Religion and Ethics Forum
Religion and Ethics Discussion => Christian Topic => Topic started by: floo on October 19, 2015, 03:31:41 PM
-
deleted
-
Hmm. Is this "a not hiding my light under a bushel" or" not showing off to gain recognition" time?
-
There are some Christians who do a lot for others, but would probably do so even if they were non believers. However there are other Christians who think they have done their bit by running off at the mouth about their faith, but do nothing practical to help those in need! Deeds are much better than words, imo.
As a Christian what do you do to help others in need?
I know that I am not a Christian but even I, a Pagan, am getting more than a little fed up with you. You are a real "one-trick-pony", and topics that you start are monotonously repetitive - everyone on this forum knows that you are about as rabid an anti-Christian atheist as it is poossible to be.
To be honest I am amazed that any of the Christians on the forum are bothered to even read your topics. I certainly shall not be in the future; responses, yes, possibly - topics, NO!
-
floo,
So you know a lot of Christians that don't do anything for others floo? Really, I doubt that any Christian has confessed that to you.
And being that you bash God here and praise and plead to him in prayer poems elsewhere on the internet, I don't care to read about your charity work because you are not credible.
-
Hmm. Is this "a not hiding my light under a bushel" or" not showing off to gain recognition" time?
Matthew 5.15
…14"You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden; 15nor does anyone light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on the lampstand, and it gives light to all who are in the house. 16"Let your light shine before men in such a way that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven.
Read the parable Jesus told of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector:
https://lifehopeandtruth.com/.../the-pharisee-and-the-tax-collector/
-
There are some Christians who do a lot for others, but would probably do so even if they were non believers. However there are other Christians who think they have done their bit by running off at the mouth about their faith, but do nothing practical to help those in need! Deeds are much better than words, imo.
As a Christian what do you do to help others in need?
I know that I am not a Christian but even I, a Pagan, am getting more than a little fed up with you. You are a real "one-trick-pony", and topics that you start are monotonously repetitive - everyone on this forum knows that you are about as rabid an anti-Christian atheist as it is poossible to be.
To be honest I am amazed that any of the Christians on the forum are bothered to even read your topics. I certainly shall not be in the future; responses, yes, possibly - topics, NO!
Exactly. I heartily agree.
-
There are some Christians who do a lot for others, but would probably do so even if they were non believers. However there are other Christians who think they have done their bit by running off at the mouth about their faith, but do nothing practical to help those in need! Deeds are much better than words, imo.
As a Christian what do you do to help others in need?
I know that I am not a Christian but even I, a Pagan, am getting more than a little fed up with you. You are a real "one-trick-pony", and topics that you start are monotonously repetitive - everyone on this forum knows that you are about as rabid an anti-Christian atheist as it is poossible to be.
To be honest I am amazed that any of the Christians on the forum are bothered to even read your topics. I certainly shall not be in the future; responses, yes, possibly - topics, NO!
Exactly. I heartily agree.
I knew you would!
-
It's other people's business what they do.
-
Thank you, CMG and Rhiannon for your support.
-
I will continue to challenge the nastier aspects of Christianity, like those who proselytise but do nothing useful! I have already said there are decent Christians around who do a lot of good. However, they tend not to be the fundies on the whole!
And just how many fundies are there on this board, Floo?
-
Hmm. Is this "a not hiding my light under a bushel" or" not showing off to gain recognition" time?
Matthew 5.15
…14"You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden; 15nor does anyone light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on the lampstand, and it gives light to all who are in the house. 16"Let your light shine before men in such a way that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven.
Read the parable Jesus told of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector:
https://lifehopeandtruth.com/.../the-pharisee-and-the-tax-collector/
Well unfortunately there are Christians who come across as more resembling the description of the Pharisee, it's just they do it by claiming to be "born again" and better than others ( including other Christians)
Sometimes they abuse people, and they can come from any denomination.
In fact I've met a few that have really looked down on the whole idea of good deeds as being pointless.
Not all Christians are like that obviously, but there are enough to be disturbing.
Perhaps they are so intent on their faith they are unaware of the impression they are creating.
There is an unplea...
Of course; but there are most certainly atheists like that, and others of every belief. Always pick on Christians, eh? I'm not an apologist for all Christians, though you seem to have taken it upon yourself to denigrate whenever you can. You say, "Well unfortunately there are Christians who come across as more resembling the description of the Pharisee..." Name some. It's easy to make an assertion like that: justify it.
-
Well unfortunately there are Christians who come across as more resembling the description of the Pharisee, it's just they do it by claiming to be "born again" and better than others ( including other Christians)
Sometimes they abuse people, and they can come from any denomination.
In fact I've met a few that have really looked down on the whole idea of good deeds as being pointless.
Not all Christians are like that obviously, but there are enough to be disturbing.
Perhaps they are so intent on their faith they are unaware of the impression they are creating.
There is an unplea...
Of course; but there are most certainly atheists like that, and others of every belief. Always pick on Christians, eh? I'm not an apologist for all Christians, though you seem to have taken it upon yourself to denigrate whenever you can. You say, "Well unfortunately there are Christians who come across as more resembling the description of the Pharisee..." Name some. It's easy to make an assertion like that: justify it.
And, of course, you will know every single Christian that Rose knows, won't you, so that you will be able to refute the charge against any one she names!
-
It seems that the only Scripture a Bible believer knows about good works is that we are not saved by them (Eph. 2:8,9)! Sadly, many have further adopted an attitude about good works that they are virtually insignificant. Therefore, this article should be very surprising as it reveals Biblical truths about this important subject. Christians are to let their light shine which means that they are to do good deeds before others, even the unsaved:
http://www.evangelicaloutreach.org/goodworks.htm
This article shows it quite nicely.
I think that the issue with that article is that it is American and perhaps reflects a fairly small group of readers. I would have to say that of the American Christians I know well, none could be said to fit the picture this provides. As for the UK Christians I know, the verse the writer quotes would probably come fairly low in any list of references to 'good works'. I suppose it deopends on whether one is an evangelical, a fundie, or a liberal. The former and the latter would seem to have a good balance in their understanding of the place of good works.
-
The sort of person you are is far more important than having any sort of faith. If you are decent, honest and try to help others, that is much more to be prized than anything else, imo.
Wew might not agree on some things but this post - definitely.
Too many people, of many faiths, talk the talk but haven't bothered to learn the walk! All mouth and no action - my ex-mother-in-law for one.
-
Well unfortunately there are Christians who come across as more resembling the description of the Pharisee, it's just they do it by claiming to be "born again" and better than others ( including other Christians)
Sometimes they abuse people, and they can come from any denomination.
In fact I've met a few that have really looked down on the whole idea of good deeds as being pointless.
Not all Christians are like that obviously, but there are enough to be disturbing.
Perhaps they are so intent on their faith they are unaware of the impression they are creating.
There is an unplea...
Of course; but there are most certainly atheists like that, and others of every belief. Always pick on Christians, eh? I'm not an apologist for all Christians, though you seem to have taken it upon yourself to denigrate whenever you can. You say, "Well unfortunately there are Christians who come across as more resembling the description of the Pharisee..." Name some. It's easy to make an assertion like that: justify it.
And, of course, you will know every single Christian that Rose knows, won't you, so that you will be able to refute the charge against any one she names!
Of course I won't, and that's the whole point, which you've missed - it is pointless to talk in such general and unjustifiable terms.
-
The sort of person you are is far more important than having any sort of faith. If you are decent, honest and try to help others, that is much more to be prized than anything else, imo.
I think that the two go hand in hand, Floo. Remember that 'faith' is a very wide term, and needn't involve a belief in a deity. After all, other words for 'faith' are 'trust' or 'belief'. One can have 'trust' or 'belief' in humanity's ability to resolve its own problems.
-
Wew might not agree on some things but this post - definitely.
Too many people, of many faiths, talk the talk but haven't bothered to learn the walk! All mouth and no action - my ex-mother-in-law for one.
And, of course, this applies equally to those who claim not to have a faith, Matt. As such, it makes your post, and Floo's original with which you are agreeing of very little overall value as they are both generalisations (something that Floo is only too good at)
-
The sort of person you are is far more important than having any sort of faith. If you are decent, honest and try to help others, that is much more to be prized than anything else, imo.
I think that the two go hand in hand, Floo. Remember that 'faith' is a very wide term, and needn't involve a belief in a deity. After all, other words for 'faith' are 'trust' or 'belief'. One can have 'trust' or 'belief' in humanity's ability to resolve its own problems.
Then why bother with your god?
-
Then why bother with your god?
Why bother with 'my' god? Because I believe that belief/faith/trust in the creator of all things enables me to be more in tune with the needs, concerns, fears (and happiness) of my fellow humans than not having that belief/.../... .
-
Then why bother with your god?
Why bother with 'my' god? Because I believe that belief/faith/trust in the creator of all things enables me to be more in tune with the needs, concerns, fears (and happiness) of my fellow humans than not having that belief/.../... .
If it makes you happy wanting to believe that fine. It certainly didn't work for me.
-
Then why bother with your god?
Why bother with 'my' god? Because I believe that belief/faith/trust in the creator of all things enables me to be more in tune with the needs, concerns, fears (and happiness) of my fellow humans than not having that belief/.../... .
Personally I've never really noticed that about you.
