Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
mfbukowski

Humanism and the Ideal Perfected Human

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I guess I thought our HG is different, since we are the only church with the authority to baptize and be given the holy ghost. Glad to read your side. 

His side is the church's side.

If your idea was correct there could be no converts, because then they could not feel the HG until after baptism.

Of course they must be able to feel the Holy Ghost before baptism to be converted in the first place.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

MiserereNobis,

I cannot speak for my brother, Mark, nor would I presume to do so.  While I agree that one should not reach too far in an effort to draw parallels that are entirely too strained, and while Mark is free to correct me on any point if he wishes, at one time, essentially, I believe he was the sort of humanist he has in mind here, and that is why the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ as promulgated by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints appealed to him.

Is anyone expecting that humanists will, en masse, see the light and join the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in a mass-baptismal event much like what occurred with Alma's people at the Waters of Mormon in the Book of Mormon?  Plainly, such an expectation would be unrealistic (to put it mildly)!  On the other hand, if the odd humanist sees the parallels (or at least the lack of contradiction) between what he already believes and the doctrine of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, that cannot, from the perspective of the Church, its leaders, and its members, be a bad thing.

I wish you well. :) 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

His side is the church's side.

If your idea was correct there could be no converts, because then they could not feel the HG until after baptism.

Of course they must be able to feel the Holy Ghost before baptism to be converted in the first place.

This is confusing, then why are they blessed with the Holy Ghost after baptism. Maybe they just got the Holy Spirit instead? Which I've felt should be the same. But not according to our church, sounds like the Holy Ghost isn't Jesus, but the Holy Spirit is according to other Christians. 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Excellent points, thanks.  Now I get your point.

I am not sure that it is a parallel and you may have identified the difference in the FUNCTION of the idea of "God".

For me the belief in God FUNCTIONS as a personal relationship with a Guiding Leader who is inside of me and for all I know, I suppose could be my unconscious but it sure feels as though the personal Guide is outside me.

Even atheists like Hitchens believe in an internal "watcher" who acts as our conscience in telling us what is good from what is not.

But a personal covenant with someone inside me?  Obviously that is not going to work, and you may have nailed it.

So the location of that personal Guide is what separates us from Humanists?  

I think of secular folks who will say things like "Just let me pull this off, Universe, and I promise to ....."    So in that context who is the Universe that is going to "let you pull this off"?

Definitely getting closer- thanks

Which internal watcher authored which manifesto and presents himself both as the model to follow and the internal guide, watcher or conscience?

The internal watcher is partly innate, partly osmoted, and partly adopted. So two parts of the internal watcher develop with help from the outside, from people located outside of us and who encourage us in relation to the ideal that gets formulated, in some direction or another. The sense of right and wrong (and our sense of any other opposing forces) contributes to how we conceptualize and experience the ideal, no matter how improbable it may be. This is also our universe, so if we have to bargain with it, I’d say we’ve created the wrong universe (tail wagging the dog sort of thing) and need to start over and eventually relying on something outside (someone located elsewhere, Exekiel 35:1 and then 36:26; Chapter 36 is all about where the beneficiaries dwell, not where the word to do so came from).

It seems the best any author of a humanist manifesto can do is to present himself both as the model to follow and as one contributor of many (given innate, osmoted, and competing sources) to the internal guide which defines the ideal. Sounds fishy! Certainly not the way, the truth, the light, etc. and I don't think any author has gone that far (but those who have, there's the beef!).

Edited by CV75

Share this post


Link to post
19 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

This is confusing, then why are they blessed with the Holy Ghost after baptism. Maybe they just got the Holy Spirit instead? Which I've felt should be the same. But not according to our church, sounds like the Holy Ghost isn't Jesus, but the Holy Spirit is according to other Christians. 

