Could it happen here?

by BurnTheShips 65 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  BurnTheShips

  s you probably know, extreme left is dying throughout the continent, along with militant a(nti)theism.

  No, but there seems to be a grassroots antitheism growing under the auspices of the likes of Dawkins and others.

  Antireligious movies like Wilders' Fitna are generally criticised by public opinion as being counterproductive and this anti-islam discourse is accompanied by an anachronistic desire for a purely christian Europe.

  I personally think that the anti-Islamic backlash will be the spark that touches off something big, to be sure.
• 

  BurnTheShips

  will die off like Neanderthals

  Ah, lets leave antiNeanderthalism out please? As a Neanderthal myself, that hurts.

  I have no doubt that we will progress as you note, but the example of Soviet Russia is not merely anti-organized religion, but antifaith.

  Spirituality or not, don't people have the right to meet if they share a common spiritual interest?

  Burn
• 

  hamilcarr

  I personally think that the anti-Islamic backlash will be the spark that touches off something big, to be sure.

  For your apocalyptic prophecy to be fulfilled, it must be sustained by the younger generation, which isn't the case at present. Some even make mention of a spiritual reveil among students.

  You're right in criticizing Dawkins and company. But just think about the other side: if you are constantly threatened by hellfire, anathema or Armageddon, the temptation to strike the ball even harder back may be irresistable. Besides, compared to the Soviets, Dawkins is an altar boy so to speak.
• 

  Eyes Open

  I'm sure anti-religious feeling will continue to grow, but I hope as knowledge becomes ever more easily accessible here in the UK and the general consensus moves towared atheism, theism will die a natural death. If religion was to be forcibally targeted as a whole, I guess it would only encourage people to take up the cause.
  
  Disallow something and people do it. A big part of JW'ism, for example, is the feeling that the world is out to get you.
• 

  BurnTheShips

  For your apocalyptic prophecy to be fulfilled, it must be sustained by the younger generation, which isn't the case at present.

  Nothing apocalyptic, just an observane of history, which repeats.
• 

  AuldSoul

  I would caution against equating anti-organized religion with anti-theism. Richard Dawkins and the like only attack beliefs with words. I think we are a long way from Dawkin's perspectives on reality producing legislation to impose those perspectives on pain of punishment.

  I do not believe theism is at any risk of dying out or becoming illegal here. I do believe anti-Islam sentiments will produce something soon, but I sincerely doubt it will take the form of outlawing organized religion, much less outlawing theism.

  Respectfully,
  AuldSoul
• 

  WTWizard

  If we do develop an antitheist society, I hope it is through fully integrated thinking and not force of law. An honest reading of the Bible, without any bias from religious training or expectations that stem from religion, reveal some total surprises. First, Satan was not wicked (he tried to set mankind free, just as Jesus did). Second, God is not all-righteous as most people are prejudiced to believe. Notice all the wanton destruction of value God has created in the Bible.

  And, I have noticed that Jesus did not teach people to be ashamed of their normal body functions. What he did lambaste were people that coerced others into following them. He came down very hard on the Pharisees for binding the people into a bicameral mode, not for committing fornication or drunkenness. Jesus didn't even condemn the tax collectors, who were dishonest and extorted excessive taxes out of people. Those people were not the ones that did most of the damage to society--the Pharisees were.

  It was the apostle Paul that introduced the element of guilt and control of one's body members, not Jesus. This was because Paul misinterpreted Jesus' teachings. He took them literally, not as metaphors for teaching bicameral people. And that was put right in the Bible, at the source. Which puts out a false image of what the Bible is actually telling people.

  However, there is no way I will support force of law to force people to believe that. Anyone that wants to believe that God is all-benevolent is free to do so. Anyone that believes that Jesus only did as God told him is free to believe it. No one is going to force anyone to go out and commit "sins" just because I don't think Jesus was referring to them as wrong. People should actually believe as they choose. However, I believe that anyone that is interested in the Bible will benefit the more they can ditch pre-conceived notions about it and read it totally objectively.

