No different than claiming religion causes oppression. If religion is the problem, why did atheists behave as badly or worse when they got power?
I don’t see anyone here claiming that, though.
Good, then I am responding to Bill Maher’s assertion that religion has “harmed the human race”.
I’ll take Mysticism for a $100, Alex.
Ok? I am afraid I do not get your point. Are you making an argument?
I’m expressing my disbelief in how off the mark Maher & others are concerning religion, when mysticism is what’s really the culprit, imo.
Mysticism is real culprit for what? I do not see a lot of mysticism in Marxism, but the results were the same, i.e. war, murder and oppression. The real culprit that “harmed the human race” is political power and groups of people that call themselves government. In my opinion, anti-religion and anti-mysticism arguments are red herrings.
For the most part, they don’t. They support some degree or form of property rights without even knowing it.
At the root of marxism is a profound mysticism.
Please explain because we might be working under different definitions of both marxism and mysticism.
Well, I can’t speak for anyone but myself, but I became an anarchist because I will have no King but Christ. And I’m not the only Christian for whom this is true. Certainly, scripture can be interpreted broadly to justify authoritarianism. But the words of Jesus of Nazereth, taken in context and accurately translated, are clearly anti-authoritarian, if not explicitly anarchistic. Even the famous “render unto Caesar” utterance was, to His audience, an act of civil disobedience.
Polylogism, the labor theory of value, and the idea of “historical inevitabilities” including a thinly-veiled millenialist view which was not quite utopian, but damn close.
That is exactly what we need, a religion to carry economics on it’s back.
I myself agree with Bill Maher.
As to your question, of course there is good to religion. But I think the bad outweighs the good.
I don’t see how you, or anyone else for that matter, could really know what life would have been like for early humans without religion, or if we even would have survived at all. As such, this sort of statement is mere bigotry.
Pretty much, especially after he went on national TV and told the world he was a Libertarian.
http://archive.salon.com/ent/tv/feature/2001/08/01/maher/index.html
Gee, you think you could address what was written, rather than getting all huffy because someone doesn’t kowtow to your puerile belief system?
That verse was pretty eye-catching when I first read it as part of “Discovering Self-Government: A Bible-Based Study Guide.” The entire 1st Samuel 8:4-20 seems to support full out anarchy, and also points out that as with ancient Israel, people want a government so they can be like all other nations. The desire for a state (according to that verse) also seems to suggest that people want a government “to judge them, to spout before them, & fight their battles.” Sounds like the word of god is total anarcho-capitalism to me.
Looks like the only people God intended to rule over the Israelites were the Israelites themselves, not a government or any king or queen. Try telling that to your local preist. [:)]
War is the most profitable business ever. Religion does a great job dividing humanity than anything else…" if goods dont cross borders…armies will"
This is like saying you do not know how humans could have survived without government as well. But humans do survive without religion just fine. Atheists/agnostics do not suddenly keel over without religion.