I don't think you understand the position of LDS Christianity or other Christians on this issue. Christianity at large teaches that the Holy Ghost isn't Jesus. They teach the doctrine of the trinity in that the Holy Ghost is a person of the trinity which is one God. We essentially teach that too. The Holy Ghost is a personage of the Godhead. Christ said that those who blasphemed against Him could be forgiven,  but those that blasphemed against the Holy Spirit would not in this world nor the next. He also taught that the Holy Spirit would not come until He/Yeshua went away, and that the Holy Spirit would lead believers unto all truth.

Edited by RevTestament
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

OK yes you got it, totally, you get the golden ring.  You are perhaps THE guy around here who understands my progression from Catholicism very well.

But consider trying to pull this off in Catholicism! ?  Transcendent Trinity with substance philosophy?  Not a good match!

What I saw in the philosophy of Joseph Smith was Humanist Christianity- exactly what I was looking for

Worshiping an immanent perfected Human?   Are you kidding me?  And applying Social Trinitarianism to Christianity at the same time?

I was all over THAT!   But what was needed as well was a community!   And where are you going to find a community with my ideas?

I WAS that guy you describe in my first meetings.  But I have had heavy duty experiences and those keep me going knowing that linguistic descriptions are useless.

Still haven't found anything better....  and I still have the temple where I can do the total mysticism thing.   Works for me. ;)

 

Yes! The golden ring! Is the inscription in the tongue of Mordor?

You're absolutely correct that humanism and Catholicism don't match up well, for lots of reasons. Despite having a sometimes deserved but often exaggerated role limiting scientific inquiry, it is also important very people to not forget all the advancements in knowledge that Catholicism and Catholics brought. Think of all those monks and Jesuits who :) 

I'm glad things are working for you and I love that you have this project to help humanists find their way to God. And I wish I knew more about temple mysticism since it is mysticism that led me to spirituality, then religion, then Catholicism. I have a deep love of mysticism in all religions.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, s.calloway said:

They are unique because they provide answers to ultimate questions in a way that no other texts do.

If by "way" you mean that the answers themselves are unique, well, that's not a very significant statement because it can be made about any religion's texts.

But if by "way" you mean method, or something else, can you elaborate? How does the LDS canon present answers in a way that is unique to the Koran, or the Buddhist texts, or the Hindu texts, or the Jewish texts, or the (fill in the blank for every religion that has a text)?

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

This is confusing, then why are they blessed with the Holy Ghost after baptism. Maybe they just got the Holy Spirit instead? Which I've felt should be the same. But not according to our church, sounds like the Holy Ghost isn't Jesus, but the Holy Spirit is according to other Christians. 

Wikipedia and a million other sources say:

"

According to standard Latter Day Saint theology, the gift of the Holy Ghost is the privilege of receiving inspiration, divine manifestations, direction, and other blessings from the Holy Spirit which are not available to those who have not received the ordinance. These include cautions, warnings, and discernment of right and wrong. The gift of the Holy Ghost is the key to all of the spiritual gifts operating in the church, including prophecy and revelation.[5]

Latter Day Saints believe that people who have not received the gift of the Holy Ghost are able to feel the influence of the Holy Ghost from time to time and the inspiration of the light of Christ (conscience) as they listen to spiritual promptings, but those who have been baptized and confirmed to receive the gift of the Holy Ghost will always feel his companionship, as long as they remain worthy of it.[6] Latter Day Saints believe that the state of worthiness is maintained through ongoing repentance and discipleship.[1] Latter Day Saints believe that a person who has received the gift of the Holy Ghost will lose the benefit of its promptings if they commit a major sin (until they repent) or if they exercise "compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness".[7]"

 

Converts actually get lessons on this stuff before baptism. I suppose you could live a lifetime in the church and never know this if you have not studied it. It is a key Doctrine.

 But it is shocking to me that that's possible.

Edited by mfbukowski

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, RevTestament said:

This means members have heard whisperings not to cross the road or not to get on an airplane, etc. Things they did not pray about at all...

