Do We Need Religion?

Pagans are small tribal religions that were absorbed by the major religions. Anyone who believes the supernatural (walking on water, parting the seas, ghosts etc.) are still suceptible to rhetoric based on faith. The problem is still there, they just don't have proof of them acting on it.

Buddhism would never work in our economy though. If you don't want anything you don't buy anything.

In a word, yes.

__________________
PLEASE READ!: The contents of the above post is the educated opinion of the author. At times, said opinion is so strong it gets stated as fact. This is simply how the author chooses to express his deeply held opinion and should not be misconstrued to suggest more. Or it's a joke. Deal.

Um ... rewriting history much?

__________________
If you can dream it, I can code it.
Every hand's a winner, and every hands a loser, the best you could hope for is to die in your sleep.

P.A.G.A.N.

which one, that they were absorbed or that theres not a lot of proof?

I believe that in a universal sense, the perception of goodness and compassion goes a long way into understanding humanity and the nature of being human. Why we are here is a collosal question, but what seems to sustain us as a species is in acting in the best interest of our survival without going beyond need. There is no need to conquor anything until you have oppression. And oppression is the result of greed.

I think that's what qualifies on face value earth being hell, and beyond that is just going back to our spiritual roots. I believe that goes back to God. I believe there is a devil and evil, true evil and that those spirits human beings encounter have either not made it across or they are fallen beings of another nature that are condemned or waiting to be judged.

Look, I most certainly don't have any real answers that one could qualify in terms of things existing beyond tangibility, except for love. But the very fact that love exists beyond the need for procreation and clinically observed stimulus in our bodies, is enough to at least consider the possibility. For me it's confirmation, and for many other reasons. For many it's perhaps a learning process. One way or another, my fear of death is completely vacant and had been for many many years. And it comes from a profound intuition about things unexplanable through science. And certainly does not stem from somebody telling me it's so. The bible or otherwise. My belief in this realm comes from experience, personal experience and it's something that cannot be reversed.

I feel quite fortunate, and the quality of my life refects these things.

Anne Marie

Simpletons need religion, so that's a yes.

you must spend a lot of time in church.

__________________
"Nothing is more unreliable than the populace, nothing more obscure than human intentions, nothing more deceptive than the whole electoral system."- Marcus Tullius Cicero

The "small tribe" ...

__________________
If you can dream it, I can code it.
Every hand's a winner, and every hands a loser, the best you could hope for is to die in your sleep.

never, actually.

And the non-simpletons need religion for the simpletons, so that's an emphatic yes... and then some.

__________________
PLEASE READ!: The contents of the above post is the educated opinion of the author. At times, said opinion is so strong it gets stated as fact. This is simply how the author chooses to express his deeply held opinion and should not be misconstrued to suggest more. Or it's a joke. Deal.

snappy comeback.

__________________
"Nothing is more unreliable than the populace, nothing more obscure than human intentions, nothing more deceptive than the whole electoral system."- Marcus Tullius Cicero

Religion allows people to make up answers to troubling questions they can't answer. Even great minds like Newton have sought refuge in religion,upon reaching the limits of their understanding. On the personal level, it is a coping mechanism and source of comfort. On the social level, it has long been a powerful means of control and a strong unifying factor capable of binding large numbers of otherwise diverse persons together into a singular People. Take, for example, Constantine's use of his own brand of neo-christianity (what would become Roman Catholicism) to bind the Roman populace together under the cross, when they were otherwise greatly varied in all but the name 'Roman'.

The op asked "we". So you are incorrect in stating "yes" as many we's don't.

fair enough, but in my defense I was thinking of the numbers today.