What do religious people positively contribute to the world that non-religious people can't?

[Dawnofhope]

I see all people have the same human nature for comfort, safety, relations, and understanding sense of self. Charity and treating people kind aren't religious. Religion is How a group of people connect to what they feel will help them with charity etc. It gives individuals the purpose as well as the function. We don't have the same source "and" if we put our heads together, I'm sure that doesn't matter.

But I'm not certain why the question is phrased that way. If it can go both ways, what can non religious provide that religious can't, I get it. But is there anything religious can give for humanity that religious cant?

Loaded question.

Perhaps another way of phrasing it is what do some religious people bring to the table that non-religious people don't. We could reverse the question, for sure. Why do you consider the question anymore loaded than any other question about differences and similarities between religious and non-religious folk?

 

[Dawnofhope]

My pleasure. Ultimately, I think any religion, - Islam included - , has to transform the individual first; and then only it can transform communities, through the individuals that make up that community.



True, but these people don't really believe in the Hereafter (even though they may present themselves as religious); otherwise they wouldn't support injustice.

That being said, while we can battle this or that suffering (and indeed, when we can, we must), we can never vanquish suffering as such. Religions can help us have a more realistic approach to the world, and to 'lower our expectations', so to speak.

Agreed.

 

[Sunstone]

Religions -- which in this case seems to refer to institutionalized religiosity (unless you mean to include such things as the religions of the New Guinea highlanders, etc. ) -- can by virtue of their being institutionalized, institutionalize charities, etc. That's important because institutions outlast individuals. But secular people can do the same things -- it's just harder for them because they typically lack the donner base of a religion.

I don't think religious people bring anything to the table that non-religious people cannot bring and have not at times brought. If there are differences, they are matters of degree, not matters of kind. At least that's my guess.

Takes a big ego for a person to think their god makes them special. I hope that statement is not misinterpreted -- but given this is RF, it probably will be. What I mean is, to blindly assume that one has something to offer the world because of one's particular expression of religiosity -- now that's cheek. That's ego! Of course, the folks in this thread are not for the most part making blind assumptions.

 

[Deeje]

To the best of my understanding faith communities, like families are powerful institutions for positively motivating and shaping the character of us all. What happens when families and faith communities contribute to an environment where abuse can happen? What about when it responds negatively by negatively sweeping it under the carpet?

And of course you'll believe every word of this one-sided propaganda (documentary) piece. Why pick on us? We have one of the lowest incidences of child abuse.....and no organization is immune to these criminal con artists. We are trusting of our brotherhood normally because we have no reason to distrust them.

Many of these incidences took place decades ago when the judicial system was not as protective of the victims as it is now. The victims had to face their abusers in court and were put through a grilling that was often more traumatic than the original offense committed. Some parents chose not to report it. Our Elders needed proof that the offense had taken place, like the police do. You can't just take matters into your own hands and bring charges. We have an obligation to report and leave the rest to the proper authorities. That was not always the case.

In the times before we had female judges, males were not as sensitive about sexual crimes as women might have been. It was not an uncommon thing for buggery to take place on university campuses as a matter of course, when access to willing women was a bit more difficult. Men saw no harm in it.

The Catholic church engaged in so much child abuse because, in their twisted evaluation of things, it was deemed to be against God's law to have sex with women......so they abused young boys instead. They were forbidden to marry and so needed a sexual outlet. Children in their institutions were an easy target. Homosexual activity was also common in their ranks.

What do you actually know about JW's Adrian? We have less avenues for child abuse than most other religious organizations because we do not segregate our children away from their parents. No Sunday School....no youth camps or other times when adults can easily take advantage of such a separation. Our children are an active part of our congregations. Any abuse that took place was enacted as an abuse of the parent's trust, as is usually the case. They are groomed for quite some time to build that trust.

Do you have any idea what the court system used to do to abuse victims?
Do you understand that our elders are not the police and have no power to take any action scripturally against an offender without proof. Tell me please who else knows when an abuse takes place?....sometimes only God and the victim who is often too afraid to tell.

