West I think that is where our basic disagreement lies on this topic. When a priest commits a crime, you blame the religion, i blame the man.

The funny thing is we both appear to despise the same thing, which is hypocrisy. The only difference is that you ascribe this generally to religion and the religious, I do not, i ascribe it specifically to the individuals and groups who are the hypocrites and believe there are many religious people and groups which are not.

"People can believe what they want but why not worship idols in the privacy of the home , indulge in the dungeons and dragons of the bible and churches and leave people out of it?"
I think the answer to this lies in the question of helping others from before. If religion were just a selfish obsession then it probably would be a private thing like playing dungeons and dragons at home.

"West I think that is where our basic disagreement lies on this topic. When a priest commits a crime, you blame the religion, i blame the man." - Donnie

Taking your point as said. How do you feel abour Church funds/resources being used to defend priests? Should a few Bishops be gaol for shielding pedaphiles? [I would!]

waterboy,

Busy for a while. Will come back

Donnie in a game of football why do you think sledging or violence occurs? Is it because individuals are generally bad people or is it that the competitive nature of football drives a person to act out sledging or violence? Can football claim to set a good example (set morals) for children to learn good honest team work and fair play?

Is it wrong to say that because football is violent then its claim that it sets a good example for children is unfounded? Is it wrong to say because only men are allowed to play football then it is gendered biased?

I am sorry I cannot see any true claim that religion makes. Religion is as self serving as the belief in god is and the primary mission of religion and the god believer is to look out for number one.If it were not so there would be no myths such as salvation or heaven tied to the superstition.

I can not buy into the argument that if Robin Hood murders the rich to give to the poor (in the religious case himself and his followers) then he is helping as thus good. The god evokes good deeds argument is in effect unfounded and in principle a Machiavellian styled attempt at trying to appear better than religion and god belief in actual fact is.

Why not be honest and believe in god and know it is a form of self centeredness? Many god believers may find it is liberating to admit the truth. Why not admit god is a myth or at least admit claimed gods are totally unknown to begin with? That may be liberating to the believer too, to have no agendas , to not have to go out to convince others of that which clearly the believer has no knowledge of in the first place.

Sells is talking about Dungeons and Dragons and his article is an admission the rules of the game are arbitrary.

Waterboy Christianity has not made any worthwhile contribution to humanity, all progress in human rights and technology draw from other theoretical basis. Pharmacology owes more to paganism and Greek philosophy,needless to say in the Christian era of Europe Jews, Moslems and Wiccans performed the dark art of medicine. Our values of Justice and fairness came from the Greeks via (and in some cases strengthened by ) the Romans. The Roman law process extinguishing the validity of the story of the trial of Christ. Our sense of worth as individuals came to us from the Celts. The state protecting its citizens were a concept handed down from pagan ancient Britains , later the Vikings and the modern sense can be traced back to good King Wenceslas who stood up to the church of Rome in the cause that only a state can Judge a citizen and the Church has no right over his citizens.

Wenceslas was murdered in a church backed coup by his brother because like it or not the Christian era was a brutal era imbued with superstition, theocracy and a regression in morality that only secularism has saved the western world from.

Donnie,

"Should a few Bishops be gaoled for shielding pedaphiles? [I would!]" Gaol the Bishops with priests that is. One can argue that some god is not evil, but some priests are evil. But on balance the history of the Christian church is evil, especially after the third century. O.

waterboy,

Busy still. Will return to the Mtsyery Cults matter later.

In the interim, please note, the OT contains at least two Churches [and a different godhead the NT), we then have the Jesus Cults, then the Raionalisation and Hellenisation of the Cults. As, the godheads, messenger from god, sacraments, incarnation, recurrection [rebirth secret, earlier accounts relate to corn] and transfiguration are all consistent with a cult. With cults, it is not just the mystery, as the name would imply. The other characteristics on mystery cited [from the catholic encylopaedia also relate.]

At the time of Constantine, there were competing trinities and different natures of divinities. Consolidation from a cult to an institutionalised church, is noted by Sociogists as part of a the Life Cycle of a successful church. Histographies of the eraly church suggest the faith spread vertically down generations and from the matrimonial line. Constantine [if he did convert], is a liekly example.

Before Constantine gave the universal Christian church the green light, at most 2% of the Roman Empire, practised the faith. When the faith was legitimate, and, belief was okay, upward social mobility [Fox] was not curtailed by believing in the Pauline doctrine cum Nicaean crede, which by then had undergone several transformations. The Christian fourth century church would have shared characteristics of the Taliban, destroying opposing cultures [Wells]. [Here, it is an institutionalised faith not a cult.]

From the Greek, we have the debate between Rhetoric and Dialogue. The Church imposing docrine and interpretation by a priesthood [Sells-like] takes the Rhetorical path. Contrarily, Greek preseverd via the Byzantine Empire, recognises dialogue [for/against]. The Christian churches, suppression of knowledge was eventually broken and debate and Episte & Techne rediscovered turbo-charging understanding over the past three hundred years.

waterboy,

"Christianity is in a continuity with pre-exilic Hebrew faith (quite antithetical to Greek philosophy and eastern religion) and even if Christian religious culture has adopted some of the accidental characteristics of other religions that does not bring it into identity with those religions. This is a point you seem incapable of comprehending." -- waterboy

The OT has roots possibly going back as far as Sumer. The Hebrews were Henotheists they married [like catholic nuns do] their tribal god, a Baal volcano god in this case. Jesus' teachings are Greek influenced. He [or his composite] grew-up in a declined Greek Greek-City state. The Jews were opposed to Greek and then the Roman occupation. Paul's Greek [but it is Greek] is not the educated Greek of Socrates. There is a four hunded year long wedge of vulgar Latin between the two.

The "accidential" adoptions are significant in nature, transforming the simple cult into a major religion.

Incidently, the major exiling of the Hebrews from Egypt occurred hundreds of yeras before Moses [if he existed]. Jews were exiled from the Holy Lands by Hadrian in the second century of the current era. Some Jews had seek the company of gentiles, feign dropping their core faith, to be allowed to visit Holy sites.