In his "Origins of Christianity", Revilo P. Oliver suggests that religion has mainly served a social function, with three distinct purposes:
- Political bond
- Sanction for social morality
- Consolation for individuals
All these three functions are important to a society, and may indeed work more powerful when intertwined with the divine. But even so, they have little to do with actual faith.
There is of course also the other function, of a more spiritual type.It may be more or less prevalent in different religions or in the practice of its followers, but without it it would be silly to call it a religion at all. That purpose is simply put:
Teaching the Truth and/or as a guide to finding the Truth
If these social functions are separate from the spiritual, would it be possible to extract them completely from the clutches of religion? In the western world this process has indeed already come a long way, secular variants provided for us to worship in place of the old. In theory this could work equally well, but in practice we've seen all the three functions come crashing down. Now, in all fairness, this decline was most likely forced upon us on purpose, but even so, it forces us to ask the question: Are religious societies stronger than secular?
I believe Greg Johnson has said something to the like of "My race is my religion" and when regarding the three social functions, that might be indeed well enough. The political bond of a race with common blood is obvious, social morality does not need to be more complicated than "what is good for my race is good for me" and the obvious consolidation of a racial religion is of course that even though individuals may suffer and die, their spirit will live on eternally in the blood of their race.
In this section we will discuss the pros and cons of current religions and proposals of new ones.
Do we need a new religion, an old religion or indeed no religion at all? Is Christianity the savior or the cause of our troubles?
Last updated on Monday, August 22, 2016