-
Athiests seem to think for example if we were all a bit more educated we couldn't possibly fail to see it their way.
Some atheists - maybe even most. I think, more accurately, we think that if people were more widely educated in childhood they'd not adopt adherence to a particular religion - they might still be theists, but being exposed to a range of faiths and seeing the equally unsupported claims they all make would prevent the tribalist elements of particular creeds taking hold quite as strongly.
From my personal point of view, and I suspect others hold a similar viewpoint, faith doesn't bother me particularly, religion bothers me.
Religious people do the same in that they feel if the non religious look for God their lives will be richer.
In my (limited) experience, religious people feel that if the non-religious - and other religions - could only find the god they accept, those people's lives would be richer.
I prefer those people, religious or otherwise, who would just like people to be better and their lives to be richer regardless of how they do it.
O.
We are all different though.
[/quote]
-
I've let my kids make up their own paths. Currently I have one pagan, one atheist and one footballist. The atheist is also strongly interested in yoga and meditation, which she does in school as well as at home.
The one thing all three are united in disliking is having Christian worship forced on them at school. Only happens at harvest and Christmas but they really get cross about it, in a way that surprises me.
-
I've let my kids make up their own paths. Currently I have one pagan, one atheist and one footballist. The atheist is also strongly interested in yoga and meditation, which she does in school as well as at home.
The one thing all three are united in disliking is having Christian worship forced on them at school. Only happens at harvest and Christmas but they really get cross about it, in a way that surprises me.
Ask for them to be exempted from Christian worship, that should be possible, unless of course it is a church school.
It's only twice a year. I think it's good practice for the weddings and baptisms to come.
-
I think it's good practice for the weddings and baptisms to come.
Momma hopes!
-
I think it's good practice for the weddings and baptisms to come.
Momma hopes!
Blimey, I didn't mean theirs! My eldest has told me she wants a tattoo. I've said great, she can do what she likes, so long as she doesn't come home telling me she wants to get married I'm happy.
-
I think it's good practice for the weddings and baptisms to come.
Momma hopes!
Blimey, I didn't mean theirs! My eldest has told me she wants a tattoo. I've said great, so long as she doesn't want a husband she can do what she likes.
As long as she stays away from boyfriends names ;) I'd have thought a prospective hubby would accept it.
Lots of people make the mistake of adding a name to it, not realising they may then not stay with the other person.
I've just reformatted my statement because I realised it sounded like I thought a tattoo would put a decent bloke off. No, I like tattoos, I just don't think much of marriage.
-
I think it's good practice for the weddings and baptisms to come.
Momma hopes!
Blimey, I didn't mean theirs! My eldest has told me she wants a tattoo. I've said great, she can do what she likes, so long as she doesn't come home telling me she wants to get married I'm happy.
If mine had told me they wanted a tattoo I would have grounded them forever, or until they had decided against the notion! ;D
-
I think it's good practice for the weddings and baptisms to come.
Momma hopes!
Blimey, I didn't mean theirs! My eldest has told me she wants a tattoo. I've said great, she can do what she likes, so long as she doesn't come home telling me she wants to get married I'm happy.
If mine had told me they wanted a tattoo I would have grounded them forever, or until they had decided against the notion! ;D
Why?
-
Athiests seem to think for example if we were all a bit more educated we couldn't possibly fail to see it their way.
Religious people do the same in that they feel if the non religious look for God their lives will be richer.
We are all different though.
Different concepts enrich our lives.
That only applies if we haven't been created by the same being, Rose.
-
I prefer those people, religious or otherwise, who would just like people to be better and their lives to be richer regardless of how they do it.
O.
Is that actually possible to do, O?
-
I think it's good practice for the weddings and baptisms to come.
Momma hopes!
Haven't you ever been to a friend's wedding or the baptism/dedication of a relative's child, Matt?
-
I think it's good practice for the weddings and baptisms to come.
Momma hopes!
Haven't you ever been to a friend's wedding or the baptism/dedication of a relative's child, Matt?
I don't see the relevance of the question.
-
I think it's good practice for the weddings and baptisms to come.
Momma hopes!
Blimey, I didn't mean theirs! My eldest has told me she wants a tattoo. I've said great, she can do what she likes, so long as she doesn't come home telling me she wants to get married I'm happy.
If mine had told me they wanted a tattoo I would have grounded them forever, or until they had decided against the notion! ;D
Why?
I DETEST Tattoos.
-
I think it's good practice for the weddings and baptisms to come.
Momma hopes!
Blimey, I didn't mean theirs! My eldest has told me she wants a tattoo. I've said great, she can do what she likes, so long as she doesn't come home telling me she wants to get married I'm happy.
If mine had told me they wanted a tattoo I would have grounded them forever, or until they had decided against the notion! ;D
Why?
I DETEST Tattoos.
If they are over 18 - I regret that you have no say in the matter.
That said - I do not particularly like tattoos on females - one or two, or a memorial to Mum or Dad, or a child - fine.
My elder daughter has about 14 or 15 - all small ones, mostly covered when she is dressed, she knows my opinion on the subject so she tends to have any new ones put where I cannot see them.
I have two - one is a unique picture of the Green Man, drawn for me by an old friend, the other a brilliant advert for not putting girl-friend's names on your arm. Eventually, when I find the right dragon, I will have it covered with that.
-
Or a happy living together? Rhiannon's point does not suggest there is no possibility of a happy marriage so why the straw?
-
I think it's good practice for the weddings and baptisms to come.
Momma hopes!
Blimey, I didn't mean theirs! My eldest has told me she wants a tattoo. I've said great, so long as she doesn't want a husband she can do what she likes.
As long as she stays away from boyfriends names ;) I'd have thought a prospective hubby would accept it.
Lots of people make the mistake of adding a name to it, not realising they may then not stay with the other person.
I've just reformatted my statement because I realised it sounded like I thought a tattoo would put a decent bloke off. No, I like tattoos, I just don't think much of marriage.
But your children might have a happy marriage.
it wouldn't be so awful would it?
The problem is, Rose, the word "might"!
-
Or a happy living together? Rhiannon's point does not suggest there is no possibility of a happy marriage so why the straw?
Just surprised she would be unhappy, if one of her children wanted to get married.
It sounded as if it would be unacceptable to her.
Perhaps I read it wrong.
It was a joke. I don't rate marriage but my kids are free to make their own paths.
-
Sadly many 'Christians' talk the talk but it doesn't always make them better people, which is all that counts in the end. Since I first posted this thread in October we have had some shocking examples displayed by a small minority of Christians on this forum, whose behaviour has brought Christianity into much disfavour. On an American religious forum, on which I post, one of the posters stated that the point of Christianity wasn't to be a good person, but to get to heaven by doing the 'saved' bit! Quite a number of those who support the 'you must be saved' dogma, seem to believe that once you do that you are 'saved' for all eternity, whatever you do thereafter. How very convenient! :o One can only think that those Christians whose behaviour is far from good espouse that crazy idea! ::)
-
Sadly many 'Christians' talk the talk but it doesn't always make them better people, which is all that counts in the end. Since I first posted this thread in October we have had some shocking examples displayed by a small minority of Christians on this forum, whose behaviour has brought Christianity into much disfavour. On an American religious forum, on which I post, one of the posters stated that the point of Christianity wasn't to be a good person, but to get to heaven by doing the 'saved' bit! Quite a number of those who support the 'you must be saved' dogma, seem to believe that once you do that you are 'saved' for all eternity, whatever you do thereafter. How very convenient! :o One can only think that those Christians whose behaviour is far from good espouse that crazy idea! ::)
It's one of a number of ways to escape accepting death as being final. I find it sad that so many people are like that, but for them, any way out is valid.
-
It's one of a number of ways to escape accepting death as being final. I find it sad that so many people are like that, but for them, any way out is valid.
Deciding philosophically on balance that Death being final is a walk in the park compared with facing the prospect of Death THEN judgment. That's what people can't face en mass Len.
-
Deciding philosophically on balance that Death being final is a walk in the park compared with facing the prospect of Death THEN judgment. That's what people can't face en mass Len.
Oh dear, have you been SO bad in your earthly life that you fear judgement? Bad people deserve all the mental torture that religion entails.
-
Oh dear, have you been SO bad in your earthly life that you fear judgement? Bad people deserve all the mental torture that religion entails.
Death THEN judgment Len........I don't get to do the judging and neither do you. That's a blow for our judgmental attitudes for openers .......and yours are always on display around here. You don't get to say who's bad and who's good.
-
Some Christians are so busy glorying in the prospect of non-believers roasting in hell, they give no thought to the prospect that they might be joining them if Jesus doesn't recognise them as one of his buddies!
-
Some Christians are so busy glorying in the prospect of non-believers roasting in hell, they give no thought to the prospect that they might be joining them if Jesus doesn't recognise them as one of his buddies!
You have turned a statement Death then judgment into people glorifying in the prospect of non believers roasting in hell. That is a case of a mental bypassing...or in other words dodging the issue.
I have said Death then judgment in which we do not have any role in how we and others are judged.
Basically Leonard James is peddling a myth about the courage of facing oblivion being superior to facing up to eternal judgment.
-
You have turned a statement Death then judgment into people glorifying in the prospect of non believers roasting in hell. That is a case of a mental bypassing...or in other words dodging the issue.
I hope you'll tell Tertullian and Tommy Aquinas this if you see them.
