Wayne Hudson,"THE ENLIGHTENMENT CRITIQUE OF‘RELIGION’.

Thu, 07 Feb 2008 18:27:06 -0000

Highlights and Sticky Notes:

In the context of the early seventeenth century Hobbes can be read as a political Calvinist who unquestionably supported a

Christian

Commonwealth, provided it was regulated by the state.

Whereas Spinoza sought to limit harm done by religion, the English deists sought to show that revealed religion could not differ from natural religion and that there were no rational grounds for accepting mysterious doctrines or miraculous stories simply because it was claimed that were revealed.

he dominant pattern of thought in France, to which even those who disagreed with it tended to respond, alleged that natural religion taught every human being some conception of a Supreme Being and also the rudiments of morality, whereas Christianity, in the sense of a positive religion based on priestcraft, was contrary to reason, harmful to society, and discredited by the discoveries of historians, travellers and natural scientists.

For Hegel religion was the self-knowing and the self-relationship of spirit (Geist). It was not merely the relationship of the finite consciousness to the infinite, but the self-consciousness of absolute spirit mediated in and through finite consciousness: “The simple concept that we have established is the self-consciousness of the absolute spirit, its self-consciousness of being for itself as spirit”.[8]

eligion remains as a form of representation (Vorstellung), but philosophy makes possible a new level of comprehension of it.[9] And religion survives the transformation, in the sense that it remains within philosophy as something preserved at a higher level (aufhebt), not something left behind or cancelled. Hence Hegel wrote that ‘religion can exist without philosophy, but philosophy cannot exist without religion, for it includes religion in itself’ (Enz.,Vorrede zur zweiten Ausgabe, 12).

Religion for Feuerbach was the self-alienation of human consciousness, the projection of the human essence as other (Wartofsky 1977: 217).

that philosophy itself was not an uncontaminated source by which religion could be criticised.

Religion conceals from human beings the real tasks that confront them; it also reconciles human beings to the world in which they suffer and sanctions it. Even worse, religion robs human beings of their dignity and renders them sheep-like; it also perverts the natural relationships and proportions of human life by repressing and transposing into a heavenly mode important human dimensions such as sexuality.

Against Feuerbach, he insisted that there was no abstract ‘human essence’, that the human essence was only the ensemble of social relations, and that religious feeling was always a social product.[15]

he argued that the ‘essence’ of religion was not to be found in any ‘essence of man’ but in the material world which was already in existence

Of course, as is well known, Marx characterised religion as the opiate (not opium) of the people, the illusory happiness which consoles and comforts them in their suf

ferings.

e ‘heart of a heartless world’, ‘the sigh of a distressed creature’, a protest against misery, and, most important of all, ‘the spirit of a spiritless condition’.[18]

Marx’s critique of religion was weakened by his lack of clarity about how religion related to the world that produced it.

The religious reflex of the real world can only vanish, when the practical relations of everyday life offer to man none but perfectly intelligible, reasonable relations with regard to his fellow men and to Nature.[23]

Marx ‘s contribution was to shift the focus from the critique of religion itself to the critique of the world in which religion arises.

Marx’s shift implies that religion arises from objective rather than subjective causes, and not out of free but mistaken decisions of human beings. It also implies that the traditional kind of criticism of religion will prove ineffective as long as such conditions continue to exist, and that the true overcoming of religion results from transforming its secular basis, not from criticisms of religious ideas and institutions.

Marx's theory is that man's obsession with religion is based upon a social world that leaves man wanting. Thus, creating the need for some belief that there is meaning and satisfaction transcendent of his earthly confines.
posted by stech1

Marx’s claim that religion is epiphenomenal in so far as it is determined by the socio-economic structure in which it is found, does not exclude the possibility that the negative character of religion results from the negativity of contexts that condition it, and not from the practice of transcendent projection.

Nietzsche was a bitter critic of superstitious belief in other-worldly powers. He was certainly a bitter critic of religion in the sense of superstition and belief in other-worldly powers.

Similarly, for Nietzsche, humanity projected its impossibilities, and not its possibilities, into the God topos, and this topos then made humanity ashamed of its own finitude. Hence, for Nietzsche, religion was not, as it was for Feuerbach, a necessary form of alienation on the way to a future reconciliation. For Nietzsche there was no possibility that human alienation could ever be overcome.

Nietzsche can be read as producing a non-metaphysical this-worldly religious outlook which says yes to life and affirms the eternal joy of becoming[28]

Here the crucial implication is that getting rid of all enchantment would be a mistake, because raising the body to ‘spirit’ requires some form of disciplined practice, if not ‘religion’ of a traditional kind.

Tags: no_tag

Posted by: stech1

"Universalism: a historical survey" by Richard Bauckham

Sun, 09 Dec 2007 14:18:08 -0000

Highlights and Sticky Notes:

C. W. Emmet's essay, 'The Bible and Hell' (1917), is something of a landmark.

This is a significant step beyond traditional theology, which always asserted not only that final condemnation is a real possibility but also that some men will actually be lost. It is also a position which has probably had more appeal to conservative Christians (including Roman Catholic theologians) than dogmatic universalism; it allows us to hope for the salvation of all men without presuming to know something which God has not revealed.

There remains an irresolvable tension between the election of all men in Jesus Christ and the phenomenon of unbelief.

Tags: no_tag

Posted by: stech1

Liturgy spirituality worship

Sun, 02 Dec 2007 15:17:07 -0000

Tags: no_tag

Posted by: stech1

Gospel Truth - New York Times

Sun, 02 Dec 2007 14:47:59 -0000

Comments:

Have we been mislead about the recently translated Gospel of Judas?
posted by stech1

Highlights and Sticky Notes:

While National Geographic’s translation supported the provocative interpretation of Judas as a hero, a more careful reading makes clear that Judas is not only no hero, he is a demon.

Jesus doesn’t want Judas to betray him out of ignorance. Jesus wants him informed, so that the demonic Judas can suffer all that he deserves.

These Gnostics equated Ialdabaoth with the Hebrew Yahweh, whom they saw as a jealous and wrathful deity and an opponent of the supreme God whom Jesus came to earth to reveal.

it may stem from an understandable desire to reform the relationship between Jews and Christians.

Tags: no_tag

Posted by: stech1

globeandmail.com: Panel debates The Golden Compass, religion, atheism

Sat, 01 Dec 2007 23:55:08 -0000

Tags: no_tag

Posted by: stech1

Zeitgeist - The Movie, 2007

Tue, 06 Nov 2007 07:58:49 -0000

Tags: no_tag

Posted by: pc1989

Howstuffworks "Has Science Explained Life After Death?"

Tue, 06 Nov 2007 07:49:21 -0000

Comments:

It's interesting but doesn't take my piece of cake. :P posted by pc1989

Tags: no_tag

Posted by: pc1989

The Truth's feed | Diigo Group

Wayne Hudson,"THE ENLIGHTENMENT CRITIQUE OF‘RELIGION’.

"Universalism: a historical survey" by Richard Bauckham

Liturgy spirituality worship

Gospel Truth - New York Times

globeandmail.com: Panel debates The Golden Compass, religion, atheism

Zeitgeist - The Movie, 2007

Howstuffworks "Has Science Explained Life After Death?"