Religions are so many and so diverse that a single word like 'religion' does not mean anything. Freemason is 'religion', Christianity is a 'religion', devil worshiping is 'religion' etc. What do these groups have in common so that we put the same label on them? Nothing! So we should stop talking of 'religion' and rather say the exact group you are attacking.
People who use the word 'religion' are the lazy guys who want to read labels on containers saying 'this is salt', 'this is sugar', 'this is oil' etc, but never want to open the can to check the exact contents. They want an easy, 'one-size-fit-all' diagnosis of human problems. So they have identified one umbrella termed 'religion'. But they are deceiving themselves. Saying 'religion' is like saying 'an animal'. You haven't sayed anything. There is no such a single entity an 'an animal'. It is more meaningfull to say 'cobra', 'tortoise', 'domestic cat', 'leopard', 'giraffe' etc. So when you telk someone, beware, there is a cobra on the way, he understands what you are talking of. Then we generalize afterwards, if we even need such a generalization.
Remember that generalization is a human, lazy shortcut. He can't list all the dangerous groups, so he shoehorn a bulk of them into a single basket and give it a single name. That was the use of generalization. But its abuse is never ending! It is abused to bring about confusion and smear. Rather than examining individual concepts, claims, ideas or people, we just concentrate on seeing their 'earmarks' and then conclud that we have known everything there is to know about them. Guess what? It is 'religion', it is 'politics', it is 'fear'. It is 'ego', he is a 'starseed' etc!
Roaring Lovely > Roaring LovelyFebruary 26, 2021 at 5:15am
I for one never need to figure out a group where an idea, belief etc belong to as a guide to judgement. I don't first categorize, then judge. This is dangerous and misleading. When we think this way, we can easily be manipulated by a few people. Rather that making a judgment, we are shoehorning it to fit what we read in a book, an article, a channelled message etc. Since no channeler writter etc can make a whole list, he sells ideas in bulk. But We can debunk groups, behaviours etc without even saying, for instance, 'this is a religion'. If a group is murderous, it is murderous. Whatever 'group' they belong is irrelevant.
Beware of religious extremists..who force their religions on to others ...they actually do more evil and hide as religious extremists..they pretend to be good outer appearance but inside they are evil ..crooks .. liars..and corrupt
"Yes Both dictators had the same nickname except for Napolean it was more affectionate because he would stay close to his men on the battlefield. Hitler was a runner during WW 1, as you know underground comm lines were blown up and soldiers had to…"
"As for the little corporal Adolf, I believe that Napoleon was also described as such, by his men..."Le Petit Caporal" and especially after the Battle of Lodi, 1796..."
"Queen Catherine de' Medici did offer and provide Michel with her personal protection, being her court astrologer, in effect, yet the risk was still there and why he used codes, in his works...So that's incorrect...and court politics can change a…"
"Nostradamus was not afraid to be taken to an inquisitrion investigation, Catherine de' Medici, the Queen of France (wife of King Henry II), was the royal supporter who protected and admired Nostradamus. She summoned him to Paris in 1555–1556 to draw…"
"Don't ya just love it, when supposed mythology, becomes proven fact....🇮🇳Rama Setu & Dwarka........Yes, they're all real and sometimes assumed fiction, can become discovered fact........The Indian people knew it, in spite of their government…"
"Only a scurrilous scallywag, such as Kier Starmer, would seek to appeal such a just and needed legal verdict, that supports the apt rights of Chagossians........I say, bravo to the ruling....Rule Britannia.....!!🇬🇧🫲🏿🇮🇴🫱🏿🇺🇸…"
"The latest news on the ongoing (light--dark) tug-of-war over Chagos, is great news and will make comrade Xi Jinping, cough on his chop suey flavoured cornflakes...This means the case for British retention of the territories, safeguarding ownership…"
Replies
People who use the word 'religion' are the lazy guys who want to read labels on containers saying 'this is salt', 'this is sugar', 'this is oil' etc, but never want to open the can to check the exact contents. They want an easy, 'one-size-fit-all' diagnosis of human problems. So they have identified one umbrella termed 'religion'. But they are deceiving themselves. Saying 'religion' is like saying 'an animal'. You haven't sayed anything. There is no such a single entity an 'an animal'. It is more meaningfull to say 'cobra', 'tortoise', 'domestic cat', 'leopard', 'giraffe' etc. So when you telk someone, beware, there is a cobra on the way, he understands what you are talking of. Then we generalize afterwards, if we even need such a generalization.
Remember that generalization is a human, lazy shortcut. He can't list all the dangerous groups, so he shoehorn a bulk of them into a single basket and give it a single name. That was the use of generalization. But its abuse is never ending! It is abused to bring about confusion and smear. Rather than examining individual concepts, claims, ideas or people, we just concentrate on seeing their 'earmarks' and then conclud that we have known everything there is to know about them. Guess what? It is 'religion', it is 'politics', it is 'fear'. It is 'ego', he is a 'starseed' etc!