What the drive for religion actually says

[Peter Kropotkin]

And why this topic belongs here...
and we need to make sense of history....

and we begin with the Renaissance...

The awakening of the Renaissance from the Medieval period was driven, in large parts,
by the rediscovery of ancient writers like Cicero, Lucretius, and even works by
Plato and Aristotle that had disappeared during the Middle ages....
The rediscovery of classical Greek philosophy is what drove the Rennaissance...
The understanding that Human beings counted more than god or religion,
this new understanding was called "Humanism" .. and in many ways, has driven
all philosophy and religion since then....
and the Catholic Church was quite ok with this new understanding, indeed, for
a large portion of the Renaissance was driven by church members all the way to the
Pope.. in fact, you cannot write a history of the Renaissance without the contributions
of individual church members.... and the fact is the Renaissance, rebirth
was limited to a very small number of people.. (the Renaissance only
impacted the small number of people who could read)
and we can judge the Italian Renaissance to have lasted from roughly
1300 to 1600....But Kropotkin, how does this impact our understanding of
today? Why dear reader.. the specifics of the Renaissance gives us many answers
to our past, present and future... it tells us where this modern drive for
religion will bring us... and it is not in a good place either...

The rebirth of civilization comes directly from the availability of new
sources of information...from the writings of the ancient thinkers and ORO
philosophers...from books... and we can time of the end of the
Renaissance in the Catholic church to the "Index Librorum Prohibitorum"
which was printed in Rome in 1557... and in Italy, the Bible itself was
banned from the general public...(in fact, it was still illegal to own a bible
in Italy until 1870)

And a look at history tells us what that impact of banning books achieved
in Italy and Spain... Th Renaissance, or rebirth of knowledge ended with
this banning of books...you can make the case that the banning of books
turned Italy from the leading light of the Renaissance to the backwater
of Europe... intellectually... (and what about Galileo?... even the
church managed to silence him eventually)

One could make the argument that the rise of Northen Europe
came from the easier availability of books to the intellectual class
of the north.. in science, philosophy, history, math, political science all
dramatically grew in northern Europe because the books needed
were available to the north... and not in the south, Italy and Spain...

and we can make the exact same argument about the rise and fall
of science, philosophy, history and medicine in the Islamic world...
in a study of the Islamic world science, philosophy, medicine,
you can trace the rise and fall of those disciplines to the
easy availability of needed books in the early days of the Islamic
world to the fall of science, philosophy, history, medicine.. to the
ever increasing turn to religion in the Islamic world..
books that were readily available about science, philosophy, medicine
were no longer available after about 1000 AD and with this loss came
the decline of science, philosophy, history and medicine, in the Islamic
world....

and we can this decline in science, philosophy, history, sociology,
and other disciplines in America with the ongoing banning of books,
in America...to ban books in turning to the bible, means that we will
suffer the exact same fate as the Islamic world after 1000 AD..
and in Spain/ Italy after 1550...
and we can vividly see this in the falling scores of High School students
in science, history, philosophy, math... in fact across the board, in scores
in both the SAT, AP and PSAT scores are going down... and what has increased?
why book banning and a return to the bible as the only book worth reading...
This is not a coincidence... you can lead the world in science, math, history,
philosophy subjects.. but that requires open access to books, all books,
regardless of their religious connection or contact...

In other words, if we want to lead the world in science, technology,
medicine, philosophy, physics.. we have to decide between
religion or allowing complete and unrestricted access to books
and knowledge.... no acceptations... if we accept religion and
book banning/burning, we automatically doom America to becoming
a second rate country... ( one might make the argument that because
of the modern rise of Religion, we are already there, at best,
a second rate, on our way to becoming a third world country,
because of our sad devotion to god, religion, and the bible)

we cannot choose to both sides, we must decide on what fate
we create for America by choosing sides, do we follow the
path of the Enlightenment and make science, math, history,
philosophy.. the intellectual processes of being intelligent...

or do we abdicate our responsibility to become wise,
to hold knowledge, to understand the who, what, when,
where, how and why of existence...
and that knowledge cannot come from shepherds 2000 years ago....
to live in a modern age, requires, indeed demands modern knowledge
and skills.. that can't be found in the bible or in banning/burning books...

what kind of future do you want? and how shall you help bring it about?
By bringing knowledge and information to everyone or by limiting it to
only those select few and within religious terms?

