Being A Christian

[linwood buddie]

Act of god mate ,he didn't want me posting any heathen propaganda.

[faraway saint]

Act of god mate ,he didn't want me posting any heathen propaganda.

You'll go to the bad fire. ????

[stlucifer]

Good god.

Bad god. Haven't you been listening to Oakey and Farty

Surely that’s “nae god”?

[faraway saint]

What about the devil?

He's real, right? ????

Should I start a thread?

Edited February 28, 2016 by faraway saint

[oaksoft]

The fact that you are aware that there was a character in Harry Potter with that name (I'm assuming that you are correct) should be embarrassing enough.

[oaksoft]

I just think other people should be cool with what I believe or disbelieve.

In fairness I didn't say I wasn't cool with you believing what you want.

I made it clear that my main problem was with organised religion. In particular its undue influence on our laws and specifically the disgraceful attempts by religious people to equate the validity of the Bible with that of peer-reviewed science.

I was very clear to use that phrase to stop people throwing this accusation of intolerance against the "right to believe" at me.

Sadly it's also clear that it isn't just Dickson who can't read.

Edited February 28, 2016 by oaksoft

[oaksoft]

I suspect you're wasting your time with these two narcissists. Tolerance isn't something they practice.

It won't help you but I agree with you entirely in this point. Why does there have to be proof when you have faith? If it gives comfort to an individual why take that away?

….aaaaand like the local bus from just down the street along comes a classic example of that inability to read other people's posts.

Edited February 28, 2016 by oaksoft

[insaintee]

Bad Forum

Gie Div a cuddle

[oaksoft]

You've changed the parameters of you're argument. You're now saying religion is wrong because people who are religious do bad things. It's a bit like saying politics is bad because politicians do bad things.

Far more people died because they questioned Mau's hand book or because they belonged to race that hitler's psudoscience deemed sub human (indeed not even just hitler social darwinism was used to justify a whole load of the worst of the colonial excesses). So I'm sorry look at some of the scientific "heros" Daulton, Wright etc and they quite unsavoury. Science does Some scientists do not have as clean hands as you might think.

You're also right in that scientific orthodoxy is ever changing and evolving, but certainly careers can go down the tube if stray from that orthodoxy. You can question these things but only within certain parameters. I'd certainly not even consider publishing if I found evidence that climatic change might be either of a lesser magnitude or of lesser impact than currently thought. There are similar unspoken restraints in some areas of the health/biological sector as well.

Religion has definitely reformed it's self many times and the ideas and concepts within it have changed to reflect changed human understanding.

TBH the second you start bringing Hitler into an argument you have just lost.

[oaksoft]

You've changed the parameters of you're argument. You're now saying religion is wrong because people who are religious do bad things. It's a bit like saying politics is bad because politicians do bad things.

I am saying organised religion is, by definition, bad because each organised religion very specifically tells its believers that only they will be rewarded in the "afterlife".

They are told by the same religion that all others are to be condemned in the "afterlife". That those people are somehow lesser.

The Bible is full of stuff about stoning adulteresses - something we have come to see as illegal. The word murder springs to mind.

I seem to remember all manner of stuff about what to do with homosexuals as well. Again nowadays we have prison for people who decide to follow the "true word" in this context.

That's just two simple examples of the rotten core of organised religion.

Don't even get me started on what happens to people who covet asses.

I'm not sure how anyone could defend these religions.

TBH I am beginning to wonder if you have actually READ the Bible or any other organised religion's core text.

Edited February 28, 2016 by oaksoft

[insaintee]

What about the devil?

He's real, right?

Should I start a thread?

That's Shull's job

In fairness I didn't say I wasn't cool with you believing what you want.

I made it clear that my main problem was with organised religion. In particular its undue influence on our laws and specifically the disgraceful attempts by religious people to equate the validity of the Bible with that of peer-reviewed science.

I was very clear to use that phrase to stop people throwing this accusation of intolerance against the "right to believe" at me.

Sadly it's also clear that it isn't just Dickson who can't read.

What if I believe in an organised religion?

Don't you think that current human rights and laws have developed from the Judaeo-Christian traditions. How would that have developed without them? Perhaps like Pol Pots Cambodia.

