Searching for GOD...

[Alan Burns]

... what are your thoughts on the humble tomato, fried tin tomato or fried fresh tomato

Gonnagle.

Much to my wife's disgust, I much prefer fried tinned tomatoes than fried fresh ones, particularly with bacon 

[ippy]

Ippy? Accusing someone of mere assertion? whatever next?

By the way Ippy...It is not ''Proven sourse''.........but ''Proven sauce''......Happy to put you straight.

Yes I spotted it last night just before I posted, I thought, wrongly that I had corrected it obviously not.

Be surprised when I get my spelling right, I am blighted with the inability to avoid spelling disasters, you should see how hard my spell check works on anything I write.

If you put me right in an ongoing process I'm sure you'll be kept busy; I do my best in this area.

ippy   

[Leonard James]

Yes I spotted it last night just before I posted, I thought, wrongly that I had corrected it obviously not.

Be surprised when I get my spelling right, I am blighted with the inability to avoid spelling disasters, you should see how hard my spell check works on anything I write.

If you put me right in an ongoing process I'm sure you'll be kept busy; I do my best in this area.

ippy

I think the word you wanted was 'source'.

[ippy]

Dear Leonard,

Aye!! and this fascinate me, you old friend are a excellent example, you often use Biblical quotations as throw aways, but then you are not alone, other atheists on this forum have been known to dip into the Bible for a odd quote or three.

Then we have Vlads pin up boy, Dawkins, he regards himself as a cultural Christian, just wondering how many more atheists on this forum regard themselves as "cultural Christians".

Our Gordon, our very valued Mod, now he has never had God in his life, although when I think about it, he has, hard to escape us Bible bashers when you live on the west coast of Scotland, wonder if Gordon thinks of himself as a "cultural Christian".

This opens up all sorts of other thoughts in my very cluttered mind, walking away from religious thought, does that leave some kind of void?

Taking religion out of schools, in this country, Scotland, there is a push on to ensure our kids are well schooled in the three R's, where is the push to ensure our kids are well schooled in, Love, Charity, serving our fellow man, just as important as the three R's, more important, in fact they should be on equal footing.

On the subject of charity, Church of Scotland, England, Ireland, Wales, Salvation Army, Barnado's, the atheist is quite happy for these institutions to deal with our down trodden but will rail against religious privilege, our own government gives these institutions tax payers money to deal with this countries ill's, something is out of kilter here when it comes to atheist thinking.

Anyway Leonard that is my little rantette for today, time for breakfast, square sausage, tottie scone, egg, what are your thoughts on the humble tomato, fried tin tomato or fried fresh tomato

Gonnagle.

Clueless! It'd be a wast of time trying to explain, you still don't understand secluarism, change your handle Gonners, try Don Quixote.

ippy

[ippy]

I think the word you wanted was 'source'.

Tell me about it Len, the spell check on my PC near enough glows red when I'm writing anything out, it's to late now it's been the same right from the start of my long distinguished literary career, wot i rote about.

ippy

[Bubbles]

Much to my wife's disgust, I much prefer fried tinned tomatoes than fried fresh ones, particularly with bacon 

Fried tinned tomatoes ?

 

Never tried that!

Isn't it a bit sloppy?

[Gonnagle]

Dear ippy,

Clueless! It'd be a wast of time trying to explain, you still don't understand secluarism, change your handle Gonners, try Don Quixote.

Aye that's me old son, forever searching for clue's and tilting at windmills, goodnight old son and may your God go with you.

Gonnagle.

[Leonard James]

Tell me about it Len, the spell check on my PC near enough glows red when I'm writing anything out, it's to late now it's been the same right from the start of my long distinguished literary career, wot i rote about.

ippy

As long as we know what you intend, Ippy, the spelling doesn't matter a shit. 

[Outrider]

Aye!! and this fascinate me, you old friend are a excellent example, you often use Biblical quotations as throw aways, but then you are not alone, other atheists on this forum have been known to dip into the Bible for a odd quote or three.

Is that a surprise? It's one of the most significant documents in our culture's history, and virtually no-one denies there are some good statements of moral guidance in there, as stand alone segments - it's the idea that you are required to believe in a supernatural creator in order for following to somehow be 'valid' that we disagree with. It's too easy to throw out the baby with the bathwater.

As someone born and raised in Britain, huge parts of my vocabulary and idiom are, for instance, derived from Shakespeare: I personally don't give two figs for Shakespeare's work as a whole, but you can't escape the influence of it in our culture.

