religious "education" - the very things that others would like to ban!
Waaaaait up a minute there.
I don't think anyone's suggesting banning religious education. Well, probably apart from Woppit, whose posts I stopped reading somewhere around page 5.
We've previously discussed not allowing RE to infiltrate science, and generally about how teaching RE as "fact" within context of a given denomination (as opposed to an impartial "christians believe X, whereas muslims believe Y" approach) is a bone of contention. We've also discussed whether this should be a mandatory subject up to 16.
But, correct me if I'm wrong, I don't believe anyone's suggested banning RE.
Thm kids may well not do as their parent say but the correlation ( I know it does.not.show causality) between your folks belies and yours is going to be pretty high. Also whilst the folk may leave the parents religion it is some way from a random spread.in terms.that Jews have Jewish kids Muslims have Muslim kids etc they dont te d to get a newish kid a Muslim a Buddhist and bhai etc
Still going ...
For me, this:
[img] 
[/img]
explains better than I can the way in which gods alleged influence and power has retreated in the face of reason.
All this talk of "days" vs "periods of time" in Genesis and the "careful theology" (thousands of years worth!) necessary to tell the difference between homosexuals and shellfish ...
Well, its just very complicated scaffolding on a crumbling edifice.
The simplest explanation is that the whole of theology has no factual basis.
The weird thing is that the more complex and creaky the supporting "theological" scaffolding and doublethink required becomes. The more religious people start pointing at its complexity like its something to be proud of?
Its not; its just a series of desperate measures thrown up to support your irrational ideas, and smokescreen the fact that theres not really anything of any substance there to support anymore.
I would have some respect for theology and its promoters if they valued and promoted the clarity and explanatory power of its ideas, but the one thing they can never do is be clear.
edit .. forgot the point 🙂
education about the topic of religion.. fine
religious education [Nelson Muntz] HA HA [/Nelson Muntz]
religious "education" - the very things that others would like to ban!
I'm not sure that was the suggestion. It was more a case of the pervasive influence of religion via the state.
However, seeing as you've raised it, what you are actually underlining is the opening of Pandoras box, in much the same way that brought about the collapse of the Eastern Bloc. i.e. even with all the apparatus for the propagation of religion, it is no longer possible to con the population.
In the Eastern bloc a good deal of its demise was attributed to the global coverage of the 1976 Olympics, and the simple fact that it became impossible to hide the realities if life within in relation to life outside. Similarly, as information has become instantly globally available it has become impossible to stem the intellectualisation of views on religion. If you do and you take take just a short step back the sort of views being expressed on here are difficult to deny. i.e. generality is good, specifics are not, and the apparatus for delivery is corrupt.
But if we are going to ridicule this 'poorly thought-out story', don't you think we should consider how successful it has or has not been ?
Quite. But this still holds true.
it's not possible to negate the fact that there were other factors involved in its longevity, from personal ambitions through political involvement, imperialism, conquest and subjugation and a few very well funded promotional bodies to support its propagation, not just personal discovery and enlightenment.
@THM - that will probably depend upon the culture in which the family and children exist, children rebel - perhaps that is where the young free thinkers break away from the established religious order to form new branches, it allows them to modify the doctrine to better suit them and their position.
I have yet to find many people who do exactly what their parents tell them
"Exactly," no, but that's a bit of a reach isn't it. But your formative years are undeniably moulded by your parents. They tell you about the world, and they form the basis of your opinions and beliefs until you reach an age where (some people at least) have the tools to question that.
As a general rule, Catholic parents raise Catholic children (obviously, as they believe it's the right thing to do), Muslim parents raise Muslim kids, and so on. I'm sure that there are examples of, say, Muslims with Catholic parents, but I'd wager it's exceptionally rare.
I'd love to see some stats on this, but people aren't born religious. So they must get it from their parents, their peers, their family, their community. I'm sure some people find their own way their in adulthood (we've examples of that amongst STW members) but I'd hazard that's atypical.