-
Any non-religious person doing a good deed trumps the religious believer every time, we're not looking for brownie points, we're a lot nearer to pure altruism than any religioso.
Please note the, "a lot nearer".
ippy
-
Any non-religious person doing a good deed trumps the religious believer every time
ippy
How ?
-
I DETEST Tattoos.
They're great, Floo, especially the annual one in Edinburgh!! ;)
-
How ?
Any non-religious person doing a good deed trumps the religious believer every time, we're not looking for brownie points, we're a lot nearer to pure altruism than any religioso.
Please note the, "a lot nearer".
As I said before, not your edited version Vlad. (Above).
ippy
-
They're great, Floo, especially the annual one in Edinburgh!!
Tattoos, the on the flesh kind, = disfigurement.
ippy
-
Can't be disfigured by what you choose, ipples, only by what you don't.
-
Death THEN judgment Len........I don't get to do the judging and neither do you. That's a blow for our judgmental attitudes for openers .......and yours are always on display around here. You don't get to say who's bad and who's good.
In which case, there's little point being concerned about it. The gospels and other scriptures are unclear in any case, and Christians don't get any quarter either. Christ is reported to have said "Not everyone saying unto me 'Lord, Lord.....etc" ending with "Depart from me, ye that work iniquity"
According to Aquinas (apart from his egregious comments on the blessed contemplating the damned, to which Shaker has alluded):
It cannot be said that those who perform works of mercy during life on earth will necessarily escape the punishments of hell. Even great sinners may sometimes do remarkable deeds of mercy. During earthly life, such deeds may be the means of winning (congruously) contrition for the one who performs them, but they are no guarantee that contrition will be accepted, or that it will endure to the end of life, and so enable the performer of the good deeds to escape hell.
If you think you know what the correct formula for 'salvation' is, no doubt you'll keep peddling it on here (but preferably in the clearest English of which you're capable). But those of us who've had a gutful of such fear and guilt-related crap are likely to suggest that you simply get on with living your life doing as little harm to your fellow creatures as possible, since you know no more about such eschatological and supernatural matters than any of us. Your take on Christianity is just one among many.
-
Any non-religious person doing a good deed trumps the religious believer every time, we're not looking for brownie points, we're a lot nearer to pure altruism than any religioso.
Please note the, "a lot nearer".
As I said before, not your edited version Vlad. (Above).
ippy
The problem with this claim is that there are many people, religious and not who do good deeds to impress their peers and colleagues; there are those - again of both types - who don't do anything, and perhaps most importantly, Christians, (and I can't speak for people of other faiths) aren't promised brownie points anyway - other than possibly (as mentioned above) from their peers and colleagues.
You and others have mentioned this idea before, suggesting that it is such people who are looking to earn such points.
-
Tattoos, the on the flesh kind, = disfigurement.
ippy
I 'm not enamoured by tattoos, but our eldest daughter has an absolutely beautiful one on her back at belt level, which is an inticate design combining the 4 national flowers of her mother's nation (Australia), her father's nation (England), her own 'childhood nation' (Nepal) and her own birth nation (Wales). The last thing it is is a disfigurement.
-
Any non-religious person doing a good deed trumps the religious believer every time, we're not looking for brownie points, we're a lot nearer to pure altruism than any religioso.
Please note the, "a lot nearer".
As I said before, not your edited version Vlad. (Above).
ippy
You completely misunderstand Chriistianity Ippy. There are no brownie points to be won.....There is no scale of good deeds hence the need for Jesus and his death.
Secondly we don't know what your motivation is for Good deeds since it cannot be measured only observed. 2 people doing the same deed are observed doing the same thing i.e. altruism. In other words if it is possible for a theist to do something for brownie points it is possible for an atheist to be doing something to look good in the sight of his fellow atheist.
Thirdly, if you do good for the sake of good you are a moral realist since you believe in an absolute good. You are I would say a de facto theist.
Fourthly, does altruism really equal ''doing good''.
There, Ippy you haven't demonstrated you are any nearer to anything.
-
In which case, there's little point being concerned about it. The gospels and other scriptures are unclear in any case, and Christians don't get any quarter either. Christ is reported to have said "Not everyone saying unto me 'Lord, Lord.....etc" ending with "Depart from me, ye that work iniquity"
According to Aquinas (apart from his egregious comments on the blessed contemplating the damned, to which Shaker has alluded):
If you think you know what the correct formula for 'salvation' is, no doubt you'll keep peddling it on here (but preferably in the clearest English of which you're capable). But those of us who've had a gutful of such fear and guilt-related crap are likely to suggest that you simply get on with living your life doing as little harm to your fellow creatures as possible, since you know no more about such eschatological and supernatural matters than any of us. Your take on Christianity is just one among many.
As far as I can see, Dicky, it's all a whole lot of bullshit dreamed up by sanctimonious twerps with too much spare time on their hands.
If I were younger and had more energy I would be doing something far more interesting than wittering on about it here.
-
Quote from: ippy on Today at 04:17:56 PM
Any non-religious person doing a good deed trumps the religious believer every time, we're not looking for brownie points, we're a lot nearer to pure altruism than any religioso.
Please note the, "a lot nearer".
As I said before, not your edited version Vlad. (Above).
ippy
You completely misunderstand Chriistianity Ippy. There are no brownie points to be won.....There is no scale of good deeds hence the need for Jesus and his death.
Secondly we don't know what your motivation is for Good deeds since it cannot be measured only observed. 2 people doing the same deed are observed doing the same thing i.e. altruism. In other words if it is possible for a theist to do something for brownie points it is possible for an atheist to be doing something to look good in the sight of his fellow atheist.
Thirdly, if you do good for the sake of good you are a moral realist since you believe in an absolute good. You are I would say a de facto theist.
Fourthly, does altruism really equal ''doing good''.
There, Ippy you haven't demonstrated you are any nearer to anything.
All of the underlined bits answered your question before you asked thats why I expressly said, we're a lot nearer to pure altruism than any religioso, got it this time.
ippy
-
Quote from: ippy on Today at 04:17:56 PM
Any non-religious person doing a good deed trumps the religious believer every time, we're not looking for brownie points, we're a lot nearer to pure altruism than any religioso.
Please note the, "a lot nearer".
As I said before, not your edited version Vlad. (Above).
ippy
You completely misunderstand Chriistianity Ippy. There are no brownie points to be won.....There is no scale of good deeds hence the need for Jesus and his death.
Secondly we don't know what your motivation is for Good deeds since it cannot be measured only observed. 2 people doing the same deed are observed doing the same thing i.e. altruism. In other words if it is possible for a theist to do something for brownie points it is possible for an atheist to be doing something to look good in the sight of his fellow atheist.
Thirdly, if you do good for the sake of good you are a moral realist since you believe in an absolute good. You are I would say a de facto theist.
Fourthly, does altruism really equal ''doing good''.
There, Ippy you haven't demonstrated you are any nearer to anything.
All of the underlined bits answered your question before you asked thats why I expressly said, we're a lot nearer to pure altruism than any religioso, got it this time.
ippy
Is there something to get?
You asserted a Christian does good to get brownie points. A Christian knows he cannot earn God's approval so you were hopelessly misinformed there.
Secondly you asserted that an atheist does good out of pure altruism. There is no way of demonstrating that and it is equally feasible that he is doing it to impress.
There is therefore no possible evidence of anybodies altruism being purer.
And lastly you assert that altruism is the same as doing good. Please demonstrate.
-
All of the underlined bits answered your question before you asked thats why I expressly said, we're a lot nearer to pure altruism than any religioso, got it this time.
Good to see you wriggling to get your originally erroneous claims to appear viable.
-
Good to see you wriggling to get your originally erroneous claims to appear viable.
No not really Hope that reference, nearer to pure altruism, was there in the first post, I underlined it later to point out to vlad, that he had missed this carefully placed part of that original post.
Obviously he missed it, unlike others that are more into being selective; now who would be one of those selective exponent others be now?
Now go back to the post of mine where I specifically pointed out, nearer to pure altruism, you can make your apology as soon as you like, because you've got it well and truly wrong, I'll look forward to this.
ippy
P S Please note post number 65 on this thread.
-
No not really Hope that reference, nearer to pure altruism, was there in the first post, I underlined it later to point out to vlad, that he had missed this carefully placed part of that original post.
And? In case you find it hard to understand English, I'll reword what I wrote.
"Good to see you wriggling in order to make out that the erroneous claims that you made in your original post appear to be viable."
As for your underlining of bits of that original post in subsequent posts, those all appeared after Vlad had answered your originl post point by point. Rather than him missing 'the carefully placed part of the original post', you have missed the whole point of his argument, which was that your original post has absolutely no evidential legs to stand on.
Now go back to the post of mine where I specifically pointed out, nearer to pure altruism, you can make your apology as soon as you like, because you've got it well and truly wrong, I'll look forward to this.
ippy
I'm quite happy to apologise that I disagree with your original post and apologise on my own behalf and perhaps even on Vlad's behalf for pointing out where you made several fundamental errors in that post.
-
And? In case you find it hard to understand English, I'll reword what I wrote.
"Good to see you wriggling in order to make out that the erroneous claims that you made in your original post appear to be viable."
As for your underlining of bits of that original post in subsequent posts, those all appeared after Vlad had answered your originl post point by point. Rather than him missing 'the carefully placed part of the original post', you have missed the whole point of his argument, which was that your original post has absolutely no evidential legs to stand on.
