Is religion good for social cohesion?

Question

We have all heard and seen the polarizing capability of Islam. But what about Christianity? is it any better wheb the 'good book' says:

You must kill those who worship another god. Exodus 22:20

Kill any friends or family that worship a god that is different than your own. Deuteronomy 13:6-10

Kill all the inhabitants of any city where you find people that worship differently than you. Deuteronomy 13:12-16

Kill everyone who has religious views that are different than your own. Deuteronomy 17:2-7

Kill anyone who refuses to listen to a priest. Deuteronomy 17:12-13

Kill any false prophets. Deuteronomy 18:20

Any city that doesn’t receive the followers of Jesus will be destroyed in a manner even more savage than that of Sodom and Gomorrah. Mark 6:11

Jude reminds us that God destroys those who don’t believe in him. Jude 5

More here:
http://uk.messages.news.yahoo.com/World/threadview?bn=UK-NEWS-WOR-Religion&tid=63082&mid=63082&tof=6&m=tm&rt=1

Answer 1

No, it's good for social tension.

Answer 2

First of all, the old testament verses are written TO ISRAEL. They were the people from whom the christ would come, and it was EXTREMELY important that they kept idolatry and evil out of the country. They had enough problems from outside sources without collapsing from within.

Jesus was talking to israel as well, and this is a prophecy of the future (endtimes) wars that will happen.

Jude clearly is referring to UNGODLY (evil) people who do very bad things in this life. Read the whole book of Jude, it's only one page.

Christians are NEVER called to kill anyone, at least until armageddon, at which point you won't be here, nor will I.

I know you are just baiting, which is fine, but if you're really interested in the answers to your questions, go to the link below.

Answer 3

I'm a folklore & mythology major, and a big part of this is anthropological study on things such as this. Basic answer: Sort of. It used to be a major factor in holding a tribe or small community together--the wise man/woman of the tribe was where people went for answers. When small settlements became cities, politicians were needed, and they saw that people still listened to religion--so they put forth their issues as edicts from God, and people listened. Was this good or bad? It was deceptive, but this is how empires were built and technology advanced, because everyone was pulling in the same direction.

Today, we can use reason and logic to figure out what's best for people, and leaders no longer have divine right. It's no longer necessary in its role as a social construct.

Answer 4

Those who are called by Christ are called to be separate from the world, not to be friends with the world....to seek unity in its time, but to uphold truth and love as the loftier goals...And as Jesus demonstrated, love does not always mean seeking social cohesion....asit is written, "better are the wounds from a friend than the kiss of an enemy..."

(though it is also important to understand the differences between the New Covenant and Old Covenant with respect to physical violence....Jesus said, "I know you have heard, 'eye for an eye'...but I tell you, turn the other cheek...")

Answer 5

actuality is the position you stumble on it. interior of many myths there is an area of actuality at that is foundation. regrettably lots of the so-referred to as truths that we've recieved by religion and technology have change into used for the era of heritage to regulate the thousands by technique of the imposition of outrage and absence of understanding. This has not continually been the case, obviously. subsequently the fee of Discrimination. once you've this characteristic you'd be able to 'type the wheat from the chaff' of glaring, and not in any respect so glaring, fabrications designed to enslave mankind less than a feudal-like hierarchy. those that do not have this characteristic will want to larger enlighten themselves about the authentic subject matters dealing with mankind, particularly than the propaganda we are shown on television. Social unity is more effective perfect inspired by a equipment of voluntary participation in accordance to genuine education......particularly than by technique of pressure and coercion from those who's motives are, for the most area, egocentric. The 'noble lie' does exist. we've considered this in climate replace, GM meals and option capacity technologies. The elite, subsequently is the few in positions of capacity who want, not the betterment of society i.e. 'Social team spirit', yet more effective administration and capacity. the present equipment is designed to furnish mankind particular 'freedoms' and take 2 away by the 'backdoor'! through 'noble lie' the inhabitants is made more effective attentive to the so-referred to as income, and kept contained in the darkish about that is unfavourable outcomes. seem at Atomic Experimentation, turning out to be a member of the european and Slave Labour occurring around the realm if theres any doubt.

