Is belief in God madness in a modern world?

I don't think we can ever come to a conclusion. We are not equipped. Our standards of comparison and our field of vision are both far too limited.We have to assess moral 'improvement' or 'deterioriation' according to our limited (and biased) standards, as you say. That's leaving aside completely the consideration that many adult moral choices are, in fact, tradeoffs.We also have to assess this according to our ability to see the overall picture, which no one can. We are just not in a position to say. Without the ability to see into every human heart no one knows. Without knowing what kind of person every infant in the world will grow up to be no one knows. People are born into this world every day who must learn all the age-old lessons afresh. Each one of them has to eat of the tree of knowledge, lose the garden paradise all over again, and make choices in the aftermath. How can you tally something that is far too big to see? Especially when it is, of necessity, a fluid, fluxuating tally?It remains worth noting, as people have here, that many longstanding systemic evils in human society have been eradicated in the last millennium, or at least put to flight. Too often we fail to take account of things that have gone well and disasters that have been avoided. But we are speaking of the progress made by society historically in such cases, not the core integrity of the individuals that compose the society right now.It's remains also worth noting, as people have here, that fundamentalists of the Jesus-is-coming-back-to-earth-next-Tuesday-after-lunch variety have an a priori interest in representing the situation as getting worse. They don't really see the world getting worse becauae the question, for them as for everyone else, is too big to answer. They look at the world through the filter of what they have been told to expect and what they want. They don't want to be part of any old generation that dies as all have done while the world goes on spinning. They want to be special. They want to be a generation unlike any that has gone before, one that will be whisked straightway off to glory without the unwelcome experience of dying. It's a narcissistic vision: to be the goal of all history. Grandiose aims like that are hard to protect. Those who hold them must filter the evidence thoroughly. They cannot afford to keep an open mind.That's why for me questions like 'Is the world getting better or worse?' fall into the same category as questions like 'What would the world be like if Japan had won the Battle of Midway?' They are interesting to bat around in a conversation for the purpose of gaining fresh perspectives. But no one knows.__Edited by Archer Opterix, : tinkering.Edited by Archer Opterix, : clarity.Edited by Archer Opterix, : concision.Edited by Archer Opterix, : typo repair.

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

I saw your point before you made it.When I posted my comments about the limits of human knowledge, I knew you would view that as an opportunity to announce that God has no such limits, then segue into a Jesus commercial.Of course God has no such limits. He's God.I discussed human beings because human beings are the creatures having this discussion. This includes you. It is reasonable to take into account the limitations that come with that. You are defending yourself against a charge I never made. And the spelling you want is canon.Sanity is perfectly compatible with Christian belief. Sanity is also perfectly compatible with any number of non-Christian beliefs. And no belief system innoculates a person against the possibility of insanity.Whatever beliefs we hold, we do well to recognize our limitations. It's silly to call yourself an 'utter failure' just because human beings don't know everything. It's silly to call the world 'a sewer of madness' just because human beings don't know everything.It's all-or-nothing with you, isn't it? Extremes. Either we possess all the answers (omniscience) or we possess none (insanity).You recognize no states in the middle. Certainly none that might be of any worth.That's a very bipolar way of looking at things.No, scottness, religious belief does not equal insanity. But extreme bipolarity does.Consider making a place in your thoughts for moderation. Any kind at all.It's healthier.__Edited by Archer Opterix, : typo repair.

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

You're off again, Rob. Too bad. You were doing so much better making a connection between your comments and the discussions in which they appear. Now this.You took my statement about being 'reasonable' completely out of context and assumed I was advocating some philosophical position (you label it 'pluralism') that was not under discussion at all.You took my cautions to you about 'bipolarity' in mental images and matched them against quotes from outside sources to make it appear I was at odds with persons and positions whose views were not under discussion at all.That's a stinky thing to do, Rob.My caution about irrational extremes in mental images was not addressed to your mentor or to Wikipedia. It was not addressed to all religious persons or to Jesus. It was addressed to you.And I gave you good advice. I recommended simply that you develop a taste for moderation. I said this would be healthy.The way you treated that advice only shows how much you need it. You countered that you had no 'sympathy for the devil' or desire to be like Hitler or Stalin.Moderation does not mean being like Hitler and Stalin, Rob.It means being moderate.___Edited by Archer Opterix, : typo repair.

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

Your post looks complete on its own terms, Rob. I will not respond other than to clear up one thing.You have assumed more than once lately that I am 'offended' in one way or another. I have never been offended by anything you have written.__

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

Reading Message 50 again, quotes included, would be a good start on answering this if you're really interested.__

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.