In lots of ways the bible is more relevant to the development of our laws than scientific text because it addresses moral dilemmas.

[oaksoft]

That's Shull's job

What if I believe in an organised religion?

Don't you think that current human rights and laws have developed from the Judaeo-Christian traditions. How would that have developed without them? Perhaps like Pol Pots Cambodia.

In lots of ways the bible is more relevant to the development of our laws than scientific text because it addresses moral dilemmas.

That bit in bold? I'm sorry but FFS SERIOUSLY?

Most of the Christian organisations can't even agree on whether women should be allowed to preach and right now they are tying their knickers in knots over what to make of homosexuality.

And that bit about Pol Pot? That's Christian arrogance right there. Believing that only you lot can have a moral code.

Edited February 28, 2016 by oaksoft

[insaintee]

That bit in bold? I'm sorry but FFS SERIOUSLY?

Most of the Christian organisations can't even agree on whether women should be allowed to preach and right now they are tying their knickers in knots over what to make of homosexuality.

And that bit about Pol Pot? That's Christian arrogance right there. Believing that only you lot can have a moral code.

Don't think it's controversial at all.

I gave the example of Pol Pot because it is the only one I know where the laws developed out with a religious context. Even communist Russia and China had their laws based on religious principles. I'll be happy to discuss any other example you can give me of a judicial system based entirely on secular principles.

[oaksoft]

Don't think it's controversial at all.

I gave the example of Pol Pot because it is the only one I know where the laws developed out with a religious context. Even communist Russia and China had their laws based on religious principles. I'll be happy to discuss any other example you can give me of a judicial system based entirely on secular principles.

You have just highlight the problem.

We are still in the process of undoing some of the huge damage to our society caused by a formerly religion controlled nation.

You would need to ask homosexuals, women and businessmen who want to open on Sundays exactly how good it is to be under the cosh of religion.

We are almost secular anyway in the UK. We are certainly no longer a Christian society. IMO that is a good thing. Only Islam seems to be spreading right now and TBH that religion is now so tarnished with the sort of terrorist activities which used to blight Christianity that I expect them to have no prospect of having any sort of legal influence any time soon. Again that is a good thing.

If we can just stop these people polluting the minds of children by deliberately sowing seeds of division and fear that would be great.

No child should have to suffer religion being forced down their throats.

[RickMcD]

Gie Div a cuddle

Is it compulsory? I'm getting a bit nervous.

[RickMcD]

Has it ever occurred to either of you two numpties to ignore what you dont like and just get on with your points?

If I had a pound for every time you two posted something which was polluted by a whiny sentence in it about other posters I would be a rich dude.

I confess to having in the past posted things that I regret when I see them the following morning when I've sobered up. What's your excuse bearing in mind you have admitted that you resent spending the time of day and you don't drink? When Div came up with General Nonsense I don't imagine he intended it to be a thread for abuse. I don't care what anybody wants to talk about but I'm far from the only one who gets weary about continual abuse and name-calling. And as Div has said, quite a number have walked away which is a pity. I would add that in my humble opinion there are a few posters who thoroughly deserve the abuse that they receive.

[oaksoft]

I confess to having in the past posted things that I regret when I see them the following morning when I've sobered up. What's your excuse bearing in mind you have admitted that you resent spending the time of day and you don't drink? When Div came up with General Nonsense I don't imagine he intended it to be a thread for abuse. I don't care what anybody wants to talk about but I'm far from the only one who gets weary about continual abuse and name-calling. And as Div has said, quite a number have walked away which is a pity. I would add that in my humble opinion there are a few posters who thoroughly deserve the abuse that they receive.

As regards the bit in bold, you can't really have it both ways.

As for those who have walked away? That is the natural course of things.

People come and go. It's wrong for people to assume that it's always for the worst when people move on.

The problem is that you are throwing stones in a glass house.

You have a track record of putting yourself about on this forum.

Now you want to complain about others doing the same?

Like I said, you can't expect to have it both ways bud.

Finally, you asked what my excuse is.

I have no excuse to offer. I give it out and I take it back in spades.

You won't find me complaining too much about it outside threats of physical violence, sexism and racism.

