Is Religion Ridiculous?

David Horowitz's NewsReal Blog ^ | December 4, 2010 | Walter Hudson

[Walter Scott Hudson]

In a recent post answering the anti-religious zealotry of Bill Maher’s documentary-style film Religulous, I concluded that the film’s topic is “the argument of our time.” That is to say, our political paradigm is founded upon our spiritual paradigm, how we define and perceive the nature of man.

If you believe mankind to be the product of an ongoing, emergent, evolutionary process, then you will tend to believe that human consciousness can be applied to drive evolution in a favorable direction. This belief tends to metastase into an elevation of some men above others. Whether the basis for distinction is national identity, race, creed, intellect or some other factor is irrelevant. The end result is the same – a loss of freedom, and often life.

Conversely, if you believe mankind to exist in a state of sin – moral retardation, then you will abandon the futile task of perfecting man and work toward maintaining a society which minimizes the potential for abuse by defusing power and maximizing individual liberty. This was the position of the American Founding Fathers, who wrote and spoke extensively regarding the fallibility of man (even those with crowns) and the necessity to bind them with the chains of the Constitution.

In this follow-up, I would like to answer some thoughtful points raised by one of our readers.

[mmercier]

Maher is proof positive that there is a God.

And that he/she/it has a sense of humor.

[convertedtoreason]

Religion = relege = to seek

Religion, the concept of God, relates to man’s recognition of uncertainties and hope that “a greater, real force” exists to guide him in facing those uncertainties.

Uncertainties always point to the “future”. The concept of the “future” is aking to the concept of “end”, “death”, “retribution”, “reward”, and “punishment”.

Only a man who certainly knows the future has the capacity to reject religion, since he’s no longer scared of “uncertainties”. Is there such a man? I don’t know of any.

Here are some modern day religions:

“Perpetual Earth” seekers - those who put their trust in the eternal “existence” and “conservation” of earth at its present habitable form as their redemption.

“Knowledge” seekers - those who believe that science and knowledge will give them enlightenment and the possibility of longer, or even eternal life.

... and many more.

My point:

Those who are advocating for the eradication of polarized religion/faith such as Christianity with hope that somehow Muslims’ jihad will spare them are either:

(1) coward and fool; or

(2) Evangelist of their own brand of religion with an agenda of replacing the mainstream Christian faith by their own creed.

The above is clearly the case of Maher. Maher is an evangelist of the “Church” of Darwin.

Atheism is also a form of religion by the way. Many atheists dismiss the uncertainties of the future by forcing themselves to believe that their existence as a “being” and the memory that it carries “will end” after their last breath. Atheists tend to believe that “a person will only live once, thus must not have other objective in life but enjoy the most of it.”

Funny, all these so-called “new religions” and even atheism (a religion too) had also been tried and advocated in the ancient times.

[mmercier]

The only thing I know for certain is that any man of any faith who believes he has direct communication with his god is a more dangerous animal than any four legged beast.

[convertedtoreason]

Gotcha! You have a religion too. Nice.

Evangelize!

Cheers!

[Strk321]

“The only thing I know for certain is that any man of any faith who believes he has direct communication with his god is a more dangerous animal than any four legged beast.”

You mean like Jimmy Carter claiming that he talked to God in his living room?

[The Comedian]

To cling to religion is infantile, ignorant, and suicidal.

Let me make a brief linguistic distinction here.

Religion is ridiculous. Religion is mankind's structured approach to the Infinite. It's pointless and silly. The finite set cannot contain the Infinite set. It's mathematically impossible.

Yeshua Messiach proved religion was ridiculous. For starters, he showed those who thought themselves wise to be foolish, and showed that the grave was nothing to be concerned about.

The only thing that counts, now, for all of humanity is to transcend the fiction of religion, and to reach across the gulf between man and God via the bridge that is Jesus.

You do that, you're across. You ignore Him, you're effed, well and truly. I have yet to discover any sort of middle ground between jumping the chasm and falling to your death.