Kropotkin

[Peter Kropotkin]

Epistemology: The theory of knowledge, especially with regards to
its method, validity, and scope.. Epistemology is the investigation
of what distinguishes justified belief from opinion.....

So, what does epistemology has to do with this topic/thread of
the "drive for religion?"

The question of epistemology is the question of knowledge,
and the drive for religion is a also a drive for knowledge...but
and this is important, which knowledge is more valuable in our
modern age? The drive for religion is the attempt to better understand
god and religion.. and our age of Enlightenment is about knowledge
of who we are and our knowledge of science, history, philosophy,
sociology, math and psychology, among other disciplines...
or stated another way, which knowledge is more important, more
valuable to us in this modern age?

In our modern technological world, which knowledge is more valuable
science, history, philosophy, math, medicine or which of gods ten
commandments are the ones we should obey?

In a world with smart phones, computers, cars, spaceships, the internet,
modern medicine, should we spend time on how long Noah's flood lasted
or the concept of the sin of Adam? Which strikes you as more important,
given you are reading this on modern technology, across vast distances?

This question of what we value or what we should value, is the
question that leads us into the future... if we value science, history,
philosophy, math.. then we must give up our dance with god and religion....

Every step we take into turning America into a theological state,
takes us another step into the decline and extinction of what made
America great... any type of return to the "good old fashion religion"
is another step into the extinction of science, philosophy, history,
math, sociology... for we can have one or we can have the other,
but we cannot in good conscience hold to both principles at the
same time...so, are you a "Modern" person and hold to science,
philosophy, math, history.. the "Enlightenment" project or do
you hold to god and religion and the death of our modern science,
medicine, history and all the other disciplines that has build
us into the technological world we live in today... do you turn
your back on those disciplines and return to a state of ignorance
within religion?

Kropotkin

[Agent Smith]

Nietzsche famously announced the death of God, but looks like that thread is due for a resurrection - anytime now!

This time though the intervening period of rampant atheism will leave its mark on neo-theism. Neo-theism, what'll it look like?

[bobmax]

Nietzsche famously announced the death of God, but looks like that thread is due for a resurrection - anytime now!

This time though the intervening period of rampant atheism will leave its mark on neo-theism. Neo-theism, what'll it look like?

I think atheism will evolve.
From the naive idea of ​​the non-existence of the being God, it will have to face true atheism.

That is, the doubt that the Good is not.

The current widespread atheism is almost a child's play.
A necessary game because it sweeps away so many superstitions.

But then you become an adult.
And then it is up to you, in perfect solitude, to affirm that the Good is!

God needs you.

[Agent Smith]

Neo-theism would indeed need to tackle the problem of a absence of evidence and the presence of counterevidence vis-à-vis God. As for God needing us, that's a line of thought that's been done to death, oui?

[bobmax]

Neo-theism would indeed need to tackle the problem of a absence of evidence and the presence of counterevidence vis-à-vis God. As for God needing us, that's a line of thought that's been done to death, oui?

The reality of God is such that it cannot be proven.
Because God is the Truth. And the Truth is what allows any possible proof.

For this reason the Truth cannot be proved itself.
Therefore Truth = Nothing.

And it is precisely in that it is nothing that it needs you.

Yes, death is necessary.
Not physical death, however, but the death of the soul.

[Agent Smith]

Neo-theism would indeed need to tackle the problem of a absence of evidence and the presence of counterevidence vis-à-vis God. As for God needing us, that's a line of thought that's been done to death, oui?

The reality of God is such that it cannot be proven.
Because God is the Truth. And the Truth is what allows any possible proof.

For this reason the Truth cannot be proved itself.
Therefore Truth = Nothing.

And it is precisely in that it is nothing that it needs you.

Yes, death is necessary.
Not physical death, however, but the death of the soul.