Heaven Help Us

[MaryN]

Well, personally I don't do organised religion. I've been a Pagan since my late teens and see no need to involve religion in anything. I could, however, see religious factions causing problems in small societal groups. Do you, for instance, refuse to allow someone to join you because their belief system is different to yours, or do you accept them and hope they fit right in? And yes, MB, I can see your point about the troubles of the world being people based, but without people there is no religion, and I doubt if giraffes or zebras give a toss one way or another.

Still, an interesting and quite revealing batch of replies.

[Mortblanc]

If all one ever does is sit in a pew once or twice each year, or you were dragged to services unwillingly at some point, then the view you have of "organized religion" might be a bit jaded.

In my land atheists/pagans or whatever are scarce, but have taken control of our government. They do a very good job of making it sound like there is no religious influence in our land and any that presents itself is negative. That is far from truthful.

My Church is a community of like minded individuals that come together several times each week, and not always in the confines of stained glass and incense.

Among my friends from Church are a dozen men who meet every Thursday afternoon for lunch and planning sessions. Among those plannings are the camping trips, cookouts, hikes, hunting and fishing trips for that group and for the church as a whole. Some of the women do the same thing, planning girly things, and they are also welcome to meet with the men for Thursday lunch any time they desire.

Or group gets constant practice at quick reaction and communication due to the close nature of the group. As an example, when my wife passed away I made a single call from her bedside at 3am. Within 20 minutes there were five people there to support me. I was not left alone for 2 weeks. I have done the same for several of them since that time, and we all work with whatever skills we have in those situations.

The total group numbers around 200 men women and children. Among that number are professors, doctors, lawyers, several RN nurses, at least one surgical nurse, a dentist, several business owners and various other assorted craftsmen and skilled artisans. Many of us are veterans of more than one war.

We are not a group of losers hiding and whimpering prayers in the darkness. Most of the group are land owners and some of the members have large holdings and sizable farms.

One of the things that makes us a "like minded group" is that our present government is engaging in mild persecution against all faith based groups. We are aware that we might fall under serious persecution at any time, and we feel the need to be prepared for such things. For Americans that means several things; cash reserves, food stores and a few other odds and ends.

In other words, my Church is an already organized and functioning unit, capable of maintaining itself for an extended period of time in relative comfort and safety.

Now let's look at the OP in a different way.

Rather than asking if you would take a poor looser, deranged, God believing moron of a Christian into your group to burden you and cause all sorts of problems,

Why not ask why a well organized, successful, well equipped group of Christians would wish to take a non-believer into THEIR group.

After all, the non-believer is never going to fit in.

[Steve]

(11 May 2014, 19:14)Mortblanc Wrote: [quote='MaryN' pid='82601' dateline='1399752680']
They will even reengineer a religion to meet those personal needs.

Isn't that why religion was invented ? To control people ?

What better way for a dictator to control people than to tell them that there is an all-powerful and vengeful God, who placed him on the throne, and who will torture them forever if they don't obey the rules.

But don't worry paupers, "Blessed are the meek", so just do as you are told and you'll have a wonderful time in heaven ( when you're dead ).

And if an even bigger dictator makes rules that the local monarch doesn't like, such as not allowing him to shag his latest fancy, then he simply changes that bit of the religion and gives it a different name, "Protestant" for example.

[Mortblanc]

Again, you are placing all "religions" in a generic pot and labeling them as negative based on the actions of a few power and control freaks.

You can not separate "religion" from fear of the government or separate the concept of religion not being a branch of government. I suppose that is ingrained in the culture with the Queen being head of the COE.

On top of that your "state religion" has become so weak that there is the distinct possibility that it might be replaced, by a newer belief system with more devoted believers imposing their will as the stronger majority.

(I can't see British atheists giving it much of a go against radical Muslims)

Many nations have constitutional guarantees of separation between church and state, but that is not part of your heritage either. Therefore one religion could supplant the other as "state approved" by simple vote of the majority.

