Still, religious people typically attach much of their ego and identity to their religious ideas and dogma. It's often the case that fair appraisal and objective criticism of those religious ideas and dogma is seen as a direct personal attack on the core of their being, even when it isn't.
Depends whether the appraisal and criticism is fair and objective, and of the ideas. I've witnessed a lot of "Christians are idiots", "I pity them", etc. That's not fair or objective and is certainly personal and not related to their faith.
And as I see it, being a Christian IS your identity. You can't be a bit Christian, just as you can't be a bit pregnant.
As a BB uber-fan I can confirm that an AT is a safe space to express your star-struck love for a total stranger without some killjoy pointing out that it is a bit foolish. The main BB forum can be a seething cauldron of hate and abuse, and an appreciation thread is in the nature of a pit-stop where you can change your deflating tyre off the main track.
Exactly, and who am I to deny someone that enjoyment?
Who would deny other people enjoyment, just because they do not follow or enjoy something others do?
Depends whether the appraisal and criticism is fair and objective, and of the ideas. I've witnessed a lot of "Christians are idiots", "I pity them", etc. That's not fair or objective and is certainly personal and not related to their faith.
But if I said Christianity is a baseless and fundamentally flawed belief system, I'd also get the same response.
And as I see it, being a Christian IS your identity. You can't be a bit Christian, just as you can't be a bit pregnant.
Sure you can. Not all Christians subscribe to the same hardline ultra-orthodox ideas of the Westboro Baptist Church, for example. Ideas which are Biblicaly sound. A moderate Christian, by definition, is choosing a partial Christianity, choosing to ignore certain tenets and tradition, choosing to disregard foundational dogma. Christianity to a person is often just a glorified patchwork of their own individual preferences and biases.
But if I said Christianity is a baseless and fundamentally flawed belief system, I'd also get the same response.
Sure you can. Not all Christians subscribe to the same hardline ultra-orthodox ideas of the Westboro Baptist Church, for example. Ideas which are Biblicaly sound. A moderate Christian, by definition, is choosing a partial Christianity, choosing to ignore certain tenets and tradition, choosing to disregard foundational dogma. Christianity to a person is often just a glorified patchwork of their own individual preferences and biases.
I'll add my assertion to others I've read on here - I haven't seen any personal attacks on people's intelligence from Christians towards atheists, agnostics or people of other faith.
My view of a person's faith (not just Christianity) is that it is not a tacked on belief to be saved for Sundays/Fridays/whatever faith day is the "big one". It is part of who you are, embedded like print in a stick of rock. I am human, British, English, white. I have a county, a city, a family name. I am also Christian. It is who I am. If you called my family idiots, or said something derogatory about my ethnicity or cast aspersions on my city, I would feel saddened and possibly attacked as it relates to who I am. Same for my faith. I am Christian, my faith is part of me.
The way I live my Christian faith is a different matter - I can choose how "in depth" to go, but my faith is an essence of my being. Making a personal comment about that essence and my stupidity to possess it, rather than the way I live it out, is the difference between personal attack and debate (or attack) on religion itself.
My view of a person's faith (not just Christianity) is that it is not a tacked on belief to be saved for Sundays/Fridays/whatever faith day is the "big one". It is part of who you are, embedded like print in a stick of rock. I am human, British, English, white. I have a county, a city, a family name. I am also Christian. It is who I am. If you called my family idiots, or said something derogatory about my ethnicity or cast aspersions on my city, I would feel saddened and possibly attacked as it relates to who I am. Same for my faith. I am Christian, my faith is part of me.
The way I live my Christian faith is a different matter - I can choose how "in depth" to go, but my faith is an essence of my being. Making a personal comment about that essence, my stupidity to possess it, rather than the way I live it out, is the difference between personal attack and debate or attack on religion itself.
And when making these weak and wishy-washy appeals to emotion, you must also consider the wider context of the discussion and the wider extent of the issues and concerns involved.
