|
Post by paulslaugh on Mar 14, 2023 17:35:03 GMT
Whoever it was, they have a lot to answer for. Yeah, like the creation of hospitals, etc.... . The missionary monks and nuns did this, not the church hierarchy who decided to turn the Body of Christ into a war machine.
|
|
|
Post by paulslaugh on Mar 14, 2023 17:35:55 GMT
Only if it died out along with every other religion. If it died out alone, the gap would simply have been filled by another religion, and so, the world would be no better off. But the overwhelming majority of research and studies show that Christianity is positively associated with numerous benefits that contribute to a healthy society at large. Like science.
|
|
djorno
Sophomore
@djorno
Posts: 322
Likes: 81
|
Post by djorno on Mar 14, 2023 17:45:16 GMT
But the overwhelming majority of research and studies show that Christianity is positively associated with numerous benefits that contribute to a healthy society at large. Like science. Of course. The science that Christianity helped give rise to.
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Mar 14, 2023 17:55:19 GMT
Yeah, like the creation of hospitals, etc.... . The missionary monks and nuns did this, not the church hierarchy who decided to turn the Body of Christ into a war machine. The monks & nuns are still part of the Christian Church, nonetheless.
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Mar 14, 2023 18:05:15 GMT
Only if it died out along with every other religion. If it died out alone, the gap would simply have been filled by another religion, and so, the world would be no better off. But the overwhelming majority of research and studies show that Christianity is positively associated with numerous benefits that contribute to a healthy society at large. A survey of mankind's history shows that the bad done in the name of religion (including Christianity) outweighs the good.
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Mar 14, 2023 18:08:41 GMT
Yes, a lot of bad have been done in the name of Christianity or by professing Christians themselves. Pope St. John Paul II the Great even acknowledged this himself, back in 2000. But, Christianity has also always emphasized charity & charitable acts too. As for the Crusades: It started with Muslims in the Middle East chasing out Christians from Jerusalem & elsewhere in the Holy Land. Pope Urban commanded Christians in Europe to help their brothers & sisters in Christ in the Middle East. And those so-called "christian" cults are just that: CULTS. They do not represent mainstream Christianity. All religions have their fringe cults that do crazy stuff, that do not in fact, follow what the religion actually teaches or represent. Christianity itself began life as a cult. It has been highly sectarian almost from its beginnings, so to claim '...doesn't represent 'true' Christianity' is to fall into the No True Scotsman solipsism. Each sect will claim that it and it alone is the only embodiment of the values of 'true' Christianity. The notion of mainstream Christianity, outside of the candyfloss Sunday-school preachments of certain basic ethical concepts such as the so-called Golden Rule (which is not itself original to Christianity, BTW--we have Confucius, some 500 years previously to thank for that), is largely non-existent. Has Christianity been behind some good? In the course of two millenia, the law of averages says, sure, the odds are that it would be. So have the other major world religions (which Christianity is often loath to admit to). So have many secular movements, non-God affiliated (which Christianity is often loath to admit to). But using those same averages, the thinking individual would be apt to concede that Christianity--in it's 'true' form, or another--has been responsible for a great deal of death, war, persecution, and just general endemic misery in this world. All of it? Of course not. A great deal of it (and much of it utterly unnecessary, were it following verbatim the teachings of its oftimes titular figure)? Without question. So I stand behind my contentions. Correct. It started off as a Jewish sect with its cult centred upon the Lord Jesus Christ. It also started off as a persecuted one at that. And yes, the Golden Rule can be pretty much found in most religions. No argument there. And as for your example of the "No True Scotsman..." crap, in comparison to afore-mentioned so-called Christian "cults:" Ever since the Protestant Reformation, when the Bible was allowed to be translated into the vernacular, people have gone on to interpret Biblical teaching based upon their own personal experiences & intellect. For the most part, Protestants did not use the writings of the Church Fathers, etc., which would have helped them better understand scriptural teaching, in order to interpret it. Because of this, in the past 5 centuries since the afore-mentioned Reformation, Protestantism has fractured into thousands & thousands of sects. Some of these sects do not even count themselves as Protestant. So, they come up with ideas that would be far from what Christianity was originally intended to do or be. Yes, other religions have done a lot of good as well, such as Buddhism, etc. As for those secular, non-God affiliated movements: Those good teachings that they may have taught would have originally come from religious teachings, such as Christianity, etc.
