Oh, just one snarky comment as well. If your Pope was so concerned about th welfare of people he could spend some of the billions, perhaps trillions of dollars the church has accumulated to ease the plight of its poorest followers. He's no better than Joel Osteen or any of the other meachurch pastors who live in multi-million dollar mansions while their followers life from paycheck to paycheck.

Let me be clear. ALL religion is demagoguery. It's all about making your own desires seem more important by ascribing them to some superior power. NOTHING written specifically about religion bears any importance to me except that it exhorts followers to persecute or kill others. THAT'S when religion means something, when it's inflicted from without.

"Niebuhr and Pope Francis have been genuinely concerned with the quality of the lives of people. " "winners write the history books". Dont be fooled.

It should come as NO surprise that the current pope, or some other religious leaders, were great humanitarians... that fact does NOT make their belief in a supreme being true...

I find this to be far too subjective. My question is what distinguishes the two "wonderful" thinkers from other leaders? The question was asked then answered not with examples but just opinion.

A lot of us that no longer go to church because we no longer believe in the dictates of religion remain good humanists and we know many good clergy that are too. Even though there’s a line that separates us now

Anything a theologian has to say is truly based on their belief in their god or gods, therefore I have no interest in how they think.

I like the theologian Anton LaVey, Peter H. Gilmore, and Michael W. Ford.⛧⛧⛧⛧⛧⛧

I DO respect the current pope, never heard of the other gentleman.
On the other hand I'm not going to read his writings or listen to his speeches or take his theological beliefs to heart.
Therefore my interest is minimal.

You are very much mistaken about the current pope. Take a look at his position on trans people. And women in the church are not faring too well. It amazes me how susceptible some are to good PR.

I’ve just looked up Neibuhr on Wikipedia ( not the most reliable source I know but dies as a kick start).

This guy is good and high profile in the 30s. Commended as an inspiration by Obama and is quoted as saying

“Man's capacity for justice makes democracy possible; but man's inclination to injustice makes democracy necessary."

He also write The Serenity Prayer from what I understand. Pretty upright and stable guy in anyone’ Book I’d say.

The established churches don't have to make ground. Evangelicals have to sell themselves, and dogma sells, because it appeals to our base instincts like, laziness, I don't want the bother of thinking, and hate, I want to blame someone else.

Everywhere there are very intelligent people and others not so much. It's not by being religious that makes you stupid and close minded. Pope Francis is a breath of fresh air in the Vatican, I don't agree with his beliefs but he has opened many things for the best. Unfortunately, as said, there are people that use religion as a means of control not for the purpose that should be. That's just human behaviour, always distorting things when it suits their interests.

Exactly what you said below. RELIGION IS MAN-MADE, TO CONTROL THE MASSES. MAN CREATED GOD AND "GOD'S WORD".

"That is exactly what these demagogues are doing – infusing their theology with their own biases and untruths, and calling it “the word of God.”These are despicable egocentric and destructive people whose pronouncements must be challenged at every turn! They would would diminish, abuse, and impose religious tyranny upon us".

Yes! The great twentieth century theologian Paul Tillich called religious literalism idolatrous.

i actually have a theory about this, though i wouldn’t claim to know for sure. i think it’s because we have so much access to information now and so many popular and well-known intelligent atheists. there are a lot of people that we recognize as very intelligent throughout history who i think would label themselves as atheists or agnostics if they hadn’t more access to information and the scientific knowledge we have now OR if they could safely do so without being killed. people who were deep thinkers, who questioned the status quo, etc. i think the reason we see less people like that in religion now is simply because they are able to identify as nonbelievers, leaving only the people less likely to think critically and question things to lead religions.

Sad, but true. Lot of con artists out there fleecing people. Taking a lot of money for themselves and justifying it by preaching that God wants us all to be wealthy, especially those who preach his word. But, check out James Cone. Check out his book or talk "The Cross and the Lynching Tree." You don't hear much about him because he makes Christians uncomfortable with his honesty.

You cross-posted this in Religion ... cross-posting is generally discouraged if not against the rules (can't remember). Pick a place and post it once. I think it might be okay to link from here to the other post, though.

For me, a religion is only as good as what it DOES for the greater good. Talk is cheap. Other than doing something good for the world, religion is useless.