom can justly establish a religion cum denomination?

Some religionists [e.g., Alsan from another thread] are "convinced" the world is only 6,000 years old. When astophysical evidence is introduced to suggest otherwise; it is proposed that our region of space is a special zone, where the laws applying elsewhere in the universe are suspended.

Cheers,

O.