|
|
|
Post by drystyx on Mar 14, 2023 18:18:46 GMT
Yes, a lot of bad have been done in the name of Christianity or by professing Christians themselves. Pope St. John Paul II the Great even acknowledged this himself, back in 2000. But, Christianity has also always emphasized charity & charitable acts too. As for the Crusades: It started with Muslims in the Middle East chasing out Christians from Jerusalem & elsewhere in the Holy Land. Pope Urban commanded Christians in Europe to help their brothers & sisters in Christ in the Middle East. And those so-called "christian" cults are just that: CULTS. They do not represent mainstream Christianity. All religions have their fringe cults that do crazy stuff, that do not in fact, follow what the religion actually teaches or represent. Christianity itself began life as a cult. It has been highly sectarian almost from its beginnings, so to claim '...doesn't represent 'true' Christianity' is to fall into the No True Scotsman solipsism. Each sect will claim that it and it alone is the only embodiment of the values of 'true' Christianity. The notion of mainstream Christianity, outside of the candyfloss Sunday-school preachments of certain basic ethical concepts such as the so-called Golden Rule (which is not itself original to Christianity, BTW--we have Confucius, some 500 years previously to thank for that), is largely non-existent. Has Christianity been behind some good? In the course of two millenia, the law of averages says, sure, the odds are that it would be. So have the other major world religions (which Christianity is often loath to admit to). So have many secular movements, non-God affiliated (which Christianity is often loath to admit to). But using those same averages, the thinking individual would be apt to concede that Christianity--in it's 'true' form, or another--has been responsible for a great deal of death, war, persecution, and just general endemic misery in this world. All of it? Of course not. A great deal of it (and much of it utterly unnecessary, were it following verbatim the teachings of its oftimes titular figure)? Without question. So I stand behind my DELUSIONS. No need to thank me for the edit. Just simply fixing it so you come across as someone who isn't babbling incoherently all the time.
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Mar 14, 2023 18:23:28 GMT
I'm quite sure you don't. I asked you a question. And I answered it.
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Mar 14, 2023 18:35:49 GMT
Christianity itself began life as a cult. It has been highly sectarian almost from its beginnings, so to claim '...doesn't represent 'true' Christianity' is to fall into the No True Scotsman solipsism. Each sect will claim that it and it alone is the only embodiment of the values of 'true' Christianity. The notion of mainstream Christianity, outside of the candyfloss Sunday-school preachments of certain basic ethical concepts such as the so-called Golden Rule (which is not itself original to Christianity, BTW--we have Confucius, some 500 years previously to thank for that), is largely non-existent. Has Christianity been behind some good? In the course of two millenia, the law of averages says, sure, the odds are that it would be. So have the other major world religions (which Christianity is often loath to admit to). So have many secular movements, non-God affiliated (which Christianity is often loath to admit to). But using those same averages, the thinking individual would be apt to concede that Christianity--in it's 'true' form, or another--has been responsible for a great deal of death, war, persecution, and just general endemic misery in this world. All of it? Of course not. A great deal of it (and much of it utterly unnecessary, were it following verbatim the teachings of its oftimes titular figure)? Without question. So I stand behind my contentions. Correct. It started off as a Jewish sect with its cult centred upon the Lord Jesus Christ. It also started off as a persecuted one at that. And yes, the Golden Rule can be pretty much found in most religions. No argument there. And as for your example of the "No True Scotsman..." crap, in comparison to afore-mentioned so-called Christian "cults:" Ever since the Protestant Reformation, when the Bible was allowed to be translated into the vernacular, people have gone on to interpret Biblical teaching based upon their own personal experiences & intellect. For the most part, Protestants did not use the writings of the Church Fathers, etc., which would have helped them better understand scriptural teaching, in order to interpret it. Because of this, in the past 5 centuries since the afore-mentioned Reformation, Protestantism has fractured into thousands & thousands of sects. Some of these sects do not even count themselves as Protestant. So, they come up with ideas that would be far from what Christianity was originally intended to do or be. Yes, other religions have done a lot of good as well, such as Buddhism, etc. As for those secular, non-God affiliated movements: Those good teachings that they may have taught