Is religion relevant today?

Do you still believe?

That's two different questions.

And the second is quite vague.

Is religion relevant today?

Yes. Most likely will be for the foreseeable future, even given the fact that the "religious" are the worst enemy of their own belief systems.


Do you still believe?

In the religion I was raised under? No.
In the god of Abraham? No.
In the god of the Bible? No.
In any of the Christian sects that claim the Bible as their holy book? No.
In the so called Christian god? No.

In "god?

I believe in:
> the Great Sky god
> the Mother Earth
> the Cave Bear (metaphorically of course)
> that Truth is a Pathless Land that cannot be reached by any religious system.

> and the fall of man (not the Adam & Eve nonsense) which is likely to soon begin if it hasn't already started.

Is religion relevant? I'd say yes because we have so many new ones, communism, environmentalism, climatism, scientology, etc.

I assume when you say religion, you mean Christianity. May I ask? What translation of the Bible do you use?

Do I still believe? NO
Did I ever believe? No
Will I ever believe? Probably not.

I assume that was not for me, but will answer anyway.

I started with the KJV, but then learned it was a translation from the Vulgate, which was translated from Greek text to latin. The KJV was modified to make King James happy... so I stopped using it, though I did keep it around for reference.

I once had a "Good News For Modern Man"... I think that was the title... just NT... I didn't like the translation, so got rid of it.

Later I got an American Standard Version and a Spanish/English NIV (my favorite).

Part of me wants an Egyptian Coptic Bible (aka Coptic Orthodox Church). I doubt I'm up to reading a bible again so have decided to save the money... for now at least.

Up until about a year ago I had a half dozen Bibles. I would cross reference to help with understanding. Then I threw them in the trash, except for the Scofield study bible.

There are many versions of the books on line that can be compared. Subtle changes in wording can change meaning a whole great big lot. (no I will not, cannot, give an example)

Yes... cross referencing... and then discarding all.

I just watched a CSpan video of a guy named Nicolson. He wrote a book about the 50 men who translated the KJV, God's Secretaries He says they relied on Greek texts for the New Testament and mostly a Hebrew text for the old testament.

Nicolson says that King James wanted a text that all English Christians could use. At the time, many people used the Geneva Bible, which translates the word, king, with the word, tyrant. James wanted them to eliminate the word tyrant.
The KJV is the most widely used, if not read, version and it doesn't use the word tyrant. Jimmy got his way, although not in his lifetime.

Yes... Jim didn't like many of the negative or confusing parts of the bible.. especially if they might challenge his kingship.... but he ended up creating other negative or confusing parts of the bible... etc... still many cling to the KJV as the go to version of the bible.



PS
I love your intelligence. Keep it up!

Thank you, Mr Chaski. Did my mother pay you to say that?

Jonah Goldberg of National Review speaks of the "decline of strong independent institutions — religious, civic, and familial ... ," so maybe the answer is, "No."

On the other hand, people search "for other outlets to find a sense of meaning and belonging. Identity politics, populism, and nationalism are filling that void," so maybe the answer is, "Yes."

AEI

I been in a cave
for forty days
only a spark
to light my way
I wanna give out
I wanna give in
this is our crime
this is our sin

I grew up going to an evangelical church and pretty much bought into biblical beliefs into my 20s. I also came from a family that welcomed scientific discovery and theory and did not see it as a threat to biblical beliefs, including evolution. Much of Genesis is vague and allowed for such.

So it was the opposing evangelical/fundamentalist interpretation of Genesis that began to be a problem for me once I reached of age and began to dwell on such matters. My belief system in regards to god drastically changed as a result during my 30s and 40s.

However, a belief in a god has not moved completely out of the picture for me. There is still a lot that science cannot yet explain. To me, the “supernatural” is just that - interpretation of what cannot yet be explained within science.

In terms of humanity, religion began as an attempt to explain observed phenomena that could not yet be understood otherwise. The sun, moon, and stars were given names and purported to have divine powers.

But such beliefs evolved as science began to explain such phenomena. At times, this evolution was a struggle, as it was for Galileo, and still is today. Much of the world’s population still doesn’t like it when science is ready to replace what we used to believe.

I don’t see it that way. I welcome scientific explanation as simply a better way to understand our universe. And this may someday even include god (or what we once understood him as). This should not be seen as a threat at all, but something we should welcome.

Today I see the Bible, as well as the writings of other religions, as a continued attempt by humanity to explain what’s happening around us. Sure, there are lessons to be learned, and some of those lessons I still take to heart. But the book also isn’t without error. We are human and our experience and minds are limited.

Is there a god? Perhaps, but he (if god can even be referred to as that) likely isn’t anything resembling what we perceive him to be.

Will we have an after life? Perhaps, but one thing for certain is that, what we do in the life that we have will most certainly determine how we continue to live in the lives of others once we do pass.

no it isn't relevant, but it is dangerous. we are now in a situation where people who don't believe in an invisible being are in danger of being charged with blasphemy because supposed secular governments are backing down in fear of radical religious dogma.it should be illegal to even dare to accuse a non believer of blasphemy.