[Isle Of Bute Saint]

I confess to having in the past posted things that I regret when I see them the following morning when I've sobered up. What's your excuse bearing in mind you have admitted that you resent spending the time of day and you don't drink? When Div came up with General Nonsense I don't imagine he intended it to be a thread for abuse. I don't care what anybody wants to talk about but I'm far from the only one who gets weary about continual abuse and name-calling. And as Div has said, quite a number have walked away which is a pity. I would add that in my humble opinion there are a few posters who thoroughly deserve the abuse that they receive.

You have made some good points also agree with the above. Over the years many a good poster has walked away from this forum. Best thing that has happened over the past few years is the ignore button don't like putting anyone on ignore but if you have a bad smell following you around the forum the ignore button fixes the problem to a certain extent.

Was brought up going to the Life Boys then the BB to be in such organizations you have to attend bible class and church. Was in these organizations right up to 16 years of age. Such faith organizations are no bad thing installing a good basic way how to lead your life right from wrong. At the same time learning skills you might not otherwise have done. I believe in God though cant say I practise any particular faith. What is God though some think its a person , a man. For me God is a power , a force who created the seeds of life.

There is too much hypocrisy in all man made religions for me to follow any particular one though I appreciate the early learning installed by a church organization.

[insaintee]

TBH the second you start bringing Hitler into an argument you have just lost.

Really

[insaintee]

Is it compulsory? I'm getting a bit nervous.

Yes

[insaintee]

Sorry, but what?

This is really a windup, isn't it?

Human rights are just that, human, not religious. Many things seen as being Christian values are really human values. Our ability to empathise is far more important and helpful than any "rules" laid down by religion. In fact, a lot if those religious rules come directly from the human ability to empathise, even if the punishments for transgressors don't.

Let's look at the Judaeo-Christian ten commandments.

First of all, we should ignore the first four as they are all "look at me, aren't I great" rules. Then, in no particular order (and in modern English):

Don't kill, don't steal, don't lie - things that most people, regardless of faith (or lack of) would agree are good rules to live by and which existed long before Judaism.

Don't be jealous of what someone else has - another good way to live. "Keeping up with the Joneses" is a pointless, and probably damaging, way to live your life. It also may tempt you to break the "don't steal" commandment.

Don't commit adultery - that basically goes back to "don't lie" as you have promised to be faithful.

Respect you elders - well, they have more experience than you. This would have been more valuable when people didn't live as long and when they were less literate. Another example of before Judaism.

Taking this on board, in what ways has any religion benefited the laws of any nation and what exactly does the bible say should be the punishments for transgressors of the "laws of God"?

Having said all that, there would have been times in human history (and the situation possibly still exists in certain areas at certain times) where, in order to survive, people would have had to break those rules. It doesn't mean they wanted to or didn't know that they were doing wrong, only that the only other option was death. For example, during a famine five thousand years ago (imagining that you were around then), if the only way for your child to live was for you to steal the food from your neighbour, who needed it to keep their child alive, would you steal the food (and possibly kill your neighbour to get it) or would you let your child die? What if it wasn't a neighbour but a stranger? Or what if your neighbour was your mother and their child was your sibling? What if your neighbour was an elder child of yours?

That's taking things off at a tangent, so feel free not to answer READ any of that.

FIFY

[Dibbles old paperboy]

Last night i was at the kirk session meeting of a local Church of Scotland congregation in Renfrewshire. Under the "correspondance" item on the agenda were several thank you letters from organisations who had received financial assistance from this congregation in the last few months for work taking place outside the parish - street children in Peru being helped, projects transporting doctors and dentists to people in rural areas in the Amazon and Tanzania (120k people served last year), work helping drug, alcohol addicts, and prisoners and prostitutes in Glasgow.

After Renfrewshire Council put up the cost of lets the church has also let local community groups who could not afford the new let prices use their halls, they have bought a car park which was for sale and let the community use it as a car park free of charge.