would have originally come from religious teachings, such as Christianity, etc.There are sectarian traditions within Catholicism: there are seven non-Latin, non-Roman ecclesial traditions: Armenian, Byzantine, Coptic, Ethiopian, East Syriac (Chaldean), West Syriac, and Maronite. Each to the Churches with these non-Latin traditions is as Catholic as the Roman Catholic Church. The very name 'catholic' taken from the adjective meaning "a wide variety of things; all-embracing" reflects this. If you are insisting the Roman Catholic tradition is the only 'true' one, you are involved in a version of No True Scotsman right off the bat. Trying to lay schisms wholly at the feet of the Protestant tradition is an error, but one RC'ers are quite prone to. As for those secular, non-God affiliated movements: Those good teachings that they may have taught would have originally come from religious teachings, such as Christianity, etc.
Wrong again, as any student of philosophy could easily point out.
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Mar 14, 2023 18:38:59 GMT
Christianity itself began life as a cult. It has been highly sectarian almost from its beginnings, so to claim '...doesn't represent 'true' Christianity' is to fall into the No True Scotsman solipsism. Each sect will claim that it and it alone is the only embodiment of the values of 'true' Christianity. The notion of mainstream Christianity, outside of the candyfloss Sunday-school preachments of certain basic ethical concepts such as the so-called Golden Rule (which is not itself original to Christianity, BTW--we have Confucius, some 500 years previously to thank for that), is largely non-existent. Has Christianity been behind some good? In the course of two millenia, the law of averages says, sure, the odds are that it would be. So have the other major world religions (which Christianity is often loath to admit to). So have many secular movements, non-God affiliated (which Christianity is often loath to admit to). But using those same averages, the thinking individual would be apt to concede that Christianity--in it's 'true' form, or another--has been responsible for a great deal of death, war, persecution, and just general endemic misery in this world. All of it? Of course not. A great deal of it (and much of it utterly unnecessary, were it following verbatim the teachings of its oftimes titular figure)? Without question. So I stand behind my DELUSIONS. No need to thank me for the edit. Just simply fixing it so you come across as someone who isn't babbling incoherently all the time. No, you do tend to babble incoherently only when someone points out the fatuity of your sky-fairy (belief in which could readily be called 'delusional'). If you call putting a silly twist on a word 'editing', do yourself a favor and don't enter any literary fields anytime soon. Maxwell Perkins you ain't .
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Mar 14, 2023 18:49:17 GMT
Correct. It started off as a Jewish sect with its cult centred upon the Lord Jesus Christ. It also started off as a persecuted one at that. And yes, the Golden Rule can be pretty much found in most religions. No argument there. And as for your example of the "No True Scotsman..." crap, in comparison to afore-mentioned so-called Christian "cults:" Ever since the Protestant Reformation, when the Bible was allowed to be translated into the vernacular, people have gone on to interpret Biblical teaching based upon their own personal experiences & intellect. For the most part, Protestants did not use the writings of the Church Fathers, etc., which would have helped them better understand scriptural teaching, in order to interpret it. Because of this, in the past 5 centuries since the afore-mentioned Reformation, Protestantism has fractured into thousands & thousands of sects. Some of these sects do not even count themselves as Protestant. So, they come up with ideas that would be far from what Christianity was originally intended to do or be. Yes, other religions have done a lot of good as well, such as Buddhism, etc. As for those secular, non-God affiliated movements: Those good teachings that they may have taught would have originally come from religious teachings, such as Christianity, etc.There are sectarian traditions within Catholicism: there are seven non-Latin, non-Roman ecclesial traditions: Armenian, Byzantine, Coptic, Ethiopian, East Syriac (Chaldean), West Syriac, and Maronite. Each to the Churches with these non-Latin traditions is as Catholic as the Roman Catholic Church. The very name 'catholic' taken from the adjective meaning "a wide variety of things; all-embracing" reflects this. If you are insisting the Roman Catholic tradition is the only 'true' one, you are involved in a version of No True Scotsman right off the bat. Trying to lay schisms wholly at the feet of the Protestant tradition is an error, but one RC'ers are quite prone to. As for those secular, non-God affiliated movements: Those good teachings that they may have taught would have originally come from religious teachings, such as Christianity, etc.