If religion was just a person to person deeply held personal belief about life or the world, or hopes and dreams for their spiritual self, or personal preference or taste, and was unobtrusive and harmless to everyone else, it wouldn't be worthy of so much open criticism. But it's not just that is it? It's a collective, often hysterical and irrational mass belief and school of thought that has so much stranglehold on the world that it affects millions of lives every day whether they agree with it or not, whether they want it to or not. It affects things from who gets to govern the most powerful secular (apparantly) nation on earth, to if homosexuals deserve to live or die on the other side of the planet.
When the religions of the world offer themselves up as a complete system of life - law, policy, social, economical, educational, philosophical, even military, and with pretty much the sole aim of converting and controlling the masses - we can criticise them as thoroughly and shamelessly as we can any other constitution or political ideology. As soon as we can’t, it’s no longer a democracy.
Your post is my whole point. Get angry if you don't like what religious people do. But don't be rude to the religious people themselves. Surely people can vehemently disagree with someone's opinions or actions, without resorting to verbal blows?
It's one thing to say "I think Christians have too much power in law-making." Or even "I hate the way marriage is still enshrined in Christian law. What gives them the right in a modern democracy to decide on the form of legal marriage?" It's another thing to say "Christians are so backward, they should have no say in deciding marriage laws." One is civil and attacking a position, the other is attacking the people themselves. There are better examples, I'm sure, but you get my drift......
It seems that whenever there is debate about a faith, or faith in general, it becomes about the people of faith and not the faith itself as a concept.
Anyway, I've got a bedroom to tidy, so I'm off now. See ya!
I see this thread has been open for only 12 hours, and has attracted over 100 posts. That's nice. I wonder if any of them would care to give an opinion on whether myra hindley, if she truly repented, is in heaven? Of course, anyone who thinks her repentance wasn't genuine is making a judgement which isn't theirs to make, so maybe they'd kindly not post that view.
I see this thread has been open for only 12 hours, and has attracted over 100 posts. That's nice. I wonder if any of them would care to give an opinion on whether myra hindley, if she truly repented, is in heaven? Of course, anyone who thinks her repentance wasn't genuine is making a judgement which isn't theirs to make, so maybe they'd kindly not post that view.
If she truly repented (as in it was genuine and she had done her pennance for her sins).. I suspect so.
It's one thing to say "I think Christians have too much power in law-making." Or even "I hate the way marriage is still enshrined in Christian law. What gives them the right in a modern democracy to decide on the form of legal marriage?" It's another thing to say "Christians are so backward, they should have no say in deciding marriage laws." One is civil and attacking a position, the other is attacking the people themselves. There are better examples, I'm sure, but you get my drift......
And my initial point was that these are often seen as the same thing. Anyone critical of religious dogma is lumped in the "those angry atheists" camp. Although, to be fair, it's usually just transparent chicanery tactics, a last-ditch response to the fact that they have failed to defend their dogma and opinion on intellectual grounds. So the next step is to demonize the opposition as a collective 'other'. It's easy to casually dismiss an invented cartoon character enemy than it is to honestly address the actual valid criticism and concerns.
I see this thread has been open for only 12 hours, and has attracted over 100 posts. That's nice. I wonder if any of them would care to give an opinion on whether myra hindley, if she truly repented, is in heaven? Of course, anyone who thinks her repentance wasn't genuine is making a judgement which isn't theirs to make, so maybe they'd kindly not post that view.
I think Myra Hindley is in the same position as every other dead person, but that we can't know what that is. Not a very exciting view I know, but there we are.
And if someone was an unrepentant unbeliever to their dying day, would they also get into Paradise?
I tend to think everyone does anyway, if indeed there is a heaven (which i think there might be just not necessarily in the Christian sense)
If however, you follow the scriptures (and the conent is true)and they say you have to be repentant for your sins and you aren't, I would think it is game over.
Unbelievers will soon believe, if they do end up stood at the gates of heaven. None of us will know though until our time comes and as a safety precaution i am going to try to be good:D
I see this thread has been open for only 12 hours, and has attracted over 100 posts. That's nice. I wonder if any of them would care to give an opinion on whether myra hindley, if she truly repented, is in heaven? Of course, anyone who thinks her repentance wasn't genuine is making a judgement which isn't theirs to make, so maybe they'd kindly not post that view.