These rock spiders do not exactly have "Pedophile" tattooed on their foreheads.
In more recent years, we have implemented many more safeguards for our children in response to the inquiry that was held.....and the court system has also come to the aid of the victims as well, rather than allowing the perpetrators to use their lawyers in court to discredit and destroy their credibility, they now can give their evidence via video link.

On the other side of that coin we have seen teens bring accusations against their teachers or others as an act of spite, ruining their reputation and leading to a loss of employment. It's an evil world.

Your comments seem like a beat up based on the testimony of a few victims. We hate child abuse as much as any decent people would. Please do not imply that we have a "cover up" approach when that is definitely not the case. Nothing is swept under the carpet, I can assure you.

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/102007362

 

[firedragon]

This question is for anyone who is seriously concerned with making the world a better place, even through the most humble of acts of service in one's family or community. What religious folk positively contribute that a non-religious folk don't?

Well, you are gonna get a lot of prejudice.

 

[Dawnofhope]

And of course you'll believe every word of this one-sided propaganda (documentary) piece. Why pick on us? We have one of the lowest incidences of child abuse.....and no organization is immune to these criminal con artists. We are trusting of our brotherhood normally because we have no reason to distrust them.

Many of these incidences took place decades ago when the judicial system was not as protective of the victims as it is now. The victims had to face their abusers in court and were put through a grilling that was often more traumatic than the original offense committed. Some parents chose not to report it. Our Elders needed proof that the offense had taken place, like the police do. You can't just take matters into your own hands and bring charges. We have an obligation to report and leave the rest to the proper authorities. That was not always the case.

In the times before we had female judges, males were not as sensitive about sexual crimes as women might have been. It was not an uncommon thing for buggery to take place on university campuses as a matter of course, when access to willing women was a bit more difficult. Men saw no harm in it.

The Catholic church engaged in so much child abuse because, in their twisted evaluation of things, it was deemed to be against God's law to have sex with women......so they abused young boys instead. They were forbidden to marry and so needed a sexual outlet. Children in their institutions were an easy target. Homosexual activity was also common in their ranks.

What do you actually know about JW's Adrian? We have less avenues for child abuse than most other religious organizations because we do not segregate our children away from their parents. No Sunday School....no youth camps or other times when adults can easily take advantage of such a separation. Our children are an active part of our congregations. Any abuse that took place was enacted as an abuse of the parent's trust, as is usually the case. They are groomed for quite some time to build that trust.

Do you have any idea what the court system used to do to abuse victims?
Do you understand that our elders are not the police and have no power to take any action scripturally against an offender without proof. Tell me please who else knows when an abuse takes place?....sometimes only God and the victim who is often too afraid to tell.

These rock spiders do not exactly have "Pedophile" tattooed on their foreheads.
In more recent years, we have implemented many more safeguards for our children in response to the inquiry that was held.....and the court system has also come to the aid of the victims as well, rather than allowing the perpetrators to use their lawyers in court to discredit and destroy their credibility, they now can give their evidence via video link.

On the other side of that coin we have seen teens bring accusations against their teachers or others as an act of spite, ruining their reputation and leading to a loss of employment. It's an evil world.

Your comments seem like a beat up based on the testimony of a few victims. We hate child abuse as much as any decent people would. Please do not imply that we have a "cover up" approach when that is definitely not the case. Nothing is swept under the carpet, I can assure you.

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/102007362

Hi @Deeje

My comments were in response to a member of this forum who grew up as a JW and experienced sexual abuse.

This thread is about the positive contributions that individuals make through their faith communities compared to the positive contributions non-religious individuals make without any faith community. Its not about sexual abuse within faith communities, nor picking on any religious groups that may or may not have been complicit in allowing sexual abuse to continue.

My wife has a JW work colleague who recently invited her join her for a coffee. She’s quite positive about the couple of JWs she has known. Recently she told me about the TV documentary so we were both curious.

