An interesting issue of religious freedom

[The Flying Tench]

I'm certainly not about to try to rebutt your personal faith John but then again, I've never had an issue with people having a personal faith.

Suffice to say that Whilst I'm sure that your experiences were very real to you, they carry very little weight from an empirical point of view and as you point out yourself in most cases there is either a physchiatric explaination or the whole thing can be explained by something such as your name having come up in a previous conversation and having been subsequently forgotten. If you choose to see the cumilitive "evidence" as proof of the existance of a god, who am I to say you shouldn't.

Well, although there's a subjective element, I have tried to bring out the aspects which are empirical. But it's very difficult to debate by computer, we'd really need to have a few beers together - and even then I am not suggesting either of us would change his view.

 

Re what you are saying about funerals and how many people who attend believe in God, I don't think we are miles apart.

 

Tight lines!

[Ken L]

Well, although there's a subjective element, I have tried to bring out the aspects which are empirical. But it's very difficult to debate by computer, we'd really need to have a few beers together - and even then I am not suggesting either of us would change his view.

 

Re what you are saying about funerals and how many people who attend believe in God, I don't think we are miles apart.

 

I've done the beer and debate thing many times with a mate who's curate of the local church - he also knows the current archbishop of York rather well. Neither of us have ever shifted the others views an inch but we have had a lot of fun and forced one another to think a bit which is always healthy.

 

You said yesterday that you felt that there were only about 5% true christians in the country and that's probably a little on the low side but i tend to find that there are a lot of folks who say very firmly that they believe in a god (as in the christian god) but have no time for organised religion.

Plenty of scope for you to reach out to those people who believe in a god and bring them into your fold but can us non-believers please have a few schools ? I don't think there's a single school my home town that doesn't have a christian affiliation !

[corydoras]

The word 'fundamentalist' is really just a word for anyone who you think is more definite, rigid, perhaps intolerant and closed, than you think they ought to be.

 

As for 'secularist fundamentalist', I would apply that to the kind of atheist or agnostic who thinks it's self apparent that they are right, and that all religions are obviously on a par with believing in the tooth fairy. Also those who, in a society such as ours where most people believe in God, try to ban civic carol services and stop employees wearing crosses, turbans etc

Why is beleiving in a God different from beleiving in the tooth fairy, leprechauns, or unicorns or anything else that has no empirical evidence to support that it exists in reality?

 

When my own son found out that Father Christmas was a lie he was very upset with us for telling him lies for 6 years. The one good thing that came out of it was that despite having had to go through Communion and Confirmation, to keep his grandmother happy, he thinks that the whole notion of The Three in One God as being little more than "Papa Noël" for adults.

 

I don't know where you get the idea that we live in a society where 'most people beleive in God?' Just because someone ticks the CofE box on the cencus form does not mean that they are a Christian. I've nothing against folks singing Christmas Carols at Christmas time, I often play them myself.

[Ken Davison South Wales]

And lots of people cry for their long dead mommy's but that doesn't mean that their mothers escaped death and have come back to comfort them.

 

 

Odd that, just about everyone I've ever met who has had a heart attack, been diagnosed with cancer or had organ failure has turned to the science of medicine to improve and extend their lives and for those who have been given a favourable prognosis by a practitioner of applied science, they have gained a great deal of peace of mind. Even those who have been unable to dodge the inevitable have gained solace by being told what can and will be done to minimise their pain and maintain their dignity - although n some cases those promises have turned out to be hollow.

 

Having been the recipient of a triple bypass and know a number of people with the same problem I can tell you first hand how wrong you are. Medical cures might heal or repair the body but they fail miserably with all but a few for curing the mind. John a very good friend of mine had a cancer growth behind his eye, several attempts were made to eliminate it each being very painful, after eighteen painful months science decided to remove the eye. One thing kept John sane through this terrible experience his faith in his god, he drew his strength from this belief not the fumbling science which eventually gave up and removed his eye.

 

Believe me none of the people I have met had any faith in the NHS and it's science it extended lives but at what price, me I meditated with my Lapis Lazuli string of beads wondering what exactly was the big bang and what was there to go bang. You see I believe that beyond the big bang is a power so awesome the humane mind is unable to comprehend it, some call it some kind of god, others choose science as their shield and sanity.

