Why is it a $Modern Times'$ fashion: not to believe in God (almost)at all?

[Tlalocone]

(I apologize to true believers though.)

It looks like to me that Today's world became too money oriented.

Can you argue against it?

And if you think it is true, then what 'duja' T-hink

it is happenning at all? (Do NOT misunderstand me please I DO know economics is important issue.):) I am just curios of every forum member's opinion about this thread.

[Bugeater]

Well, in earlier times, people who didn't believe were punished in various ways or killed. Non-conformers didn't have as much freedom from persecution as they do today.

[mgb]

I disagree that it is a particularily" modern issue".

When you look back at cuniform most of the earlies examples were "receipts" for transactions.

If you mean modern as in recorded history, then I guess you might be right.

[Star Cannon]

I think that maybe most feel free to disagree with something that has not been proven.

In this day and age, not many are going to a kill another for not believing in religion and/or the concept of a 'god'.

[Dman]

Because it's the age of knowledge and thinking

[euterpenc]

It's probably mroe of an issue than it should be. We need to look more inward.

[misutii]

in my opinion it is part of evolution, god is dead because we, for the most part, don't need him anymore, because human beings are so apt at creating what we need we also learn to be apt at disposing of it when it's no longer needed

[Crazy]

I am just curios of every forum member's opinion about this thread.

What do curious or unusual objects have to do with our opinions on the greed of today's society.

It is all because it is going to the capitalist system. Capitalist = money oriented.

[Claverhouse]

It is merely a function of a dying Culture.

And the egalitarianism that both dictates and hastens that death quite separately cannot perceive nor accept anything superior.



Claverhouse :ph34r:

[Pierce]

I don't think there is really anything new about "modern times" other than technology, which has not proved as liberating as hoped. The basic struggles of mankind remain as they have been since the dawn of man. Wisdom remains wisdom, hubris remains hubris, and God remains God. Money doesn't seem a driver to me at all. Rich and poor believe in God, or not. If you think there is no God, but only human religions, then I suppose everything is up for grabs, but that's not a new thought either. What amuses me is haughty intellectuals imagining that they are the first enlightened generation to suppose that God does not exist. Faith in God is, and always has been, a matter of perspective rather than intelligence or money.

[PsiKik]

I don't think there is really anything new about "modern times" other than technology, which has not proved as liberating as hoped. The basic struggles of mankind remain as they have been since the dawn of man. Wisdom remains wisdom, hubris remains hubris, and God remains God.

Excellent. It came as something of a shock to me when I finaly internalised this concept only a few years back.
I think many thinking people may initialy feel some kind of misplaced pride in assuming that somehow being part the current, living, modern generation gives them some kind of superiority in thought to those who came before.

I describe it as people still thinking the way they did 100's of years ago. Only new thing is technology or more properly the noticeable exponential increase in technological capability in recent times and the inability of the old ways of thinking to deal with what this new technology brings with it - severe problems never encountered by previous generations.



Money doesn't seem a driver to me at all. Rich and poor believe in God, or not. If you think there is no God, but only human religions, then I suppose everything is up for grabs, but that's not a new thought either. What amuses me is haughty intellectuals imagining that they are the first enlightened generation to suppose that God does not exist. Faith in God is, and always has been, a matter of perspective rather than intelligence or money.

Power is the driver throughout history. Money is a central pillar in upholding the power of those who have it. Religion is for those who need to believe in something or for those that find
religion useful in controlling people.

As per the original post-starting question, I don't think religion is any less fashionable today than in the past, there is just more polarization between those that do and those that don't.

Also, those that don't believe are more open about not believing. Declaring yourself an atheist or being a member of another, non mainstream, religion would have been a socially problematic thing to do in the not so recent past.

