Now if you said the more you study science the more you believe
in religious dogma, I would be surprised.
We don't need to spend our time and money poking holes
in religious dogma, we need to use the facts and evidence to demonstrate that Atheism is and always has been morally and intellectually superior to religion.
Then we must make sure he believes blindly
in religious dogma and genuinely wants to impose his beliefs on everybody else.
Your prediction of what this supposed loss of morals will cause in 5 - 10 years is cynical and founded
in religious dogma.
The GOP were trying to pass more and more legislation that was rooted
in religious dogma!
Others choose to do so without the assistance of ignorant religious dogma and I'd say it works even better than the misplaced focus encouraged by fear of not «believing» (
in religious dogma).
The ground of the specific assurance
in religious dogmas is then an affective experience.
Not exact matches
Tell me there is no
religious dogma involved
in that.
I don't just deny a belief
in a God (s), but oppose those that do and vigorously oppose those that seek to impose their
religious dogma on our political decision making.
Religious zealots
in America (nearly always of the chrsitian variety) never tire of trying to stuff their
dogma down the throats of all Americans.
- But the difference is, Science eventually comes to its senses
in the face of TESTABLE EVIDENCE and changes it's views; the thought of changing away from
religious dogma is abhorrant to almost all faiths, and change
in practices often take much time.
Now, realize that
in today's society you are still just as hated, shunned and looked down upon for declaring that same differing belief... or even non-belief — just because people are still too hung up on their precious
religious dogma to realize that, though the outcome is obviously less drastic than
in the past, they are still doing the same thing that
religious people did
in the past?
Differences of
dogma in an essentially Christian society mostly call for giving individual believers the room for distinctions of belief while allowing genuinely distinct (and inevitably very small)
religious minorities broader latitude.
The vibrant American Church became fractious: Many priests and
religious abandoned their spiritual callings for the world; some theologians dispensed with their obligations to work with the Magisterium; evangelization suffered; loyalty to Church teaching was rejected
in favor of a misguided notion of «conscience;» and
dogma and truth were repudiated.
We can discover a reversal of the kenotic movement of the Word
in the very insistence of the
religious Christian that faith has for once and for all been given, that it is fully and finally present
in the Scriptures, the liturgies, the creeds, and the
dogmas of the past, and can
in no sense undergo a development or transformation that moves beyond its original expression to new and more universal forms.
Religious language is also historical and evolutionary: it depicts the people of God as on a journey to the holy land, the Church as a mystical body evolving toward the fullness of Christ, the liturgy as consisting of cycles of growth, the Christian life as an exodus, grace as growth
in the fullness of Christ,
dogma as evolving, etc..
Yet what an alteration this enduring
dogma has undergone
in regard to its more precise formulation, its more exact theological interpretation, its perspectives, the consequences that are to be drawn from it, the weight it has
in religious life.
your understanding of the change process is very simplistic, because your mind is not open, you specifically believe already
in the traditional doctrines,
Dogmas as shown
in thousands of years of history evolves, and the need for input variables, meaning the diversity of
religious belief is necessay because nature through his will is requiring this to happen, we are being educated by God
in the events of history.
In the past when there was no humans yet Gods will is directly manifisted
in nature, with our coming and education through history, we gradually takes the responsibilty of implementing the will.Your complaint on your perception of abuse is just part of the complex process of educating us through experience.
When particular elements
in the traditional teaching about the nature of things have been challenged by demonstrable scientific findings, the whole structure of
religious dogma has been called into question.
On that rainy morning
in Cambridge, I inhabited a
religious world
in which
dogma seemed secure; and a demonstrative faith, surely, is a good thing.
Most people lose or forget the subjectively
religious experience, and redefine Religion as a set of habits, behaviors,
dogmas, forms, which at the extreme becomes entirely legalistic and bureaucratic, conventional, empty, and
in the truest meaning of the word, antireligious.
There is no place for
religious dogma in this common sense proposal.
In other words, the fact that so many people can be swayed by
religious myths and
religious dogma helps us understand why the world is so messed up — people can be talked into just about anything, including things that are bad for them.
Now, realize that
in today's society you are still just as hated, shunned and looked down upon for declaring that same differing belief... or even non-belief — just because people are still too hung up on their precious
religious dogma to realize that they are still doing the same thing that
religious people did
in the past.
Dogma doesn't say that women shouldn't have higher positions
in the hierarchy, or that decision - making
in the church should not be shared with female
religious.
Although held
in theory over a long period, the belief was accentuated during the latter part of the nineteenth century and since, and became finally a basic
dogma underlying the Japanese Imperial thrust, which is often regarded as the beginning of World War II.9 The idea was taught
in the schools,
in the army, and resulted finally
in a fanatical
religious, as well as patriotic, devotion to the emperor, without which, it seems to the writer, it is impossible to explain the daring attack of the island empire of Japan upon the richest and most powerful nation
in the world, the United States.