[chesters1]

religion is ok if its kept to oneself and never used to influence a judgement on others ,a bit like apartheid or the holocaust !to some its an abomination others a genuine fix for many problems.

 

before someone jumps up and wonders at the comparisons remember religion (if only the christian one) has operated both of the other methods plus a whole host of other atrocities to further its agenda and still is "in gods name" the other religions have their own versions but just as bad to further their agendas.

 

those that "represent" any religion have some serious thinking to do IMHO take the catholics for instance who on earth would put on a pedastal a god who openly allowed its mouth pieces to abuse children (just for one example) and do nothing to STOP it ,"mysterious ways" is not an excuse in any ones minds the catholic church was also hand in hand in the holocaust in ww2 ,not such a nice god when you look harder how can anyone admit they favour such a mean despicable entity if it existed never mind knowing full well it doest so doing its "deeds" of their own backs with god as an excuse.

the jewish god excuse is great for ethnic cleansing ,slaughter of children and women and subjugation of millions of less "chosen" types it did in the old testament it still is today

Edited March 25, 2010 by chesters1

[DavyR]

remember religion (if only the christian one) has operated both of the other methods

 

Not just the Christian religion at all. Slaughtering other people who don't share your point of view (whether that's on religion, politics, or, in the case of some South American countries, football) appears to be a fundamental(ist?) part of what it is to be human.

 

Which is one of the reasons for my generally misanthropic outlook on things.

[chesters1]

"the other religions have their own versions but just as bad to further their agendas"

as you say some dont even use the "god" excuse at all but generally are poorer

Edited March 25, 2010 by chesters1

[Vagabond]

Linked to this is the evidence for the resurrection. ........ It really is very hard to come up with an alternative explanation as to what happened.

 

Well, I was forced to study the Hebrew and Greek Sciptures as a child and I absolutely loved coming up with "alternative explanations" to accepted dogma - it was the only thing that made it bearable - although I was careful to keep the alternatives to myself at the time.

 

Matthew 27: 57/8

"a rich man of Arimathaea, named Joseph....went to Pilate, and begged the body..and laid it in his own new tomb"

 

Mark 15:43-45

"Joseph....craved the body. And Pilate marvelled if he were already dead......(and asked the centurion if t'were true and centurion said yes - ie Pilate did not check himself)

 

Luke 23: 51-53 Similar account to Matthew

 

John 19: 38/9 Similar story, plus "Nicodemus (disciple and former Pharisee - ie an educated man for those times) brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes...." (if he had access to those, bringing restorative remedies would be well possible)

 

So, without consulting anyone else's website or book, here's what I make of it.

 

Given the Roman custom was to leave crucifixees in place until they rotted, there was obviously a bit of graft going on here - rich man with money wants body - so the headlines might have read "governor in bodies-for-cash scandal"

 

Pilate expressed surprise that Christ were already dead - very significant bit that ! So the centurion confirmed that he was - well, if you can bribe a governor, centurions are easy.

 

So it is at least possible, ON THE BIBLICAL EVIDENCE ALONE, that an unconscious body, not a dead one, was removed and placed in Joseph's (Not Peter's, FT) garden. In comes Nicodemus, bearing pharmaceuticals, (myrrh, aloes and what else?) and a recovery is well on the cards - the main problem of being crucified would be dehydration (later the far crueller practice of roping instead of nailing victims to the cross meant they suffered longer.) and once recovered from dehydration, the nail wounds, although painful, would not be life-threatening - that assumes the spear wound was not mortal either.

 

The recovery might be termed "miraculous" but it has a rational explanation. How many besides Joseph and Nicodemus were in on it is a matter for speculation - some of the more gullible followers may well have believed it was a "resurrection"

 

It was to prevent such recoveries, restorations or "resurrections" that the Romans left the crucifixees to rot!

[DavyR]

A subject (cause of death in crucifixion) that has attracted a fair bit of academic interest in its time:

 

http://www.rsm.ac.uk/media/pr191.php

 

Pilate no doubt would have been surprised that Christ had apparently died so quickly.

[chesters1]

probably didnt look at the bright side of life