US ambassador killed over a film

[kandrathe]

As opposed to history, ethics and science, which are not meant to be contemplated, and do not inform philosophy and thought? I don't understand the distinction.

Well, you don't tend to re-read and meditate over your freshmen physics texts -- unless you are a freshman in physics -- and then it's not a matter of desire, but more one of practical hate. People don't tend to gather every Sunday in large groups to hear a credentialed local expert talk about Heisenberg's Uncertainty principle.

Judaism was a small-time provincial middle eastern religion with no role whatsoever in shaping the dominant civilizations of the day. What about Greece? Rome? Socrates? Cicero? These have a much stronger claim to be founding influences. Christianity is a later development, and far less useful than the enormous body of logic, ethics, law, science and literature bequeathed to the world by the Greeks and Romans.

The issue was that it was exclusive. You needed to be born into it.

What does it mean to teach your children something which is false? Is that brainwashing? If so, then yes. If not, then it depends on what you mean by brainwashing.

What makes morality false? It's appeal is not the antiquarian historical reinterpretation of Middle Eastern myths -- Genesis 1-11, which is what most every non-Christian gets hung up about. And, yet even in those stories there are lessons for us. Noah, and the Ark is an interesting story, but the details are not the focus. The lesson in the story is his faith and obedience even when his calling seemed ludicrous, and then even in the face of ridicule by those who don't understand. Also, important theologically is the explanation of God's covenant with humanity, which is re-asserted with Moses, and then rewritten by Christ. Perhaps it's based on some real life incident, but just like Paul Bunyan, its become embellished through centuries of oral re-telling before it was finally penned in ~250 BCE. It's value is not the accuracy of its science or history -- and the overwhelming bulk of Christians don't dwell on the details.

The best explanation for the inclusion of the Old Testament (Migra) in Christianity, is that it provides context and reference for the new inclusive Christian sect mostly established by Paul in Rome. I teach my children the positive things like forgiveness, universal love, "turning the other cheek", the power of faith, discipline, honesty, integrity, integration into society, submission to authority, to seek value in the people and things around you and then also to deal with humanities more negative and destructive aspects, such as arrogance, envy, avarice, apathy, carnality, violence, consumerism.

What are the similarities between the Christian Trinity and the gods of Hinduism?

We could go into great detail, but in the big picture the aspects encompass creator, preserver, and destroyer.

There is a strict formal similarity - many gods in one - but beyond that, they are vastly different, in meaning, ethic, aesthetic, tradition, purported influence, worship, and so on. If what you are looking for are things that let you tie them together, you will find them. But you can always make new categories, or break them.

Certainly, there are differences.

What I think we are observing is a human need for narrative, part of how we make sense of the world around us. We use metaphor, storytelling, myth, theory, evidence, logic, and all our other tools to gain understanding.

Partly, that is true. Religion often provides context for each persons existence, but moreover I think it provides comfort in the face of adversity. The more a person suffers, the more they need comfort, be it from society, or beyond. What all modern religions have in common is their message of compassion. When someone is entirely alone, then, they are still not alone. You may see that as placebo, but you cannot dispute the results. I see that there is a need. We are still greedy, murderous barbarians at heart. Anything that unites us toward a interconnected compassionate society is a good thing. I would offer as evidence the transformation of my own people of Scandinavia.

It's not that it doesn't work at all, it's that we can do much, much better.

... and, what has the other side produced in this regard? Secular humanism? How's that working?