Then we have Vlads pin up boy, Dawkins, he regards himself as a cultural Christian, just wondering how many more atheists on this forum regard themselves as "cultural Christians".

I'm not so sure on that - I see Ugandan and Nigerian people as being 'cultural Christians', their culture seems to cleave more consistently to Biblical values. Certainly the history of Britain and it's adoption of certain values and the sequence in which they were adopted has been influenced by Christianity, but equally I think Anglicanism has been massively influenced by the secularisation, modernisation and development of British culture - it's that influence ON the church rather than by the church that sees Britain nestled within a broad world-wide collection of advanced, developed nations and the Church of England in the process of severing itself from a more primitive, uncultured Anglican community into a loose affiliation.

This opens up all sorts of other thoughts in my very cluttered mind, walking away from religious thought, does that leave some kind of void?

You'd have to ask someone that's done it, but judging by Rose's general sense of contentment I'd suggest that it doesn't necessarily have to.

Taking religion out of schools, in this country, Scotland, there is a push on to ensure our kids are well schooled in the three R's, where is the push to ensure our kids are well schooled in, Love, Charity, serving our fellow man, just as important as the three R's, more important, in fact they should be on equal footing.

Firstly you'd have to ask if that's what schools are there to do (the modern education standards seem to suggest they are). Then you'd have to ask if religious education is the place to do that, given that suggesting religion is the way to 'be good' implies those without religion don't have a mechanism, which isn't the case. As it is, those sorts of ideas of personal development are typically handled in Personal Social and Health Education (or whatever acronym it's been given this year).

On the subject of charity, Church of Scotland, England, Ireland, Wales, Salvation Army, Barnado's, the atheist is quite happy for these institutions to deal with our down trodden but will rail against religious privilege, our own government gives these institutions tax payers money to deal with this countries ill's, something is out of kilter here when it comes to atheist thinking.

Not really. The government doesn't give just these institutions money to look after the poor and needy, it gives all charities tax relief to facilitate that work. The problem is that it automatically gives churches tax relief for all their income, without actually determining what is charity work and what is just the everyday work of their continuing business - cinemas don't get tax relief to entertain return customers or maintain their buildings, why do churches?

O.

[ippy]

As long as we know what you intend, Ippy, the spelling doesn't matter a shit. 

Cheers Len, there are enough well educated idiots around, nothing new there with my spelling, it's as bad now as when I started and it won't be getting any better or any more predictable.

This is a cultural problem where we are all guilty of splitting children at the age of eleven, it's been a part of our language to refer to the " bright", ones go to the grammar schools, instead of saying, the more "academic" ones go to the grammar schools, I find myself using this term , inappropriatly, this is a point more often than not that flies over the heads of the more academic people of this world that we all live in and need each other.

By the way I'm not forgetting that the splitting of children at the age of eleven isn't as prevelent as it was when I was at school sixty odd years ago.

ippy

[ippy]

Dear ippy,

Aye that's me old son, forever searching for clue's and tilting at windmills, goodnight old son and may your God go with you.

Gonnagle.

Splerg be with you too Gonners.

ippy

[Leonard James]

... this is a point more often than not that flies over the heads of the more academic people of this world that we all live in and need each other.

Quite! It is difficult for some people to accept that the dustman is as  important to our well-being as the neurosurgeon is.

[Shaker]

"I am the way, the truth and the life says the Lord.  No one can come to the Father except through me"
This is not a club to hit out at other religions, but a simple statement of why Jesus lived, died and was resurrected.  It is through the power of Jesus that good people will enter heaven.  It does not exclude people of other faiths, or even no faith, but it will certainly help if you can accept Jesus as your saviour.

So if people of other faiths and no faith are not excluded from heaven, exactly what is Jesus for? What's the benefit of accepting a set of implausible, unsupported beliefs about a dubious figure? How does Jesus help? By your very own words Jesus is a mere appurtenance, an optional extra. Is it through the power of Jesus that good Jews and good Sikhs go to heaven? Or do they not enter heaven at all according to you? Arrogance or malevolence - your choice.

Yet again you're saying two wholly contradictory things, Alan. On the one hand you say: "... we still need Jesus' help to get to heaven ... It is through the power of Jesus that good people will enter heaven ... it will certainly help if you can accept Jesus as your saviour," and yet on the other you say: "It does not exclude people of other faiths, or even no faith." People of other faiths and no faiths are in essence going to be people who don't even believe in Jesus and his message and worldview. So what's belief in Jesus actually for if, on your view, people of other religions and no faith at all go to heaven regardless? How and in what ways does a belief in Jesus help?