Wrong again, as any student of philosophy could easily point out. Those sectarian traditions are based on place of origin. Not Biblical interpretation. They still follow the same tenants of the Church. Catholicism & Orthodoxy split in the 10'Th Century. However, their core tenants are pretty much the same.
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Mar 14, 2023 18:51:45 GMT
Of course. The science that Christianity helped give rise to. You must be referring to that 'science' that demonstrates how exposure to direct flame reduces human tissue to chunks of carbon. On a more serious note, there is considerable debate on that notion, as this article gives a decent glimpse of: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relationship_between_religion_and_science#:~:text=Most%20scientific%20and%20technical%20innovations,elements%20of%20the%20scientific%20method. And if you respond with some variant of tl;dr, don't waste any more of my time here. But the overwhelming majority of research and studies show that Christianity is positively associated with numerous benefits that contribute to a healthy society at large.And while we're trading links, point us towards some of that overwhelming majority of studies and research that show this. Don't forget to include how they were peer-reviewed and to what extent the conductors of these studies and researches were connected to this Christian tradition they're evaluating so glowingly.
|
|
djorno
Sophomore
@djorno
Posts: 322
Likes: 81
|
Post by djorno on Mar 14, 2023 19:44:31 GMT
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Mar 14, 2023 20:43:23 GMT
Historians of science say we should be thankful to Christianity for the development of science because Christian doctrines and ideas were crucial for the development of science. Neither Noah J. Efron nor John Heilbron are Christians. Without Christianity science would not be what it is today. Sure. Here are some examples: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3426191/ This article does not posit Christianity per se as conducive to overall mental health; it primarily relates to 'religion' and 'spirituality' and does not give direct linkage of Christian belief as a keystone of mental health. It cites a claim of Jews and Pentecostals as in particular having higher incidences of depression than RC Italians or Irish, but provides no particular religious relevance to this (and in the case of Jews, in particular of Eastern European descent, genetic propensities are given as a possible factor, not religious ones.www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/21606544.2020.1796820This link is an abstract of a study, and can't be counted as a 'proof' of anything. Unless you can quote the full paper, delete it.files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1005832.pdfThis is a paper on a study of Catholic and Protestant parochial schools as per their impacts on academic achievement: A meta-analysis was undertaken, including 41 studies to determine the infl uence
of Catholic and Protestant schools. The analysis examined studies undertaken
at both the elementary and secondary school level. The results indicate that both
Catholic and Protestant school students do better than their counterparts in
public schools. In addition, Protestant school students excelled more than their
Catholic counterparts on most standardized tests, but Catholic school students
did better than their Protestant school counterparts on non-standardized measures. The signifi cance of these results is discussed. There is only tangential connection to the broader surmise that Christianity is some manner of essential component to a 'healthy society' to be found in it.www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0191886900002336Again, this article relates to 'religiosity', not Christianity specifically. It could as well be speaking of the psychological benefits a Hare Krishna would find in their belief system as it could a Christian churchgoer.pages.ucsd.edu/~memccullough/Papers/McCullough_Carter_Relig_Self_Control_APAHANDBOOK.pdfAlthough a couple of discrete mentions of Christianity are made in this, one again, this is a posit of supposed psychological and social goods resulting from religious practice, not Christianity exclusively. scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3055&context=facpubOnce again, a study on the connections, supposedly positive, between religious belief, practice and possible beneficial effects on management of depression and stressful life events. Not really saying anything more than the first link you quoted.core.ac.uk/download/pdf/232828597.pdfAbstract: Contemporary research on adolescent involvement in religion and delinquency is generally traced to
Hirschi and Stark’s 1969 study, titled ‘‘Hellfire and Delinquency.’’ Their study surprised many by
reporting no significant relationship between religious involvement and delinquency. Subsequent
replications provided mixed results, but multiple reviews, both traditional and systematic, found
religious involvement to be inversely related to delinquency. However, meta-analysis of the relationship remains scant with only three studies published to date. To address this research need, we
conducted a meta-analysis of 62 relevant studies over four decades, which provided 145 effect sizes
from 193,656 adolescents. We examined six bivariate correlations between two, attitudinal and
behavioral, measures of religious involvement (religiosity and church attendance) and three indicators of delinquent behavior (alcohol use, illicit drug use, and nondrug delinquency). Our metaanalysis results indicated an inverse relationship among all correlations (range: .16 to .22).
