Religion
Related: About this forumGod and Mammon together at last.......the prosperity gospel movement:
http://www.wilsonquarterly.com/book-reviews/holy-high-rollers************
Strong personalities dominate the movements historystarting with early stalwarts of the mid-20th century such as Oral Roberts and Kenneth Hagin. Over the decades, believers have wanted their ministers and revivalists to look the part, to model unimaginable success. The aptly named Creflo Dollar, a pastorprenuer with unequaled charm, founded the nondenominational World Changers Church International in Georgia and has confidently faced down several scandals. At one point he assured his congregation, I own two Rolls-Royces and didnt pay a dime for them. Why? Because while Im pursuing the Lord, those cars are pursuing me.
************
My friends, know what this refers to? A movement with a lot of followers. Lots of them. Not two or three. Lots.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)with these churches?
Prosperity gospel is a scam being perpetrated by those who would prey on people at their lowest points.
Like snake oil or homeopathy, it makes promises it can't keep and the only ones who really prosper are the charlatans that push it.
There will always be false prophets.
longship
(40,416 posts)People like Robert Tilton, the Crouch's, Oral Roberts, and all the rest. I'll add the faith healers to these prosperity scammers as there's no way that they don't know what they're really doing, people like Peter Popoff, Benny Hinn, and their ilk.
All of these pray/prey on the flocks -- dare I say fleece.
I want to see people other than atheists/agnostics/whatever standing up against this utter rubbish.
If a group of believers wanted to do something about these scams and organized an effort, this atheist would proudly stand next to them as they prayed for relief (so to speak).
Here's where believers and non-believers can begin forming what may be an enduring alliance. One would hope.
I still think religion is generally a bad thing. But I also acknowledge that the world will likely never be rid of it. It's probably part of human nature. Given that, the only rational solution is to form alliances with people who see the worst of religion's effects and oppose those things. The discussion alone would be interesting. Our future may depend on this.
As Daniel Dennett has professed, I want to treat religion as an epidemiologist might do it. I want it to evolve into avirulence where the toxic effects are absent.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)Both believers and non-believers who post in this group have been highly critical of these "pastors" and their churches.
Exposure is a good tool, and we can use that here as much as possible.
longship
(40,416 posts)Excuse my French. But that's the truth.
Atheists crave legitimatization. Above all, they are sick and tired of having to hide in the corners. I don't anymore, but I've long since given up on being PC. I like throwing an occasional chair into the dialog in spite of the fact that I rail against that very thing here often. (It's like spices, too much overwhelms.)
The liberal religions are truly being drowned out by the loonies: the Biblical literalists, the tongue speakers, the out right scammers, etc. And what's worse, they have the money and power to overwhelm those voices who would say, "Hold on there! I disagree." The worst of the worst suck up all the oxygen in the room.
So how could non-believers not ally with the liberal believers under these conditions? If one acknowledges that religion is a cultural and possibly genetic human trait, what does a non-believer have to lose?
I am increasingly coming to the opinion that if this is not done humankind is in for a very rough ride in the coming years. The crazy is very strong in many religious circles. Maybe we don't need to oppose religion. Possibly we should focus on the crazy. We'll need allies to accomplish that.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)I am so glad every time I see a story about organizations building alliances for a cause. Some of these are called "interfaith", but I think we need a different word, as some non-believers may find the word faith off putting.
It was coalitions like these that turned the tide during the civil rights and anti-war movements. And that is just in my lifetime.
Non-believers and liberal/progressive people of faith have a lot in common and a lot of potential to get shit done.
Those that oppose the coalitions for whatever reasons just need to get out of the way. That includes leaders of the christian right and leaders of the anti-theists. They can keep fighting their battles alone and I will continue to oppose them.
I'm liking the way you are thinking, my friend.
dimbear
(6,271 posts)We're talking big numbers. Since the group is so fuzzily defined, I wouldn't expect a real firm number to pop up.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)Plus their congregations are very fluid, imo. There have been a number of articles posted here written by people who have been fleeced and are highly critical of these operations.
Like most scams, people come in desperate, are filled with hope and then leave when the promises don't pan out.
I would also wonder whether these numbers include their television audiences.
trotsky
(49,533 posts)A 2006 poll by Time reported that 17 percent of Christians in America said they identified with the movement.
That makes it a larger group than just about any other Christian denomination in the USA, apart from Catholics.
Take some time to absorb that before you reject it as being incompatible with your narrative. I think you would do yourself a huge favor, cbayer, to acknowledge the reality of Christianity today rather than what you think or hope it is.