'ignorant and primitive sheep-herders' which was clearly intended to ridicule.
Not at all. Merely descriptive of actuality. Not like you to read into something, that which isn't there, ernie. I'm disappointed.
nealglover - MemberWoppit, I'm not really sure why you are still reading this thread.
I'm god. I move in mysterious ways.
Allegedly.
As a general rule, Catholic parents raise Catholic children (obviously, as they believe it's the right thing to do), Muslim parents raise Muslim kids, and so on. I'm sure that there are examples of, say, Muslims with Catholic parents, but I'd wager it's exceptionally rare.
Yep. It's like a virus that we catch from our elders.
Helpless children become indoctrinated into dogma and unless they are fortunate enough to have the skill of independent and critical thinking strong enough to overcome the conditioning by the time (typically, eight years old or thereabouts) this skill naturally develops, they are stuck in a forced "mind-shape set" for life.
A form of child abuse.
Point accepted about RCs more likely to have RC children etc (indeed an obligation I believe at baptism). I was guilty of exaggerating to make a point which is, that the modern generation if far better placed than previous ones to exercise their own free will (this is probably true throughout history with exceptions such as the Dark Ages), and yet as Ernie points out, religious following, far from dying out, continues to endure. The answer may be the search for salvation as JY pointed out, it may the others that I added to the list. Who knows?
(p.s. JY in countering your patronising accusation, I may have come back a little stongly 😉 Then when looking through back pages to answer cougar's question, I re- read you response to someone complaining "how do you know what I am thinking," with the line "you are not very good at explaining yourself." (page 4 i think) Now that could be considered patronising, but I thought it was the funniest post of the day 😉 please continue!!!!)
There is progress, however:
the modern generation if far better placed than previous ones to exercise their own free will
Sure. Like I said, progress.
In some cultures, anyway.
Yes indeed cougar or have we reached a paradoxical position? Since exercising free-will is the fundamental first point of the three Theological Virtues are we arguing that "progress" implies that religion has been successful or the opposite?
I will leave that with you!!!
THM I accepted that answer / the point you made in your list. However the thrust of my post and your quote is the answer I am still waiting for. j cannot cut and paste.it on my phone
seems like a good time that there are at least 2 questions explicitly directed at you, for which I am waiting for an answer.
Jews have Jewish kids Muslims have Muslim kids etc
Well there's an interesting sidebar there to do with race. Judaism was and possibly still is closely tied to a particular ethnic group. So you can be Jewish and yet not be at the same time. I think they call themselves 'lapsed Jews' don't they?
Not quite as clear cut with Muslims though, but it started off being an Arab thing didn't it? Incidentally I think that's why the Catholic church is so-called, despite these days being not particularly catholic.
Mr Woppit - Member
Not at all. Merely descriptive of actuality. Not like you to read into something, that which isn't there, ernie. I'm disappointed.
Of course not Woppit, you weren't trying to ridicule religion.........silly me 😀
Since exercising free-will is the fundamental first point of the three Theological Virtues are we arguing that "progress" implies that religion has been successful or the opposite?
Your assumption there is that religion is inherently causal either way; I wonder if perhaps we've progressed despite religion.
Wasn't exercising free will what got us all into trouble in the first place? (-:
Sorry CM on phone will look back tonight but Last I read you thought I was being a dick and I had to leave it so I did not respond.
I think one was on love and yes I believe folk feel it, that it affects them and that it is real. I may have some problems proving that scientifically which l assume was the point? ditto aesthetics or say humour?
Still would argue I can show these are real whether I can fully explain them or not
Of course not Woppit, you weren't trying to ridicule religion.........silly me
Actually no, I wasn't. I was merely pointing out that the "Book of Genesis" was written by primitive people who sought an explanation for the universe through 1: story telling and 2: a belief in a supernatural being.
I am fond of ridiculing religion however, I admit. I think it deserves it, but wasn't doing so on this occasion. (smiley disingenuous face or whatever, at this point. Probably.).
@JY- there is a/physiological reaction when in love or amused, not so sure about aesthetics.
