The Atheism Thread

[Arnold Layne]

religion teaches to accept without question

As an ordained priest I spent most of my professional life teaching people to question every last theological dictum, and to do their own spiritual thinking. Whilst exceptions could be found to prove your point, it none the less remains a wild generalisation and quite misleading.

The sort of "Blind" faith you post about may perhaps be found in certain fringe evangelical sects, but in the broad stream of modern Christian thought it is a curiosity, a lunatic remnant of practices long since abandoned.

Also worth noting that the National Church in the UK is the "Church of England", a Reformed (protestant) denomination founded largely on the cardinal protestant principle of "private judgement".

Edited September 14, 2009 by Arnold Layne

[Guest grandad]

the good book and gods book are the same, its called the bible.

[christopherc]

I though christianity involved belief in "the one true god" and heaven, a pretty constraining environment for one to engage in their own spiritual thinking.

Edited September 14, 2009 by christopherc

[Twenty Three]

Also worth noting that the National Church in the UK is the "Church of England"

The national church in the UK you say ?

[Arnold Layne]

I though christianity involved belief in "the one true god" and heaven, a pretty constraining environment for one to engage in their own spiritual thinking.

As a Christian I don't feel constrained.

Christianity may involve a lot of man made nonsense, but doesn't have to.

I don't adhere to denominations or organised religion. I dont "go to church" on sundays, or observe special days etc etc.

I just try and follow the carpenter's son - he makes sense to me, with his words on peace, love and forgiveness. And acknowldeging the divine, far from constraining, is liberating and celebratory.

Church's, creeds and rules etc - not what JC intended. The very opposite. I despise "Religion", in that it hides the real truth from people.

"One true God", is a nonsense.

[Laramie]

I read somewhere that Jesus was a woodcarver not a carpenter, I think it was in a woodcarving book come to think of it. Something to do with the translation of woodworker but I'm not sure.

e2a. I know, stick to woodcarving.

Edited September 14, 2009 by Laramie

[Arnold Layne]

Also worth noting that the National Church in the UK is the "Church of England"

The national church in the UK you say ?

I apologise, should have writen:

... in England.

The sister episcopalian churches elsewhere share the same platform in "private judgement", however (generally speaking).

[weed_G]

i've already explained the difference, science seeks to disprove and never prove anything but question everything, religion teaches to accept without question, and in fact if shown evidence against said religion, then it is in fact a test of how strong your faith is, and you should believe even harder etc etc

the bit about science is right ..the bit about all religions being 'blind acceptance' ..is wholly inaccurate ...like I said before more religions have been forgotten than you or I have heard off ...even if you spent the rest of your life studying different religions ..the generalization still wouldn't be valid for all or even most

oil is an inaminate substance, it has nothing to do with science, it's not a science war, it's a war over wealth,

oil is heavily refined, and used in combustion engines or to make plastics etc ..these are all scientific devices/industries ..btw modern societies are just one big scientific device that require vast quantites of oil just to function ..they would'nt work without trucks and trains shipping food, electricity etc...hence why we are so desperate for oil ..this can easily be checked by looking at how much oil modern societies use per capita say compared to some tribes living in the amazon ..the only difference is science

the same reason for wars since the beginning of time i should imagine, the darwin example is a good one, got any others

nations go to war for all sorts of reasons, but I wouldn't say that religion is fundamentally war mongering ..just because someone invented the nuclear bomb does that mean that all science is bad(juries still out on that)

and as for saying i haven't looked into religion, you couldn't be further from the truth, religion and the possible existence of a god or some higher entity interests me greatly and i've spent MANY hours studying various religions. i still believe any organised religion to be hoax's they all come from the minds of men. religion is basically some people claiming to know the truth, which of course no-one does, religion was invented simple as.

ahh 'organized religion' ..a better distinction ...yes anyone claiming to be channeling god should be heavily scrutinized especially god brokers that dont deliver ....doesnt prove or disprove the existence of god tho ..like I said before bad electricians don't prove that all electricians are bad or that somehow electricity theory is wrong ..I mean surely the dude that built the universe wants use to converse directly and not through some con man

I'm not saying you haven't looked into religions, but by looking at your replies you seem to think they are all the same with the focus being on the christian-judeo, but even within these there is much diversity, arnie layne is prob the expert here ....maybe you need to look at some different angles which is why I suggested those 2 books as a starting point ...at the beginning of huxleys book ..he will begin by explaining why modern mainstream religions are a con ..hes a smart man ..btw this is the same guy who wrote 'brave new world'

[weed_G]

I read somewhere that Jesus was a woodcarver not a carpenter, I think it was in a woodcarving book come to think of it. Something to do with the translation of woodworker but I'm not sure.

e2a. I know, stick to woodcarving.