I await any substantive argument to the contrary.

And as a former atheist, you best come heavy.

Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.

[dr_lew]

Religion = relege = to seek

Can you cite an authority? I don't get anything like this from e.g. Chambers Murray. Religion comes straight from latin, religio, meaning scrupulousness or reverence. There is a relego ( infinitive relegere ) but it means "to gather up" and I don't see any connection to religio.

There is religatio = "a binding back", and I might suppose a connection from this to relgio, as scruples might be seen this way, but I don't know.

[RedStateRocker]

Malarkey.
One can be a cold blooded non believer and still recognize that a constitutional republic based on Judeo-Christian principles is empirically proven to yield the maximum in wealth and personal freedom. I know of some quite patriotic and economically sensible men and women who are of the opinion that the greatest good for the greatest number occurs when the Torah and the New Testament are taught, revered and respected but who don’t believe in any metaphysical reality at all.

“Religion is regarded as ‘true’ by the masses, ‘false’ by the elite and ‘useful’ by the rulers” Suetonius

[Gene Eric]

FWIW, Christianity is not a religion.

[tired&retired]

WOW, lots of antagonists posting today!

Religion, or believing based upon faith, will soon be replaced by knowing.

[wastoute]

LOL If Bill Maher believes he is an evolutionary improvement over our Founders then he has clearly never read a word any of them ever wrote. If I were to believe in a concept like “evolution” the evidence would have me believe that in fact we are progressing in a DOWNWARD direction rather than improving.

[wastoute]

Great! You are just about where I started from 12 years ago (give or take). One day I realized that “if things go better with God” maybe it is because He is there. Just sayin’...

[convertedtoreason]

Oops. relego. not relege.

It’s a hot hot, UNRESOLVED topic. he he he! And I’m not a scholar. Following are the only things that I can offer you. If find more about the origin of word religion, I will be glad to hear them.

Many modern Christian scholars (as opposed to secular counterpart) view that the use of the word “re-lego” was a poor Latin translation. The more exact translation is probably “select again” or “study again”.

Christian scholars (Bible translators) opine that the original manuscript should mean “to seek”: A person is either not satisfied or something is bothering him. Hence, he has to look for a “new answer” again. That process is the one that “we should consider as religion”.

It was the early church scholars who used the “religion” as an “institution of belief for a particular god”, which is the modern meaning of the word we now know. They were Clement, Augustine, and others. The assimilation of the word by the early Christians was definitely due to the fact they had to confront the many Roman “religions” during that time. But the formal acceptance of Religion as “institution or organization of a particular belief in god” occurred in around 1100-1200 AD (medieval age?).

In fact, some of the early Christian Fathers (maybe after the original apostles) were actually “apologists” and were advisers to Constantine to defend Christianity against the doubts of the remaining non-believers.

But as Christians, we should be more interested on how the translated “Bible” used the word “religion”:

From The KJV:

Acts 26:5 (First occurrence of the word “religion” - Paul’s own defence before the Court of Agrippa)

“Which knew me from the beginning, if they would testify, that after the most straitest sect of our religion I lived a Pharisee.”

>> Paul used the word “religion” here to make a case to Agrippa that his Christian faith was just like other “religions” in Rome. The only difference is that Paul has already “found” his living God, which is above all other Roman gods.

Gal. 1:13

“For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews’ religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it: And profited in the Jews’ religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers.”

>> In here, Paul is distinguishing religion from the Church of God.

But the most significant use of the word “religion” is this:

James Chapters 1 -2: Some excerpts:

19 Wherefore, my beloved brethren, let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath: 20 For the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God. 21 Wherefore lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls. 22 But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves. 23 For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass: 24 For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was.

25 But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed. 26 If any man among you seem to be religious, and bridleth not his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this man’s religion is vain.

27 Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.

