That being said anyone who is religious would feel uncomfortable while watching “Religulous”. The name to me was well thought out but offensive, “Religulous” a portmanteau or blend of the two words, religion and ridiculous. To me the movie should have actually been called “Christian Bashing Featuring Some Other Religions for Split Seconds” by Bill Maher. I wrote down many of his questionable quotes that are almost intelligent. Bill Maher is a smart individual but an agnostic can only promote what they know which means not very much when it comes to religion.
For example, on Damascus Road, Saint Paul’s religious experience transformed his moral outlook. It would appear that all religious experiences demonstrate a revelation of truth, but one could argue that this does not indicate they are true. As Freud would argue that religious experiences are a way of externalising deep, repressed personal truths. In such a view, religious experiences are unverifiable and cannot be thought to prove the existence of God, as they are merely manifestations of the human subconsciousness. A transient experience short, and cannot be sustained for a long duration of time.
George Washington, for example, is not known to have taken communion, and one bishop who knew him was confident he was not a believer. Jefferson's scissored-down New Testament is well known. In the realm of what Meacham calls "public religion" the founding fathers thus assiduously avoided any sectarian bias. They strongly protected the right of every citizen to freely exercise "private faith," or no faith at all, as each individual conscience saw fit. Such was the paradox between political liberty and religious faith: "Many, if not most, believed; but none
Being an Atheist will influence an individual’s aspirations and behaviour, and will do so independently from individual to individual, generally however, Atheism will influence similarly. Aspirations can typically be divided into two groups: those towards oneself and those to the world. An Atheist may aspire to live happily and using the measure of conscience and reason as their guidance, see that this requires a just and fair world. In this manner an atheist may aspire to create a world that is just and fair and so aspire to become more environmentally friendly, be a nicer person etc. Disbelief in a God would
“It would be misleading to think that all these factors influenced all scientists to the same degree. However, a major component of anyone’s theoretical outlook is his religious worldview (which could be atheism or agnosticism, as well as a traditional religion). Worldview had a far more significant influence on the origin of old-earth geology than has often been perceived or acknowledged. A person’s worldview not only affects the interpretation of the facts but even the observation of the facts. Another prominent historian of science rightly comments about scientists and non-scientists: ‘men often perceive what they expect, and overlook what they do not wish to
Kevin Morgan LCC 3302 The Effect of Darwin’s Theory on the Christian and Scientific Communities 570 It is well known that Darwin was not the biggest fan of religion. However, his general attitude toward the church was far from malicious. Darwin’s research was purely of scientific merit, and yet was perceived as an attack on the idea of creationism. The church took personal offense by his publications, and even retaliated with volumes of work discrediting Darwin. While his ideas were revolutionary at the time, Christianity has persisted for over a century, but has built a tolerance to the ideas of natural selection.
Genesis 1-2 can show us that God is all-powerful and all-loving. As far as Genesis 1-2 goes, it is more important to understand the scripture, rather than prove it to be factual. “Although popular images of controversy continue to exemplify the supposed hostility of Christianity to new scientific theories, studies have shown that Christianity has often nurtured and encouraged scientific endeavor, while at other times the two have co-existed without either tension or attempts at harmonization” (Ferngren, 2). Genesis 1-2 is the cause of much unnecessary tension between the religious and scientific communities. The writers of Genesis 1-2 wrote it in a way that presents the Earth’s creation as a factual account of God creating the heavens and the Earth.
Due to this, the word “pagan” in the English language refers to people who are not Christian, Muslim or Jew. But, all pagan religions are strongly dedicated to the profound love and respect for the earth and for all life. Even in Latin, the word had changed its meaning when used colloquially. Latin may be a dead language, meaning that it has ceased to change for a long time, but still had its colloquial words at the time.
For this instance, this is not the case, society must constantly correct immoral actions performed by certain individuals. These individuals originate from diverse backgrounds and religions, and where as there is no specific religion that can be solely liable. Therefore, it becomes necessary to determine how violence and religion can simultaneously exist because the nature of these two elements seems to be contradictory. To begin with, there are two particular explanations in which introduce some historical examples of religion and violence intertwining, and illustrate how those two entities (religion and violence) can coexist. One explanation states that certain individuals feel that violence is relatively harmless, and therefore feel no remorse in performing violent acts.
7) The Bible is a “living, breathing document”, but it is not like the US constitution. As our nation constantly changes and evolves, the constitution represents the limits our nation abides by. Although new issues, such as healthcare and gay marriage, are dragged to the forefront of our legislation, the constitution is simply a set of guidelines our government must abide by to avoid complete anarchy. The Bible is different. As we all know, it’s the most influential book in our occidental society.