Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site ihnet.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!ihnp4!ihnet!eklhad
From: eklhad@ihnet.UUCP (K. A. Dahlke)
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: Evolving Religions
Message-ID: <240@ihnet.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 12-Jun-85 10:35:01 EDT
Article-I.D.: ihnet.240
Posted: Wed Jun 12 10:35:01 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 13-Jun-85 01:55:29 EDT
References: <238@ihnet.UUCP> <446@cmu-cs-k.ARPA> <99@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 22

> > Since the various theistic religions are shaped by natural forces,
> > I cannot believe any religion actually contains a true deity.
> > Such a deity, if it exists, has not objectively affected anyone,
> > not even the loyal followers of any religion.  Doctrines, policies, and
> > beliefs evolve and  become extinct, driven solely by natural forces.
> But so have all other systems of thought; if this discredits religions, it
> also discredits Marxism, the various humanisms, and all other atheistic
> religious systems.

Here I disagree.  Atheistic belief systems (e.g. humanism)
do not require a deity, or any divine intervention.
It is not a threat to acknowledge their natural evolutionary origins.
However, Christianity (for example) must, by its very doctrines,
be more than a natural, evolving belief system.
Yet, I claim it is not.
Therefore, humanism may have objective validity,
while Christianity, as it stands today, cannot.
Is there any theistic religion that cannot be explained by
natural evolutionary processes?  If so,  where do I sign up?
-- 
Is it time to go home yet?
Karl Dahlke    ihnp4!ihnet!eklhad