Incidentally, I’m halfway through reading the essay that kja wrote. It’s actually very interesting so far; I’d recommend it.

Just saw this on C4
http://www.4thought.tv/themes/where-do-we-go-when-we-die/jeremy-pearce

World’s going to get pretty crowded..

Just re-reading…

well our view is that it is wrong with no basis in fact and no observation to verify it. What exactly are you expecting?

What about things that might be un-observable?

some christian do do this with the bible.

Yeah, you won’t find me defending their point of view.

However if it is the work of man/men/woman/women and by implication a work of collective fiction

NO! Fiction means something deliberately made up for entertainment. A biography is not fiction, even if it’s some crazy interpretation.

When I turned the computer off late afternoon my time on Wed., I thought this thread had about reached the end,

I was on holiday. I caught up this morning now I’m back at work 🙂

What about things that might be un-observable?

See this is what I mean about unhelpful , the christians DO NOT believe that god is un-observable so let them explain their view please

I’m not stopping them. Until one pops up to explain their Christian views, I’ll continue to express my philosophical ones.

NO! Fiction means something deliberately made up for entertainment. A biography is not fiction, even if it’s some crazy interpretation.

Though obviously fictional biographies, and biographical fictions somewhat blur the distinction : )

Also the dramatised versions “based on” real events I was discussing to myself earlier.

I’m not stopping them. Until one pops up to explain their Christian views, I’ll continue to express my philosophical ones.

With respect, and correct me if I’m wrong, I don’t recall you ever really airing your views per sé, beyond “hey, let’s all be nice to each other,” which convention dictates is the sort of thinking that gets people nailed to crosses. You’re largely just dissecting everyone else’s.

Glad you like it Cougar, I think I articulate in it fairly well my attitude towards scripture… Right, I’ve had a long and emotionally challenging day, so I will post up a few thoughts here, but probably won’t come back to the computer this evening as I need some space.
I’ll start by reposting the 1st founding principle of the Baptist Union of Great Britain. ‘That our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, God manifest in the flesh, is the sole and absolute authority in all matters pertaining to faith and practice, as revealed in the Holy Scriptures, and that each Church has liberty, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, to interpret and administer His laws.’
Not keen on the word ‘Laws’, probably doesn’t mean quite what it’s supposed to. Anyway, that’s a statement that I fully agree with, indeed that attitude is one of the reasons I chose to become a Baptist minister and not part of another denomination.

It’s been a surprise to me to read in this thread that many people with no faith are perturbed by the fact that people of faith can agree to disagree or can change their stance on certain issues. This has never been a problem for me. There are a few things that I believe are central to being a Christian – belief in the deity of Christ, belief in the Holy Trinity, and belief that through faith in Christ, his life, death and resurrection, we are somehow made ‘right’ before God. These are my ‘Primary theological issues’.

Notice that in that founding principle it’s Jesus who is the sole authority in matters of faith, and not the Bible. I believe that I’ve experienced a personal revelation of Jesus Christ, through the power of the Holy Spirit and it’s that experience which is the ultimate foundation of my faith, and not the Bible. So where does the Bible fit into my faith? I believe that the four Gospels are a reliable account of the life, works, and teachings of Jesus. And being that Jesus is God, what the four Gospels tell us Jesus was like is what God is like. When I say reliable, I don’t mean perhaps what we as 21st Century Westerners with our thought processes heavily influenced by Greco-Roman philosophy might think.

Matthew and Mark (probably a disciple of Peter) were Jews and wrote as Jews; people who knew the Old Testament intimately and saw Jesus as the Messiah foretold by the Jewish faith. Luke was gentile, probably the Doctor Luke of Paul’s letters and wrote more scientifically probably to non-Jewish, non-Christians in Rome. John, probably the ‘beloved disciple’ of Christ put a far more spiritual emphasis and interpretation on his recollection of events. Luke also wrote Acts as a history of the early church and of Paul. So for me the Gospels and Acts are fundamental to my faith. The epistles (letters) of the New Testament were written to specific churches in specific contexts, and whilst inspired by God their instructions may not apply specifically to context today. As one of my lecturers was fond of saying ‘It’s not about “the Bible says…” it’s about “what does the Bible mean when it says…”’ For example; Paul instructs women to cover their heads in church. The only women in his context who didn’t cover their heads were prostitutes. It’s as if Pauls says ‘Christian women, you are free from your culture’s rules, but it’s probably best not to dress like a prostitute.’