I'm quite happy to apologise that I disagree with your original post and apologise on my own behalf and perhaps even on Vlad's behalf for pointing out where you made several fundamental errors in that post.
Hi there Hope, please note the above, a clear space for you to write anything else you want to write as though it's me saying it, be my guest.
ippy
-
Hi there Hope, please note the above, a clear space for you to write anything else you want to write as though it's me saying it, be my guest.
ippy
Thanks for the space you left but netiquette requires me to write any comments under your own.
So, here goes; The only times I 'write anything else you want to write as though it's me saying it' is when it is a quote from one of your posts. That's how the quote function works, so that people can see what you (or any other poster) writes, and what another poster then writes in response to 'you' write.
-
Thanks for the space you left but netiquette requires me to write any comments under your own.
So, here goes; The only times I 'write anything else you want to write as though it's me saying it' is when it is a quote from one of your posts. That's how the quote function works, so that people can see what you (or any other poster) writes, and what another poster then writes in response to 'you' write.
Interesting.
ippy
-
There are some Christians who do a lot for others, but would probably do so even if they were non believers. However there are other Christians who think they have done their bit by running off at the mouth about their faith, but do nothing practical to help those in need! Deeds are much better than words, imo.
As a Christian what do you do to help others in need?
That is between God, the persons and I.
Most believers do not do things for acknowledgement. Believe it or not, we do it because we care thanks to the care laid on our hearts by God. Will you ever learn to reason before speak?
-
Matthew 5.15
…14"You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden; 15nor does anyone light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on the lampstand, and it gives light to all who are in the house. 16"Let your light shine before men in such a way that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven.
It is very difficult to hide the changes knowing God and Christ in your life produce.
Good works are amongst them, but they are just the normal thing to do and only God deserves the praise and recognition for the results.
Praying is our way of acting on our faith. The results are all Gods as is the thanks and praise for the answering.
Love is the only way forward for us all. I have been touched by your concern these last few months (((Rose))) and your words of comfort and support have been gratefully received. Thank you.
-
floo,
So you know a lot of Christians that don't do anything for others floo? Really, I doubt that any Christian has confessed that to you.
And being that you bash God here and praise and plead to him in prayer poems elsewhere on the internet, I don't care to read about your charity work because you are not credible.
Floo, knows no other way. She won't open up and let anyone in.
I daresay not even her family. But somewhere deep inside she must know God loves her...
-
The sort of person you are is far more important than having any sort of faith. If you are decent, honest and try to help others, that is much more to be prized than anything else, imo.
Where on this board have you tried to help believers?
Does being decent and honest include insulting and tarring all believers with the same brush you created?
-
[quote author=Sassy link=topic=11030.msg577216#msg577216 date=1450097655]
That is between God, the persons and I.
Most believers do not do things for acknowledgement. Believe it or not, we do it because we care thanks to the care laid on our hearts by God. Will you ever learn to reason before speak?
[/quote]
3
ippy
-
It is very difficult to hide the changes knowing God and Christ in your life produce.
Good works are amongst them, but they are just the normal thing to do and only God deserves the praise and recognition for the results.
Praying is our way of acting on our faith. The results are all Gods as is the thanks and praise for the answering.
Love is the only way forward for us all. I have been touched by your concern these last few months (((Rose))) and your words of comfort and support have been gratefully received. Thank you.
6
ippy
-
Floo, knows no other way. She won't open up and let anyone in.
I daresay not even her family. But somewhere deep inside she must know God loves her...
4
ippy
-
It is very difficult to hide the changes knowing God and Christ in your life produce.
Indeed. Just ask the Westboro Baptists, or the KKK...
Good works are amongst them, but they are just the normal thing to do and only God deserves the praise and recognition for the results.
Does that mean God deserves the opprobrium when they call for a prohibition on Muslims entering America? How do you explain the good works done by people who don't believe in God?
Praying is our way of acting on our faith. The results are all Gods as is the thanks and praise for the answering.
Do you get to complain about all the unanswered prayers, though? Why does God hate amputees?
Love is the only way forward for us all.
Absolutely.
O.
-
Floo, knows no other way. She won't open up and let anyone in.
I daresay not even her family. But somewhere deep inside she must know God loves her...
Sass you don't half talk some garbage! ::)
-
Indeed. Just ask the Westboro Baptists,
O.
Oh yes..........There are millions of those available for consultation.........
-
Oh yes..........There are millions of those available for consultation.........
So 'True' Christianity isn't decided by the correct interpretation of scripture but by popular vote?
Does that mean, given that the majority of the population of the planet reject Christianity, that 'True' Christianity is to accept that Jesus is a myth?
O.
-
So 'True' Christianity isn't decided by the correct interpretation of scripture but by
By popular vote
O.
Don't be silly......it is decided by anti theists on the basis of worst caricature.
-
Don't be silly......it is decided by anti theists on the basis of worst caricature.
Right... and the list of anti-theists is generated by the queen of the unicorns?
O.
-
Oh yes..........There are millions of those available for consultation.........
Well, I suppose Sassy's latter-day Arianism (consisting of a church, in this case, with one member) must be an overwhelming argument for authenticity. However, as I'm sure you really know, neither obsessive personal assertion, nor the o so familiar argumentum ad populum which you've implied here, count for anything very much.
-
...nor the o so familiar argumentum ad populum which you've implied here, count for anything very much.
An argument that so often gets used to express the idea that the Christian faith has passed its sell-by date
-
An argument that so often gets used to express the idea that the Christian faith has passed its sell-by date
No, it's used to point out that in a representative democracy, there shouldn't be special treatment for an increasingly small segment of the populace. It isn't used to support the fact that Christianity still hasn't made the case for Christianity.
On the other side, it's regularly trotted out to try to justify belief, because whilst millions of Muslims can be wrong, millions of Christians can't because of totally non-circular reasoning and Jesusness...
O.
-
No, it's used to point out that in a representative democracy, there shouldn't be special treatment for an increasingly small segment of the populace. It isn't used to support the fact that Christianity still hasn't made the case for Christianity.
On the other side, it's regularly trotted out to try to justify belief, because whilst millions of Muslims can be wrong, millions of Christians can't because of totally non-circular reasoning and Jesusness...
O.
No it,s used to try and establish a sell by date along with Bronze Age goat herding etc.
-
No, it's used to point out that in a representative democracy, there shouldn't be special treatment for an increasingly small segment of the populace. It isn't used to support the fact that Christianity still hasn't made the case for Christianity.
On the other side, it's regularly trotted out to try to justify belief, because whilst millions of Muslims can be wrong, millions of Christians can't because of totally non-circular reasoning and Jesusness...
O.
Yet we are constantly told that 'an increasingly small segment of the populace' is necessarily wrong because of the increasing number of people with a different outlook on life, an outlook that denies or ignores the existence of deity. That's the point about the argumentum ad populum argument - it can be used both ways.
-
Yet we are constantly told that 'an increasingly small segment of the populace' is necessarily wrong because of the increasing number of people with a different outlook on life, an outlook that denies or ignores the existence of deity. That's the point about the argumentum ad populum argument - it can be used both ways.
No, an increasingly small segment of the populace' is necessarily wrong because of the increasing number of people with a different outlook on life, I can't disagree with that.
What is in fact happening is the over representation of the various religious beliefs is now disproportionate, I know, it's been like that for years; I'll settle for a level playing field, where no one group is excluded and no one group has any kind of privilege either.
ippy
-
No, an increasingly small segment of the populace' is necessarily wrong because of the increasing number of people with a different outlook on life, I can't disagree with that.
Sorry, your reliance on the argumentum ad populum is as invalid as you and others have suggested that the religious reliance on it is.
What is in fact happening is the over representation of the various religious beliefs is now disproportionate, I know, it's been like that for years; I'll settle for a level playing field, where no one group is excluded and no one group has any kind of privilege either.
ippy
Whilst I am quite happy to agree with what you say here - after all, I've argued for the same myself since long before this boartd came into existence, I'm not quite sure how this argument fits with your earlier claim that " ... an 'increasingly small segment of the populace' is necessarily wrong because of the increasing number of people with a different outlook on life ... "
-
Yet we are constantly told that 'an increasingly small segment of the populace' is necessarily wrong because of the increasing number of people with a different outlook on life, an outlook that denies or ignores the existence of deity.
I'm not sure you are told that's WHY you're wrong. Some people cite that as evidence (wrongly) THAT you're wrong.
[quote[That's the point about the argumentum ad populum argument - it can be used both ways.[/quote]
No, the point about the argumentum ad populum is that it can't be used at all - you aren't 'right' because there are many of you.
O.
[/quote]
-
BUMP
What practical things have our more vociferous Christians done to help make the world a better place?
-
BUMP
What practical things have our more vociferous Christians done to help make the world a better place?
I have worked to improve the lives of the poor in our part of the UK by working for a homelessness charity that our church started 25-odd years (and which is now independent); helped at a jobclub that is run by Christians Against Poverty (CAP) held at our church. Taught young people to tolerate others of different skin colour, nationality, gender,age, etc., etc. as part of my job as a teacher and as a youth club leader in clubs run by the church I attend (and other other organisations)
Furthermore, I have lived and worked abroad, where I have worked with student nurses and teachers to improve their ability to provide quality services. In addition, I have - along with my wife - helped a couple of local communities where we lived at different stages in our time in Nepal to deal with issues that faced them - drug abuse being amongst the more serious. At no point did we impose ourselves on the communities; rather we responded to requests from community leaders for help and advice - which only came about once they had begun to trust us as 'bideshis' (foreigners/outsiders)
-
It's nobody else's business what anyone here does, believer and non-believer alike.