Bit of a mess, really, isn't it Alan.

[Gonnagle]

Dear Outrider,

Thank you for your reply, I am not going to debate against your post, more to discuss the points you make, or maybe just try to clarify what I have been trying to say.

Is that a surprise? It's one of the most significant documents in our culture's history, and virtually no-one denies there are some good statements of moral guidance in there, as stand alone segments - it's the idea that you are required to believe in a supernatural creator in order for following to somehow be 'valid' that we disagree with. It's too easy to throw out the baby with the bathwater.

No not surprised, just wondering how much an atheist would admit that Christianity/the Bible has affected their lives, their thinking, even if that thinking is anti Christianity.

I'm not so sure on that - I see Ugandan and Nigerian people as being 'cultural Christians', their culture seems to cleave more consistently to Biblical values. Certainly the history of Britain and it's adoption of certain values and the sequence in which they were adopted has been influenced by Christianity, but equally I think Anglicanism has been massively influenced by the secularisation, modernisation and development of British culture - it's that influence ON the church rather than by the church that sees Britain nestled within a broad world-wide collection of advanced, developed nations and the Church of England in the process of severing itself from a more primitive, uncultured Anglican community into a loose affiliation.

Literal Biblical values, and yes as I see the CoE, it is a progressive Church, slow progress but it must modernise to meet the needs of a modern society.

You'd have to ask someone that's done it, but judging by Rose's general sense of contentment I'd suggest that it doesn't necessarily have to.

Well this is one for Rose, but I don't think Rose would call herself atheist.

Firstly you'd have to ask if that's what schools are there to do (the modern education standards seem to suggest they are). Then you'd have to ask if religious education is the place to do that, given that suggesting religion is the way to 'be good' implies those without religion don't have a mechanism, which isn't the case. As it is, those sorts of ideas of personal development are typically handled in Personal Social and Health Education (or whatever acronym it's been given this year).

Well I think schools are there to teach our kids to be better adults, to instill in them good practice, and no, I am not saying that those without religion don't have a mechanism, I want to know what that mechanism is, and how you would teach the kids the merit of your mechanism.

Not really. The government doesn't give just these institutions money to look after the poor and needy, it gives all charities tax relief to facilitate that work. The problem is that it automatically gives churches tax relief for all their income, without actually determining what is charity work and what is just the everyday work of their continuing business - cinemas don't get tax relief to entertain return customers or maintain their buildings, why do churches?

Taxes were not what I had in mind, child abuse in Yorkshire ( I think it was Yorkshire ) Barnado's where called in to handle this, the atheist is quite happy, or turns a blind eye to the work of religious organisations, I think the work done deserves some kind of privilege although I could  be slightly confused on what atheists mean by the word privilege.

Gonnagle.

[Enki]

Dear Outrider,

Thank you for your reply, I am not going to debate against your post, more to discuss the points you make, or maybe just try to clarify what I have been trying to say.

No not surprised, just wondering how much an atheist would admit that Christianity/the Bible has affected their lives, their thinking, even if that thinking is anti Christianity.

Literal Biblical values, and yes as I see the CoE, it is a progressive Church, slow progress but it must modernise to meet the needs of a modern society.

Well this is one for Rose, but I don't think Rose would call herself atheist.

Well I think schools are there to teach our kids to be better adults, to instill in them good practice, and no, I am not saying that those without religion don't have a mechanism, I want to know what that mechanism is, and how you would teach the kids the merit of your mechanism.

Taxes were not what I had in mind, child abuse in Yorkshire ( I think it was Yorkshire ) Barnado's where called in to handle this, the atheist is quite happy, or turns a blind eye to the work of religious organisations, I think the work done deserves some kind of privilege although I could  be slightly confused on what atheists mean by the word privilege.

Gonnagle.

Hi Gonners,
To take your points one at a time;

I would suggest that Christianity has affected my life in all sorts of ways, some good, some bad. By the same token many other 'cultural' influences have had an effect on my life (e.g. music, drama, dancing, science). I'm not sure why the word 'admit' comes into it though. This seems to be a word associated with your hangup, rather than mine.

I see the CofE(particularly in the UK) as becoming increasingly secular although I think that it has a long way to go still.