One of the things that many people from GB visiting over here note, especially if they are traveling in the southern part of our nation, is the density of the number of churches and the diverse number of various denominational labels. Between my home and the trap ranges is a 2 mile drive and I pass 6 different churches in that distance.

We co-exist very well and in the history of the US there have been only 3 martyrs to my quick recollection. We have so much religious diversity that no one group can take control over the others and none can take control of the government.

The other thing I note seems to be the belief that all religions want to keep you from some pleasure or make you do something you do not wish to do. Most of us do not care what anyone does, as long as you are not in our face with it, or expect us to pay for it with our taxes.

Our controls are internal. I will meet the standards I have accepted to be a part of my group. Those standards are not imposed on outsiders. I do not expect "non-believers" to follow my beliefs. I most definitely do not want anyone to be forced to join my group!

Non-believers have the right to go unmolested in their unbelief, or in whatever belief they promote, just as I have the right to believe as I do.

I do expect them to follow normal cultural standards of behavior, which is why we have a legal system that is separate from the religious system. In most cases I hold myself to a higher standard of behavior that the legal system.

But, I will not accept a decision from that legal system that over rides my religious beliefs. At that point we cross into the realm of civil disobedience, passive resistance, and group action.

[bigpaul]

saw a sticker today which made me think, it read: "Christianity has PAGAN DNA"

[Straight Shooter]

Great posts MB many thanks!

[Grumpy Grandpa]

(7 May 2014, 20:15)MaryN Wrote: Do you think there will be room for religion in a post-SHTF community?

To return to your original post Mary, yes, I think there may be little choice but to make room for it. In fact, I think we may be overwhelmed by it and that is something we should be aware of. It has often been said that there are no atheists in foxholes and in truth, post SHTF may be the deepest, darkest foxhole many of us have ever been in!

I have in the past, been a religious person and while I respect the groups that MB talks about, where strength can be garnered, there may be, as there are now, those who seek to gain advantage. In fact, I think nothing is more certain.

It may be difficult however, if not impossible, to distinguish between the genuine and the manipulators...

[Midnitemo]

I lost my religion a long time ago...my kids never really grasped it from the start as I wasn't leading by example my new partner and her mother are Christian's in a very loose way not sure about the rest of the group , I think a person's belief's are between them and there deity , I have no problem with it as long as people aren't ramming it down other peoples throats or trying to convert people , not sure it would be part of my admissions program to the group as in I don't think I'd even ask.....might be concerned if they were wearing religious garb or icon's though!

[Steve]

So, if I decided to adopt a religion, which one is correct ? There are so many to choose from......and they can't all be "true" can they.

I guess Atheism is just as valid a religion as any other, so I'll have that one for now, until I find another one I like better.

[Mortblanc]

(18 May 2014, 11:59)Steve Wrote: So, if I decided to adopt a religion, which one is correct ? There are so many to choose from......and they can't all be "true" can they.

I guess Atheism is just as valid a religion as any other, so I'll have that one for now, until I find another one I like better.

More realistic in perception than one might imagine Steve.

What one worships and how they worship it, as well as how they proselytize others, has absolutely nothing to do with what or which deity is normally identified as "religious".

it is all a matter of perspective.

As an example, see if these aspects do not sound familiar:

Preppers= true believers
Sheeple= unbelievers
Apostles= survival authors, anyone on the computer with a list
Disciples= anyone still reading this post
Priests= forum moderators
Lone Wolves= religious hermits, voices crying out in the wilderness
Homesteaders= working the monastery
Stockpiles and equipment= doing good works, tithing
RVs and meets= believers gathering for worship
Surfing prepper websites= studying "the word"
Posting on prepper websites= offering up prayers
Banning from websites= excommunication
Controlling access to websites= fighting heresy
Bugging Out= the rapture
Bugging in= hiding in the catacombs
SHTF= doomsday
Post Event= prepper afterlife?

Now tell me that does not sound familiar!