Social programming + the collapse of religion and values.

daskakik

frazzle
See? Two sides of the same coin.

No, it isn't.

I guess people are just getting tired of the "science is a religion" fallacy. Even when explained why they are not the same people keep throwing it out there.

When did I say science is a religion? I said its theory and mostly it is. Once a scientific theory can be replicated it becomes accepted fact.

The brain is a good example, much of what is believed about brain function can't be replicated and even experts acknowledge that they can't prove much of what they believe, especially on how brain functions impact behavior and/or bodily functions. They're still working on "a gay gene", no proof, just theories, pro and con.

Most religionists acknowledge that their beliefs can never be more than theories. It would be pretty hard to replicate God or any of the rest of it.

reply to post by frazzle


You seem to have a hard time remembering what you post. In one instance you posted:

It doesn't matter what you call yourself if you are that in name only.

Then later try to say that what that means is that people believe in things that have been altered. No, that is not what that sentence says.

And in this case you wrote (emphasis mine):

And most parents have no clue what their children are learning at school about science and biology, which is just a different kind of religion ~ based on scientific THEORY.

and are now trying to say you didn't say that.

daskakik
reply to post by frazzle

 

And in this case you wrote (emphasis mine):

And most parents have no clue what their children are learning at school about science and biology, which is just a different kind of religion ~ based on scientific THEORY.

and are now trying to say you didn't say that.

Busted.

Who needs to be telepathic? I didn't say they weren't believers ~ at least in something that they believe to be the truth. If the words are altered, they believe in alterations. Its really not that much different for one to know that just because school history books teach students Columbus discovered America doesn't make it true. But somebody wrote it and people believe it.

You just contradicted yourself. You said they don't believe then you said they did.

Even if that 75% believed in what they read in the Scofield bible they would still be Christians. Unless you want to present some standard universal criteria to measure a 'true Christian' by. Something that would work for all Christian denominations?

A simple search of the web shows that the Scofield bible is the most widely used version in the world and has been for many years.

I asked for a source not a snide remark.

Using a keyword search of "most used bible version" the top 3 results said it was NIV as I said. They didn't mention Scofield. Can you at least give me your keyword phrase.

The reason you haven't noticed it is that they didn't bring your attention to it

Or….they don't use it… how is that not an equal possibility?

But Scofield's version began altering the KJV

You understand the KJV made alterations, yes?

But you, yourself, called it the NEW version.

There are many modern translations. The one I mentioned is one of them and is called New International Version (NIV)

What would have been wrong with reprinting the OLD version, unless they wanted to change perceptions?

You're right part of new translations contain alterations to change perceptions. *That's an example for the OP of manipulation of people*

Now when you say OLD version you apparently mean to say KJV. That's counter to your concern. There are older English translations. Better then that the Latin Vulgate. Better then that learn the biblical languages.

As to your linked Muslim texts, that is very interesting. Bookmarked. Thank you.

You're welcome. I think you misread. I've been asking you for a legitimate source for translations for the Quran since you've been attacking me for the ones I have so far used...

reply to post by frazzle

Dust begets dust. Hatred and violence beget hatred and violence.

Hogwash. Apparently you agree with the OP premise then. Monkey see, monkey do.

I've been an avid fan of the horror genre since I was a preteen! I'm a completely non-violent person.

Also been known to play a video game or two and haven't struggled separating reality from fiction there either. Save for that time I took a bunch of mushrooms and started stomping on turtles and throwing shells at passing cars.

Not many movies out there spreading happiness, maybe some laughter at the cartoons, though.

Ridiculous. You're just pulling info out of nowhere to make some silly point.

Things like wars and depressions bringing a liberal attitude is a major factor in shifts in societies tolerance and attitudes to new ideas and concepts. The rock and roll of the 50's was a major factor in the lifestyles of the youthful which brought more liberal attitudes of the 60's and it's love and peace ethics of anti war in response to Vietnam and the politics de jour. Questioning authority became more acceptable. Add to that the effects of certain drugs of the era bringing a more laissez faire attitude to many and the scene became ripe for new ideas, tolerance and an evolved society.

reply to post by frazzle

When did I say science is a religion? I said its theory and mostly it is. Once a scientific theory can be replicated it becomes accepted fact.