At the moment I work with about a dozen local churches and I have yet to meet a perfect Christian in any one of them, just as I am far from perfect myself. What I can say without fear of contradiction is that even though plenty of BAWA posters are happy to write a lot of these people off as hypocrites, holly willies and idiots, the vast majority are pretty normal people, and dare i say it, good people and most congregations are places where youth groups are given a place to meet, free advice centres are held, debt / money management if offered, bereaved people are helped free of charge unlike the charges issued for humanist funerals, Foodbanks are supported and sometimes held in local churches and plenty of the people attending church are well educated professionals who can see through straw man arguments posted about Noah's Ark or the creation account in Genesis or Moses and the Israelites escaping from Egypt.

I'm more than happy to meet IOBS, Oaky for a coffee and a chat and pass on some John Lennox books about science v religion debate or how to understand the creation story in Genesis to anyone who is genuinely interested and looking for evidence in an open-minded way.

[TopCat]

The reality is that the percentage of cunts/liars/thiefs in the Christian population is equal to the atheist population, is equal to the Muslim population, is equal to any large group of people.

You get them in all walks of life. Being religious doesn't make you more likely to be a better or worse person.

[Dibbles old paperboy]

I am saying organised religion is, by definition, bad because each organised religion very specifically tells its believers that only they will be rewarded in the "afterlife".

They are told by the same religion that all others are to be condemned in the "afterlife". That those people are somehow lesser.

The Bible is full of stuff about stoning adulteresses - something we have come to see as illegal. The word murder springs to mind.

I seem to remember all manner of stuff about what to do with homosexuals as well. Again nowadays we have prison for people who decide to follow the "true word" in this context.

That's just two simple examples of the rotten core of organised religion.

Don't even get me started on what happens to people who covet asses.

I'm not sure how anyone could defend these religions.

TBH I am beginning to wonder if you have actually READ the Bible or any other organised religion's core text.

Jesus said in John 10: 10 that he had come to bring life in all its fullness to his followers. How does this equate to organised religion only rewarding followers in the afterlife? There are 6 references to homosexual activity in the Old and New Testaments and in Genesis 19 (the destruction of Sodom & Gomorrah), heterosexual Lot is hardly a great example to us today by offering his virgin daughters to the crowd as he tries to prevent a homosexual gang rape scenario. A similar scenario is played out in Judges 19 in a place named Gibeah where the townfolk murder a concubine. While homosexual activity is denounced in those stories it is far from the only sin being committed by the crowds yet in popular imagination Sodom & Gomorrah is 'all about' homosexuality.

Many Christians believe that Jesus has paid the death penalty for everyone for all of their sins and his sacrifice and atonement negates the need for the death penalty being handed out as proscribed in Old Testament laws regarding purity and the temple, and Jews also have reinterpreted how laws in Leviticus for Temple purity are applied in a time where there is no temple.

[Isle Of Bute Saint]

Last night i was at the kirk session meeting of a local Church of Scotland congregation in Renfrewshire. Under the "correspondance" item on the agenda were several thank you letters from organisations who had received financial assistance from this congregation in the last few months for work taking place outside the parish - street children in Peru being helped, projects transporting doctors and dentists to people in rural areas in the Amazon and Tanzania (120k people served last year), work helping drug, alcohol addicts, and prisoners and prostitutes in Glasgow.

After Renfrewshire Council put up the cost of lets the church has also let local community groups who could not afford the new let prices use their halls, they have bought a car park which was for sale and let the community use it as a car park free of charge.

At the moment I work with about a dozen local churches and I have yet to meet a perfect Christian in any one of them, just as I am far from perfect myself. What I can say without fear of contradiction is that even though plenty of BAWA posters are happy to write a lot of these people off as hypocrites, holly willies and idiots, the vast majority are pretty normal people, and dare i say it, good people and most congregations are places where youth groups are given a place to meet, free advice centres are held, debt / money management if offered, bereaved people are helped free of charge unlike the charges issued for humanist funerals, Foodbanks are supported and sometimes held in local churches and plenty of the people attending church are well educated professionals who can see through straw man arguments posted about Noah's Ark or the creation account in Genesis or Moses and the Israelites escaping from Egypt.

I'm more than happy to meet IOBS, Oaky for a coffee and a chat and pass on some John Lennox books about science v religion debate or how to understand the creation story in Genesis to anyone who is genuinely interested and looking for evidence in an open-minded way.

If you read through the forum I think you will see I was attacking one individual not the Christian faith or any other faith for that matter. On another post I praised a couple of Christians I know.