Religious discussion

Not for me. It is better is everybody is singing from the same hymnal, as it were. Diversity breeds divisiveness and weakness. Just look at how diversity is tearing this country apart!

 

The only time I heard actual yelling about religion is when somebody said God Bless you to an atheist and the atheist became literally livid.

That being said here is a joke:

Once I saw this guy on a bridge about to jump. I said, "Don't do it!" He said, "Nobody loves me." I said, "God loves you. Do you believe in God?"

He said, "Yes." I said, "Are you a Christian or a Jew?" He said, "A Christian." I said, "Me, too! Protestant or Catholic?" He said, "Protestant." I said, "Me, too! What franchise?" He said, "Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Baptist or Southern Baptist?" He said, "Northern Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist or Northern Liberal Baptist?"

He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region, or Northern Conservative Baptist Eastern Region?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region." I said, "Me, too!"

Northern Conservative†Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1879, or Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912." I said, "Die, heretic!" And I pushed him over.

 

In 1890?

True

I don't think they worship monkeys it cows. The worship gods like Shiva and Ganish.

 

division

 

You could have made this shorter.

 

Which hymnal? The one of your choosing, I suppose.

 

Anyone, so long as it is the same one, suffices to reduce divisiveness.

 

The powerful Christianity Today editorial points to disagreement even if everyone turned into a lily white Evangelical Christian.

 

Sure there is disagreement. I don't advocate a Progressive style totalitarianism, God Forbid! It just helps if everyone in a society is basically aligned about the fundamental questions on the meaning and purpose of life. A secular society can't provide that.

 

I'm not sure which country you're talking about, your nick name suggests Russia, your signature suggests maybe Montenegro (profile picture maybe suggests Greece?), or maybe you're referring to my location.

Well, it depends on what goal we're trying to achieve. Everybody singing from the same hymnal can create a strong nation or group, but not necessarily one that it is very fun to be a part of. It also fails to tolerate natural diversity, and ends up mistreating people for reasonable deviations. In the end, going to either extreme will be very problematic, you need a mix.

When I say secularism is best, that assumes that we already knowledge that a certain amount of diversity is unavoidable. For instance, in most countries in the modern world, we have a mix of people of different opinions and views on religion, everyone singing from the same hymnal is impossible, and in fact trying to get it to happen is just going to be another diverse opinion tearing countries apart.

 

Congratulations! You are the first person to recognize the Cyrillic alphabet or at least the first to mention it. The profile picture is the Byzantine flag which flies to this day on Mount Athos as you may already know. I was born in Brooklyn.

I am fond of the Japanese aphorism: "The nail which sticks up gets hammered down." Dissidents get marginalized, I don't see that as a problem.

We could stop encouraging diversity. I see no reason to encourage toleration of Islam, for instance, which is antithetical to European civilization. I would guess 80% to 90% uniformity suffices.

 

Which is to say, everything that's important. Hell, that kind of agreement pretty much DEFINES totalitarianism

 

totalitarianism: a system of government that is centralized and dictatorial and requires complete subservience to the state.

I am not asking for subservience to the state. I am asking for a consensus of philosophy. It is not like this idea has not be realized in non-totalitarian states throughout history.

Totalitarianism is only necessary when you have to control a diverse population. I want a uniform population.

 

Wow, that was quite a leap - Evangelical Christian to "Progressive style totalitarianism"!! What is that, anyway?

Are you saying you would be happy with some other kind of totalitarianism?

Christian and progressive values are closely aligned, so I don't see a problem there. The NT teaches to search out those who need our help and to give that help. Jesus demonstrated that by helping those who were social pariahs - foreigners, those with different beliefs, those clearly sinning. The Bible talks about not judging others - which is the root of hate felt toward those of other religions, skin colors, etc. The Bible even calls out the wealthy to contribute more to the wellbeing of the society - to the point where the rich may have a problem getting into heaven.

The NT is a message of love and duty to all others.

 

So, you see totalitarianism as required, since we have a diverse poulation?

 

I think totalitarianism is inevitable. I don't know whether it will be left or right, though.

 

I don't do theological discussions anymore. Suffice it to say that Christians, Evangelical and otherwise are not Progressives. You might want to ponder why, but I won't get involved.

 

What states were those?

And how will this consensus of philosophy be manifested? Also, how will you bring it about?

How uniform? You are aware that no nations anywhere have really uniform populations

Going by their own precepts they should be. Why are you pushing hypocrisy on us?

 

Buddhists have no deity, at least most of their sects aren't supposed to. They do not worship Buddha any more than Muslims worship Muhammad.

 

Why is totalitarianism inevitable?

 

Muslims don't worship Mohammed they worship Allah. Mohammad is a prophet.

 

Yes, the "Seal" of the Prophets, he is the last one. The legend is that God came first with Justice, as shown by the OT prophets, but they were too stern to have much appeal so he sent his Son, with love, but love was too weak to discipline recalcitrant humanity, so God was finally fed up and he sent Muhammad, with a sword. (just a saying, not real theology)

 

Diversity isn't doing anything of the kind. It's the opposition to the diversity that is disuniting us.

 

People who talk about diversity really means specifically one kind of diversity. Diversity is not good that causes wars.

 

I don't know. 80% to 90% uniform, like before the 1960's.