Who Ruined Britain

[The Flying Tench]

Exactly, Dawkins is one of my heroes, thanks to him I no longer 'believe' in a lot of the crap that I used to. I try not to 'believe in' things at all these days. There are things that I accept as factual and things that I reject for being false.

 

Corydoras, you're the first person I've come across who's changed their views because of Richard Dawkins' books. I'm sorry in a way, of course, being a raging evangelical vicar (!), but I have to say when I read 'The God delusion' I liked the man - far more than Quentin letts!

[chesters1]

blimey your allowed to read books other than the "good" one

i cant understand the fact that the more learned you become the more the inconsistencies in the other book (the fat one with the cross) dont jump out !

just work out how much water it would take to water one of those tribe types in the desert for errr 7? years ,it doesnt say god gave them water they went in then x years came out ,7 litrs? a day per person plus animals

using humanity and kindness to base your life around is fine but a book! the bibles got plenty of kindness in it but its spattered with far more evil intentions do you just pick and choose?

and none of this "god works in mysterious ways" crap thats used to answer the hard questions

 

its nice to be able to ridicule (or in this case question) "our " religion ,when were all Muslims no doupt i would be typing this with my nose!!! mind you two hundred years ago i would have had been taken to church to have god decide if i were guilty with red hot irons

Edited October 13, 2008 by chesters1

[DavyR]

Being um, Devil's Advocate for a moment, isn't there a huge difference between the morality of the Old Testament ("An eye for an eye", the idea of a vengeful God, smiting one's enemies left, right & centre, etc.) and the New?

 

Most of the "kindness" is in the New Testament, but modern advocates of everything from making the punishment fit the crime to visiting judgement on succeeding generations or burning witches seem to prefer to draw their inspiration from the Old Testament.

 

I suppose the fact that both Testaments are usually found bound together in the same volume does confuse the issue...

[chesters1]

Being um, Devil's Advocate for a moment, isn't there a huge difference between the morality of the Old Testament ("An eye for an eye", the idea of a vengeful God, smiting one's enemies left, right & centre, etc.) and the New?

 

Most of the "kindness" is in the New Testament, but modern advocates of everything from making the punishment fit the crime to visiting judgement on succeeding generations or burning witches seem to prefer to draw their inspiration from the Old Testament.

 

I suppose the fact that both Testaments are usually found bound together in the same volume does confuse the issue...

 

the writings were also jewish which makes the christian churches adoptment of them rather strange (they were eventualy available to gentiles),only one had a natural end so perhaps a ghost writer wrote them instead.

there was also a lot of infighting amougnst these chappies as well no doupt the "closer to god than thy" mullarky so perhaps not the best of examples

out of the seventy (discover them how i did ) i think this chap was something in the roads worshipping sector

Parrobus, Bishop of Pottole

Edited October 13, 2008 by chesters1

[Guest challenge]

John was right again when he said our viewpoints are most definately coloured by how we are affected by either Tory or Labour policies, & in accordance with that thought Challenge it would seem you didn't fare well, as of course 1000's of others didn't also.

 

But evil Tyrant,

 

Pol Pot, Stalin, Mao, Hitler certainly justify that description but Maggie surely not, not even from a staunch labour position.

Just the opposite peter I did very well through the majority of the Thatcher years. She didn’t have an axe to grind with commercial fishermen at that time.

A lot of my work colleagues thought that she was great and couldn’t understand why I went round the local clubs with my coal not dole badge on collecting for the miners on strike.

They couldn’t understand why I (with many others from my home town,) went down to London and protested about the virtual police state that we where living in at the time.

“Tyrant” might seam a harsh description to many who went round at the time with there blinkers on. But I ashore you that it does not seam harsh to me and for those who had to live through her deprivation of basic human rights on a daily bases will admire me for using my restraint.

[The Flying Tench]

Being um, Devil's Advocate for a moment, isn't there a huge difference between the morality of the Old Testament ("An eye for an eye", the idea of a vengeful God, smiting one's enemies left, right & centre, etc.) and the New?

 

Most of the "kindness" is in the New Testament, but modern advocates of everything from making the punishment fit the crime to visiting judgement on succeeding generations or burning witches seem to prefer to draw their inspiration from the Old Testament.