This happens to non-LDS believers all the time. Catholics have loads of stories about guidance and miracles and manifestations and on and on. I myself have experienced "whisperings" and inspirations about things that I am not actively praying about, so the LDS gift of the Holy Ghost must be something more than just that, or else I have got it :) 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, MiserereNobis said:

If by "way" you mean that the answers themselves are unique, well, that's not a very significant statement because it can be made about any religion's texts.

But if by "way" you mean method, or something else, can you elaborate? How does the LDS canon present answers in a way that is unique to the Koran, or the Buddhist texts, or the Hindu texts, or the Jewish texts, or the (fill in the blank for every religion that has a text)?

The Book of Mormon, Pearl of Great Price and the Doctrine and Covenants are very different from other religious texts outside of the Bible. Here is an example from D & C 38:

Quote

 

1 Thus saith the Lord your God, even Jesus Christ, the Great I Am, Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the same which looked upon the wide expanse of eternity, and all the seraphic hosts of heaven, before the world was made;

2 The same which knoweth all things, for all things are present before mine eyes;

3 I am the same which spake, and the world was made, and all things came by me.

 

Or these few verses from section 1:

Quote

 

1 Hearken, O ye people of my church, saith the voice of him who dwells on high, and whose eyes are upon all men; yea, verily I say: Hearken ye people from afar; and ye that are upon the islands of the sea, listen together.

2 For verily the voice of the Lord is unto all men, and there is none to escape; and there is no eye that shall not see, neither ear that shall not hear, neither heart that shall not be penetrated.

3 And the rebellious shall be pierced with much sorrow; for their iniquities shall be spoken upon the housetops, and their secret acts shall be revealed.

 

This kind of revelation, where God speaks (“Thus saith the Lord…”) is very rare, even in the Bible. But the D & C contains 138 such revelations.

If this is a subject you're interested in, this essay may interest you, “The Rhetoric of Revelation”, by Richard Bushman.

https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/re/vol1/iss1/11/

The revelations in the D & C and the BOM and P of GP, taken together with the Bible, provide more answers to ultimate questions than any other religion in the world——in my humble view. If you doubt this, you should read the book "Wrestling the Angel" by Teryl Givens, where, by "proving contraries", he demonstrates just how many answers Mormonism provides.

https://www.amazon.com/Wrestling-Angel-Foundations-Thought-Humanity/dp/B00QQSUEQ0/ref=sr_1_1?crid=3KQL7AMU63YXO&keywords=wrestling+the+angel&qid=1567469219&s=books&sprefix=wrestling+the+a%2Cinstant-video%2C226&sr=1-1

Where do these answers come from? From the Mormon scriptural canon, together with the Bible.

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, s.calloway said:

This kind of revelation, where God speaks (“Thus saith the Lord…”) is very rare, even in the Bible. But the D & C contains 138 such revelations.

If this is a subject you're interested in, this essay may interest you, “The Rhetoric of Revelation”, by Richard Bushman.

https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/re/vol1/iss1/11/

The revelations in the D & C and the BOM and P of GP, taken together with the Bible, provide more answers to ultimate questions than any other religion in the world——in my humble view. If you doubt this, you should read the book "Wrestling the Angel" by Teryl Givens, where, by "proving contraries", he demonstrates just how many answers Mormonism provides.

https://www.amazon.com/Wrestling-Angel-Foundations-Thought-Humanity/dp/B00QQSUEQ0/ref=sr_1_1?crid=3KQL7AMU63YXO&keywords=wrestling+the+angel&qid=1567469219&s=books&sprefix=wrestling+the+a%2Cinstant-video%2C226&sr=1-1

Where do these answers come from? From the Mormon scriptural canon, together with the Bible.