-
It's nobody else's business what anyone here does, believer and non-believer alike.
Even Jesus thought that one's good works and charitable activities ought to be a private affair lest it look like vainglorious boasting, IIRC.
Matthew 6:2-3. It pays to know your Bible at times ;)
-
Indeed. Just ask the Westboro Baptists, or the KKK...
Does that mean God deserves the opprobrium when they call for a prohibition on Muslims entering America? How do you explain the good works done by people who don't believe in God?
Do you get to complain about all the unanswered prayers, though? Why does God hate amputees?
Absolutely.
O.
Not sure what KKK has to do with the personal changes of the individual.
What I have spoken about cannot be seen to refer to the KKK.
-
I have worked to improve the lives of the poor in our part of the UK by working for a homelessness charity that our church started 25-odd years (and which is now independent); helped at a jobclub that is run by Christians Against Poverty (CAP) held at our church. Taught young people to tolerate others of different skin colour, nationality, gender,age, etc., etc. as part of my job as a teacher and as a youth club leader in clubs run by the church I attend (and other other organisations)
Furthermore, I have lived and worked abroad, where I have worked with student nurses and teachers to improve their ability to provide quality services. In addition, I have - along with my wife - helped a couple of local communities where we lived at different stages in our time in Nepal to deal with issues that faced them - drug abuse being amongst the more serious. At no point did we impose ourselves on the communities; rather we responded to requests from community leaders for help and advice - which only came about once they had begun to trust us as 'bideshis' (foreigners/outsiders)
Your vainglorious boasting does you no credit whatsoever!
-
I have worked to improve the lives of the poor in our part of the UK by working for a homelessness charity that our church started 25-odd years (and which is now independent); helped at a jobclub that is run by Christians Against Poverty (CAP) held at our church. Taught young people to tolerate others of different skin colour, nationality, gender,age, etc., etc. as part of my job as a teacher and as a youth club leader in clubs run by the church I attend (and other other organisations)
Furthermore, I have lived and worked abroad, where I have worked with student nurses and teachers to improve their ability to provide quality services. In addition, I have - along with my wife - helped a couple of local communities where we lived at different stages in our time in Nepal to deal with issues that faced them - drug abuse being amongst the more serious. At no point did we impose ourselves on the communities; rather we responded to requests from community leaders for help and advice - which only came about once they had begun to trust us as 'bideshis' (foreigners/outsiders)
Good for you. :)
-
Why bother with 'my' god? Because I believe that belief/faith/trust in the creator of all things enables me to be more in tune with the needs, concerns, fears (and happiness) of my fellow humans than not having that belief/.../... .
Admire the 'I believe' prefix to your words Hope, but you can do good in all sorts of ways without having to attribute, any magical, mythical, superstition based beliefs to your acts or demeanour.
Apart from the odd murder from time to time that I just can't resist, I always try to act in general in ethical and moral ways and I think, although I've not dedicated my life to saving the world I've done plenty of small deeds that I hope help other people, no more than the average man and I've often said to others where I think I've helped is, I don't want anything in return just pass it along, it's this type of thing that can make the world a better place; any of these deeds of mine were done without any redress to a bronze age book written by ignorant peasants.
ippy
-
It's nobody else's business what anyone here does, believer and non-believer alike.
Oh but it is, as some run off at the mouth about how wonderful their faith is. It is only worth having if it is of practical use to those around them, imo.
-
Admire the 'I believe' prefix to your words Hope, but you can do good in all sorts of ways without having to attribute, any magical, mythical, superstition based beliefs to your acts or demeanour.
I don't disagree, ippy, which is why I don't attribute anything to magical, mythical or superstition beliefs.
-
BUMP
What practical things have our more vociferous Christians done to help make the world a better place?
I read all the posts on this thread, floo! Obviously some of them I just scanned but I thought it was a good idea to read back.
With all my heart, I sincerely hope you don't consider me to be a ''vociferous Christian''. At the same time I don't believe the world is any better for me being in it or because of anything I have done. Certainly I have tried to love my neighbour and there have been periods of time when I've been active on behalf of some issues - it wouldn't be right to talk about that in any detail because not letting my right hand know what my left is doing is, for me, the best way. In recent times I think I've been a bit pointless, frankly!
Plenty of people of other faiths and of no faith do good in the world and put me to shame.
Edit: Floo, I have found another forum! Might suit you (I hasten to add, not to the exclusion of this forum), scroll down a bit and you will find recent posts. Actually, the link might take you to a particular post but there are plenty of others.
http://www.christianforums.com/threads/im-not-sure-im-a-christian-anymore.7936729/
-
I don't disagree, ippy, which is why I don't attribute anything to magical, mythical or superstition beliefs.
YOU DON'T WHAT!!!!!
You attribute everything, absolutely everything, to magical, mythical or superstition beliefs! Beliefs in your GOD!
-
Your vainglorious boasting does you no credit whatsoever!
Well maybe... can you say you have done anything like that to boast about?
Would you really do all that traveling and giving all those years of your life just to have something to boast about.
I think not....
It is a clear sign that Hope cares about others and is committed enough to do something about matters which weigh on his heart when it comes to the suffering of others.
All you can do is attack him for doing the good WHICH you know you should of done but could not be bothered.
He did not get any glory and he didn't do it for the praise of men.
King James Bible
For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.
Had you known anything about Christ, Christianity and the Almighty God the Father you would know the works we do are ordained for us to do. It is not our works but our Fathers in heaven.
So tell me did you know what the NT taught? Did you make your claim knowing you falsely accused Hope or make such a claim because of your ignorance?
Should you be discussing Christian matters when you show no hindsight or forethought on the matters you discuss?
No matter how often you talk with Christians you appear never to learn anything or show you have actually reflected on anything said in conversations.
So in future you would be wise to order your remarks in accordance with Christian belief/understanding or not at all.
-
Well maybe... can you say you have done anything like that to boast about?
Would you really do all that traveling and giving all those years of your life just to have something to boast about.
I think not....
It is a clear sign that Hope cares about others and is committed enough to do something about matters which weigh on his heart when it comes to the suffering of others.
All you can do is attack him for doing the good WHICH you know you should of done but could not be bothered.
He did not get any glory and he didn't do it for the praise of men.
King James Bible
For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.
Had you known anything about Christ, Christianity and the Almighty God the Father you would know the works we do are ordained for us to do. It is not our works but our Fathers in heaven.
So tell me did you know what the NT taught? Did you make your claim knowing you falsely accused Hope or make such a claim because of your ignorance?
Should you be discussing Christian matters when you show no hindsight or forethought on the matters you discuss?
No matter how often you talk with Christians you appear never to learn anything or show you have actually reflected on anything said in conversations.
So in future you would be wise to order your remarks in accordance with Christian belief/understanding or not at all.
Oh Sass your comments are so hilarious, ;D if only you could see yourself as others see you then you might not make such silly statements. ::)
-
Oh Sass your comments are so hilarious, ;D if only you could see yourself as others see you then you might not make such silly statements. ::)
I would not be laughing if I were you; you who said she has met Christians who do not believe Christ rose from the dead.
My post makes sense but yours defies reasoning....
King James Bible
And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.
There would be no Christianity if Christ did not rise from the dead.
Whose laughing and looking silly now?
-
I would not be laughing if I were you; you who said she has met Christians who do not believe Christ rose from the dead.
My post makes sense but yours defies reasoning....
King James Bible
And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.
There would be no Christianity if Christ did not rise from the dead.
Whose laughing and looking silly now?
YAWN. You don't know what you are talking about, but that is nothing new. ::)
-
Floo, Sassy is not the only person to have replied to your thread, please do look at the other replies. Also the thread you started about praying to saints. If you start a thread posters presume you are interested and will return to it.
-
Your vainglorious boasting does you no credit whatsoever!
If you think that is boasting, you need to read the thread, Owl - Floo specifically asked (on more than one occasion - by bumping the comment) "As a Christian what do you do to help others in need?"(see OP)/"What practical things have our more vociferous Christians done to help make the world a better place?"(post #90). Had I wanted to boast, I'd have answered the question earlier on the thread rather than critiquing the original article Floo referred to, questioning whether it was a realistic representation, etc.
I realise that Floo is determined to question anything she doesn't accept or believe in - and is, as such, no different from everyone else here; however, I've discovered over the years that by answering one or more of her questions directly can help to slow her antaginims down - at least until the next time she gets on that aprticular hobby-horse.
-
Floo please read some more of the posts which have been made in response to you bumping this thread, not just posts from one poster.
-
YOU DON'T WHAT!!!!!
You attribute everything, absolutely everything, to magical, mythical or superstition beliefs! Beliefs in your GOD!
Owl, you and others like ippy attribute my faith to "magical, mythical or superstition beliefs". Not sure about ippy, but you would seem, as a Pagan, to do the same - if it were true in the first place. I don't believe that a God who I have had personal experience of is 'magical, mythical or superstition'. That is why I said that I didn't disagree with ippy's point.