Because of the gesture. You say wishing you well because it's a nice gesture. Are you saying you actually believe it'll work?
Ok I'll come clean - yes I do.
The more I think about it, the more I think phrases like 'I'll keep my fingers crossed for you' make no sense unless, at some level you think it's actually going to help.
People say 'I'll be thinking positive thoughts for you' - I mean why bother? Why bother having any hopes for anyone if those hopes don't have any effect?
So, yes, I don't know how it works, but I do think we can create a positive environment for the people around us if we all do our little bit in creating positive, hopeful energy.
I tend to think everyone does anyway, if indeed there is a heaven (which i think there might be just not necessarily in the Christian sense)
If however, you follow the scriptures (and the conent is true)and they say you have to be repentant for your sins and you aren't, I would think it is game over.
Unbelievers will soon believe, if they do end up stood at the gates of heaven. None of us will know though until our time comes and as a safety precaution i am going to try to be good:D
I didn't come in to have a dig at you at all. I came in to offer an argument to the one you put forward.
Unfortuantely I should have known better as you are impossible to have a conversation with as you simply end up throwing random accusations around.
I have acutally only ever answered a very few of your posts as this always happens. But I have seen how you respond to others who disagree with your point of view and it is always the same.
I have learnt my lesson.
Thats not really true now is it. I responded and you started accusing me of hysterical ranting (of which there was none everyone can see it, its in this thread), its obvious what youre doing and always do where my posts are concerned so please i beg you feel free to actually ignore them, the same old digs are boring from you now.
I do know what you mean. In fact I think I misinterpreted it myself.
As far as prayer, I'd love to see more studies into it. The Harvard one was very interesting. It showed that prayers didn't work, and in fact were detrimental to those who knew they were being prayed for. I'd love to see that aspect explored more and also if there are any benefits (or not, as the case might be) to those doing the praying.
Prayers are not all about ASK, ASK, ASK. Prayers are more often than not expressions of thanks.
If there is some kind of 'afterlife', ie the human mind or spirit somehow surving the death of the human body, why does it have to be religon-based, as in a heaven or a hell?
Could it not be some form of science that we are yet in 2012 able to comprehend? After all, man's existence in the first place, in the form of evolution, took ages for man to understand, indeed many still haven't cottoned on to it. So if there is an afterlife of sorts, perhaps we just haven't been able to identify it yet or the scientific process behind it
Comments
Depends whether the appraisal and criticism is fair and objective, and of the ideas. I've witnessed a lot of "Christians are idiots", "I pity them", etc. That's not fair or objective and is certainly personal and not related to their faith.
And as I see it, being a Christian IS your identity. You can't be a bit Christian, just as you can't be a bit pregnant.
Exactly, and who am I to deny someone that enjoyment?
Who would deny other people enjoyment, just because they do not follow or enjoy something others do?
Sure you can. Not all Christians subscribe to the same hardline ultra-orthodox ideas of the Westboro Baptist Church, for example. Ideas which are Biblicaly sound. A moderate Christian, by definition, is choosing a partial Christianity, choosing to ignore certain tenets and tradition, choosing to disregard foundational dogma. Christianity to a person is often just a glorified patchwork of their own individual preferences and biases.
I'll add my assertion to others I've read on here - I haven't seen any personal attacks on people's intelligence from Christians towards atheists, agnostics or people of other faith.
My view of a person's faith (not just Christianity) is that it is not a tacked on belief to be saved for Sundays/Fridays/whatever faith day is the "big one". It is part of who you are, embedded like print in a stick of rock. I am human, British, English, white. I have a county, a city, a family name. I am also Christian. It is who I am. If you called my family idiots, or said something derogatory about my ethnicity or cast aspersions on my city, I would feel saddened and possibly attacked as it relates to who I am. Same for my faith. I am Christian, my faith is part of me.