As regards Rose, she can speak for herself, therefore I make no comment.

As a former schoolteacher, I would agree that schools should guide our kids to become more responsible and caring adults. I see this as part of  the ethos of the school, rather than being taught you should do this, you should not do that, although I do see the need for some sort of examination, as Outy suggests, of personal, social and health development. What you might call a mechanism, for me, I don't see as a mechanism at all. It is a part of me. I do not feel the need to justify my attitudes by relating them to a particular religion or a particular set of religious rules. After saying that, I'm sure that my own attitudes can quite easily overlap with some of the tenets of various religions. I always tried to show by my actions the importance of such things as responsibility towards others, respect towards another person etc.

On your last point, as an atheist, I totally reject the accusation that the 'atheist turns a blind eye to the work of religious organisations'. The important point, for me, is whether any organisation, whether it be Medecins Sans Frontiers or the Salvation Army, is there basically to help people in need. I care not one jot for their religious or non religious origins, as long as their intent is to do the above. On the other hand, if a religious organisation/charity's aim is to further their particular Christian message, then I wish to have nothing to do with it. The privileges that any charitable organisation enjoys should be on the basis of the avowed aim of helping people in need, and, therefore, should not be on the basis of whether they are a religious organization or not.

[Shaker]

On your last point, as an atheist, I totally reject the accusation that the 'atheist turns a blind eye to the work of religious organisations'. The important point, for me, is whether any organisation, whether it be Medecins Sans Frontiers or the Salvation Army, is there basically to help people in need. I care not one jot for their religious or non religious origins, as long as their intent is to do the above. On the other hand, if a religious organisation/charity's aim is to further their particular Christian message, then I wish to have nothing to do with it. The privileges that any charitable organisation enjoys should be on the basis of the avowed aim of helping people in need, and, therefore, should not be on the basis of whether they are a religious organization or not.

I was going to say 'amen' to all this, then thought better of it.

[ippy]

Quite! It is difficult for some people to accept that the dustman is as  important to our well-being as the neurosurgeon is.

Not quite Len, I meant as in people like, Richard Branson, from what I've heard he's not at all academic he certainly is "bright".

There's certainly a lot of academically competent people that are a long way off of being "bright", perhaps I wasn't being clear enough.

A common misuse, by the English, of the word bright.

ippy

[ippy]

Hi Gonners,
To take your points one at a time;

I would suggest that Christianity has affected my life in all sorts of ways, some good, some bad. By the same token many other 'cultural' influences have had an effect on my life (e.g. music, drama, dancing, science). I'm not sure why the word 'admit' comes into it though. This seems to be a word associated with your hangup, rather than mine.

I see the CofE(particularly in the UK) as becoming increasingly secular although I think that it has a long way to go still.

As regards Rose, she can speak for herself, therefore I make no comment.

As a former schoolteacher, I would agree that schools should guide our kids to become more responsible and caring adults. I see this as part of  the ethos of the school, rather than being taught you should do this, you should not do that, although I do see the need for some sort of examination, as Outy suggests, of personal, social and health development. What you might call a mechanism, for me, I don't see as a mechanism at all. It is a part of me. I do not feel the need to justify my attitudes by relating them to a particular religion or a particular set of religious rules. After saying that, I'm sure that my own attitudes can quite easily overlap with some of the tenets of various religions. I always tried to show by my actions the importance of such things as responsibility towards others, respect towards another person etc.

On your last point, as an atheist, I totally reject the accusation that the 'atheist turns a blind eye to the work of religious organisations'. The important point, for me, is whether any organisation, whether it be Medecins Sans Frontiers or the Salvation Army, is there basically to help people in need. I care not one jot for their religious or non religious origins, as long as their intent is to do the above. On the other hand, if a religious organisation/charity's aim is to further their particular Christian message, then I wish to have nothing to do with it. The privileges that any charitable organisation enjoys should be on the basis of the avowed aim of helping people in need, and, therefore, should not be on the basis of whether they are a religious organization or not.

Thank you Enki for trying to explain secularism to Gonners in last part of your post, I totally agree with you and the way you've laid out, basic secular philosophy, either intentionally or not, perhaps he may take it from you?

ippy

 

[Gonnagle]

Dear enki,

I would suggest that Christianity has affected my life in all sorts of ways, some good, some bad.

What ways, and do they still affect you.

