Content why religion must end

Scholars must be aware of the fact its meaning is no longer inherently clear. For example, ancestor worship might not be a religion, per se, but it could be useful to examine it as such. The example of Scandinavia Professor Svenungsson points out that her own context, which is the Scandinavian countries, is a case in point.

Sweden, Denmark and Norway have all been characterised historically by clear religious majority cultures which have subsequently been secularised. While most Scandinavians are reluctant to conceive of themselves as religious, despite being of Lutheran extraction or even being a member of a national church, they often perceive Scandinavian Muslims and Christians of other ethnical background as religious, whether they are practicing religious people or not.

As a consequence, religion is increasingly functioning as an othering or even stigmatising category, notably within populist strands of the political debate.

Svenungsson uses a couple of examples of how this has shown itself within public debates about religion. One consequence of this is that many Scandinavians today are reluctant to recognise the extent to which Protestant norms still influence and organise their secular societies.

In conclusion, Svenungsson argues for the importance of rethinking the way we use religion as a category for making distinctions in social and political life.

How does the concept of religion relate to the rest of the world, especially the multi-religious secular societies such as China and India? Religion relates to the rest of the world in the sense that it is today an established concept which denotes certain practises and ideas. The return of religion or the end of religion? This is a collaborative production, supported by those featured to aid free of charge, global distribution.

Want to read more articles like this? Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that Christians believe that Jesus is going to come back, period? They don't necessarily believe that he's going to come back as an avenging person to kill people. One of the things that is overlooked by many Christians is that there is a wrathful Jesus in the New Testament. Jesus comes out and condemns whole towns to fates worse than Sodom and Gomorrah for not liking his preaching.

You can find Jesus in some very foul moods. Look at the theology of the "Left Behind" series of novels and all the religious extremists in our culture who describe a Jesus coming back with a sword and punishing those who haven't lived in his name.

Cherry-picking is a good thing and it's to be hoped that Muslims will eventually cherry-pick as well. But the Qur'an, virtually on every page, is a manifesto for religious intolerance. I invite readers of your website who haven't read the Qur'an to simply read the book. Take out a highlighter and highlight those lines that counsel the believer to despise infidels, and you will find a book that is just covered with highlighter.

Let's return to your idea that people must be convinced of the "danger and illegitimacy" of their core beliefs. How can they be convinced? It's a difficult problem because people are highly indisposed to having their core beliefs challenged. But we need to lift the taboos that currently prevent us from criticizing religious irrationality.

I'm not advocating that people challenge everyone's religious beliefs wherever they appear. In a crowded elevator, if someone mentions Jesus and you start barking at them, that's not really the front line of discourse. Whenever you're standing at a podium or publishing a book or article or an op-ed, that's when it's time to be really rigorous about the standards of evidence.

Interpersonally, we don't challenge everyone's crazy beliefs about medical therapies or alien abduction or astrology or anything else. Yet if the president of the U. This would be terrifying--to hear somebody with so much power basing any part of his decision-making process on something as disreputable as astrology.

Yet we don't have the same response when he's clearly basing some part of his deliberation on faith. Many people consider America to have been founded as a Christian nation. They think many of the Founding Fathers were specifically Christian and very religious, whereas many secularists argue they weren't. You've said the issue is a dead end. I just think that it's the wrong battle to fight. Even if the [Founding Fathers] were as religious or deranged by their religiosity as the Taliban, their beliefs now are illegitimate.

Secularists are on the right side of the debate and fundamentalists in our culture are distorting history. The Founding Fathers--many believed that slavery was a justifiable practice; we now agree that it's an abomination.

Because the PoR discipline is being disconfirmed at every juncture by science. How to effectively deal with faith-based claims. Did I say this was a quote fest of cogent thinking? The truth must be discovered in the process of studying the issues out. One truth is that faith has no merit. I always learn something new. Here is some sound advice.

An interesting chapter on the justification behind ridicule and mockery. The top 10 satires against religious faith. I enjoyed this chapter and it shows another side of Loftus. Provides useful appendices. Negatives: 1. It is a bit repetitive. Though he mentions a lot of books throughout the narrative I still prefer a formal bibliography. No visual material to supplement the excellent narrative. Charts, timelines, graphs to complement the written word.

In summary, albeit a narrow focus Loftus makes a convincing argument that philosophy of religion must end in all secular schools. He is one of my favorite authors and is a must read, I recommend it! By Jonathan M. Apr 28, Sotiris Makrygiannis rated it did not like it Shelves: audio-book , internet. No, I didn't finish this book, half done but I couldn't take the arguments that he is using. To repeat that if you have faith is like being a kid is not a very scientific argument.

A scientific argument will be to explain how the Quantum Entanglement occurs and what are those "spooky actions at distance" that we are investigating on Quantum level. OK, if you believe the man in the sky, is for kids but the forces are not well known and 1 of them could be what we call God. A Book By an Self-Proclaimed Expert who Is Not From confusing a guy with an EdD as an expert on epistemology to calling himself an expert in philosophy of religion with sketchy to be generous credentials, this book is massive puffery.

It asserts, it does not argue. It repeats itself. It has no understanding of how a modern university works. This is mirror Ken Ham for atheist true believers. Go to the chapter on Anselm and read the works referenced.

Count the scholarly works. You will not need l A Book By an Self-Proclaimed Expert who Is Not From confusing a guy with an EdD as an expert on epistemology to calling himself an expert in philosophy of religion with sketchy to be generous credentials, this book is massive puffery. You will not need long. Look for any competence in reading a complex thinker. Don't try handing a paper based on ideas in any given chapter in a secular undergraduate philosophy class or you will fail.

Pitiful more than anything else Aug 12, Tony Creech rated it it was amazing. Loftus does something hard and only achievable by those who honestly want to get to what is real - speak as straightforwardly and candidly as possible about philosophy. A lot of philosophers get caught in a web of obfuscation, either to inflate their ideas with language only a few can understand, or because they are so deep in the mine of expertise they only feel like speaking to other miners in the depths of an academic enclave and not doing the extremely hard work to be able to speak to outsid Loftus does something hard and only achievable by those who honestly want to get to what is real - speak as straightforwardly and candidly as possible about philosophy.

A lot of philosophers get caught in a web of obfuscation, either to inflate their ideas with language only a few can understand, or because they are so deep in the mine of expertise they only feel like speaking to other miners in the depths of an academic enclave and not doing the extremely hard work to be able to speak to outsiders.

The book is fresh air for thinking and fun for those of us who spent years in the Academy in Biblical or Theological Studies. I hope those who still think faith is somehow a virtue at least appreciate the clear punch in the nose.

Ignore the hilarious bad reviews that use ad hominem as reason they attack the authors credentials and not the reality of the work or arguments - like arguing against Steve Jobs character somehow makes the iPhone disappear and Apple not a great tech company. No, they are still there. Jul 13, Jim Knight rated it it was ok.

I read this book just because I like the way John W. Phyllis Tickle, author, "Emergence Christianity". Cord Jefferson, Gawker. Diana Bass, author, "Christianity After Religion". Please upgrade your browser. See next articles. The Opinion Pages. Is Atheism a Religion? Read More ».