Ok, so it is the method: revelation from God, "thus saith the Lord." That makes sense as being unique. However, in a non-theistic religion like Buddhism, it holds no weight. Unfortunately, I'm not going to buy and read Givens book, as this is just a cursory question for this discussion board, so perhaps you can explain his methodology to prove that Mormonism answers more ultimate questions than any other religion in the world. That's a huge bold claim that is both qualitative (what is an ultimate question?) and quantitative (more than any other religion). I imagine his methodology is quite open to attack. For example, the Buddhist canon is HUGE and covers about any topic you can possibly think of. In terms of sheer size, I would think it would answer more questions than Mormonism's canon. I mean, seriously, the Tipitaka has sooooo many volumes.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, s.calloway said:

The first words out of a New Agers mouth are always "loving God". "Would a loving God...?" Or, "Does a loving God...?"

It's all very New Agey. But what is New Age based on? What is the New Age conception of a "loving God" based on? It is all very sentimental and heart warming, this conception of a "loving God", but what is it based on?

Our conception of God has to conform with the scriptures. What else is there that can be relied on?

If God isn't loving, I'm not interested in seeking him/her/it out.  

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, changed said:

If God isn't loving, I'm not interested in seeking him/her/it out.  

Of course God is loving. In the P of GP, Enoch beholds God weeping over his creation? But he is not loving in the New Age sense, where anything and everything is okay by him. "It's all good!" the New Age God says. "Each to his own without judgement!"

The God of the scriptures, or as he is portrayed in the scriptures, says, "There is a law, irrevocably decreed in heaven before the foundations of this world, upon which all blessings are predicated. And when we obtain any blessing from God, it is by obedience to that law upon which it is predicated."

Because he loves us, God sets out the conditions for exaltation. But he cannot dispense with those conditions because of his love for us, the way an indulgent parent might do, since he is bound by the same laws we are.

 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

Ok, so it is the method: revelation from God, "thus saith the Lord." That makes sense as being unique. However, in a non-theistic religion like Buddhism, it holds no weight. Unfortunately, I'm not going to buy and read Givens book, as this is just a cursory question for this discussion board, so perhaps you can explain his methodology to prove that Mormonism answers more ultimate questions than any other religion in the world. That's a huge bold claim that is both qualitative (what is an ultimate question?) and quantitative (more than any other religion). I imagine his methodology is quite open to attack. For example, the Buddhist canon is HUGE and covers about any topic you can possibly think of. In terms of sheer size, I would think it would answer more questions than Mormonism's canon. I mean, seriously, the Tipitaka has sooooo many volumes.

Well you would have to read the book. And of course my claim that Mormonism has more answers to ultimate questions (Why am I here? Where did I come from? Where am I going? ... questions like that) than any other religion is an opinion. But it is an opinion that can be backed up——by reading Givens' book, for example.

And this thread, in its own way, backs up the claim also. Mormonism is compatible with Humanism. It is also compatible with the modern world in ways that Christianity, Islam and post-Christian era Judaism are not.

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

MiserereNobis,

I cannot speak for my brother, Mark, nor would I presume to do so.  While I agree that one should not reach too far in an effort to draw parallels that are entirely too strained, and while Mark is free to correct me on any point if he wishes, at one time, essentially, I believe he was the sort of humanist he has in mind here, and that is why the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ as promulgated by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints appealed to him.

Is anyone expecting that humanists will, en masse, see the light and join the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in a mass-baptismal event much like what occurred with Alma's people at the Waters of Mormon in the Book of Mormon?  Plainly, such an expectation would be unrealistic (to put it mildly)!  On the other hand, if the odd humanist sees the parallels (or at least the lack of contr adiction) between what he already believes and the doctrine of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, that cannot, from the perspective of the Church, its leaders, and its members, be a bad thing.

I wish you well. :) 

So now I am an odd Humanist, hey?  😜

No dang it you are right.  But if you ever find another, let me know.   I have definitely helped a few!  

I am a humanist that has been zapped heavily by Someone out there on multiple occasions, and whoever it is knows it and so do I.  And that Someone takes care of me on a daily basis and we kind of check out the status of the day every evening and say Good Morning every morning.  Sometimes we just tip our hats and say "Hi" to check in and sometimes we have a good long chat.  And sometimes we talk even longer in the temple

That's about all I know.  ;)

 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

So now I am an odd Humanist, hey?  😜

No dang it you are right.  But if you ever find another, let me know.   I have definitely helped a few!  