I read some similar things, there have been other claims like trees were in short supply so the price of wood was expensive ..the implication being that woodwork was a high trade and jesus was middleclass ..also some accusation that joseph built crosses for the romans ..long time ago ..difficult to know...somebody at woodstock said that 'jesus christ was the first non violent revolutionary ..dig it' ..dunno if he was the first but I like the sentiment

As a Christian I don't feel constrained.

Christianity may involve a lot of man made nonsense, but doesn't have to.

I don't adhere to denominations or organised religion. I dont "go to church" on sundays, or observe special days etc etc.

I just try and follow the carpenter's son - he makes sense to me, with his words on peace, love and forgiveness. And acknowldeging the divine, far from constraining, is liberating and celebratory.

.gif

Church's, creeds and rules etc - not what JC intended. The very opposite. I despise "Religion", in that it hides the real truth from people.

"One true God", is a nonsense.

just seen that, excellent

Edited September 14, 2009 by weed_G

[scraglor]

I though christianity involved belief in "the one true god" and heaven, a pretty constraining environment for one to engage in their own spiritual thinking.

As a Christian I don't feel constrained.

Christianity may involve a lot of man made nonsense, but doesn't have to.

I don't adhere to denominations or organised religion. I dont "go to church" on sundays, or observe special days etc etc.

I just try and follow the carpenter's son - he makes sense to me, with his words on peace, love and forgiveness. And acknowldeging the divine, far from constraining, is liberating and celebratory.

Church's, creeds and rules etc - not what JC intended. The very opposite. I despise "Religion", in that it hides the real truth from people.

"One true God", is a nonsense.

i was talking about organised religion as i mentioned previously. what you talk of doesn't sound anything like any of the people i know who are involved with various religions, and you even say so yourself. so bit of a moo point really

[scraglor]

I'm not saying you haven't looked into religions, but by looking at your replies you seem to think they are all the same with the focus being on the christian-judeo, but even within these there is much diversity, arnie layne is prob the expert here ....maybe you need to look at some different angles which is why I suggested those 2 books as a starting point ...at the beginning of huxleys book ..he will begin by explaining why modern mainstream religions are a con ..hes a smart man ..btw this is the same guy who wrote 'brave new world'

maybe i should have been clearer from the start then. my only qualms are with organised religions involving rules, codes etc etc, and not the believing in some form of higher existence, i'm not atheist, nor theist. i would call this theism, not religion.

from the everlasting fountain of knowledge wikipedia:

"A religion is an organized approach to human spirituality which usually encompasses a set of narratives, symbols, beliefs and practices, ..."

[ratdog]

in the REAL world a woman can be either pregnant or not pregnant,either way she is real

I see what you mean now...but its a red herring ...the entire point is that people accept the conclusions of science(the test) as gospel without really questioning or understanding the process

But it`s still a real tangible thing, i could be shown the test in all it`s detail and have been shown proof unlike someone who tells me there is a god.

[scraglor]

i was thinking the same thing earlier. science has results, actual results, the paternity test is probably not a good example as most people wont be able to understand the results. but a car moving down the road, i can see touch and feel

[Alf4lf4]

i was thinking the same thing earlier. science has results, actual results, the paternity test is probably not a good example as most people wont be able to understand the results. but a car moving down the road, i can see touch and feel

The simple fact is that any reasonably intelligent person who is prepared to take the time and trouble will be able to fully understand dna paternity tests. They do not need to take the word of anyone else. The claim that 'god' exists can not be supported by evidence that would stand critical appraisal.

[scraglor]

well that's not necessarily true, they may be able to understand the results, but if you don't understand the math and how to get to the results, then you are still taking some ones word for it. i find if you talk technically and with confidence, people will generally believe anything you say. i'm not really an electrician, i'm a shelf stacker at lidl's. but yeah, it's not the same thing as believing in a deity that even the most adamant of believers only form of proof is that because things exist, a consciousness must have created it. probably the weakest argument conceivable