2:1 My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons. 2 For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold ring, in goodly apparel, and there come in also a poor man in vile raiment; 3 And ye have respect to him that weareth the gay clothing, and say unto him, Sit thou here in a good place; and say to the poor, Stand thou there, or sit here under my footstool: 4 Are ye not then partial in yourselves, and are become judges of evil thoughts? 5 Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him? 6 But ye have despised the poor. Do not rich men oppress you, and draw you before the judgment seats? 7 Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called?

8 ¶ If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well: 9 But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors. 10 For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all. 11 For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law. 12 So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty. 13 For he shall have judgment without mercy, that hath shewed no mercy; and mercy rejoiceth against judgment.

>> Apostle James is distinguishing Religion from Faith here.
Christ last commandment is this: Love one another/neighbor?. James is consistent with Christ’s admonition to us. In James’ time, the old, widows, and orphans were the “weakest members of Jewish society”, people who had been abandoned by the elite Jews (priests and government). People that the elite Jews would never associate with.

My take:

As a Christian, my religion should be viewed as the fruit of my faith in God and Christ. To “be like” Christ (the meaning of Christian, right?), I should show LOVE to my fellow Christians.

BACK TO CHRIS MATTHEWS:

In present American politics, those Christians that remain democrats still believe that their party is the party that cares for “weakest members of the society”. IT’S JUST AN IMAGE BUT IT IS A SECRET TO POWER.

Last November, the Republicans have successfully made a case that the Democrats were actually the party of the Elite Establishment and the Republicans were the party of the common people. WE WON BIG!

That’s the real calculus.

We have a chance to dismantle forever the big lie of the Democratic Party if we have the right “Leader” who will side with the people. But it will truly depend on the character of our next nominee.

IMHO, Matthew in his attack of Religion has two purposes:

1. To promote his atheist viewpoint/religion.

2. There were significant number of Christian Democrats who backslided from the Democratic Party in November. Democratic leadership by BHO/Pelosi/Reid has become “unhinged” and blind to the plight of the ordinary Americans. Christian Democrats have always been sensitive to that.

3. Matthews now recognizes that the Christian beliefs of some democrats are an obstacle to the total goal of the Democrats: MAKING YOUR GOVERNMENT AS YOUR OWN GOD. Christians will always find that as “repulsive” to their faith.

or

4. Matthews is really afraid of the Muslim Jihadists who are really planning to destroy Christians especially Americans. To save himself, it’s Matthew religion to convert Christian Americans into ATHEISM. [In short, Matthews is just another narcissistic and Darwin-fanatic atheist.]

Cheers!

[Caipirabob]

Christianity and Christian values softening the planks of capitalism are what made America great - A success unparelled in all of human history. It's the dimishing appearance of Christian values, the demise of true capitalism and the emergence of Godless socialism that's destroying us as an American people and a nation.

Look, maybe folks on the left want to model themselves after Bill Maher. Personally I blame Carter for shutting down the insance asylums in the 70's. He unleashed a wave of socialists idiots that have plagued us ever since.

[jmacusa]

Christianity isn’t a religion? Then what is it, particularly? And may I point out yours is another one of those ‘’drive-by’’ posts where one makes a sweeping generalization or fires an accusing broadside , without substantiation, and then disappears.

[jmacusa]

Can you prove God doesn’t exist, atheist?

[RedStateRocker]

Not talking about myself, my friend. I know where I’m going and Who is going to get me there :-) Merely challenging the conventional opinion that one *MUST* be a Christian (or Jewish) to be a patriotic conservative.

[The Comedian]

Can you prove God doesn’t exist, atheist?

You are probably too stupid to realize that you completely mis-read what I wrote, but I'll tell you to go read it again anyway in the vain hope that you might understand some of the smaller words.

Read it very slowly, sounding out the more difficult words.

And not that you'll understand this, but you can't prove a negative. To challenge someone to do so shows that you are too inept at rational thought to even bother with.

Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.

[dr_lew]

I have yet to discover any sort of middle ground between jumping the chasm and falling to your death.

Here we founder on the rocks of metaphor. "falling to your death," eh? It does happen.