Stated differently, the results of this meta-analysis confirmed that religious involvement is negatively
related to delinquent behaviors, regardless of measurement characteristics. The implications of this
finding for future research on religion and delinquency are discussed. Read some of the following paper, but frankly, the abstract on this one seems to be saying the exact opposite of what you mean it to say. The little confirmation of positive effect of religiosity on the above appears to be scant and questionable.pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26110867/A study of the 'influence of religion on completed suicide' throughout the world. Once again, is not specifically citing only Christianity, and once again, relatively tenuous to the point I assume you're attempting to make.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jssr.12063Another abstract-only; full text hidden behind a paywall. Not counted as relevant here. Full articles only, please and thanks.www.researchgate.net/profile/Brandy-Maynard/publication/260035173_Buffering_Effects_of_Religiosity_on_Crime_Testing_the_Invariance_Hypothesis_Across_Gender_and_Developmental_Period/links/0c96052f25631946e9000000/Buffering-Effects-of-Religiosity-on-Crime-Testing-the-Invariance-Hypothesis-Across-Gender-and-Developmental-Period.pdf?origin=publication_detailAppears at first glance to be saying 'more religion, less crime'. Fuller examination of the article suggests something rather less simple. Gives no conclusive evidence that religion alone reduces tendencies to criminal attitudes or behavior.www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4618080/Would seem to be parroting the popular notion, in 'scientific' language, that religious belief (again, there is no specific mention of Christian religious belief) is beneficial in certain health crisis issues, such as cancer. Closer reading does not necessarily support this however; and I could hand over a comparable list of studies that suggest overt religious belief can have a negative impact on the patients overall health and well-being.www2.psych.ubc.ca/~ara/Manuscripts/ReligiousPrimingMetaanalysis.pdfA study of the effect of religion on prosociality. This one could be debated forever, with no conclusive evidence one way or another.
Fair reading list for what it is, but it in no way supports your basic thesis that science would not be where it is today without Christianity, nor does it offer up any overwhelming body of evidence that specifically Christianity is an essential factor to a so-called 'better society'.
|
|
|
Post by paulslaugh on Mar 14, 2023 21:01:40 GMT
Of course. The science that Christianity helped give rise to. And the Christians got from that from the pagan Greeks via the Muslims and Jews who had preserved as much classical documents as possible. The Western Church did fall into a long dark ages of superstition and zealotry, where intellectualism was suppressed. The number Zero was considered slightly heretical until the high Middle Ages.
|
|
|
Post by general313 on Mar 14, 2023 21:06:14 GMT
Organized Christian churches are responsible for the survival of Christianity. Without the churches, Christianity would die out in a few generations.