You are using "that's just a theory", and that's not what theory means in science.

"A scientific theory summarizes a hypothesis or group of hypotheses that have been supported with repeated testing. If enough evidence accumulates to support a hypothesis, it moves to the next step—known as a theory—in the scientific method and becomes accepted as a valid explanation of a phenomenon."
What is a scientific theory?

They're still working on "a gay gene", no proof, just theories, pro and con.

Hypothesis? So discovery isn't important to science? Still working on is what science is all about. Discovery.

Most religionists acknowledge that their beliefs can never be more than theories.

Hasn't been my experience. I rarely hear "god might exist but i'm not sure'. I do hear 'god exists and this is his word' all the time however.

It would be pretty hard to replicate God or any of the rest of it.

Not hard. Impossible. These hypothetical things are supernatural, they exist outside of nature. Therefore unknowable. They cannot be approached in any scientific manner. For that same reason, the religious belief is entirely faith based.

Lucid Lunacy

Who needs to be telepathic? I didn't say they weren't believers ~ at least in something that they believe to be the truth. If the words are altered, they believe in alterations. Its really not that much different for one to know that just because school history books teach students Columbus discovered America doesn't make it true. But somebody wrote it and people believe it.

You just contradicted yourself. You said they don't believe then you said they did.

Even if that 75% believed in what they read in the Scofield bible they would still be Christians. Unless you want to present some standard universal criteria to measure a 'true Christian' by. Something that would work for all Christian denominations?

A simple search of the web shows that the Scofield bible is the most widely used version in the world and has been for many years.

I asked for a source not a snide remark.

I don't need to present anything. By their fruits shall ye know them.

But here you go, a little extracurricular reading to whet your appetite:

en.wikipedia.org...
www.sweetliberty.org...
www.chick.com...
gospelbiblepaths.50webs.com...
www.inplainsite.org...

This is all way off topic anyway. My whole point on this issue is how people's perceptions can be changed, for better or worse, and as the OP says, media is a powerful method of doing that. I added somewhere along the line that education and curriculum is another. But I think the most effective way to alter a "target group's" perceptions is to get on the inside and water them down a little at a time. I believe that's exactly what has happened to the churches. Doesn't mean a hill of beans to me if you believe otherwise.

reply to post by frazzle

Doesn't mean a hill of beans to me if you believe otherwise.

What specifically are you referring to? We had been discussing a few different things. Yes so far I don't believe. Partly because you have avoided questions I had.

For instance. I asked for a source on your claim the majority of Christians used that Scofield Bible. I scoured all 5 of your links and didn't find anything to back that claim. I asked how you would know what all those Christians really believed internally. You didn't reply. You've avoided multiple things. So you're partly to blame for anything I haven't believed in. I need to fully understand what you're positing first. Since your position is that I need to research all your claims myself, I suppose we won't make headway.

Do I believe the media contributes to the shaping of beliefs? I have agreed to that multiple times in prior posts. That's a football fields length distance from Skorpion's conviction.

Lucid Lunacy....
You're suggesting horror films cause people to act out the horror films.

Thats not what I'm suggesting at all. A cultures glorification murder in their music and movies speaks volumes of its character as a society... And no, I'm not talking about vampire/zombie flicks. Its a reflection of whats real. Godlessness and a lack of spirituality can only lead to degeneracy.

sk0rpi0n

Lucid Lunacy....
You're suggesting horror films cause people to act out the horror films.

Thats not what I'm suggesting at all. A cultures glorification murder in their music and movies speaks volumes of its character as a society... And no, I'm not talking about vampire/zombie flicks. Its a reflection of whats real. Godlessness and a lack of spirituality can only lead to degeneracy.

Here is a very fundamental question which goes around in my head ever since this thread into existence:

What interest do you AS A MUSLIM have in bringing up this subject?

