Why Religions Fail

fschmidt wrote

The success of societies today varies greatly even though they all have access to the same science and technology.  

I agree. It's because it depends on genetics, a general genetic signature that people of the same kind carry (there were times when it was not forbidden to call them different human species).

fschmidt wrote

In the long term, the success of a society depends on its ability to enforce good morals.

It always takes a lot of energy and resources and never really works. Large populations are doomed by default. The question is not whether but when and how quickly will they collapse.

R.C. Christian wrote

fschmidt wrote

The success of societies today varies greatly even though they all have access to the same science and technology.  

I agree. It's because it depends on genetics, a general genetic signature that people of the same kind carry (there were times when it was not forbidden to call them different human species).

fschmidt wrote

In the long term, the success of a society depends on its ability to enforce good morals.

It always takes a lot of energy and resources and never really works. Large populations are doomed by default. The question is not whether but when and how quickly will they collapse.

Good morals cannot be enforced without the institution of marriage.

Christianity is the weakest link because it is now indistinguishable from liberalism, and liberalism in the 21st century only means sexual liberation from the rules of marriage and good parenting.  

Christianity is therefore kaput and cursed by God if He exists. Therefore it should be taken out with the trash and its stinking rotten corpse buried.

Islam is the obvious choice to replace it.

R.C. Christian wrote

all religions originating from Middle Eastern civilizations are necessarily dumbed down versions of a kind of ancient knowledge; religions are from the masses to the masses. To really get to the ancient knowledge, one has to dig deeper, before civilizations emerged, to times when there was no langue, no religions and no large, urbanized populations.

To get to the heart of any religion, read its official handbook ie scripture.

If you want a book of rules to base your civilisation on, why wouldn't you choose the Koran?

The Torah has 36 capital offences and even Jews don't want to live in a Torah theocracy.

Christendom has already been replaced by liberal democracy which makes Christianity kaput as well as cursed by God because of its idolatry of worshiping an executed blasphemer.  

The rising religion is Islam, the most advanced form of ethical monotheism.  

CONTENTS DELETED

umit wrote

So you get your ideas from this person?

No, I form my own ideas, and he happens to have the same opinion on civilization I do. What he writes sounds reasonable regarding how technology is a crutch to the degenerate, overpopulated man who can no longer hunt or create his own tools. Varg's words make sense, as opposed to the fairy tale sounding crap you just put together even in your above post about a so-called God you don't even appear to understand.

The reason Russia and China are on the rise is because they could keep the Middle Eastern influence at the gates.

umit wrote

I do not think you really understand...we are talking about the latest version of Gods literal word.

Oh I understand. You guys are like the blind men and an elephant, unable to grasp the bigger picture because of being enamored with your favorite mass manipulation scriptures aka religions and too proud and/or too shortsighted to admit that they are already degenerate failures.

R.C. Christian wrote

Oh I understand. You guys are like the blind men and an elephant, unable to grasp the bigger picture because of being enamored with your favorite mass manipulation scriptures aka religions and too proud and/or too shortsighted to admit that they are already degenerate failures.

You seem to be saying that your solution is better than any contained in revealed scripture. What is it, please?

What do you want a solution for? If you mean a solution against human degeneration,

1. Wait until God aka Nature sorts it out, which will happen, but probably not in our lifetime.

2. Large scale eugenics, which in practice means mass murder and is highly immoral, but apparently it wasn't a problem for some evil people who came up with the SARS and the vaccines. It's basically like the Holocaust or the Spanish Flu or World Wars on steroids.

3. Move to a reasonable place that is still not as degenerate as the West. Realistically, it's probably Russia these days.

R.C. Christian wrote

What do you want a solution for? If you mean a solution against human degeneration,

1. Wait until God aka Nature sorts it out, which will happen, but probably not in our lifetime.

2. Large scale eugenics, which in practice means mass murder and is highly immoral, but apparently it wasn't a problem for some evil people who came up with the SARS and the vaccines. It's basically like the Holocaust or the Spanish Flu or World Wars on steroids.

3. Move to a reasonable place that is still not as degenerate as the West. Realistically, it's probably Russia these days.

Another option is small scale eugenics like the Arkian idea.

umit wrote

going by "which societies are/were successful" is just not a good criterium because first of all, like I stated, there are enough examples of successful societies in the present time and in the past who are pretty successful in life, even though they have the wrong religion.
second of all, the word "successful" is too fuzzy...you should make that S M A R T (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic, Timed).

We could get into a long debate here, but I don't see much point.  The "examples of successful societies" just ignores the time lag.  It takes several generations before immorality causes decline.  And fuzziness doesn't bother me much because I have no problem saying "I don't know" when I lack sufficiently clear evidence.  I am interested in data where there are big differences, and I generally ignore small issues.

So I do not see different religions...I see only one religion, and the older versions of that one religion.

The religions are quite close in their message but there are small differences.  For example the Quran acknowledges that the Israelites were supposed to keep shabbat but Muslims don't have this requirement.  There are also small differences in writing style of each scripture, and I think this is intentional since the style of each scripture is optimized for its intended audience.

This topic I have discussed at length in my local mosque, and of course there is no resolution.  Muslims believe that the last scripture is meant for everyone, and I think God provided a variety of scriptures to address different kinds of people.  But neither position can be objectively proven.

I can tell you are not a married father.

The solution is obviously political activism to restore the patriarchy.

You're an atheist, aren't you?

Secular Koranism wrote

I can tell you are not a married father.

How can you tell?

Secular Koranism wrote

You're an atheist, aren't you?

How can you tell?

Because you are prepared to let everything crash and burn while you theorise.

Secular Koranism wrote

Because you are prepared to let everything crash and burn while you theorise.

What do you think is the practical option?

The practical option would be to say what the problem is: the failure of Christianity and what replaced it - liberalism.

This is why you say Islam should be the new moral system, don't you?

Andrew Tate has put his money where his mouth is.  

I am saying as a non-Muslim that the political solution to that of restoring social conservatism is a one-party theocracy whether it will happen within my lifetime or not.

Secular Koranism wrote

The practical option would be to say what the problem is: the failure of Christianity and what replaced it - liberalism.

This is why you say Islam should be the new moral system, don't you?

Andrew Tate has put his money where his mouth is.  

I am saying as a non-Muslim that the political solution to that of restoring social conservatism is a one-party theocracy whether it will happen within my lifetime or not.

Talk is easy but accomplishes nothing.  Politics is too hard to be practical.  So you are the one who lacks practical options.

I am a married father.  I took my kids to mosque so they could learn about Islam.  But that isn't enough.  Much more important and practical is that they are Arkian and I have told them that they must marry Arkians.  This ensures that they marry reasonably intelligent people with some knowledge of religion.  This is much more practical than politics, and has meaningful consequences unlike just talk.

Why do you say political activism is not a practical solution?

Secular Koranism wrote

Why do you say political activism is not a practical solution?

First, because the electorate is retarded.  Even when the quality of the American population peaked in the late 1700s, the electorate was restricted to men with property and without debt.  The average person has never been qualified to vote.  The result of universal suffrage is an alliance of the sociopathic elite and the moronic masses against competent men.

And second, because I am not charismatic, so even under ideal conditions I couldn't have much political impact.  Anything I do must be aimed at a tiny minority who is able to see the value of my ideas.