|
|
djorno
Sophomore
@djorno
Posts: 322
Likes: 81
|
Post by djorno on Mar 14, 2023 21:18:50 GMT
Historians of science say we should be thankful to Christianity for the development of science because Christian doctrines and ideas were crucial for the development of science. Neither Noah J. Efron nor John Heilbron are Christians. Without Christianity science would not be what it is today. Sure. Here are some examples: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3426191/ This article does not posit Christianity per se as conducive to overall mental health; it primarily relates to 'religion' and 'spirituality' and does not give direct linkage of Christian belief as a keystone of mental health. It cites a claim of Jews and Pentecostals as in particular having higher incidences of depression than RC Italians or Irish, but provides no particular religious relevance to this (and in the case of Jews, in particular of Eastern European descent, genetic propensities are given as a possible factor, not religious ones.www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/21606544.2020.1796820This link is an abstract of a study, and can't be counted as a 'proof' of anything. Unless you can quote the full paper, delete it.files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1005832.pdfThis is a paper on a study of Catholic and Protestant parochial schools as per their impacts on academic achievement: A meta-analysis was undertaken, including 41 studies to determine the infl uence
of Catholic and Protestant schools. The analysis examined studies undertaken
at both the elementary and secondary school level. The results indicate that both
Catholic and Protestant school students do better than their counterparts in
public schools. In addition, Protestant school students excelled more than their
Catholic counterparts on most standardized tests, but Catholic school students
did better than their Protestant school counterparts on non-standardized measures. The signifi cance of these results is discussed. There is only tangential connection to the broader surmise that Christianity is some manner of essential component to a 'healthy society' to be found in it.www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0191886900002336Again, this article relates to 'religiosity', not Christianity specifically. It could as well be speaking of the psychological benefits a Hare Krishna would find in their belief system as it could a Christian churchgoer.pages.ucsd.edu/~memccullough/Papers/McCullough_Carter_Relig_Self_Control_APAHANDBOOK.pdfAlthough a couple of discrete mentions of Christianity are made in this, one again, this is a posit of supposed psychological and social goods resulting from religious practice, not Christianity exclusively. scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3055&context=facpubOnce again, a study on the connections, supposedly positive, between religious belief, practice and possible beneficial effects on management of depression and stressful life events. Not really saying anything more than the first link you quoted.core.ac.uk/download/pdf/232828597.pdfAbstract: Contemporary research on adolescent involvement in religion and delinquency is generally traced to
Hirschi and Stark’s 1969 study, titled ‘‘Hellfire and Delinquency.’’ Their study surprised many by
reporting no significant relationship between religious involvement and delinquency. Subsequent
replications provided mixed results, but multiple reviews, both traditional and systematic, found
religious involvement to be inversely related to delinquency. However, meta-analysis of the relationship remains scant with only three studies published to date. To address this research need, we
conducted a meta-analysis of 62 relevant studies over four decades, which provided 145 effect sizes
from 193,656 adolescents. We examined six bivariate correlations between two, attitudinal and
behavioral, measures of religious involvement (religiosity and church attendance) and three indicators of delinquent behavior (alcohol use, illicit drug use, and nondrug delinquency). Our metaanalysis results indicated an inverse relationship among all correlations (range: .16 to .22).
Stated differently, the results of this meta-analysis confirmed that religious involvement is negatively
related to delinquent behaviors, regardless of measurement characteristics. The implications of this
finding for future research on religion and delinquency are discussed. Read some of the following paper, but frankly, the abstract on this one seems to be saying the exact opposite of what you mean it to say. The little confirmation of positive effect of religiosity on the above appears to be scant and questionable.pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26110867/A study of the 'influence of religion on completed suicide' throughout the world. Once again, is not specifically citing only Christianity, and once again, relatively tenuous to the point I assume you're attempting to make.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jssr.12063Another abstract-only; full text hidden behind a paywall. Not counted as relevant here. Full articles only, please and thanks.www.researchgate.net/profile/Brandy-Maynard/publication/260035173_Buffering_Effects_of_Religiosity_on_Crime_Testing_the_Invariance_Hypothesis_Across_Gender_and_Developmental_Period/links/0c96052f25631946e9000000/Buffering-Effects-of-Religiosity-on-Crime-Testing-the-Invariance-Hypothesis-Across-Gender-and-Developmental-Period.pdf?origin=publication_detailAppears at first glance to be saying 'more religion, less crime'. Fuller examination of the article suggests something rather less simple. Gives no conclusive evidence that religion alone reduces tendencies to criminal attitudes or behavior.www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4618080/Would seem to be parroting the popular notion, in 'scientific' language, that religious belief (again, there is no specific mention of Christian religious belief) is beneficial in certain health crisis issues, such as cancer. Closer reading does not necessarily support this however; and I could hand over a comparable list of studies that suggest overt religious belief can have a negative impact on the patients overall health and well-being.www2.psych.ubc.ca/~ara/Manuscripts/ReligiousPrimingMetaanalysis.pdfA study of the effect of religion on prosociality. This one could be debated forever, with no conclusive evidence one way or another.