  What I do support laws against is people that misinterpret the Bible to serve themselves, and then go around forcing or defrauding people to follow their interpretations. That is how damaging cults form. When they have their own loaded language, there is no way to talk any sense into them. They will shoot down any laws by twisting the meanings of words to fit their own nefarious plans. Ultimately, they will usurp control of the government and start the Second Dark Ages (like the Catholic church did the First Dark Ages--notice how similar the Watchtower Society is set up with the Catholic church. The Watchtower Society is the Catholic Church in its infancy, primed to set up the Second Dark Ages). That is what needs to be totally banned, before the Watchtower Society has the chance to pull it off.
• 

  BurnTheShips

  What I do support laws against is people that misinterpret the Bible to serve themselves, and then go around forcing or defrauding people to follow their interpretations. That is how damaging cults form. When they have their own loaded language, there is no way to talk any sense into them. They will shoot down any laws by twisting the meanings of words to fit their own nefarious plans. Ultimately, they will usurp control of the government and start the Second Dark Ages (like the Catholic church did the First Dark Ages-- notice how similar the Watchtower Society is set up with the Catholic church. The Watchtower Society is the Catholic Church in its infancy, primed to set up the Second Dark Ages). That is what needs to be totally banned, before the Watchtower Society has the chance to pull it off.

  Your use of the term "Dark Age" is a bit of an anachronism, I am afraid. The Dark Ages were not so very dark. In those aspects that they were "dark", it is attributable to the poltical, social, and economic chaos that resulted from the fall of the Roman Empire, and not to Catholic repression. If anything, Catholic institutions helped preserve what learning remained from the older Roman culture.

  Burn
• 

  hillary_step

  Burn,

  The mistake the Communist hierarchy made in the USSR was to try to force, or 'ban' religion out of existence. It is the same mistake that the Bush Administration has made in its policy towards fundamentalist Islam, that is, assuming that it is possible to bomb an ideology out of existence.

  Any historical attempts, apart from Spains annihilation of the Aztec people which was complete, to force an ideology not to exist has failed, and will fail. In fact driving religion underground as did the USSR is arguably the way to produce a generation most dedicated to its cause. Once again, similarities with the expansion of Islam fundamentalism as a catalyst to what it sees as persecution is obvious.

  If you look at Northern Europe, including the UK, much of its society is settling into a secular lifestyle. This has been achieved, and I do view it as an achievement, not by brutality but by the type of education that is yet to filter through to many parts of the US, Russia, Poland etc. For example, last night I tuned into a US TV evangelist show and caught a snow-haired preacher summing up all he knew about evolution in two sentences and calling those who believe in evolution as 'stupid infidels'. Such talk would not even reach the screens in the UK, not through banning, but with a knowledge that their would not be an audeince for such tripe.

  I have an issue with religion, which imo has overstayed its welcome, but I have no issues with the spiritual. The USSR were not seeking to remove the spiritual, they were seeking to remove organized religion, imo a noble goal. Their methodology was flawed. Social evolution is always the better alternative.

  HS
• 

  journey-on

  don't people have the right to meet if they share a common spiritual interest?

  You're thinking like an American.....lol. Of course, people SHOULD have that right.

  As I said, we are deeply and passionately a people that cherish freedom above all else. Sometimes,

  depending on the political climate of the day, it may not look like it, but when it comes down to the

  real "nut-cutting", Americans WILL NOT tolerate the loss of real freedom. It is in our very SOUL

  CONSCIOUSNESS.

  Only in an environment where this kind of freedom is cherished can real spiritual evolution take place.

  I'm going to use the dreaded "F" word here: FAITH. I have faith that man is evolving the way the Creator

  intends. Where this quantum leap in man's spiritual evolution will take place is where there is Liberty to

  do so.