Here's a true story, and it can all be verified if you search the old Beeb forum, we had a poster called Dyslexic ( could have been Dypslexic ) who was/is an atheist, but he once was a Christian, his knowledge of the Four Gospels was astounding, he could explain the hidden depth, the true message of the Gospels, you could tell that the Gospels had affected him in a very profound way, hell! the man was a better Christian than I am.

Now the above example is a tad OTT, but the poster was very relaxed in his atheism, and very relaxed regarding how the Gospels, his time as a Christian had affected him, what stuck with him and what he discarded as nonsense, and as you can see he had a big influence on me.

Just looking for atheists to open up a bit, relax your guard slightly, a bit more open on how Christianity has affected you.

By the same token many other 'cultural' influences have had an effect on my life (e.g. music, drama, dancing, science).

Me to, I can be quite boring when it comes to Einstein, and not afraid to admit I would rather read Kipling than the Gospels.

As a former schoolteacher, I would agree that schools should guide our kids to become more responsible and caring adults. I see this as part of  the ethos of the school, rather than being taught you should do this, you should not do that, although I do see the need for some sort of examination, as Outy suggests, of personal, social and health development. What you might call a mechanism, for me, I don't see as a mechanism at all. It is a part of me. I do not feel the need to justify my attitudes by relating them to a particular religion or a particular set of religious rules. After saying that, I'm sure that my own attitudes can quite easily overlap with some of the tenets of various religions. I always tried to show by my actions the importance of such things as responsibility towards others, respect towards another person etc.

Well it was Outrider who used the word mechanism, just thought a atheist, any atheist had a definitive mechanism, mine is Christianity but I will search out other philosophies and religions which inspire me.

On your last point, as an atheist, I totally reject the accusation that the 'atheist turns a blind eye to the work of religious organisations'

Well I don't see many posts on here from atheists shouting from the roof tops about all the great work done by religious organisations.

On the other hand, if a religious organisation/charity's aim is to further their particular Christian message, then I wish to have nothing to do with it.

And that is very telling, if you had to choose which organisation got the pound in your pocket, does your atheism affect this, actually I think you have answered that question.

The privileges that any charitable organisation enjoys should be on the basis of the avowed aim of helping people in need, and, therefore, should not be on the basis of whether they are a religious organization or not.

Can't really argue against this but the great work that the Church of Scotland, Church of England, Sally Ann, Barnados etc etc do, day in day out I think deserves some kind of privilege.

Gonnagle.

[Alan Burns]

So if people of other faiths and no faith are not excluded from heaven, exactly what is Jesus for? What's the benefit of accepting a set of implausible, unsupported beliefs about a dubious figure? How does Jesus help? By your very own words Jesus is a mere appurtenance, an optional extra. Is it through the power of Jesus that good Jews and good Sikhs go to heaven? Or do they not enter heaven at all according to you? Arrogance or malevolence - your choice.

Yet again you're saying two wholly contradictory things, Alan. On the one hand you say: "... we still need Jesus' help to get to heaven ... It is through the power of Jesus that good people will enter heaven ... it will certainly help if you can accept Jesus as your saviour," and yet on the other you say: "It does not exclude people of other faiths, or even no faith." People of other faiths and no faiths are in essence going to be people who don't even believe in Jesus and his message and worldview. So what's belief in Jesus actually for if, on your view, people of other religions and no faith at all go to heaven regardless? How and in what ways does a belief in Jesus help?

Bit of a mess, really, isn't it Alan.

You seem to have totally misunderstood what the New Testament is all about.
Jesus lived and died to save all mankind, but we are not the judge of who can be saved.

[Shaker]

You seem to have totally misunderstood what the New Testament is all about.

And you know this, do you?

[ippy]

You seem to have totally misunderstood what the New Testament is all about.
Jesus lived and died to save all mankind, but we are not the judge of who can be saved.

Alan? Should have been named Noal.

ippy

[Alan Burns]

And you know this, do you?

But to understand the New Testament, you need to know that God is real.

[Shaker]

But to understand the New Testament, you need to know that God is real.

You don't.

What you do is believe. This is not the same mental process as know.

That aside: what you are here suggesting is that nobody can "understand" the New Testament until and unless they believe in God. Are you absolutely sure that this is exactly what you want to say, Alan?

[jeremyp]

Quite! It is difficult for some people to accept that the dustman is as  important to our well-being as the neurosurgeon is.

Well so far in my life (and I hope it stays that way), neurosurgeons have had absolutely no importance to my well-being.