The Old Testament is a bit more tricky, we journey with a nation as it covenants with God and develops its understanding of God and God’s expectations for it. These were people who were used to telling and hearing stories, some of the OT stories probably have their origins in the most ancient stories known to humanity. The OT can be divided into four categories; The Law, History, Wisdom and The Prophets. These four categories all have different purposes and we see a development of the Jewish faith and understanding of God as we move through the OT, from a God who calls on the destruction of his enemies in the law and some historical books, to the suffering servant of Isaiah. The OT points towards a coming Messiah who will put all things right; this is not Christians reading back into the OT but is something that Jews believe, God will send the Messiah, but the Jews don’t believe it was Jesus. Indeed the Dead Sea Scrolls indicate that the community at Qumran believed that two Messiahs would come as they couldn’t see that one person could be both Priest and King.

I don’t think the original readers/hearers of the OT stories cared in the slightest whether the stories were true, they were interested in what the story could teach them. Whilst Jesus did on occasion teach by giving lists and instructions, the majority of his teaching was in parables, made up stories he used to illustrate his point. If that’s how Jesus (who is God) chose to teach when he walked the earth, why is it so hard to view the OT stories as parables? Some of them are probably true, many probably have their origin in truth, some may be complete fabrications, but that’s not the point.

Besides which, I say to all the Christians, given that Jesus (who we believe is God) didn’t seem to give two hoots about the creation story, the flood, homosexuality etc why do you? Given that Jesus did get particularly upset about issues like justice, tolerance, inclusivity, generosity, forgiveness etc why don’t you?

This ‘shifting goalposts’ thing that some are so upset about, I’m not sure I understand why. Life is a journey and we as individuals change during that journey. We see in the OT the Jews as a nation on a journey with God, and I believe that all humanity is on a similar journey where deeper truths and realities will become apparent at different stages in time. This is not just in faith, but we see scientific, technological, ethical etc development going on all around us. I know you don’t like arguments from scripture, but Jesus said he would send his Holy Spirit to teach his disciples – there was more for us to learn than what Jesus had time to teach us.

The Christian faith has changed over the course of history, but that’s not to keep up with society, we are part of society and as humanity learns and grows so does the church. As I wrote in the essay a couple of you have read, the early Jewish Christians had to come to terms with non-Jewish Christians. Christians were instrumental in the abolition of slavery, despite the Bible, even the NT appearing to condone slavery. Victorian Christians had to come to terms with women being given more rights (ok, some Christians still struggle with that one) and today the Church, at least in the UK is having to decide where it stands on homosexuality. Sometimes the Church drives the change in the wider society and sometimes the society drives a change in the Church. So yes the goalposts do move, but isn’t that kinda the point of life and being a human? Change, development, learning etc is all good and exciting stuff.

Anyway I’ve drivelled on for long enough, anyone would think I don’t get enough attention or something. Goodnight, God bless – go and enjoy the life that God gave you. I’m going to walk the dog and buy some bike parts I can’t really afford.

now I’m back at work

I am shocked–you mean people are on this site while working 😯

Ye gods.

Well I suppose I like to pose questions as much as anything else.

Are you curious about my views? Care to ask a question? 🙂

Sorry, but I have just dipped into this thread and will have to catch up before posting. I will try to represent the Christian point of view on the nature of faith when I get back from the gym. As one does.

ernie +1

and,

Good thread this, I’m really enjoying reading kja78’s posts, I hope he comes back.

This thread more than most of the religion threads is making me laugh. The smug atheist crowd are looking really stupid. Trying to slag something off without knowing much about it. A lot of people far clever than you lot have spent a lot of time thinking about it, you’re just dabbling at the edges. It’s like you’ve read about theology in a daily mail feature and think you’ve got it all sussed out.