If you're a Muslim I can assume that you assume that Christian's belief is "the wrong one" anyway, unless you were to admit that the Christian god is the same as Allah.

If you were to reject the Christian religion is "not the right one" anyway I don't understand your alleged push here in this thread where you criticize the WESTERN culture as "godless" or "has lost their moral values".

For me this would be as absurd as going on an Islam forum and criticizing that a number of Muslims are not that fundamental anymore, eg. women in Islam becoming more westernized, people in Islamic countries watching western movies etc...and saying that I fear that moral in Islamic countries for that reason is at a low.

So..even if more people in the US would adhere to what you consider "very religious"...would you still criticize the Western culture/society as "godless" and point out (multiple times) how (in your opinion) degenerate our society is...UNLESS of course you would accept the Western/Christian belief as equal to that of Islam.

Or maybe your agenda it a total different one, you just made a thread to debate and point out across multiple pages how "godless" and "degenerate" our society is...while you're in reality not even in the slightest interested how many US Americans are actually firm, fundamentals Christians..since it wouldn't change the fact for you that we're "degenerate"...as opposed to Muslim countries?

sk0rpi0n
Godlessness and a lack of spirituality can only lead to degeneracy.

And your proof of this must be that "a few decades ago" there was no murder.

And, for the record, satanists are theists.

@ NoRulesAllowed... anyway I don't understand your alleged push here in this thread where you criticize the WESTERN culture as "godless" or "has lost their moral values".

For me this would be as absurd as going on an Islam forum and criticizing that a number of Muslims are not that fundamental anymore, eg. women in Islam becoming more westernized, people in Islamic countries watching western movies etc...and saying that I fear that moral in Islamic countries for that reason is at a low.

This threads purpose wasn't a finger pointing exercise, rather it was to discuss how powers working behind the scenes can subvert entire cultures and modify them. America happened to be the example I chose. Or were you trying to tell me ''what happens in America is none of your business''? If so, you're right. But then again, are you also willing to agree that American ATSers should not be commenting on whats happening in other countries?

So..even if more people in the US would adhere to what you consider "very religious"...would you still criticize the Western culture/society as "godless" and point out (multiple times) how (in your opinion) degenerate our society is...UNLESS of course you would accept the Western/Christian belief as equal to that of Islam.

nothing prevents a muslim from recognizing moral behavior in christian societies. I have stated this before. We may differ theologically, but thats an entirely different matter. I have never hesitated to argue biblical theology with christians on this site.

Or maybe your agenda it a total different one,you just made a thread to debate and point out across multiple pages how "godless" and "degenerate" our society is...while you're in reality not even in the slightest interested how many US Americans are actually firm, fundamentals Christians..since it wouldn't change the fact for you that we're "degenerate"...as opposed to Muslim countries?

like I said, this thread wasn't a finger pointing exercise. It focussed on something else - mysterious forces that have succesfully altered the norms of an ENTIRE country.

Lucid Lunacy
reply to post by frazzle

 

Doesn't mean a hill of beans to me if you believe otherwise.

What specifically are you referring to? We had been discussing a few different things. Yes so far I don't believe. Partly because you have avoided questions I had.

For instance. I asked for a source on your claim the majority of Christians used that Scofield Bible. I scoured all 5 of your links and didn't find anything to back that claim. I asked how you would know what all those Christians really believed internally. You didn't reply. You've avoided multiple things. So you're partly to blame for anything I haven't believed in. I need to fully understand what you're positing first. Since your position is that I need to research all your claims myself, I suppose we won't make headway.

Do I believe the media contributes to the shaping of beliefs? I have agreed to that multiple times in prior posts. That's a football fields length distance from Skorpion's conviction.

If I hadn't been specifically referring to the sentences that immediately proceeded the one you're questioning I would have put that sentence in its own paragraph. Media, education and religion have worked in tandem to morph the morals and values of this country until there aren't any left.

You got the links you demanded and you're still complaining.

BTW, I read your 35 quotes from the founders. No surprises there.
www.addictinginfo.org...