I am a humanist that has been zapped heavily by Someone out there on multiple occasions, and whoever it is knows it and so do I.  And that Someone takes care of me on a daily basis and we kind of check out the status of the day every evening and say Good Morning every morning.  Sometimes we just tip our hats and say "Hi" to check in and sometimes we have a good long chat.  And sometimes we talk even longer in the temple

That's about all I know.  ;)

 

Do you think a humanist is close to a universalist? And wasn't Joseph Smith's father/grandfather universalists? 

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, RevTestament said:

I don't think you understand the position of LDS Christianity or other Christians on this issue. Christianity at large teaches that the Holy Ghost isn't Jesus. They teach the doctrine of the trinity in that the Holy Ghost is a person of the trinity which is one God. We essentially teach that too. The Holy Ghost is a personage of the Godhead. Christ said that those who blasphemed against Him could be forgiven,  but those that blasphemed against the Holy Spirit would not in this world nor the next. He also taught that the Holy Spirit would not come until He/Yeshua went away, and that the Holy Spirit would lead believers unto all truth.

That's why I thought the Holy Spirit is Jesus. Because that is what He left for the apostles to remember Him and have Him to be with them. https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Acts_of_the_Apostles/The_Training_of_the_Twelve

"He spoke to them also words of hope and courage. "Let not your heart be troubled," He said; "ye believe in God, believe also in Me. In My Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto Myself; that where I am, there ye may be also. And whither I go ye know, and the way ye know." John 14:1-4. For your sake I came into the world; for you I have been working. (p.22) When I go away I shall still work earnestly for you. I came to the world to reveal Myself to you, that you might believe. I go to My Father and yours to co-operate with Him in your behalf.

"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on Me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto My Father." John 14:12. By this, Christ did not mean that the disciples would make more exalted exertions than He had made, but that their work would have greater magnitude. He did not refer merely to miracle working, but to all that would take place under the agency of the Holy Spirit. "When the Comforter is come," He said, "whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, He shall testify of Me: and ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with Me from the beginning." John 15:26, 27.

Wonderfully were these words fulfilled. After the descent of the Holy Spirit, the disciples were so filled with love for Him and for those for whom He died, that hearts were melted by the words they spoke and the prayers they offered. They spoke in the power of the Spirit; and under the influence of that power, thousands were converted."

Share this post


Link to post
21 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Do you think a humanist is close to a universalist? And wasn't Joseph Smith's father/grandfather universalists? 

If there is a theistic humanist, she is probably a universalist.

And yes, I believe you are right about his grandfather 

Share this post


Link to post
40 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

That's why I thought the Holy Spirit is Jesus. Because that is what He left for the apostles to remember Him and have Him to be with them. https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Acts_of_the_Apostles/The_Training_of_the_Twelve

"He spoke to them also words of hope and courage. "Let not your heart be troubled," He said; "ye believe in God, believe also in Me. In My Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto Myself; that where I am, there ye may be also. And whither I go ye know, and the way ye know." John 14:1-4. For your sake I came into the world; for you I have been working. (p.22) When I go away I shall still work earnestly for you. I came to the world to reveal Myself to you, that you might believe. I go to My Father and yours to co-operate with Him in your behalf.

"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on Me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto My Father." John 14:12. By this, Christ did not mean that the disciples would make more exalted exertions than He had made, but that their work would have greater magnitude. He did not refer merely to miracle working, but to all that would take place under the agency of the Holy Spirit.

I know you are quoting the article, but point out this is a presumption. Such works might include the ordinance of resurrection. For instance Revelation tells us the two witnesses will be killed and rise up ie be resurrected after 3.5 days. I believe that to be a general resurrection. Is that doing the works of Christ? Do they do miracles? I don''t know, but they will have power to give signs. 