Atheists do not believe
in anything — it is a belief, but it is not tied to any
religious dogma.
Millions of humans have been murdered by
religious freeks because they (the murdered) didn't believe
in THEIR religous
dogma.
E.g.,
in regards to scientific support for evolution and rejection of creationism and the young earth
dogma,
in 1986, 72 US Nobel Prize winners, 17 state academies of science and 7 other scientific societies, signed an amicus curiae brief asking the US Supreme Court
in Edwards v. Aguillard to reject a Louisiana state law requiring the teaching of creationism, which the brief described as embodying
religious dogma.
If there IS a war, Rick, it's against YOU and your ilk... those who wish to impose irrelevant and invalid
religious dogma and demagoguery into politics and government
in the 21st Century.
While we are interested
in bearing witness to the gospel of Jesus, our mission is not to recruit people from one
religious institution or belief system for another; nor to give them new laws,
dogmas and rituals; but rather to persuade all to change our lives and ways, and adopt a new way of seeing, doing and being.
Public education can be
religious in this sense without violating
religious liberty and without teaching sectarian doctrines as official public
dogma.
The systematization of
religious dogmas in Islam was a task undertaken by the followers of Muhammad when the need for the establishment of a Muslim theology was felt.
By grounding
religious claims
in human experience, Schleiermacher did not have to begin with metaphysical speculation nor by requiring intellectual assent to the
dogmas of the church.
Marriage
in my view belongs more to
religious dogma not so much a biblical teaching, educate me.
In 1986, an amicus curiae brief, signed by 72 US Nobel Prize winners, 17 state academies of science and 7 other scientific societies, asked the US Supreme Court in Edwards v. Aguillard, to reject a Louisiana state law requiring the teaching of creationism (which the brief described as embodying religious dogma
In 1986, an amicus curiae brief, signed by 72 US Nobel Prize winners, 17 state academies of science and 7 other scientific societies, asked the US Supreme Court
in Edwards v. Aguillard, to reject a Louisiana state law requiring the teaching of creationism (which the brief described as embodying religious dogma
in Edwards v. Aguillard, to reject a Louisiana state law requiring the teaching of creationism (which the brief described as embodying
religious dogma).
Organized
religious dogma is nothing more than a set of rules laid down through history to keep the ignorant, unwashed masses
in check with the threat of ultimate punishment.
All three are defined by their rejection of religion and
religious dogma in favor of science, free thought and reason.
Following a
religious dogma without grasping the essence of spirituality is the core cause for the turmoil we have witnessed
in our history, and are witnessing today.
Spiritual, but not
religious can also describe a large number of people who have very solid, very defined beliefs but do not feel the need to dress them
in doctrine and
dogma and ritual.
i think the writer misses the point that many who are spiritual and not
religious have explored what religions have to offer
in the form of moral compass and
dogma and organizations and whatnot — and have found it hard to find the peace within themselves that they innately attribute to what they seek through contact and participation
in religion to begin with.
Religious dogma stems from a time
in which human rights and moral norms were far different from today.
I wonder if «spiritual but not
religious» is a bit of a cultural transitional stage
in which it is becoming clear that formal
religious dogma is at best intellectually unsatisfying, and at worst not only false but dangerous; and yet we don't really know what to do with that part of our brain that seeks magical explanations for what we can not easily understand.
These statements reveal «creation science» to be an oxymoron, a contradiction
in terms, based on
religious dogma (and a simple minded
dogma at that).
Though of less exalted origin, and not of equal value with sruti, as a basis of
religious dogma, it is perhaps quite as influential
in the lives of the people
in inculcating and nourishing
religious faith and practice.
i admit — i am resistant to
religious dogma — but
in my own defense — that is considered a virtue by myself and many others.
Religious experience,
in other words, spontaneously and inevitably engenders myths, superstitions,
dogmas, creeds, and metaphysical theologies, and criticisms of one set of these by the adherents of another.
this cult tried to change everything
in the country to match their
religious doctrine, a book that says gay people are evil, women are second class citizens, the world was made 6k years ago and a whole bunch of evil / ignorant
dogma.
Certainly the great tradition of Catholic
dogma, doctrine, and theological reflection is immeasurably more interesting than theories borrowed from current fashions
in religious thought.
Richard, there is nothing
in Christian
dogma that can be interpreted as a claim that the followers of Jesus are sinless, even though there are too many professed Christians who seem to believe that grace has made them not only righteous; but inerrant
in spiritual /
religious matters.