 

I suppose the fact that both Testaments are usually found bound together in the same volume does confuse the issue...

 

I suppose the short answer to how bible bashers like me see the difference between the Old and New Testaments is that the Old looks forward to the New in many ways - prophecies (as christians see it) about Christ, and development in understanding in various ways, such as the inadequacy of law on it's own and the need for God's grace (mercy) and therefore ours.

 

I accept there are some real difficulties in the Old Testament, such as whether a God of love could really have told the Israelites to annihilate their enemies (which they never actually did, anyway) - and of course christians have a range of views on that. Nevertheless there's a lot of love in the Old Testament too. The Israelite laws were remarkably humane compared with other nations around at the time. Just look at our own comparatively recent history where, for example, at the end of the Georgian period comparatively minor theft had the death penalty. Interestingly the 'New Testament' commandment to love God with all your heart etc and your neighbour as yourself is based on two verses in the Old.

 

The trouble with Chesters' idea that we should just base our lives round humanity and kindness is that I'm not aware there has ever been a society where this was enough. Laws and accepted mores have always been based on some kind of religion in the broad sense (to include marxism, for example). We underestimate how much our values are influenced by the way we are brought up (culturally conditioned!) In Roman society, for example, it was considered perfectly OK to kill unwanted babies - just leave them out to die. That couldn't have changed through people somehow deciding that it wasn't humane - it needed an input from some new frame of reference (in that case christianity) to bring a change.

 

Of course, some would say that humanism, broadly defined, is the new religion in developed societies and that this will bring a society of developing fairness and kindness. But western humanism has grown in jewish-christian soil. Would it not be fair to say that the jury is still out?

[DavyR]

But western humanism has grown in jewish-christian soil.

 

I'm not sure that I (or the British Humanist Association) would necessarily agree with that statement, John:

 

"Western Europe has a tradition of non-religious ethical thinking that can be traced back some 2,500 years to the philosophy of the Ancient Greeks."

 

http://www.humanism.org.uk/site/cms/conten...sp?article=1152

 

Of course, no single belief system can claim a monopoly on morality. I personally favour the dictum "First, do no harm", which appeared originally in Ancient Greece.

[The Flying Tench]

I'm not sure that I (or the British Humanist Association) would necessarily agree with that statement, John:

 

"Western Europe has a tradition of non-religious ethical thinking that can be traced back some 2,500 years to the philosophy of the Ancient Greeks."

 

http://www.humanism.org.uk/site/cms/conten...sp?article=1152

 

Of course, no single belief system can claim a monopoly on morality. I personally favour the dictum "First, do no harm", which appeared originally in Ancient Greece.

 

Thanks - interesting, and I wasn't aware BHA traced their ancestry in that way. But I guess I was using the word humanist in a more general way. The kind of people who were called 'humanist' in the Renaissance (Erasmus and Co) were mostly christian as far as I am aware, though were new thinkers not accepting all the dictates of the church.

 

I guess the real question is what are the root influences on our present legal and moral systems. I accept this is a complex issue!

[chesters1]

i think the church is still doing its best to stop "free" thinkers ,you dont call them witches anymore but i'm sure the RC's have another word.

for anyone to base their idea of humanity on the bible or even the church is sorely misled IMHO

some of the splinter groups are as hard line or more so than the islamists

the ellel lot in particular

 

you will have to look up that particular lot (they reside just down the road at pierpoint) i shant provide a link their god could well smite me he seems to be harder than the normal christian one i feel sorry for the people their "ministers" try to influence

 

this is another lot up the other end of the village bounds

http://www.cwr.org.uk/about/

 

note the thing in common ,money you dont get large commuter belt houses and estates for nowt

 

and ofcourse slap in the middle is our moslem friends in sheephatch !34 acres isnt too bad and now many more in nearby alton ,this god lark sure is a money spinner but then it always has been

Edited October 14, 2008 by chesters1

[DavyR]

i think the church is still doing its best to stop "free" thinkers

 

I must admit, I personally know an ex-CoE vicar who left because he couldn't cope with some of the attitudes he encountered from the more senior members of the heirarchy. He now belongs to something called "The Emerging Church". They appear to concentrate on practical, hands-on, good-deeds type religion, but they certainly haven't made themselves very popular with some members of the established church.