-
Well maybe... can you say you have done anything like that to boast about?
Would you really do all that traveling and giving all those years of your life just to have something to boast about.
I think not....
It is a clear sign that Hope cares about others and is committed enough to do something about matters which weigh on his heart when it comes to the suffering of others.
All you can do is attack him for doing the good WHICH you know you should of done but could not be bothered.
He did not get any glory and he didn't do it for the praise of men.
King James Bible
For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.
Had you known anything about Christ, Christianity and the Almighty God the Father you would know the works we do are ordained for us to do. It is not our works but our Fathers in heaven.
So tell me did you know what the NT taught? Did you make your claim knowing you falsely accused Hope or make such a claim because of your ignorance?
Should you be discussing Christian matters when you show no hindsight or forethought on the matters you discuss?
No matter how often you talk with Christians you appear never to learn anything or show you have actually reflected on anything said in conversations.
So in future you would be wise to order your remarks in accordance with Christian belief/understanding or not at all.
I do what I do for others but I do not go trumpeting it on a public forum so that I can get some blinkered non-entity called Sassy to give me praise and a pat on the back and a quote from the book of Chinese Whispers for my efforts.
As to my order[ing] [my] remarks in accordance with Christian belief/understanding or not at all.
I wouldn't order anything in accordance with Christian belief/understanding if a man was standing behind me with a sword to decapitate me if I did not do so. Every post that you and Hope and Vlad make on the subject only reinforces my determination never ever to return to with the Christain church or its beliefs ever again and to make my distaste for those beliefs and my reasons for that stance as often and as vociferously as possible. Each incident of my doing so evokes from you ever more confirmation to me that my view that Christians are trying more to convince themselves of the rightness of their beliefs than to convince others.
-
I do what I do for others but I do not go trumpeting it on a public forum so that I can get some blinkered non-entity called Sassy to give me praise and a pat on the back and a quote from the book of Chinese Whispers for my efforts.
Clearly you don't know Floo that well, Owl. You sometimes have to answer her directly in order to slow her down.
-
Floo, I say again, I wish you would address some more of the posts on this thread. You presumably wanted responses but you ignore most of them.
-
I don't disagree, ippy, which is why I don't attribute anything to magical, mythical or superstition beliefs.
Looks like you need to re-read your manual if that's so Hope.
ippy
-
Owl, you and others like ippy attribute my faith to "magical, mythical or superstition beliefs". Not sure about ippy, but you would seem, as a Pagan, to do the same - if it were true in the first place. I don't believe that a God who I have had personal experience of is 'magical, mythical or superstition'. That is why I said that I didn't disagree with ippy's point.
Hope, what word would chose between magic, myth or superstition, to describe someone coming back from the dead?
And that's only one of many questionable supposed events in your manual.
ippy
-
Matty,
You are so angry, flying off your handle as usual. It amaze me that you still refuse to think before you post. When you are off your handle you are ranting at and accusing people of the very things you yourself do here.
Floo,
Come on now, tell us all the great things you have done and how you have to give so much money to charities because you can't stuff anymore of it in your mattress. I know you want to toot your horn. Why would you want listed all the good deeds done by Christians around here but to create an chance to advertise what humanitarian the amazing Floo is. Do you still turn down the heat even though you can well afford to live at a warmer temperature?
-
Floo won't be talking about things she's done for others OMW, she keeps those quiet. However I have said ad nauseum that I wish she would come back, look at and comment on the posts on the threads she starts, instead of just homing in on one poster. Otherwise why do we bother?
-
Clearly you don't know Floo that well, Owl. You sometimes have to answer her directly in order to slow her down.
Are you totally blind - I was answering a post from Sassy - nothing to do with Floo!
-
I am not very good at jumping to it when being TOLD what to do, I never have been. ;D
-
No-one is telling you what to do floo, merely asking (imploring even), that you read and comment on some of the other posts on this thread and the 'praying to saints' thread. It would be a courtesy and much appreciated. Thank you.
-
I do what I do for others but I do not go trumpeting it on a public forum so that I can get some blinkered non-entity called Sassy to give me praise and a pat on the back and a quote from the book of Chinese Whispers for my efforts.
You do what you do for the good of your own conscience. It is all about how you feel for having done so.
You don't get off your bum at your own expense and travel across the world to help. So you don't deserve any praise or pat on the back for doing what you should do anyway. So you see you still are not getting it. You talk of praise etc.
For us it is about doing what is normal without any praise or pats on the back.
As to my order[ing] [my] remarks in accordance with Christian belief/understanding or not at all.
Well, so far you have proved that would be hard for you to do... It is you who thinks people deserve praise and pat on the backs for something the Christian believes is just the normal thing to do. Go figure... Do you think you need to readdress your own misguided beliefs about Christians and Christian giving. What Hope does is just works prepared for him as I said.
What is it, you cannot grasp about it being the norm and not something for praise or deserving praise???
I wouldn't order anything in accordance with Christian belief/understanding if a man was standing behind me with a sword to decapitate me if I did not do so.
Well it would be no great loss to reasoning and understanding. You would lose your head simply because you had no idea of unselfish giving from the heart of Christ and not man. I suppose you living for yourself, stops you understanding a Christian doing works prepared for them and not for any other reason than it is the right thing to do.
Every post that you and Hope and Vlad make on the subject only reinforces my determination never ever to return to with the Christain church or its beliefs ever again and to make my distaste for those beliefs and my reasons for that stance as often and as vociferously as possible.
Every post you make shows you have NO IDEA about/and was never a member of any true Christian Church.
You do not know the first meaning of being a Christian. And you never met Christ or God, as your ignorance to the good works shows.
Each incident of my doing so evokes from you ever more confirmation to me that my view that Christians are trying more to convince themselves of the rightness of their beliefs than to convince others.
If you ever were a believer and I see no evidence of that in your posts. Then you would have known it is the Holy Spirit who reassures the Christian not themselves.
1 John 3:19-24King James Version (KJV)
19 And hereby we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our hearts before him.
20 For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things.
21 Beloved, if our heart condemn us not, then have we confidence toward God.
22 And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight.
23 And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.
24 And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us.
You were never a Christian and even the simple beliefs and teachings prove this. You have no knowledge of the bible and the teachings imparted from God to man. So maybe the truth is you receive nothing because you are too busy making up your own false truths and when it comes up against the real truth, you fail even more miserably by showing off your ignorance.
-
Glad to see you're taking the No True Scotsman fallacy out for its morning walk today.
-
The garbage spouted by Sass is truly amazing. ::)
-
The garbage spouted by Sass is truly amazing. ::)
Yes you're right about Sassy; why can't our Sass give replies or contributions to the posts of others without quoting at least three quarters of the bible every time, that nobody reads anyway.
It's a bit like that well known fact that apart from friends or family letters, you get the best results by keeping things succinct, to the point and best if it's all on one page, any attempt to a second page lessens the overall effect, it shouldn't do but in real life it does.
If you read this one Sass, see if you can take it in.
ippy
-
Yes you're right about Sassy; why can't our Sass give replies or contributions to the posts of others without quoting at least three quarters of the bible every time, that nobody reads anyway.
It's a bit like that well known fact that apart from friends or family letters, you get the best results by keeping things succinct, to the point and best if it's all on one page, any attempt to a second page lessens the overall effect, it shouldn't do but in real life it does.
If you read this one Sass, see if you can take it in.
ippy
It is the constant repetition of her guide book which keeps her trapped in its bullshit.
-
Where there's muck there's brass ;)
-
Owl, you and others like ippy attribute my faith to "magical, mythical or superstition beliefs". Not sure about ippy, but you would seem, as a Pagan, to do the same - if it were true in the first place. I don't believe that a God who I have had personal experience of is 'magical, mythical or superstition'. That is why I said that I didn't disagree with ippy's point.
The difference between thee and me is that I make no secret of the fact that I admit that my FAITH is just that FAITH! - I do NOT trumpet it to all who will listen/read as FACT!
And until you and Sassy and your ilk are prepared to admit the FACT that your belief is no more FACT than mine you are still a bunch of delusional fools!
-
You do what you do for the good of your own conscience. It is all about how you feel for having done so.
You don't get off your bum at your own expense and travel across the world to help. So you don't deserve any praise or pat on the back for doing what you should do anyway. So you see you still are not getting it. You talk of praise etc.
For us it is about doing what is normal without any praise or pats on the back.
Well, so far you have proved that would be hard for you to do... It is you who thinks people deserve praise and pat on the backs for something the Christian believes is just the normal thing to do. Go figure... Do you think you need to readdress your own misguided beliefs about Christians and Christian giving. What Hope does is just works prepared for him as I said.
What is it, you cannot grasp about it being the norm and not something for praise or deserving praise???
Well it would be no great loss to reasoning and understanding. You would lose your head simply because you had no idea of unselfish giving from the heart of Christ and not man. I suppose you living for yourself, stops you understanding a Christian doing works prepared for them and not for any other reason than it is the right thing to do.
Every post you make shows you have NO IDEA about/and was never a member of any true Christian Church.
You do not know the first meaning of being a Christian. And you never met Christ or God, as your ignorance to the good works shows.
If you ever were a believer and I see no evidence of that in your posts. Then you would have known it is the Holy Spirit who reassures the Christian not themselves.