This scripture here points out that either the Holy Spirit is a separate spirit or Christ is speaking of himself in third person:
"When the Comforter is come," He said, "whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, He shall testify of Me: and ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with Me from the beginning." John 15:26, 27.

Yet, there are other scriptures I've quoted, that make it quite clear that the Holy Spirit or comforter is not Himself, like the scripture in which He says He will forgive those who blaspheme against Him, but not the Holy Spirit.

 

Share this post


Link to post
16 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Hmmm, ok good point.   I agree but I don't know what to do with that in the context of this thread.  I don't see how it fits here.  It is certainly a problem but I am not sure how I would correct it.

Usually the point is framed more in the line of "oppression" which to me is a gross exaggeration. Yet Jesus taught in parables for a reason- and that reason was that people were not ready for the real message.  I think that is a similar KIND of problem.  One cannot say what one wants to say due to the lack of comprehension of others.  Honestly, I feel that a lot.  On the other hand I consider it a fact of life that not everyone is on the same level and that there are others who are so far advanced over my level that they see my stupidity every time I open my mouth

I think at some point of maturity we can get more frank and drop the parables though.   I think this is a personal problem in worrying about what others think of us, not "opression" ;)

But honestly we should drop this line- it has nothing to do with the OP

I think I will just not answer anything not relevant to the OP and see how that works and if it gets too far afield I will just shut it down.

 

Moral treatment in the system has everything to do with the system. How one engages with the immorality in a system is important for the ideal human.  You don't seem to want to talk about it, yet on the individual level and systemic level, sexism matters. It is a betrayal of the self, it is a betrayal of others. The ideal person cannot tolerate it and continue to progress, neither can the ideal system. 

Share this post


Link to post
19 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

So the location of that personal Guide is what separates us from Humanists? 

Update:

On one hand, those who accept that the world, including the internal watcher, is a construct of their brains, I suppose the location of the internal watcher might not be a major difference after all. It’s ultimately in our heads, regardless of whether we identify its location as without or within. It is defined by the course we follow, which is ultimately laid out in our heads.

On the other hand, those who accept that their thought and behavior are in some respect formed and governed by laws and mores imposed by outside forces and events (which include other people) originating apart from their minds, might acknowledge that the location of the internal watcher is both within and without.

So I think the difference might be in whether the internal watcher self-identifies (as religious people tend to perceive it) or is defined by the individual (as less religious people tend to do).

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

Nice attempt but inadequate.

For you, not for others 

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

Moral treatment in the system has everything to do with the system. How one engages with the immorality in a system is important for the ideal human.  You don't seem to want to talk about it, yet on the individual level and systemic level, sexism matters. It is a betrayal of the self, it is a betrayal of others. The ideal person cannot tolerate it and continue to progress, neither can the ideal system. 

Like all moral issues, sexism is in the eye of the beholder. I just posted an article from a prominent sister, RS general presidency, who showed that the church is not sexist, you dismissed it as inadequate 

It's a personal opinion issue, not a systemic issue. You proved it in your dismissal. Only some women find the church sexist. You are imposing your opinion on others.

Edited by mfbukowski

Share this post


Link to post
23 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Like all moral issues, sexism is in the eye of the beholder. I just posted an article from a prominent sister, RS general presidency, who showed that the church is not sexist, you dismissed it as inadequate 

It's a personal opinion issue, not a systemic issue. You proved it in your dismissal. Only some women find the church sexist. You are imposing your opinion on others.

The church is categorically sexist.I read that article when it was released originally, and have seen numerous discussions of it since. Many women have considered that article as inadequate. But, again, it is not an opinion contest...the church is sexist by definition.

Humanism does allow for division of labor and role-making, atleast on personal scales. But I do not think codified and institutionalised roles as the church dictates (that's the authoritarian angle again) are consistent with humanism. 

Edited by Meadowchik

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...