I’ve explored many religious topics and themes during my time on RF. None of my OPs have focused on the JWs. If you want to discuss with me the documentary and allegations against your Church I would recommend starting a seperate thread and tagging me. I personally have no inclination to beat up on the JWs or any other religious denomination.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Well, you are gonna get a lot of prejudice.

Why do you think that?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Its a hard road coming up with the perfectly phrased question. But then again, its good to have your response as what throws you with the question and why.

Totally understand, and wasn't trying to be 'clever'.
But the wording of the question drove my answer a certain way, so I thought I should explain. It's an interesting topic area, I think.

 

[firedragon]

Why do you think that?

Reading the comments mate. But yet, my post will take you nowhere so I apologize. You can disregard it.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

This question is for anyone who is seriously concerned with making the world a better place, even through the most humble of acts of service in one's family or community. What religious folk positively contribute that a non-religious folk don't?

I think a possible answer is a Spirit of hope, which is then offered and asked for in prayer.

Prayer is a very powerful tool, but who is to say a non religious person does not pray? They may indeed do so, without actually knowing they do.

Having knowledge of that ability, would give the process greater influence though.

Regards Tony

 

[Mock Turtle]

I voted nothing, since I don't believe that the religious do actually contribute anything that those without such beliefs cannot, and having such beliefs often causes more issues than not having them. The simple one of believing in one's own particular faith (as being true, as opposed to all others) is so often divisive and/or causes conflict, which probably would not be there if such did not exist. We have enough dividing us as it is without beliefs so tagged to the past, and which are all too often not amenable to timely updates, to make things worse. Undoubtedly the majority of the religious are just as normal as most of the non-religious, but it is in the minorities that trouble ensues, and where all too often they are guided by the more extreme elements of any particular religious faith. And this of course doesn't just apply to one religion.

 

[Samantha Rinne]

This question is for anyone who is seriously concerned with making the world a better place, even through the most humble of acts of service in one's family or community. What religious folk positively contribute that a non-religious folk don't?

Okay, I'll bite.

The problem with secularism is that it fundamentally does not understand sin.

I am genderfluid (as noted above) meaning that a good chunk of the way I self-identify is kinda hazy in terms of male/female. I often crossdress, even though my religious background calls it not sin but an abomination (which means
"the Lord hates"). Now what exactly does this mean? Well, it means that our sins are also often our cross to bear. That is to say, the Jews (and the atheists) see sin as wickedness, as not following the rules. But the approach of following the rules, as Jews do, is that you always fall short. The law is a curse, one passage of the NT letters says. You will never match up to the standards of God. Secularism tends to either follow the same rules as the Jews (and supposed Christians) do, but without any spiritual understanding, which means that like the Jews, they run the risk of being Pharisees and hypocrites, but unlike the Jews there isn't any concept of atonement. Or they try to reject these laws in favor of virtues they made up, like "respect foer the environment" ( while not respecting humans as of worth, taxing them to an early grave for carbon use, while you feel good that you recycled) , "honoring minorities" (this is funny, because democracy is the will of many against the few so really democracy can never be in favor of minorities unless it has betrayed its core tenants), oe or "honoring or celebrating diversity" ( which is really to say that you marginalize normalcy in favor of whatever weird lifestyles you think should be promoted). These secularists abandon the law in their minds, but in search of virtue in the wasteland, they invent a sort of distorted or inverted morality where good is bad and vice versa. They are not free from the law, however but in fact morw tightly bound. Just now a different law... The Christian (real Christian not the Sunday school idiot that tries to be good enough to get into heaven) understands that the actual way out of this is through grace. We will never be good enough, we will never not be sinners, yet God wants us to know we are loved and forgiven. Grace is a gift we haven't earned. Right now I have a New Threads below me talking about how Trump is not a "typical politician". Trump is a good example of what I am talking about. Those on the left condemn him constantly for his flawed behavior. But his supporters tend to be those who understand that all of us are flawed, but they voted for him less on who he was, and more on what he we there to stop. Sin is about separation. It's about having to choose between that lifestyle where you as a woman marry a woman, and your family that looks down on it. No I'm not saying that one choice is sinful so we shouldn't do it. Our cross that we carry is often our own sin, we have to resolve these things and sometimes that does mean choosing the girl over the scolding parents. Sometimes it doesn't, that's not the point. The poinr point is the separation, the wedge this situation drives between things. I likewise, am now to choose between my job (which I present as a woman b for) and my family (who tolerates but doesn't support my being feminine). This is a tims when my famil fa! y t (sorry my Kindle is awful and won't backspace after word farts, "This is a time when my family") is a kso (also! ) trying to reconnect with relatives all of these rules and regulations, and I'm trying to figure out whether to just give up on the job, or to put the job first because my family hasn't had my back (whenever they go in the store, I have to wait in the car alone). I also saw this miniseries version of The Shining where the focus was less on him being crazy and more on the sort of delusion that the job is more important than his family's safety. So basically the point of all this, is not so much that sin is avoided because it is sin. But to understand that the conditions of life is to be in a state of sin. Confusion. Separation. In fact , we live in a world that is separated, matter from spirit, good from evil, male from female. So what about this, God hates part? Well, crossdressing woyld be just another sin, except it has a sense of self hatred (the other abominations mentioned iun the Bible were things that had to do with Jewish identity, such as not mixing fabrics). (of se(the other mentioned ) That is, many transgender people have to go under the knive to feel better in their own skin, and on the average day even though I don't go that far, I wish I had breasts, I wush I didn't have facial hair. I wish I were reborn in a different form. While the separation caused by this is bad enough, there is an added element of self hatred that makes God in turn not just call it a thing he hates. Because God wants me to love myself. Suppressing my desires doesn't solve the problem (in fact, it made my depression worse), the solution is to figure out how to love yourself, and how to mend the separation.