I think one was on love and yes I believe folk feel it, that it affects them and that it is real. I may have some problems proving that scientifically which l assume was the point? ditto aesthetics or say humour?
Still would argue I can show these are real whether I can fully explain them or not
I have no doubt you would, JY. The real challenge is in actually doing it.
A point that seems to be missed by some in this "indoctrination" of children part of the debate, is that if you believe in God and the positive impact your faith has on your life, of course you want your children to have that same positive experience. If you love God then it would be selfish to exclude them from at least being informed enough to make a decision.
As I mentioned several pages ago, my children aren't particular interested in being Christians but I gave them the option.
A point that seems to be missed by some in this "indoctrination" of children part of the debate, is that if you believe in God and the positive impact your faith has on your life, of course you want your children to have that same positive experience. If you love God then it would be selfish to exclude them from at least being informed enough to make a decision.
+1
As I mentioned several pages ago, my children aren't particular interested in being Christians but I gave them the option.
Exactly. They will pick up a whole bunch of stuff from their parents, including their faith - maybe. Some will keep it, some won't, but as a parent you have to share what you believe, even if others don't believe it
...all aboard?
if you believe in God and the positive impact your faith has on your life, of course you want your children to have that same positive experience
What if you're wrong ?
That apart, its not really the parental influence that is the biggy, its the association with the state which is more sinister IMHO. Really, if you read the book and believe it you have to see that JC and his teachings are radical and not aligned to the state in any way. Quite the opposite in fact. One has to wonder what the dear boy would make of how corrupted that position has become.
BB - so is you last sentence a call to reconnect? Perhaps you have found the missing answer to JY's question. 😉 ?
I've deliberately stayed away from this thread, but now its hit 23 pages I find myself suddenly drawn towards it
Could someone give me a summary of the main points covered so far,in a couple of sentences, so I can get up to speed. Thanks
One has to wonder what the dear boy would make of how corrupted that position has become.
He'd be turning in his grave, if he had one.
Could someone give me a summary of the main points covered so far,in a couple of sentences, so I can get up to speed.
Very good generally well mannered discussion about religion with many interesting points discussed. Precisely the sort of thing that should be on internet forum.
Could someone give me a summary of the main points covered so far,in a couple of sentences, so I can get up to speed
Start from about Page 17 for a quick(ish) catch up.
There can be no question that the Church has gone through a period of decades wherein many, many people were affected by abuse, and during which the Church utterly failed to deal with it properly. There is simply no excuse. That said, as the reasons for the failure are brought to light, the Church will be able to do its duty in a way it never has before. That is a duty shared with every institution in society to protect people of all ages and both genders from abuse, and to respond in an aggressive and transparent manner whenever it is suspected and/or detected.
We can all guess that there will many more cases brought to light over the coming few years, but we can also expect that the Church will not act in so opaque and uncomprehending a manner again.
I do not wish, and can not possibly defend what has happened in the Church, but I wil say this: I do not think that the media and the public get it right very often when they start expressing opinions as to why it all happened, and the idea that it was a problem limited to the Catholic Church. I do think the public is absolutely right, though, to demand justice and that it never be allowed to happen again.
Does it ever cross your mind that the other guy might be in charge, and that hes winning out hands down because you have free will to make you own choices, and by continuously failing to utterly reject the institution you are actually playing right into his hands......just asking, because honestly there is no way I could ever subscribe to such a blatantly obviously corrupt institution. I'll go a step further than that, and I'll tell you without any fear of contradiction that were JC real and still around, I'm totally confident whose side of the table he would be sitting on, and I don't believe in it, and am a thoroughly bad person and apparently always have been!!!
I think, BB, that your opinion of the Church's corruption is better discussed over a pint than on this forum. If only because I have to leave on a plane first thing in the morning and won't be able to respond to anything until Sunday night.
Either way, have a good weekend.
you too
That mght be a bit of the gnostic heresy you have there BB.
[img] 
[/img]
