Skip to main content

The Final Great Awakening: Religion Without Lies.

 Religion Without Lies: Is this even possible? 

Religious symbols from left to right, top to bottom: Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism,

Judaism, the Baháʼí Faith, Eckankar, Sikhism, Jainism, Wicca, Unitarian Universalism,

Shinto, Taoism, Thelema, Tenrikyo, and Zoroastrianism.

Definition of Religion: Oxford Dictionaries defines religion as the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.

"Superhuman"? Nope. "A personal God?" Nope. Let's try again.

Religion – An organized collection of beliefs, cultural systems, and world views that relate humanity to an order of existence. Many religions have narratives, symbols, and sacred histories that are intended to explain the meaning of life and/or to explain the origin of life or the Universe. From their beliefs about the cosmos and human nature, people derive morality, ethics, religious laws or a preferred lifestyle. According to some estimates, there are roughly 4,200 religions in the world.

And are any of them made without lies? Not that I've found. It's time to change this. It's critical to change this because religion leads you in the wrong direction on many moral and ethical questions. Not only religion, but Evolution by Natural Descent also leads you in the wrong direction on many moral and ethical grounds.

As one of my favorite rational philosophers, Sam Harris, opines: "Muslims and Christians cannot disagree about the causes of cholera, for instance, because whatever their holy books might say about infectious disease, a genuine understanding of cholera has arrived from another quarter. Epidemiology trumps religion (or it should), especially when people are watching their children die. This is where our hope for a truly nonsectarian future lies: when things matter, people tend to want to understand what is actually going on in the world. Science (and rational discourse generally) delivers this understanding and offers a very frank appraisal of its current limitations; Religion fails on both counts."

We want a religion that doesn't fail when confronted with the truth.

I'm open to ideas.

Science plus the assumption that we are here to improve the well-being of conscious entities?

Or is this common sense idea too radical for all the fundamentalists and the other 4200 religions in the world?

It's really not about the tax breaks, Scientologists.


Thanks for reading!
 -Dr. Mike


Popular posts from this blog

The Declaration of Independence is the foundation of modern ethics

The Settlement of the War between Science and Religion . Why the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights are More Important than you realize. These two documents provide the foundation of the Grand Moral Compromise between Religion and Science that allowed the Industrial Revolution to progress by defining the morals and ethics of governments and their relationship with the people. The only moral and ethical form of government is declared to be a Lawful Democracy with Religious  Freedom . These two documents define why this is from first postulates and dictate the method to form a government. The Grand Moral Compromise was defined in the Declaration of Independence and codified in the Bill of Rights : it is the agreement that abolished the crime of heresy in return for freedom of all religions , including science , the harbinger of truth . Only about half [G] of the world has agreed to this  Grand Moral Compromise , the rest are still at war with themselv

A Modest Proposal for Reparations

 America needs to forgive itself for its original sins of slavery and ghettoization of native Americans. To claim that was a different time and a different set of people is disingenuous. The government aided and abetted these travesties and they need to help alleviate them. So the question is how to do this fairly? Here’s a simple proposal. First we must make some observations: with DNA tracking, we know exactly who your ancestors were. They were either discriminated against or not. And we know the proportions, so we can base the reparations on a standard legal ground. The idea is to take each grouping of families and compare their wealth to the average. We can figure out what the growth rate would need to be to match the wealth of the groups at any time in the future. Pick a time frame to eliminate this systemic racism. Maybe as long as it was in place? About 350 years? So say we plan to be an egalitarian society at that point? That seems ridiculous! How about reversing the last 55 ye