1 John 3:19-24King James Version (KJV)
19 And hereby we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our hearts before him.
20 For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things.
21 Beloved, if our heart condemn us not, then have we confidence toward God.
22 And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight.
23 And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.
24 And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us.
You were never a Christian and even the simple beliefs and teachings prove this. You have no knowledge of the bible and the teachings imparted from God to man. So maybe the truth is you receive nothing because you are too busy making up your own false truths and when it comes up against the real truth, you fail even more miserably by showing off your ignorance.
For someone who has never met me you THINK you know a lot about me - you KNOW S F A about me - and never will because if you were the last person, apart from me, on Earth I would do everything possible to keep as much distance between us as possible as I could not stand having a bullshit book quoted chapter and verse at me a million times a day!
I do what I do and I defy you to prove that I do not!
You say I was never a Chritian - this, if nothing else, shows that you know nothing about me; I was brought up in Christianity and, at age 15, it took the hypocricy of the Sixth Commandment being preached to a bunch of soldiers in Her Majesty's foirces to take the blinkers off my eyes and let me see what a load of crap the Bible is full of!
-
And until you and Sassy and your ilk are prepared to admit the FACT that your belief is no more FACT than mine you are still a bunch of delusional fools!
Bravo! We all have beliefs, and none of us can claim certain knowledge as to the existence or not of gods.
-
Bravo! We all have beliefs, and none of us can claim certain knowledge as to the existence or not of gods.
Except Sassy et al . . . as they never tire of telling us poor Hell-bound unbelievers
-
Bravo! We all have beliefs, and none of us can claim certain knowledge as to the existence or not of gods.
Well said. :)
-
I was so pleased to see your name at the end of this thread but continue to be disappointed that you do not address many of the well thought out posts your fellow posters have written, and also not revisited the 'praying to saints' thread you started. You must have wanted a response, more than one response I'd imagine.
-
I was so pleased to see your name at the end of this thread but continue to be disappointed that you do not address many of the well thought out posts your fellow posters have written, and also not revisited the 'praying to saints' thread you started. You must have wanted a response, more than one response I'd imagine.
It would have been nice if you had included a "quote" at the head of your post to give us an idea of to whom you were speaking.
On another point - I would be interested to find out why you seem to think that Sassy needs you to watch her back on this forum.
She has a well desreved reputation for using interminable and extensive Emboldened "cut and pastes" from the KJV to illustrate just how pathetic, stupid, blind, ill-informed, uneducated, lying, Hell-bound anyone who dares to contradict her version of what Christianity and the resultant reality of this world is and stands for.
Our reading of the words of the Bible is in error because we are too stupid and ignorant to be able to understand what her God is saying even when the words and their meaning are both crystal clear to anyone with even GCE "O" level understanding of the English language, but then of course, Sassy is not referring to what the words of the Bible mean at all, she is referring to what the words of the Bible meant in 1640 something and if it is not that, then it is what the Hebrew meant and if it is not that it is because it was wrongly translated.
Her point-blank refusal to discuss anything - she does not discuss she pontificates - merely dismissing in derogatory terms the writings of anyone - not just Floo (against whom you, Brownie, seem to have started a personal vendetta in defence of Sassy), who dares to question her "truth".
Sorry, Brownie, but Sassy has, over the years earned the full amount of the opprobrium that heaped upon her here.
She does not need your protection, she has that of her God - and thus the protection of anyone mortal, including you, is unnecessary.
-
It would have been nice if you had included a "quote" at the head of your post to give us an idea of to whom you were speaking.
On another point - I would be interested to find out why you seem to think that Sassy needs you to watch her back on this forum.
She has a well desreved reputation for using interminable and extensive Emboldened "cut and pastes" from the KJV to illustrate just how pathetic, stupid, blind, ill-informed, uneducated, lying, Hell-bound anyone who dares to contradict her version of what Christianity and the resultant reality of this world is and stands for.
Our reading of the words of the Bible is in error because we are too stupid and ignorant to be able to understand what her God is saying even when the words and their meaning are both crystal clear to anyone with even GCE "O" level understanding of the English language, but then of course, Sassy is not referring to what the words of the Bible mean at all, she is referring to what the words of the Bible meant in 1640 something and if it is not that, then it is what the Hebrew meant and if it is not that it is because it was wrongly translated.
Her point-blank refusal to discuss anything - she does not discuss she pontificates - merely dismissing in derogatory terms the writings of anyone - not just Floo (against whom you, Brownie, seem to have started a personal vendetta in defence of Sassy), who dares to question her "truth".
Sorry, Brownie, but Sassy has, over the years earned the full amount of the opprobrium that heaped upon her here.
She does not need your protection, she has that of her God - and thus the protection of anyone mortal, including you, is unnecessary.
Wow, Owlie! A very perceptive and exact appraisal of Sass. Well done!
-
Wow, Brownie! A very perceptive and exact appraisal of Sass. Well done!
It might well be but it was Owlswing posting it in what seems to me a particularly bizarre take on Brownie asking Floo to respond to those in here other than Sassy
-
It might well be but it was Owlswing posting it in what seems to me a particularly bizarre take on Brownie asking Floo to respond to those in here other than Sassy
Yes, I'm afraid it was a clanger on my part. I have now corrected my post. Thank you, NS.
-
There are some Christians who do a lot for others, but would probably do so even if they were non believers. However there are other Christians who think they have done their bit by running off at the mouth about their faith, but do nothing practical to help those in need! Deeds are much better than words, imo.
As a Christian what do you do to help others in need?
I thought it was a fact.that secular humanists were less charitable than Christians.
With the increase in secularism has come increased vilification of the needy as sponges.
-
I thought it was a fact.that secular humanists were less charitable than Christians.
With the increase in secularism has come increased vilification of the needy as sponges.
News to me.
The only vilification of the needy as sponges of which I'm aware in this country comes from the Conservative party headed by Christian-when-it-suits-him David Cameron and especially the Catholic Iain and Duncan Smith, rather than the atheist Jeremy Corbyn who seems to be rather keen on helping the needy.
-
News to me.
The only vilification of the needy as sponges of which I'm aware in this country comes from the Conservative party headed by Christian-when-it-suits-him David Cameron and especially the Catholic Iain and Duncan Smith, rather than the atheist Jeremy Corbyn who seems to be rather keen on helping the needy.
Yes but squadrons of UK voters are keeping IDS and his ilk in and JC out. Most of those voters must be non religious.
Plus the bishops have been opposing the government before the atheistCorbyn .
Your turd, sorry, turn.
-
It would have been nice if you had included a "quote" at the head of your post to give us an idea of to whom you were speaking.
On another point - I would be interested to find out why you seem to think that Sassy needs you to watch her back on this forum.
She has a well desreved reputation for using interminable and extensive Emboldened "cut and pastes" from the KJV to illustrate just how pathetic, stupid, blind, ill-informed, uneducated, lying, Hell-bound anyone who dares to contradict her version of what Christianity and the resultant reality of this world is and stands for.
Our reading of the words of the Bible is in error because we are too stupid and ignorant to be able to understand what her God is saying even when the words and their meaning are both crystal clear to anyone with even GCE "O" level understanding of the English language, but then of course, Sassy is not referring to what the words of the Bible mean at all, she is referring to what the words of the Bible meant in 1640 something and if it is not that, then it is what the Hebrew meant and if it is not that it is because it was wrongly translated.
Her point-blank refusal to discuss anything - she does not discuss she pontificates - merely dismissing in derogatory terms the writings of anyone - not just Floo (against whom you, Brownie, seem to have started a personal vendetta in defence of Sassy), who dares to question her "truth".
Sorry, Brownie, but Sassy has, over the years earned the full amount of the opprobrium that heaped upon her here.
She does not need your protection, she has that of her God - and thus the protection of anyone mortal, including you, is unnecessary.
I'm sorry Owlswing but as my post was immediately below floo's, I assumed she (& others) would realise I was addressing her. It was nothing about Sassy, floo responded to something Len said. My point was that floo does not address any of us when we try to answer her questions and I really don't know why as she poses the questions, presumably to get a response. Perhaps I should give up, in fact I will. There's only so much dead horse flogging one can do after all. I like floo very much, known her forum-wise since 2012. She used to say more.. Ah well. Anyway thanks to you Owlswing for responding. x
-
I'm sorry Owlswing but as my post was immediately below floo's, I assumed she (& others) would realise I was addressing her. It was nothing about Sassy, floo responded to something Len said. My point was that floo does not address any of us when we try to answer her questions and I really don't know why as she poses the questions, presumably to get a response. Perhaps I should give up, in fact I will. There's only so much dead horse flogging one can do after all. I like floo very much, known her forum-wise since 2012. She used to say more.. Ah well. Anyway thanks to you Owlswing for responding. x
I do hope you keep posting
-
I'm sorry Owlswing but as my post was immediately below floo's, I assumed she (& others) would realise I was addressing her. It was nothing about Sassy, floo responded to something Len said. My point was that floo does not address any of us when we try to answer her questions and I really don't know why as she poses the questions, presumably to get a response. Perhaps I should give up, in fact I will. There's only so much dead horse flogging one can do after all. I like floo very much, known her forum-wise since 2012. She used to say more.. Ah well. Anyway thanks to you Owlswing for responding. x
I was not and am not trying to get you to give up on the forum. There are good people here and, like a lot of places, there are those who spoil a good thing for good people.