The way I live my Christian faith is a different matter - I can choose how "in depth" to go, but my faith is an essence of my being. Making a personal comment about that essence and my stupidity to possess it, rather than the way I live it out, is the difference between personal attack and debate (or attack) on religion itself.
If religion was just a person to person deeply held personal belief about life or the world, or hopes and dreams for their spiritual self, or personal preference or taste, and was unobtrusive and harmless to everyone else, it wouldn't be worthy of so much open criticism. But it's not just that is it? It's a collective, often hysterical and irrational mass belief and school of thought that has so much stranglehold on the world that it affects millions of lives every day whether they agree with it or not, whether they want it to or not. It affects things from who gets to govern the most powerful secular (apparantly) nation on earth, to if homosexuals deserve to live or die on the other side of the planet.
When the religions of the world offer themselves up as a complete system of life - law, policy, social, economical, educational, philosophical, even military, and with pretty much the sole aim of converting and controlling the masses - we can criticise them as thoroughly and shamelessly as we can any other constitution or political ideology. As soon as we can’t, it’s no longer a democracy.
Your post is my whole point. Get angry if you don't like what religious people do. But don't be rude to the religious people themselves. Surely people can vehemently disagree with someone's opinions or actions, without resorting to verbal blows?
It's one thing to say "I think Christians have too much power in law-making." Or even "I hate the way marriage is still enshrined in Christian law. What gives them the right in a modern democracy to decide on the form of legal marriage?" It's another thing to say "Christians are so backward, they should have no say in deciding marriage laws." One is civil and attacking a position, the other is attacking the people themselves. There are better examples, I'm sure, but you get my drift......
It seems that whenever there is debate about a faith, or faith in general, it becomes about the people of faith and not the faith itself as a concept.
Anyway, I've got a bedroom to tidy, so I'm off now. See ya!
If she truly repented (as in it was genuine and she had done her pennance for her sins).. I suspect so.
I think Myra Hindley is in the same position as every other dead person, but that we can't know what that is. Not a very exciting view I know, but there we are.
I tend to think everyone does anyway, if indeed there is a heaven (which i think there might be just not necessarily in the Christian sense)
If however, you follow the scriptures (and the conent is true)and they say you have to be repentant for your sins and you aren't, I would think it is game over.
Unbelievers will soon believe, if they do end up stood at the gates of heaven. None of us will know though until our time comes and as a safety precaution i am going to try to be good:D
I don't believe in heaven.
Ok I'll come clean - yes I do.
The more I think about it, the more I think phrases like 'I'll keep my fingers crossed for you' make no sense unless, at some level you think it's actually going to help.
People say 'I'll be thinking positive thoughts for you' - I mean why bother? Why bother having any hopes for anyone if those hopes don't have any effect?
So, yes, I don't know how it works, but I do think we can create a positive environment for the people around us if we all do our little bit in creating positive, hopeful energy.
Fibber;
Thats not really true now is it. I responded and you started accusing me of hysterical ranting (of which there was none everyone can see it, its in this thread), its obvious what youre doing and always do where my posts are concerned so please i beg you feel free to actually ignore them, the same old digs are boring from you now.
Nice
Prayers are not all about ASK, ASK, ASK. Prayers are more often than not expressions of thanks.
Neither do I, but my question was aimed at the people who do believe.
My apologies. From the way you phrased it, I believed it was for anyone who'd made one of the 100-odd posts in the thread.
(I thought of you when I read that post).
For the uninitiated SULLA used to claim to hide copies of The God Delusion in book shops. I think he made it up though.
So what?
If there is some kind of 'afterlife', ie the human mind or spirit somehow surving the death of the human body, why does it have to be religon-based, as in a heaven or a hell?
Could it not be some form of science that we are yet in 2012 able to comprehend? After all, man's existence in the first place, in the form of evolution, took ages for man to understand, indeed many still haven't cottoned on to it. So if there is an afterlife of sorts, perhaps we just haven't been able to identify it yet or the scientific process behind it