How long would religions propagate if followers stopped doing one thing?

Give money.

Quote: rxwine

Give money.

I'd guess indefinitely (as long as possible) because if people really believe, they'll perform the services for free, as long as they have other income.

So for example, feeding the homeless, providing shelter, or penance, etc.

If a person doesn't have other income, then they'd likely have to take care of themselves first before others.

Why would a supernatural being need money?

Quote: rxwine

Why would a supernatural being need money?

A supernatural being, like God, doesn't need money.

I was referring to the followers as referred to in your title:

"How long would religions propagate if followers stopped doing one thing?"

I bet religion would fizzle down quite a bit if religious institutions were taxed. I am convinced that a noninsignificant amount are just tax shelters for the leaders.

Religion can be thought of as a system to take care of the needy.

If that system is being phased out, then another system can be phased in.

For example, the governments can redistribute the resources so the needy are taken care of.

So one system might be heart based (conscience clarity) and another legal based (forced).

But both can redistribute the wealth to the needy.

Quote: DoubleGold

Religion can be thought of as a system to take care of the needy.

If that system is being phased out, then another system can be phased in.

For example, the governments can redistribute the resources so the needy are taken care of.

So one system might be heart based (conscience clarity) and another legal based (forced).

But both can redistribute the wealth to the needy.

I was stunned a decade or so ago when a local temple was trying to fire a rabbi, but contractually would still have to pay out the remainder of his salary. The salary was over $100k a year! I had of course heard of the mega church pastors making 7 figures, but thought priests/rabbis/pastors were lowly compensated. I’m not saying they don’t deserve it, but it was surprising to me.

Quote: DoubleGold

Religion can be thought of as a system to take care of the needy.

If that system is being phased out, then another system can be phased in.

For example, the governments can redistribute the resources so the needy are taken care of.

So one system might be heart based (conscience clarity) and another legal based (forced).

But both can redistribute the wealth to the needy.

The problem with religion as a system to distribute resources to the needy, is there are strings attached.

Sure, they "help anyone", but they will have to sit through services, get pressured into joining, etc.... And, this is the optimal scenario, in some cases they flat out only help their own or those willing to convert.

Religions help people from a missionary perspective, they want to "save" them (and gain a lifelong loyal member). Very rarely (almost never) is the reasoning behind helping true charity.

Gandler, I think there will always be strings attached no matter what system is phased in.

If we eventually phase in Communism and look back, I'd be willing to have the Religion strings attached again.

But it might be too late then.

So be careful what we wish for.

They should not be tax exempt, that is stupid and unfair to we atheists.