Agree with the first part. Glad he’s back.

Second part was a bit naughty. Obviously tongue in cheek, but maybe missing a little winky smiley for the hard of thinking. 😉

It wasn’t aimed at anyone personally, but it’s quite amusing to see who’ve self-identified in order to take personal offence.

The logical fallacy part tickled too.
You get called out (wrongly) for “ad hominems” and “from authority”.
And the next post argues against human scrifice.
Magic. 🙂

Anyway, good to see a voice of reason amongst the madness on these threads.

Thanks for that excellent post kja78, you are a fantastic communicator like so many other preachers, and that in itself gives me a warm fuzzy feeling 🙂

some may be complete fabrications, but that’s not the point.

Very succinctly what I’ve been trying to say. But the literalists here make so much noise that I don’t think they can hear it.

Good luck with your emotional challenges too.

For example; Paul instructs women to cover their heads in church. The only women in his context who didn’t cover their heads were prostitutes. It’s as if Pauls says ‘Christian women, you are free from your culture’s rules, but it’s probably best not to dress like a prostitute.’

This is why I am saying that the scornful atheists sound silly – they are finding points to ridicule, but without understanding the context they only have half the story.

It sometimes seems that (not neccessarily everyone on here) the most scornful are trying to find things to ridicule so that they can do so and feel like they’ve won some great battle by conclusively proving that God doesn’t exist.

Great job guys!

Anyway, good to see a voice of reason amongst the madness on these threads.

If that was aimed at me – thanks! If it was aimed at kja78, I thoroughly agree.

I’m not going to respond to kja78’s post right now as, well, TBH Lovefilm have just sent me the new Tomb Raider. But I would like to say one thing.

There’s an argument that gets proffered here sometimes that the theology debates on STW are pointless. That no-one ever changes their mind and it’s just pointless bickering. I’d like to refute that.

One of the big issues I have with the religious is that it is sometimes apparent that many theists don’t appear to have given much thought to their “beliefs.” They’re Christians, or whatever, by default.

The intelligent and thought-provoking input from people like kja78 and Ro5ey have given me cause to revise that opinion. I’m not necessarily convinced that they’re representative of the majority, more’s the pity, but it’s refreshing and reassuring to know that there are people out there for whom their faith is a considered, measured choice rather than blindly ‘believing’ what they were brought up to believe.

STW does good debate. And I’d like to thank you all for that.

Christians were instrumental in the abolition of slavery

well they helped create it as well and you could argue christians did everything in this country for a few centuries good and bad – I am sure we will be able to say the same about atheists soon enough 😉

FWIW you explain it well, as does your essay.
I guess what many of think is that god bellowed to us and sent down tablets of stone and you need to adhere to these for ever as rules. the church sticking to antiquated views of women and homosexuals helps maintain his view. It is interesting to consider that it[relationship/faith with gd/holy spirit/jesus] is a relationship that can also change and evolve.
I think where we struggle is that when the biblical accounts are clearly factually wrong [ genesis and flood for example] you[probably more we] then get tied up in knots as to whether the bible is true or false – the word of god or not the word of/myth or laws etc. For you i assume it is less relevant than your relationship with faith JC etc
i dont agree with you but you explain it well.

Well I suppose I like to pose questions as much as anything else.

You and me both.

Are you curious about my views? Care to ask a question?

Nothing jumps immediately to mind if I’m honest. The point I was making was more that you invariably play devil’s advocate (irony?) on this sort of thread. Whilst that’s absolutely fine and I’m no stranger to it myself as a means of progressing a discussion, it does kind of mean that you’re more of a self-elected referee rather than an active player, if you see what I mean.

well they helped create it as well

That’s basically DNA’s comment about Bill Gates, isn’t it. Hang on, let me dig out a quote.