 

[Samantha Rinne]

Sorry, I cannot backspace or create new paragraph. The point in all of this is that religion (specifically Christianity() has improved the world by by allowing people to love themselves and stop pushing legalism (another theme of the Shining) on other people. When people accept that they are flawed and try to live their own truth, we have stuff like the first openly transgender politician. On the other hand, the secular world , rather than supporting people coming out and being successful at their dreams, prefers the idea of enforced quota. Tokenism actually screws over the cause of transgender or gay (or black in the past and much of the present) people, as they can't legitimately claim their success, and worse, it creates backlash for those who didn't come to accept them for their merits but for the law imposed on them. The goal of religion is to mend the separation and let there be world where we love others as we love ourselves. Secularism cannot make this world happen because thet are like the dad in that film. They understand only rules and punishment.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Sorry, I cannot backspace or create new paragraph. The point in all of this is that religion (specifically Christianity() has improved the world by by allowing people to love themselves and stop pushing legalism (another theme of the Shining) on other people. When people accept that they are flawed and try to live their own truth, we have stuff like the first openly transgender politician. On the other hand, the secular world , rather than supporting people coming out and being successful at their dreams, prefers the idea of enforced quota. Tokenism actually screws over the cause of transgender or gay (or black in the past and much of the present) people, as they can't legitimately claim their success, and worse, it creates backlash for those who didn't come to accept them for their merits but for the law imposed on them. The goal of religion is to mend the separation and let there be world where we love others as we love ourselves. Secularism cannot make this world happen because thet are like the dad in that film. They understand only rules and punishment.

Thanks for putting your heart and soul into answering my question. It sounds really hard for you at the moment and I appreciate you trying to grapple with some of the major issues underlying a question that’s far from straightforward. I hope you feel connected to the Grace and Love of Jesus.

 

[chinu]

Religion mean re-legion / re-union with -- from where we all started the journey of life in the beginning/God's home.

Taking the above definition of religion into consideration -- a true religious person has NO interest in this world -- neither do work for any kind betterment -- nor the betterment of this world is possible.

The ONLY betterment happen is -- people become familiar with the "Truth" that this world can never become a permanent peaceful / better place to live on -- reside on.

 

[SalixIncendium]

This question is for anyone who is seriously concerned with making the world a better place, even through the most humble of acts of service in one's family or community. What religious folk positively contribute that a non-religious folk don't?

