The Religion Thread

[silkyman]

Er, no. Agnosticism is not the state of not knowing, it's the belief that you can't know. Some people believe there is a God and they know there is, some people believe there's no God and they know there isn't, and some people don't know but still believe it's something that's knowable. These people are not agnostics.



I didn't claim anything of the sort.

I misremembered who had made that other post. It was Ian. So, yeah, it served it's purpose, but with someone else.

 

[JimJams]

So what? Your argument seems to be against religious views on god or a god like entity but you mix that up with an agnostic view on the same thing.
This is what I'm saying when you seem to be missing the point. You're always looking to disprove the existence of god by dismissing the religious perspective of who/what god is and what he/she/it does. That's not what everybody is saying possibly exists, it can be far more simple or far more complex than that. In detail forces such as nature and time could be considered godlike entities.

 

[JimJams]

As long as you are also open to the possibility that absolutely anything anyone can think of is also real.

Star Wars was based on a true story, because George Lucas is actually Luke Skywalker transported through a wormhole. He only keeps quiet about it for fear of being branded a loon. Possible? Yes?

Well yeah. As said something being possible does not make it likely. Like if you'd told a Man City fan in 2000 that his club would win the premier league, you'd have been sectioned, but here we are.

 

[silkyman]

Which then begs the question, why does one exceedingly unlikely belief get you sectioned, and another one gets you into the House of Lords?

 

[JimJams]

Cos unfortunately most countries were founded on those beliefs.

 

[HertsWolf]

Which then begs the question, why does one exceedingly unlikely belief get you sectioned, and another one gets you into the House of Lords?

It may be an exceedingly unlikely belief, but it is one that has been upheld by the faith - rightly or wrongly - of maybe one billion people. We may well be deluded and unable to prove the existence of this or that or the other, but then that's faith for you.

I've just been reading some of the discussions at and around the recent General Synod. It was either that or read more from MorDon about LibDems.

In those discussions, I see these nutty unelected bishops (and others) discussing a wide range of really pressing social, economic and environmental challenges that the world faces today, including the huge and complex issues of migration, asylum seekers, food poverty, climate change, AIDS, etc. The discussion has been passionate, respectful and - importantly - largely free of political dogshit and agendas. (Yes, I know that historical abuse, views towards homosexuality/transgender relationships and other burning issues within the church have their own agendas)

I said earlier (I think in this thread) that the number of bishops should probably be reduced in the upper/second chamber, but lets hope you get replacements who will encompass and try to include such a wide range of views. I can understand those who sneer at the bishops but they probably do represent several million people in this country. However, it does make me wonder how many of those who sneer have ever listened to any senior clergy talking about social justice or important issues.

So the reason they don't get sectioned is that they work hard on a whole range of issues which are not directly related to invisible beings. Or orbiting teapots.

Edit: Just to further add that even if the bishops were not present in the Lords, these topics would still be discussed within the church and church charities and NGOs would still be at the forefront of challenging social injustice.

 

[silkyman]

This forum has discussed those same things.

 

[silkyman]

OK....

It seems that this is something that can't really be debated because even if 'God' really didn't create anything, or had any contact with humanity, he might still be there, somewhere. By endowing him with potentially limitless powers, that could be in a parallel dimension, on the other side of the galaxy or second star on the left and straight on until morning.

Different tack, then, looking at the recent Tyson Fury, erm, Fury.

Should someone with pretty unpleasant views be given any sympathy for those views, or have those views be given any more validity, just because they come from a religious base?

 

[Ebeneezer Goode]

Less so, arguably.

 

[blade1889]

He's a vile and backwards #### whether those views came from religion or ronald mcdonald.

 

[Womble98]

Three Islamic schools have been shut down in Birmingham for promoting extremism

 

[G-Dragon]

Three Islamic schools have been shut down in Birmingham for promoting extremism

About time...

 

[Ebeneezer Goode]

Every faith school should have at least one government appointed teacher to keep an eye on this shit.

 

[Womble98]

Textbooks contained anti-Semitic, homophobic and hardline Islamic theology. I wonder where this school for its funding from. *cough*saudi Arabia*.

 

[HertsWolf]

Should someone with pretty unpleasant views be given any sympathy for those views, or have those views be given any more validity, just because they come from a religious base?

Just because someone says they are based upon religious perspective, doesn't mean they are. Same with Islamic extremists, they are just using some warped angle for justifying their vicious, misogynistic, medieval views.

 

[Ebeneezer Goode]

It's just a coincidence then that those views sync up with the scripture so snugly. "Medieval" would be quite a progressive slant to take really, given the source material.

 

[silkyman]

Just because someone says they are based upon religious perspective, doesn't mean they are. Same with Islamic extremists, they are just using some warped angle for justifying their vicious, misogynistic, medieval views.

Except the views they kill for ARE in the scriptures, and the bible has some very unpleasant things to say about homosexuality.

 

[SUTSS]

Just because someone says they are based upon religious perspective, doesn't mean they are. Same with Islamic extremists, they are just using some warped angle for justifying their vicious, misogynistic, medieval views.

You can't say that all the goods things that religion brings are because of religion, but all the bad things that religion brings is because the religion has been warped or the people are just trying to find something to justify their actions. It's a horrible double standard and it doesn't really help anyone or anything to do so.

 

[Alty]

Sorry to show up without proffering a view on God/agnosticism, but to go back to the House of Lords stuff discussed earlier...what is this commitment people have to the concept of a second chamber? The best functioning and most democratic parliaments are unicameral. Why shouldn't we be the same?

 

[Dr Mantis Toboggan]

tradition

 

[Dr Mantis Toboggan]

talking bout chocolate

i am outraged.com

 

[silkyman]

Sorry to show up without proffering a view on God/agnosticism, but to go back to the House of Lords stuff discussed earlier...what is this commitment people have to the concept of a second chamber? The best functioning and most democratic parliaments are unicameral. Why shouldn't we be the same?

It gives an extra layer of protection against batshit insanity like the tax credit debacle.

 

[Dr Mantis Toboggan]

just cause a largely undemocratic institution occasionally does the right thing, doesn't mean it's good all of a sudden.

 

[Ebeneezer Goode]

just cause a largely undemocratic institution occasionally does the right thing, doesn't mean it's good all of a sudden.

I imagine that's how many feel about the EU.

 

[HertsWolf]

You can't say that all the goods things that religion brings are because of religion, but all the bad things that religion brings is because the religion has been warped or the people are just trying to find something to justify their actions. It's a horrible double standard and it doesn't really help anyone or anything to do so.

I didn't.

 

[HertsWolf]

Except the views they kill for ARE in the scriptures, and the bible has some very unpleasant things to say about homosexuality.

I'd suggest that 99.999% of practising Christians, Muslims and other faiths today recognise that their holy books have some weird stuff in them, but also contain mainly guidance about how to lead better lives and be better people. It's very rare for any text to be taken absolutely literally whether its ancient or modern.

 

[Ebeneezer Goode]

Yeah, but the stuff in that 0.001% is eating shellfish and wearing clothes woven from two materials, while the sexism and homophobia is still fairly prominent around the world. Our modern Western liberalism is as much down to our irreligiosity as anything else.

 

[Alty]

It gives an extra layer of protection against batshit insanity like the tax credit debacle.

Unnecessary when you use a proportional electoral system.

 

[sl1k]

When FPTP works for the two dominant parties, is electoral reform likely anytime soon?

 

[Aber gas]

When FPTP works for the two dominant parties, is electoral reform likely anytime soon?

It's gone very quiet on that issue. When the lib dems were stronger proportional representation was certainly on the table for discussion. I can't see it happening currently.