Thus,

“The idea that Bill Gates has appeared like a knight in shining armor to lead all customers out of a mire of technological chaos neatly ignores the fact that it was he who, by peddling second-rate technology, led them into it in the first place.”

it’s refreshing and reassuring to know that there are people out there for whom their faith is a considered, measured choice

Yep, and because I listen to stuff like Thought for the Day instead of getting all angry about it (like some on here admitted to doing) I’ve also learned that.

you[probably more we] then get tied up in knots as to whether the bible is true or false

Hmm I am not sure about that. From the outside it’s easy to attribute characteristics to ‘Christians’ as a whole, as it is to Muslims and everyone else, but there are loads of differing viewpoints. It’s easy to laugh at fundamentalists or people pushing inerrancy but you can’t lump moderates in with them.

it does kind of mean that you’re more of a self-elected referee rather than an active player

I’m not that solipsistic 🙂 I don’t have a particularly strong viewpoint on the Bible itself – it’s not that important to me personally but I’m happy to learn about it for whatever it is.

What I do care strongly about though is poor thinking and ignorance. It winds me up. Especially so when it results in people being really offensive to people who don’t deserve it. Wtf are they trying to do? STW can be nice as pie most of the time but as soon as religion is mentioned people queue up to jeer and laugh – why? Do you so desperately need to make yourself feel like the big guy? FFS.

What I do care strongly about though is poor thinking and ignorance. It winds me up

you and me both.

as soon as religion is mentioned people queue up to jeer and laugh – why?

you know, I don’t think that’s fair. A select few do, sure, but they’re a vocal minority IMHO.

Fair point. It’s easy to confuse the vocal minority with the majority – which is what I was just complaining about. D’oh.

The intelligent and thought-provoking input from people like kja78 and Ro5ey have given me cause to revise that opinion. I’m not necessarily convinced that they’re representative of the majority, more’s the pity

My experience is that the majority have made a considered opinion in that same way that many non-believers have as well. It’s just that not many can express it quite as well as these folks can. A fair number of my ‘believing’ friends (for want of a better term) are people who didn’t come from any sort of religious background but rather came to their faith later in life. It really does work in both directions

ps. and interesting thread. I doubt it would have lasted this long pre the lifetime bans which is a pity

I think that the tone of the debates has steadily improved. The first one I read wasn’t much better than schoolkids throwing things at the fat kids.

Read My Bible 🙂

Religion, the root of all evil………….

Read My Bible

A few good laugh out loud moments there, fair play.

“Creepeth” properly gives me the giggles for no good reason.

I notice the OP still hasn’t explained why he asked the question.

My ex partner was deeply religious & I’m not. After a few jars I’d often prod her with the religious stick for an argument. She would retreat stating “you need to talk to my pastor as I don’t know enough about it”

My reply would be “so you choose to believe heart & soul about something you know nothing about”

The bible is for the gullible, desperate, needy & megalomaniacs of this world

Our weekends would fly by

After a few jars I’d often prod her with the religious stick for an argument.

You sound like a lovely fellow.. holy shit.

Oh and what’s wrong with being needy? We all have needs, I know I do.

Yeah I’ve already got you down as needy

That makes me inferior then?

Reading this:

After a few jars I’d often prod her with the religious stick for an argument.

Reminds me of Junkyard’s…

As for aggressive aethism I am never really sure what this means. For sure some peole dislike the message and the believers more than others but it is an importnat issue – i find it used as a bit of a lazy slur tbh used to charicature folk.

…way back in this thread.

That was kind of where I was going with the notion of an aggressive atheist standpoint.

No judgements. 😉

Inferior? Read the post again …

aye fair enough you found one but I think we can just call that aggressive/disrespectful shitty tbh
Perhaps we should ask him about 29 ers to see if this aggressiveapproach is a trait or just something he does to religious folk

Who me?

My post was tongue in cheek.

Now, applying that school of thought to the good book in question, where does that bring us?

That you can’t believe everything you read. Or, being more precise, anything at all. Where does that leave us… 😉

Note : I just spent the last 10 minutes typing a long-winded post but deleted it because I really can’t be arsed to get into a debate.

I don’t believe you.

🙂