especially when the product is eternity. Religion is a multi trillion dollar industry. Why?
Start a local group for some do-good purpose. It takes money. If you want the group to survive (let alone expand), it must get bigger. Otherwise, it will get smaller.
You might not think religion does any good, but the religious think it does.
That’s relatively inexpensive compared to… :
About $22 Billion In Gold, Diamonds, Jewels Found In Indian Temple …
www.npr.org/…/some-22-billion-in-gold … n-indian….
For Christianity however, doing “good” is irregardless of its own Biblical doctrine that “All our righteous acts are like filthy rags” (Isaiah 64:6)
Even so, doing “good” deeds are profitable to some extent, after all, church’s wouldn’t be doing so well if it weren’t, yes? Church’s just don’t sustain enough income for “good” deeds regardless, they go above and beyond sustenance of doing good and skyrocket towards the mega luxurious; stocking and hording gold, bullions, rare artifacts, jewels, anything of value you could imagine including stocks in major corporations, bonds, just like any other money hungry corporation.
I think you somehow missed what I said. “Sustain enough” isn’t possible. Everything either expands or shrinks. If you want to at least stay the same, you need to expand. If you are greedy (and yes, you can be greedy for things you consider “good”, such as benefitting mankind), you really, really want to expand.
Whatever my feelings on religion, I’m trying to just state the facts here.
Your link didn’t work. Sounds interesting though, if you can make it work.
Incorrect. Sustaining is possible. Spending money on gold statues, $80,000+ vehicles, are frivolous losses towards religious organizations that do not sustain good deeds. Sustenance of doing good deeds would simply be buying the means to do the good deeds effectively, and that wouldn’t include many of the expenditures of various churches and their pastors, temples, temple owners, whatever. Expanding is one thing; I don’t see religions expanding to do good deeds, I see them sitting on billions, living the good life, backed by the horde that surpass banks. On a smaller level, they live the life of Riley… so to speak. While helping… for a price obviously.
Nothing sustains. Nothing. If you mean it’s possible to not be so greedy and over the top, then of course.
Yes, greed. But not just greed.
I guess maybe I don’t understand your intention here. I thought you were suggesting that the whole point of religion is business. If so, I disagree with that.
Anon’s got it. Many of the charitable aspects of religion costs large sums of money. Where that money goes is another question. Plus there are factors like institutional upkeep. Here is a chart to ponder:
Government is a bigger racket.
Damn, this is such a great subject for a thread.
Pats WW_III_Angry on the back
[quote=“Xunzian”]
Anon’s got it. Many of the charitable aspects of religion costs large sums of money. Where that money goes is another question. Plus there are factors like institutional upkeep. Here is a chart to ponder:
Sure they do. This doesn’t justify what I’m referring to.
My only question is:
And?
What does it matter?
Unregulated product claims.
It is hypocritical evidence; if their religion is true amassing hordes of wealth would be contradictory to their teachings, fruitless and even damning. If their religion isn’t true, then it would be best to accumulate wealth just like everyone else who is going to die and cease existing on this planet, because there’s nothing to look forward to after death, no riches in heaven, so lets get all the riches here.
And to my mind that misses the point.
If they want to care about money beyond means then so be it.
How am I to sweepingly judge all religion based on the ideal of greed that is inseperable in this context from the human will to bow in reverence by giving of ourselves up in some manner.
We can say it needs go where useful, but that hasn’t been the spiritual behavior of humans in history.
Rather like ants, humans appear pushing the horded mound towards the revered.
You know, there are individuals who talk the talk and walk the walk. Organized religion doesn’t.
But what is this point that to your mind, my posts, have missed?
But… who are you to judge? A thinking, judging human being, of course. Just like the rest of us.
What I’m saying is that one of the major purposes of organized religion in society is to serve as a charitable institution. Compare how important organized religion is in high functioning welfare states vs. low-functioning welfare states vs. non-welfare states. It is a pretty clear line. Things like the afterlife and the like may be a product being sold but that isn’t their major money-maker nor their raison d’etre. Charity is the perpetuating element. That not all charities are created equally then becomes very important when making future considerations as to the function of religion as a charitable business.
Why do humans give to reverence?
Why do humans choose to deplete their selves for reverence?
I got a magic elixir in my possession. It will trim twenty years off of anybody instantly. Who wants to buy it from me? It will cost you about fifty dollars or half a ounce of gold if you got it.
That’s not the basis of human spiritual giving from their possession unto their reverence Joker.
That’s the human basis of wanting to be powerful in some respect of the concept and willing to try anything that might give towards that edge.
If that is what someone is after spiritually, then they will get what they are rewarded by the land they are tilling.
I haven’t sympathy for that.
A spiritually centered adherent of any religion will give out of reverence; not out of gain in some facet of power.
Their reward to their own self will equally be rewarded by the land they are tilling.
If that is so, why are the religious such hypocrites of their own faith and beliefs?
From my perspective of many religious people there only appears to be their cold tolerance of social oppression all around them everyday.
In my observance they are complacent within it.
What do you think about that Jayson?