FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Non Abrahamic Religions & Philosophies
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-14-2006, 02:53 AM   #101
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 431
Default

Hi JPD -
Quote:
You talk about spreading the "good news". You assume that this is good for people because they are missing something. This is a judgement that you make all the time.
If the good news turns out to be true, and I hadn’t told people, that would be despicable; if I am wrong, I do no real harm. Generally speaking, I assess, but I try not to judge.
Quote:
The problem is that these weird, completely groundless speculations, are thrust into our faces at every possible opportunity. Every Easter and Christmas is a reminder. I would love to see these being renamed as something neutral.
I don’t believe the secularisation and non- (not multi)-culturalisation that has swept our lovely UK this past 50 years or so has been a good thing. There were good intentions perhaps, but the results are not as expected. But the prognosis is more of the same is required? If we exclude God from our country we will suffer as a nation.

Hi Clete -
Quote:
Helpmabob, are you saying there is such a thing as a "free lunch" with Christians? I'm sorry but I have to disagree.
I thought you would disagree. I am not doubting that you have found this to be the case, I am only saying that there are people living on other parts of the internet that have found Christians to be attentive to the needs of others.
Helpmabob is offline  
Old 01-14-2006, 03:06 AM   #102
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Britain
Posts: 5,259
Default

Um... JPD why do you want Easter to be renamed? It's the 'pagan' name for the festival. It's based on the name of the pagan fertility god Eostre. Hardly anything in Easter is Christian. In fact the name is the LEAST Christian thing about it. To be honest I am happy to let the pagans keep their hi-jacked festival's old name.
fatpie42 is offline  
Old 01-14-2006, 12:46 PM   #103
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: San Jose, California USA
Posts: 5,275
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Helpmabob
Hi Clete - I thought you would disagree. I am not doubting that you have found this to be the case, I am only saying that there are people living on other parts of the internet that have found Christians to be attentive to the needs of others.
I think we're getting a little off track here. Initially you and I were talking specifically about born-agains, and as you know not all Christians are born-agains. Of course there are Christians who are attentive to the needs of others, just like there are Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists and Atheists (and many other groups) who are attentive to the needs of others. My points were the following:

1. Born-agains--and mind you I'm not talking about all Christians here, just born-agains--are as dogmatic and un-peaceful as Dawkins, if not more so. They’re dogmatic in the sense that they’re opinionated and not open to the possibility that they may be wrong about the nature of existence. They’re un-peaceful in the sense that they tend to feel the need to push their beliefs on others, sometimes quite forcefully.

2. Your statement “…they said that there is no such thing as a free lunch. But they obviously hadn’t met many Christians.�? Is demonstratively false due to the myriad counterexamples that have occurred throughout the past two thousand years of human history (the colonization of the Amercas and Africa spring instantly to mind as do the Inquisition and the missionary work going on around the globe to this very day).

One thing I am not saying is that all Christians (or even all born-agains) are bad people who aren’t attentive to the needs of others. I just don’t think that, as a group, they’re any better than any other group of people.
Clete is offline  
Old 01-14-2006, 02:27 PM   #104
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Paisley, Scotland
Posts: 5,819
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Helpmabob
I don’t believe the secularisation and non- (not multi)-culturalisation that has swept our lovely UK this past 50 years or so has been a good thing. There were good intentions perhaps, but the results are not as expected. But the prognosis is more of the same is required? If we exclude God from our country we will suffer as a nation.
Are you Scottish? If so you should know very well the nature of sectarian division in our country. Do you seek to make it worse by foisting yet another round of religious dogma to follow-up on John Knox & the like? No thanks, keep your religion to yourself. We are gradually, albeit far too slowly, getting rid of the stigma cause by the reformation and there are little shoots of secular humanism. I don't want those poisoned by ridiculous superstition & division.
JamesBannon is offline  
Old 01-16-2006, 03:24 AM   #105
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 431
Default

Hi Clete - One thing I am not saying is that all Christians (or even all born-agains) are bad people who aren’t attentive to the needs of others. I just don’t think that, as a group, they’re any better than any other group of people. You’re absolutely right. In fact, I wouldn’t even be able to argue that on average, in themselves, christians are not worse.

Hi James – I am not happy with sectarianism. It has been one of the by-products, not one of the aims of the Reformation.
Quote:
We are gradually, albeit far too slowly, getting rid of the stigma cause by the reformation and there are little shoots of secular humanism.
I think one of the recent by-products of the rise of secular humanism in the UK has been the introduction of ‘civil partnerships’. So, in my opinion, there are drawbacks with however thing are organised.
Helpmabob is offline  
Old 01-16-2006, 04:09 AM   #106
JPD
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: London, UK
Posts: 5,322
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatpie42
Um... JPD why do you want Easter to be renamed? It's the 'pagan' name for the festival. It's based on the name of the pagan fertility god Eostre. Hardly anything in Easter is Christian. In fact the name is the LEAST Christian thing about it. To be honest I am happy to let the pagans keep their hi-jacked festival's old name.
From Wikipedia:

"Easter is the most important religious holiday of the Christian liturgical year, observed in March, April, or May to celebrate the resurrection of Jesus, which Christians believe occurred after his death by crucifixion in AD 30-33 (see Good Friday). Easter can also refer to the season of the church year, lasting for fifty days, which follows this holiday and ends around Pentecost. Further information: Eastertide."

"In most languages of Christian societies, other than English, German and some Slavic languages, the holiday's name is derived from Pesach, the Hebrew name of Passover, a Jewish holiday to which the Christian Easter is intimately linked."

But the Pagan origins are discussed further down so, yes, I agree with you.
JPD is offline  
Old 01-16-2006, 04:21 AM   #107
Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Alibi: ego ipse hinc extermino
Posts: 12,591
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clete
One thing I am not saying is that all Christians (or even all born-agains) are bad people who aren’t attentive to the needs of others.
Sure, and as I've just read elsewhere, paragons are by definition nobody's problem. But it is the cult of non-thinking called 'faith' -- the I'm right and if you disagree you're wrong, and it is a positive virtue not to have to provide evidence that I'm right mindset -- that so easily leads to trouble. It is the root of a lot of evil, if not all of it (hence, presumably, the question mark at the end of the programme's title).
Oolon Colluphid is offline  
Old 01-16-2006, 04:25 AM   #108
Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Alibi: ego ipse hinc extermino
Posts: 12,591
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Helpmabob
Hi JPD - If the good news turns out to be true, and I hadn’t told people, that would be despicable; if I am wrong, I do no real harm.
Hmmm. Pascal's Wager, anyone?

If you're wrong, no harm, eh? I assume that you think leading people to believe in untruths (which they'd be if you are wrong) is oaky, yes?
Oolon Colluphid is offline  
Old 01-16-2006, 04:39 AM   #109
JPD
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: London, UK
Posts: 5,322
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Helpmabob
If we exclude God from our country we will suffer as a nation.
Will we? In what way exactly? And how can one "exclude" something which isn't actually anywhere in the first place? Just to be on the safe side we should also not exclude everything else for which no evidence exists. That will be one huge list. What, these things have not been documented? I'll start with boobam polips in gegint fagib moss.
JPD is offline  
Old 01-16-2006, 05:26 AM   #110
Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Alibi: ego ipse hinc extermino
Posts: 12,591
Default

Yep. I can see there'd be no end of trouble if we excluded astrology, ear candles, psychic surgery, feng shui and reflexology from our country too. Keep all manner of unevinced magical thinking, or the country's fucked. Gotcha. :thumbs:
Oolon Colluphid is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:51 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.