The thing that kept running through my mind the whole time I was reading was wondering how they'd respond to the suggestion of legalizing gay marriage, they never put forth anything remotely resembling marriage contract law, it was accepted by ALL as a function of the churches and suggesting they stick their noses in that would have gotten them tarred and feathered. Do you even know where the founders got married? Probably not.

You also won't find any quotes from the founders on government's role in child rearing. I wonder how they'd have responded to the idea of sex education for elementary school students. I even wonder what they'd think of Pelosi and McCain and the rest of them. We sure do know what McCain and Pelosi think of the founders.

And then there is the fact that a few quotes are nothing if you don't know the speaker's/writer's backgrounds and biographies. As you said (oops, not you, someone else) once before, what a politician says depends on who he/she's talking to and that hasn't changed throughout the history of American politicians. That's the bedrock of political "principles": say what they want to hear, its good for voting "season" (like hunting season).

reply to post by babybunnies

Moral decadence comes not from a lack of religion, but from an ease of access to consumer goods and easy access to temptation in many areas. The people of the USA use about 25% of the world's resources to support their lifestyle.

THAT is what has caused moral decay.

Good job. That's an issue that hasn't be talked about enough on this thread, but which came first, the chicken or the egg? Is it easy access to toys, or is it the sense that owning more toys will fill that empty space in our hearts? Does having money and toys provide more happiness than the love of decency and freedom? If so, we're dead ducks.

The morals of money-lending*

World Guide. During the prophet Muhammad's lifetime, criticism of usury became established. This stance was reinforced by his teachings in the Qur'an, around 600 AD. The original term for usury was riba, which literally means 'excess or addition' and referred just to interest on loans

The practice of usury -lending money and accumulating interest on the loan- can be traced back 4,000 years. But it has always been despised, condemned, restricted or banned by moral, ethical, legal or religious entities.

www.henciclopedia.org.uy...

Muslims don't hate us for our freedoms, the central bankers hate Muslims for their freedom from indebtedness.

ETA: actually central bankers hate anyone who is free of debt. They merely have contempt for those who allow themselves to be buried by it.

reply to post by frazzle

You got the links you demanded and you're still complaining.

Sigh.

Let me break it down.

You claimed the majority of Christians used the Scofield Bible. I asked for a source. You told me to look it up. I basically asked again. You gave me 5 links. I searched all 5 links and there was nothing to back up your claim. Understand now? Apparently evidence doesn't matter to you.

Media, education and religion have worked in tandem to morph the morals and values of this country until there aren't any left.

I live in this country and I see people with good morals and values all the time. Perhaps you should move to a different town if you think the country is void of them.

Other than that, I agree they all work in tandem. Society and all its constituents both contribute and receive influence. It's a dynamic system of social interactions.

The thing that kept running through my mind the whole time I was reading was wondering how they'd respond to the suggestion of legalizing gay marriage

Back then or now? They probably would have rejected it. They would have probably rejected interracial marriage too. I imagine you support the later? They were of the times. If they were living now and heard the same arguments… I imagine they would see it as the Supreme Court is starting to.

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy


You are right. After looking harder I did find more sources that give figures ranging in the 8 - 15%.

Thought it would be smaller than that. Surprised I am.

Lucid Lunacy
reply to post by frazzle

 

You got the links you demanded and you're still complaining.

Sigh.

Let me break it down.

You claimed the majority of Christians used the Scofield Bible. I asked for a source. You told me to look it up. I basically asked again. You gave me 5 links. I searched all 5 links and there was nothing to back up your claim. Understand now? Apparently evidence doesn't matter to you.

Media, education and religion have worked in tandem to morph the morals and values of this country until there aren't any left.

I live in this country and I see people with good morals and values all the time. Perhaps you should move to a different town if you think the country is void of them.

Other than that, I agree they all work in tandem. Society and all its constituents both contribute and receive influence. It's a dynamic system of social interactions.

