"Religion Is Unnecessary vs the Secular World": OK, If You Say So, Why Can I Refute It In a Blaze?

Po Hi II greenpeaceRdale1844coop • blah blah blah Instead of whining that I am wrong, why not actually provide evidence? I ask AGAIN, what does religion accomplish that the secular world cannot?

• As a poster child of psychological projection, you use attack-oriented terms like "whining," and the term "wrong," without actually acknowledging any substantive issues stated, and its diverse significance. "Significance" thus brings us to a crucial issue regarding evidence, which requires being adequately literate in the first place in order to interpret said evidence. Your capital letters "again" is not literacy, but denialism.

Secular humanism´s manifestoes are in denial about the theistic origins, practices, and phenomena that underlie modern "secularism." The relevance and essential importance of Jesus´ 2 loving Commandments for Moses and God were not sustained from any other potential source, not even Moses himself who originated the saying in Judeo-Christianity.

"Rationalism" in the Greek tradition was preserved by Christian philosophers in relation to the Christian monastic system that emerged from the prayerful-meditative ascetic Anthony of the Desert around and after 300 AD/CE. As church authority emerged independent of Western Roman Emperors after 476, the interplay of groups proliferated monasteries along with churches until Charlemagne. By 1150, the fruit of monastic and other religious schools, modern Universities emerged as Christians understood God´s kind of omnipotence through Jesus avoiding Greek assumptions that had been as frozen as they were relegated to documentary existence. Yet, they had been the fruit of spiritual lifestyles themselves.

It took a monk with a doctorate to articulate and call up courage to face the powers of the church and Holy Roman Empire in around 1520 as Luther did. A transcendent God and prayerful relationship do that, with roots back at least to Elijah, as per scholar Huston Smith, leaving aside Moses, and others. Newton and Galileo, and the rest, mostly didn´t give up Christianity because it addresses the reality behind lawfulness that is explained powerfully by a loving Creator (of the Big Bang and evolution, many of us might say now).

And so on through the Enlightenment, the American Revolution, and up to UN human rights, sustainability, and not least of all, Al Gore´s religious and intellectual clarity and courage in association with Christian FDR´s UN and their IPCC on Climate Change.

Your kind of petulance shows deprivation from the issues you leave unresolved and contstricted artificially. Love conquers all, but love wasn´t conveyed in that form by anyone except Jesus Christ of Nazareth. The full legacy of Jesus called "secular" has been twisted from DesCartes´ kind of approach called mechanicism and Jefferson´s insight to avoid interdenominational and other conflict. The solution is spiritual modernization and its implications, not anti-religious ideology´s fallacy´s, wrongheaded disconsolate rebelliousness, and denialism. "Let he who has ears to hear...," as that Nazareth pioneer is recorded as saying. Buddha´s Four Noble Truths and more spiritual insight can be related thanks to the efforts of two dissident Christians who organized the 1890s World Parliament of Religions. And then there are the illusions of scientism. Another time.