History, Evolution, and The Darwin Debate

Darwiniana header image 2

From religion to…what?

May 17th, 2015 · No Comments


These discussions are a bit tedious because the misuse of the term ‘religion’ and ‘secular’ beggar the discussion.

First, ‘secular’ refers to the new era of modernity, the new age observed in the sixteenth century, with the Reformation. Secularism is not atheism, it is a field of modernity which includes a vast terrain.
We should drop the term ‘secular’, it is a lost cause.

The term ‘religion’ is hopelessly confused with Xtianity and its fortunes. The passing of Xtianity could mean the passing of a religion but an increase in religiousness or real spirituality. Many spiritual sages hoped for the passing of religion so that people could encounter their spirituality. Don’t get hijacked by these new atheist hucksters who negate even spirituality. They can’t even handle ‘enlightenment’ as a term without a nervous breakdown.

These articles are absurd: the percentage of Xtians is still 71%!

The cult of new atheists cannot provide any solution to the issues. The issue of ‘god’ is only important for strong monotheists. But for the truly spiritual the ‘god’ question is receding into the realm of metaphysics.

Some caveats in ‘leaving religion’: if you enter general culture beyond all religion taken to the new atheist extreme you will end up in trouble. People suffer psychological/behavioral entropy in such situations, and the narrow cult of upper middle class ‘new atheists’ will not do anything to help those they deliver to this entropy. To the extent that religion means helping people these functions will disappear, as the snotty scientism set will grin with darwinian social darwinist satisfaction at their ‘salvation’.

Keep in mind that religion is not being abolished, but recycled. Xtianity is a shell shocked ruin: it needs to be recycled. This has nothing to do with atheism, or belief, as such.

Even if you leave religion the burden is on you to study the legacy of religion, its history, nature and significance. You have no other options here: the science set won’t provide anything. You need to understand why you are leaving religion, what it means, and a way to find better paths than the junk culture provided by science at this point. Science is especially weak on such issues. Where will you find reliable information on the many issues of spirituality?

And so it goes, on and on. Be wary of the cocky set of new atheist bullshitters. They can’t even get science right.

The issue of atheism is trivial, of no importance.

I pass between theism and atheism all the time, daily, weekly.
Its main function so far seems to be to get new atheists so confused they get everything else wrong. Look at Dawkins: he can’t get evolution right because he is confused about ‘god’ and design arguments.These guys are klutzes, really.

Operating alone in the universe refusing all spiritual and religious interaction, relying solely on the stupidity of scientists, is a slow road to ruin. It will be good at the beginning to be rid of the baggage of religion, but sooner or later this approach will run on empty.

Tags: General

0 responses so far ↓

  • There are no comments yet...Kick things off by filling out the form below.

Leave a Comment