The thing that kept running through my mind the whole time I was reading was wondering how they'd respond to the suggestion of legalizing gay marriage

Back then or now? They probably would have rejected it. They would have probably rejected interracial marriage too. I imagine you support the later? They were of the times. If they were living now and heard the same arguments… I imagine they would see it as the Supreme Court is starting to.

edit on 20-2-2014 by Lucid Lunacy because: (no reason given)

Searched. You might have missed a few things and that's okay, I'm very tired of the whole ridiculous argument anyway and anyone who really wants to know what those links show can check them out for themselves.

In the meantime, the popularity of Scofield's version is not in question by those who "have a need to know" as is clear from one of the links you "searched" :

This edition of the Bible [Scofield Reference Bible], which has had unprecedented circulation, has popularized premillennial teachings and provided ready helps of interpretation. It has probably done more to extend premillennialism in the last half century than any other volume. www.sweetliberty.org...

And another:

In 1967, E. Schulyer English wrote that the sales of the Scofield Bible had topped three million copies. Now, the number hovers near the five million mark with all language editions. That testimony itself demonstrates the appeal, approval, and usefulness of the Scofield Bible. Though Study Bibles are being published now at an astounding rate, between five and fifteen new titles a year in the last decade, the new and the old Scofield Bibles show a consistency in demand. And many have not just one, but several Scofields, for as one wears out, another is purchased to take its place. And why is the Scofield loved? Because no other Bible provides the clarity and consistency of comments that help the reader to understand God's revelation to humans in the broadest sense, and how that revelation relates to every day Christian life. www.rayofhopechurch.com...

But not everyone considered Cyrus Scofield a upright man of 'God':

"Cyrus committed a series of St. Louis forgeries that could not be settled so easily, and the erratic young gentleman was compelled to linger in the St. Louis jail for a period of six months.

Among the many malicious acts that characterized his career, was one peculiarly atrocious, that has come under our personal notice. Shortly after he left Kansas, leaving his wife and two children dependent upon the bounty of his wife’s mother, he wrote his wife that he could invest some $1,300 of her mother’s money, all she had, in a manner that would return big interest.

After some correspondence he forwarded them a mortgage, signed and executed by one Chas. Best, purporting to convey valuable property in St. Louis. Upon this, the money was sent to him. Afterwards the mortgages were found to be base forgeries, no such person as Charles Best being in existence, and the property conveyed in the mortgage fictitious…”[vi]

Also from the Sweet Liberty site that you searched. Yeah, he was a pretty dynamic socializer and like I said once before, just the kind of guy you'd want tampering with your sacred texts.

Absolutely there are many millions of people with good morals and values, which only goes to prove the old adage that you can fool some of the people all of the time, you can fool all of the people some of the time but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time. I have known a lot of very good people who consider themselves staunch Christians simply because they believe in what they learned in Sunday school, summer bible camp and from their parents (which is the role parents are supposed to play ~ bringing up kids with good morals and values.) None of them have ever sat down and read the bible and the ones I've asked about the Scofield Bible have said "WHO" "What"?

The founding fathers would have had apoplexy equally over same sex or interracial marriage, more than a few of them were slave owners. But of course this is not to say they found interracial "relationships" entirely unacceptable. Even so, their wives were "good white Christian women."

It wasn't quite the same north of the border ~ well until the Americans drove the British up there bringing "new societal norms" with them which relegated mixed marriages to a thing of scorn. Children of those mixed marriages soon learned to hide their heritage if at all possible.

And with that, I will bid you adieu.

People have always complained about how the new generation are morally corrupt and have it too good etc.

i.e -

"We live in a decaying age. Young people no longer respect
their parents. They are rude and impatient. They frequently
inhabit taverns and have no self control."
- Inscription on a 6,000 year old Egyptian tomb

"What is happening to our young people? They disrespect their elders, they disobey their parents. They ignore the law. They riot in the streets inflamed with wild notions. Their morals are decaying. What is to become of them?"
Plato, 4th Century BC

"The young people of today think of nothing but themselves. They have no reverence for parents or old age. They are impatient of all restraint... As for the girls, they are forward, immodest and unladylike in speech, behavior and dress."
Attributed to Peter the Hermit, AD 1274