Fair reading list for what it is, but it in no way supports your basic thesis that science would not be where it is today without Christianity, nor does it offer up any overwhelming body of evidence that specifically Christianity is an essential factor to a so-called 'better society'. Those studies are based on the western population where the overwhelming majority of the religious & spiritual are Christians. A number of the links are only able to be viewed fully by pay per view, but you may be able to find copies of the full studies somewhere online if you look hard enough. Regardless the links show an abundance of positive religious benefits for society.
|
|
|
Post by paulslaugh on Mar 14, 2023 21:23:08 GMT
There are sectarian traditions within Catholicism: there are seven non-Latin, non-Roman ecclesial traditions: Armenian, Byzantine, Coptic, Ethiopian, East Syriac (Chaldean), West Syriac, and Maronite. Each to the Churches with these non-Latin traditions is as Catholic as the Roman Catholic Church. The very name 'catholic' taken from the adjective meaning "a wide variety of things; all-embracing" reflects this. If you are insisting the Roman Catholic tradition is the only 'true' one, you are involved in a version of No True Scotsman right off the bat. Trying to lay schisms wholly at the feet of the Protestant tradition is an error, but one RC'ers are quite prone to. As for those secular, non-God affiliated movements: Those good teachings that they may have taught would have originally come from religious teachings, such as Christianity, etc.
Wrong again, as any student of philosophy could easily point out. Those sectarian traditions are based on place of origin. Not Biblical interpretation. They still follow the same tenants of the Church. Catholicism & Orthodoxy split in the 10'Th Century. However, their core tenants are pretty much the same. Most of the structure of Christianity is not based in Judaism, but adheres closely to pagan traditions. Sharing bread and wine was a common practice to honor the gods, and the Greco-Roman world had shockingly high number of gods to appease and ask for intercession so they will continue to bless Rome and make it successful. Getting the number of deities down to three guys and their mother was an attraction alone for the new religion.
|
|
|
Post by paulslaugh on Mar 14, 2023 21:32:19 GMT
Organized Christian churches are responsible for the survival of Christianity. Without the churches, Christianity would die out in a few generations. Paul of Tarsus did a tremendous amount of the early work almost on his own. We have a few hours of his thoughts down on paper but he worked his mission for over 30 years, so undoubtedly he said a lot more to his followers. Going by his writing, he was dynamic speaker. The James’ Jerusalem church didn’t want to include gentiles unless they converted fully to Judaism. Paul saw the potential in the religious marketplace.
|
|
|
Post by general313 on Mar 14, 2023 21:40:58 GMT
Organized Christian churches are responsible for the survival of Christianity. Without the churches, Christianity would die out in a few generations. Paul of Tarsus did a tremendous amount of the early work almost on his own. We have a few hours of his thoughts down on paper but he worked his mission for over 30 years, so undoubtedly he said a lot more to his followers. Going by his writing, he was dynamic speaker. The James’ Jerusalem church didn’t want to include gentiles unless they converted fully to Judaism. Paul saw the potential in the religious marketplace. I'm sure you've studied this way more than I have. Would it be reasonable to give Paul of Tarsus pretty much all the credit for conceiving Christianity as a world religion, open to everyone? Before him, it seems to be one of several competing Jewish sects.
|
|