Sheer numbers. Look at all the gods we have working with us!

Seriously though, I answered "nothing." Some people need and/or are comfortably being religious; some people don't need or are uncomfortable with religion.

It's behavior that affects change, not what one believes.

 

[ChristineM]

This question is for anyone who is seriously concerned with making the world a better place, even through the most humble of acts of service in one's family or community. What religious folk positively contribute that a non-religious folk don't?

I voted nothing. In the past religion has been both a good and bad influence on the world. It has helped build communities, with a caveat that you must be a member of their club. It has also been the cause of many premature deaths and wars against those not a member of the club

I see no difference now, only the players have changed.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Religion mean re-legion / re-union with -- from where we all started the journey of life in the beginning/God's home.

No, it doesn't. We've been through this previously. Here is the word's etymology:

c. 1200, "state of life bound by monastic vows," also "conduct indicating a belief in a divine power," from Anglo-French religiun (11c.), Old French religion "piety, devotion; religious community," and directly from Latin religionem (nominative religio) "respect for what is sacred, reverence for the gods; conscientiousness, sense of right, moral obligation; fear of the gods; divine service, religious observance; a religion, a faith, a mode of worship, cult; sanctity, holiness," in Late Latin "monastic life" (5c.).

According to Cicero derived from relegere "go through again" (in reading or in thought), from re- "again" (see re-) + legere "read" (see lecture (n.)). However, popular etymology among the later ancients (Servius, Lactantius, Augustine) and the interpretation of many modern writers connects it with religare "to bind fast" (see rely), via notion of "place an obligation on," or "bond between humans and gods." In that case, the re- would be intensive. Another possible origin is religiens "careful," opposite of negligens. In English, meaning "particular system of faith" is recorded from c. 1300; sense of "recognition of and allegiance in manner of life (perceived as justly due) to a higher, unseen power or powers" is from 1530s.
​

religion | Origin and meaning of religion by Online Etymology Dictionary

 

[Vinayaka]

Upon further reflection ... it's difficult to figure how much a person does unless you know them well. I've been enlightened about that a few times at funerals when the eulogist shared stuff about the deceased that I hadn't realised. For example, at one funeral I learned how an elderly acquaintance of mine had brought his handicapped neighbour groceries once a week for over 30 years.

Other folks simply brag, about donations., about how much they did, etc. But when you look into it, it's no more, or even far less, that the others around have done. One man here told me how he was a founding member of the temple I help at. He simply wasn't. It was an outright lie, trying to impress me.

Still others, out of insecurity (the cause of pride) have deceived themselves into thinking they're huge givers, when they're not.

All of this is outside the religion/no religion question in the OP. It's on the individual.

 

[chinu]

No, it doesn't. We've been through this previously. Here is the word's etymology:

c. 1200, "state of life bound by monastic vows," also "conduct indicating a belief in a divine power," from Anglo-French religiun (11c.), Old French religion "piety, devotion; religious community," and directly from Latin religionem (nominative religio) "respect for what is sacred, reverence for the gods; conscientiousness, sense of right, moral obligation; fear of the gods; divine service, religious observance; a religion, a faith, a mode of worship, cult; sanctity, holiness," in Late Latin "monastic life" (5c.).

According to Cicero derived from relegere "go through again" (in reading or in thought), from re- "again" (see re-) + legere "read" (see lecture (n.)). However, popular etymology among the later ancients (Servius, Lactantius, Augustine) and the interpretation of many modern writers connects it with religare "to bind fast" (see rely), via notion of "place an obligation on," or "bond between humans and gods." In that case, the re- would be intensive. Another possible origin is religiens "careful," opposite of negligens. In English, meaning "particular system of faith" is recorded from c. 1300; sense of "recognition of and allegiance in manner of life (perceived as justly due) to a higher, unseen power or powers" is from 1530s.
​

religion | Origin and meaning of religion by Online Etymology Dictionary

Re + Legion.

Legion -- legion meaning - Google Search