this post was submitted on 25 Nov 2025
62 points (97.0% liked)
Asklemmy
51368 readers
873 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy π
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Maybe if people understood morality as part of the universe and human experience and not just an invention, and then kept themselves righteously in check as they should which would naturally follow (through belief in a higher power and His judgement, for instance, or simply because they take pride in being correct human beings), we could all live under the same paradigm, trust each other more easily, and work together to make our world better for us all.
While I respect your devotion to your faith as a means of promoting goodwill, I vehemently disagree that faith should serve as any integral component for a just society. Theocracies allow for plenty of corruption, manipulation of history and academia, sanctioned death, and abuse of their populations simply under other names and with varying methods.
Religion can be an accepted component of one's society. It should never serve as the bedrock of a society, lest it be seized and contorted by the next aspirational oligarchs seeking to write themselves in as "more equal than the others".
A text that serves as the axiomatic rock behind a culture's ideology cannot be corrupted, but yeah any human institution will allow for human mistakes. Having said that, there's no Christian religion in let's say Trump's America or Islam in the upper echelons of Emirati society, since they think and behave in ways that are diametrically opposed to the message of Jesus and Muhammad, and the prophets they referred to. These people believe in A, as evidenced by their actions, but say they believe in B. One can lie about their beliefs, but it cannot be used as a condemnation of the belief they're lying about, right?
Not true christians!
I could hardly find a text that went through more and bigger revisions than bible.
I ain't a Christian! But the Bible is a collection of books and correspondence, with many many authors (usually they say who they are in the first few lines of the book/letter), not just one book. And of course everything past the Old Testament can be more than iffy because Christianity/Catholicism was a tool for social control put together by the imperial power of the time to ride the wave and not get overwhelmed by it. Anything Paul says sounds like a fed cosplaying a believer, lol, and besides the additions, who knows what exactly had been modified? It must be read with discernment, basically.
Ecclesiastes is one book, for instance, upon which one could rely entirely to believe in God and do good deeds... but the Qur'an is also one book, more comprehensive and, at least for many of us, the word of God itself!
I referred to christianity from your comment and bible because my knowledge about islam is way less than about christianity. I had read Quran but i was not impressed at all, though it was more consistent than bible at least. Though i seem to remember there was nearly 15 centuries of various people writing interpretations of it, of which some was even enforced.
Also we seem to shift the topic, the foundation of society is not any text or another, it's the mode of production. And the shifting of holy texts and religious canons excellently illustrates that they are not any rock but the cover (base and superstructure, remember), as you mentioned yourself with how the bible was used.