[booyalab]

You might be a rock 'n' roll addict prancing on the stage,
You might have drugs at your command, women in a cage,
You may be a business man or some high degree thief,
They may call you Doctor or they may call you Chief

But you're gonna have to serve somebody, yes indeed
You're gonna have to serve somebody,
Well, it may be the devil or it may be the Lord
But you're gonna have to serve somebody.

(Gotta Serve Somebody- from Bob Dylan's short bout of religion)

[Claverhouse]

I think many thinking people may initialy feel some kind of misplaced pride in assuming that somehow being part the current, living, modern generation gives them some kind of superiority in thought to those who came before.
Not just thinking people. Each generation thinks that it is God's ( or Nature's ) Last Word. And that all previous generations, quaint and different, existed to bring their particular generation to it's perfection.


Claverhouse :ph34r:

[coffeezombie]

If God exists, "it" certainly doesn't exist in any way that humans have ever written about the concept or ever will. The present morality always seems to get injected into the concept somewhere along the line.

[Claverhouse]

If God exists, "it" certainly doesn't exist in any way that humans have ever written about the concept or ever will. The present morality always seems to get injected into the concept somewhere along the line. One cause of justified mistrust of organised religion is that Faiths always mirror contemporary morals/ethics rather than hold to their original precepts...

Early christianity was against war, during the renaissance Pope Julius was quite good at it, by now it's only ok for spreading democratic values.


Claverhouse :ph34r:

[Tlalocone]

One cause of justified mistrust of organised religion is that Faiths always mirror contemporary morals/ethics rather than hold to their original precepts...

Early christianity was against war, during the renaissance Pope Julius was quite good at it, by now it's only ok for spreading democratic values.


Claverhouse :ph34r:hmmmm...
It seems that you are not very fond of the notion of religion.
Well, you don't have to. Do not believe in religion, believe in the power of LOVE, and BELIEF.
That is all even if it can Not be done easily thanks to ateism and the churches' suspected misusage of their 'power(whatsoever)' and some people only judge religion and not BELIEF, because BELIEF really can not be judged at all.http://www.asianchristianart.org/profile/GeoffTodd/images/Belief.jpg
http://www.muslimwakeup.com/mainarchive/images/lakshmi-300.jpg

[Serotonin]

Do not believe in religion, believe in the power of LOVE, and BELIEF.

Believe in the power of belief. Sounds highly recursive to me.

[Tlalocone]

Because you may not understand what I would like to say.

[Serotonin]

Indeed I have no fricken clue.

[PsiKik]

I don't believe in anything, I only know what I know.

[Claverhouse]

hmmmm...
It seems that you are not very fond of the notion of religion.
Well, you don't have to. Do not believe in religion, believe in the power of LOVE, and BELIEF.
That is all even if it can Not be done easily thanks to ateism and the churches' suspected misusage of their 'power(whatsoever)' and some people only judge religion and not BELIEF, because BELIEF really can not be judge

Not at all. The opposite. I am religious ( if not a religious person ): I believe in God the Creator and Maintainer of Worlds; in an after-life for all creatures; and in living an ethical life based on gratitude to our Creator.

I am no longer a christian, because I cannot believe in mankind's redemption though the murder of Jesus Christ: as far as established churches go, I find them suspect, but necessary. It may be unINTPlike, but I like tradition and ritual. ( providing it doesn't involve too much kneeling: I started hating prayers from about 6 onwards ). However the most important thing is to live a life loyal to the King you have who is God's Vicegerant. ( In your case, the Hapsburger... ).

My point was that not that established churches misused power and forced belief, but that their current values always faithfully follow the mass-morality rather than sticking to one code throughout eternity. The popes have always stuck with any regime until it falls, whereupon it is discovered they have always supported the new winning regime. Thus they preached support to the Bourbons, to Bonaparte, to the Bourbons again, to the republic, to Louis-Napoleon, to the third republic, to Vichy, to the 4th and 5th republics... Not really people you can rely on.


Claverhouse :ph34r:

[Dman]

I believe that this thread sucks.