Answer 6

I don't know where to begin...

Foremost, you take "social cohesion" as a good in and of itself. This may sound nice, but I would love for you to define social cohesion. Tell me why and how you want people in society to interact and see themselves as one.

If you do believe social cohesion to be the highest good, you are sorely mistaken. I understand that Richard Rority is a living "philosopher," but he can't even answer basic rationalist charges, such as...

Each person is made up of one body. That is to say, each person owns their own body. Society can never truly be "one" because each person is an individual unit. That is to say, what motivates one person may not motivate another. By nature, we will always be many at best trying to become one.

Secondly, social cohesion does not allow for rational thought. If social cohesion is the highest good, then that means we would all have the same opinions, tastes, and beliefs. The human animal is a rational animal. That is to say, reason can lead a person to live life in a multitude of ways. If people in society are left to determine their own course of life, many will live life in one way and many in another (Why does one person grow up to be a thief and another a policeman?). If you truly wanted your social cohesion, you must take freedom from each person. Thus, if social cohesion is the highest good, then you must strip people of freedom, choice, and rational thought. This sounds a bit like a tyranical regime. Do you support tyranny?

As for the scriptures you quoted, you have obviously never studed Christain theology.

Throughout the Old Testament (where all of your quotes are from), God made covenants with the Israelites. These covenants were promises made to the chosen people based upon the behavior, duties, and obligations of the Israelites.

The quotes you give come under a covenant of pain. It was a promise by God to deliver the Israelites as long as they lived by a strict code. This covenant lasted for a few hundred odd years and passed on to yet another convenant that was less violent.

The final convenant given by God came from the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. No longer is it necessary to hurt or maim in the name of Christ. The convenant now is one of love. Christ preached to love thy neighbor and spread the word of Christ, not to kill in his name.

While it is true that many have killed in Christ's name, they have all been condemned by the Church and nearly every Protestant sect of Christainity. Just because a few take blood to be the message of Christ does not mean that it was the true message. Hence, those who preach a bloody message of Christ have always been dethroned: the Klu Klux Klan, the Nazis, and etc.

Finally, as for the quotation from Mark, notice the word "receive." Christainity has always declared a right to teach. By receive, Mark means that each city should welcome or atleast allow Christains to enter into it to spread the word of Christ. When Mark mentions "destroy," he is referring to the End Times as found in the books of Daniel and Revelations. In these apocolyptic events, cities like these will be destroyed. Fear not though, this sort of destruction is by God's hand, not the hand of any man or woman.

Now, if we are done here, I believe that the asker has some studying of Christain theology and Greek rationalism to do. Without these two cornerstones, your argument and understanding will always be for nothing.

Answer 7

what the hell? take a look at exodus 22:20 for example, the first example you gave, which according to you says "You must kill those who worship another god." how did you possibly get that conclusion from what exodus 22:20 ACTUALLY SAYS: "20 And a stranger shalt thou not wrong, neither shalt thou oppress him; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt."

who exactly is a stranger, do you think? could it be, hey, a person who is foreign to your land and belief system? how exactly does "treat this person kindly" become "kill him"?

i roll my eyes at your "web site".

Answer 8

as suual another person twist scripture to fit their need.

anyone forcing you to bow to GOD.?
no.

so go ahead and live like you want to.

God knows few will convert.
He has prepared for that event.

2 tim 3:7 tells us the truth won't even be known to those who study.

have fun.

Answer 9

no all you get with religion is holy wars and bigets

Answer 10

thanks for speaking up ............. yep, Bible says it loud and clear, just like Qur'an does ................ but it all refers to a WAR ONLY

peace brothers and sisters, please ............ we only have this one chance to prove to be worthy of God's mercy

let's meet in heaven PLEASEEEEEEEEEE