I have a list of posters here that I try to avoid responding to if it is humanly possible, this allows me to repond to those who talk a reasonable amount of sense, including you.
Floo can, I know, be irritating at times, so can I and I don't even have to try!
I do sometimes have to drop out from a discussion when the egg-heads start using long words that seem to relate to philosophical or scientific concepts that are about as far over my head as the edge of outer (or even, inner) space and I can make myself look bloody stupid, I don't need help.
Stay on here, ignore those who irritate you sand keep the rest of us on our toes! Please!
Edited for typo's
-
I was not and am not trying to get you to give up on the forum. There are good people here and, like a lot of places, there are those who spoil a good thing for good people.
I have a list of posters here that I try to avoid responding to if it is humanly possible, this allows me to repond to those who talk a reasonable amount of sense, including you.
Floo can, I know, be irritating at times, so can I and I don't even have to try!
I do sometimes have to drop out from a discussion when the egg-heads start using long words that seem to relate to philosophical or scientific concepts that are about as far over my head as the edge of outer (or even, inner) space and I can make myself look bloody stupid, I don't need help.
Stay on here, ignore those who irritate you sand keep the rest of us on our toes! Please!
Edited for typo's
Can I suggest then that you don't misrepresent Brownie as having a vendetta against Floo or defending Sassy when she asked Floo to respond to other posters than Sassy? Seems to me you owe Brownie an apology.
-
Owlswing, I didn't mean I was going to give up on the forum, only that I will give up asking floo to respond to posts. If you look back at the posts I have made on this thread, I've made so many making the same request! It's a bit exasperating but one could say that's my problem. I've known floo forever on forums and known Sassy for many years, more than five. Leonard somewhere in between. Neither floo nor Sass need back up, they can give as good as they get but it just seems strange they provoke eachother when there are all of us 'lovely' posters (halo smilie needed here), who have things to say on the topic of a thread. We've all three been known to have a laugh in the past and been symathetic to eachother's difficulties, but times change, so do people. I have., I'm sure.
Nobody irritates me on here and I'm sorry if I have given the impression that they do. I like the diversity of posters and am fond of the 'old ones'. We need to have some fun again, we can do that over on the general forum sometimes.
Thanks too Nearly Sane. Nobody must ever mind telling me if they think I've said something inappropriate, I'll always take it on board and try to explain what I meant.
God bless you all on this Maundy Thursday morning and, for non believers I'll add Yah boo. I'll try and sleep in a while but if I can't, doubt anyone will stay awake with me, like someone else we know about. That's for the eveinin though.
-
Owlswing, I didn't mean I was going to give up on the forum, only that I will give up asking floo to respond to posts. If you look back at the posts I have made on this thread, I've made so many making the same request! It's a bit exasperating but one could say that's my problem. I've known floo forever on forums and known Sassy for many years, more than five. Leonard somewhere in between. Neither floo nor Sass need back up, they can give as good as they get but it just seems strange they provoke eachother when there are all of us 'lovely' posters (halo smilie needed here), who have things to say on the topic of a thread. We've all three been known to have a laugh in the past and been symathetic to eachother's difficulties, but times change, so do people. I have., I'm sure.
Nobody irritates me on here and I'm sorry if I have given the impression that they do. I like the diversity of posters and am fond of the 'old ones'. We need to have some fun again, we can do that over on the general forum sometimes.
Thanks too Nearly Sane. Nobody must ever mind telling me if they think I've said something inappropriate, I'll always take it on board and try to explain what I meant.
God bless you all on this Maundy Thursday morning and, for non believers I'll add Yah boo. I'll try and sleep in a while but if I can't, doubt anyone will stay awake with me, like someone else we know about. That's for the eveinin though.
A fellow insomniac?
-
. . . God bless you all on this Maundy Thursday morning and, for non believers I'll add Yah boo. . .
Ah well - I suppose Yah boo is better than some things that have been said to me - especially around this trime of year and the old old discussion about the Pagan festival of Ostara supposedly from the Goddess Oestre - the same root as oestrogen and why there are eggs at Easter - so it is another Christian "pinch" from the Pagans.
Only the Venerable Bede shows any mention of the Goddess Oestre, in this country most pagans refer to the festival as the Spring Equnox, Ostara being another US 'improvement' to the UK/Europe version of neo-paganism!
Happy Easter to you Brownie.
-
Yes you're right about Sassy; why can't our Sass give replies or contributions to the posts of others without quoting at least three quarters of the bible every time, that nobody reads anyway.
It's a bit like that well known fact that apart from friends or family letters, you get the best results by keeping things succinct, to the point and best if it's all on one page, any attempt to a second page lessens the overall effect, it shouldn't do but in real life it does.
If you read this one Sass, see if you can take it in.
ippy
Sometimes you should not need to be told why a particular passage of scripture is added.
It usually shows where the belief comes from and shows why you do not know the bible.
If you cannot understand these things should you be posting about biblical or Christian matters of faith?
-
The difference between thee and me is that I make no secret of the fact that I admit that my FAITH is just that FAITH! - I do NOT trumpet it to all who will listen/read as FACT!
And until you and Sassy and your ilk are prepared to admit the FACT that your belief is no more FACT than mine you are still a bunch of delusional fools!
What belief do you have?
Until you are prepared to take the same steps I have to knowing why my faith is real then you are not in a position to call anyone a delusional fool, except yourself. Because by that last sentence you have already admitted your beliefs have no real basis in truth.
You believe everyone like you with beliefs? We do not make ours up. Our God is real. Sorry if you do not like it. But the truth is the truth. God is real and if you could be bothered or wanted to find him in truth, you would.
-
For someone who has never met me you THINK you know a lot about me - you KNOW S F A about me - and never will because if you were the last person, apart from me, on Earth I would do everything possible to keep as much distance between us as possible as I could not stand having a bullshit book quoted chapter and verse at me a million times a day!
I do what I do and I defy you to prove that I do not!
You say I was never a Chritian - this, if nothing else, shows that you know nothing about me; I was brought up in Christianity and, at age 15, it took the hypocricy of the Sixth Commandment being preached to a bunch of soldiers in Her Majesty's foirces to take the blinkers off my eyes and let me see what a load of crap the Bible is full of!
Go on let off you poisonous steam and vent it well.
You just confirm you were never a christian and you are even less a gentleman or a scholar.
Look at the utter twaddle you write and insults. Grow a pair and stop moaning like a mard Ass.
If you ever have anything useful to say or discuss which does not begin and end with you and the abuse of others then let me know.
I personally find it boring with all the attributes of a disgruntled teenager with an anger problem and personality complex.
-
I thought it was a fact.that secular humanists were less charitable than Christians.
With the increase in secularism has come increased vilification of the needy as sponges.
You still can't understand secularism Vlad, what is it that you find about secularism that's so difficult for you to understand.
Removing religious privilege considerably differs from religious persecution; is it because you think that the various religious groups wouldn't be able to cope with being on a level playing field, level with everyone else?
ippy
-
It would have been nice if you had included a "quote" at the head of your post to give us an idea of to whom you were speaking.
On another point - I would be interested to find out why you seem to think that Sassy needs you to watch her back on this forum.
She has a well desreved reputation for using interminable and extensive Emboldened "cut and pastes" from the KJV to illustrate just how pathetic, stupid, blind, ill-informed, uneducated, lying, Hell-bound anyone who dares to contradict her version of what Christianity and the resultant reality of this world is and stands for.
Our reading of the words of the Bible is in error because we are too stupid and ignorant to be able to understand what her God is saying even when the words and their meaning are both crystal clear to anyone with even GCE "O" level understanding of the English language, but then of course, Sassy is not referring to what the words of the Bible mean at all, she is referring to what the words of the Bible meant in 1640 something and if it is not that, then it is what the Hebrew meant and if it is not that it is because it was wrongly translated.
Her point-blank refusal to discuss anything - she does not discuss she pontificates - merely dismissing in derogatory terms the writings of anyone - not just Floo (against whom you, Brownie, seem to have started a personal vendetta in defence of Sassy), who dares to question her "truth".
Sorry, Brownie, but Sassy has, over the years earned the full amount of the opprobrium that heaped upon her here.
She does not need your protection, she has that of her God - and thus the protection of anyone mortal, including you, is unnecessary.
I make no apology for challenging the garbage spouted by Sass, and will continue to do so. To be frank I have no ideal why Brownie is on my case and defending Sass. ::) I challenge Alan Burns and Hope all the time, and TW on the occasions he puts in an appearance.
-
I am not on your case floo and if you read my posts carefully you would know that. Sass is able to defend herself, she doesn't need me. I merely pointed out something that must have been obvious to all even if they didn't think it important enough to mention. My main point was that you do not come back and respond to posters who have taken time to reply to a question which you posed. Anyway I said I would give up asking you; I was so pleased to see you had posted on this thread today but am disappointed you haven't taken my point and probably haven't read most of the posts on this thread, which you started, about 'Deeds not words'. Never mind, I won't mention it again.
-
I will respond to whom I wish to respond.
-
I am not on your case floo and if you read my posts carefully you would know that. Sass is able to defend herself, she doesn't need me. I merely pointed out something that must have been obvious to all even if they didn't think it important enough to mention. My main point was that you do not come back and respond to posters who have taken time to reply to a question which you posed. Anyway I said I would give up asking you; I was so pleased to see you had posted on this thread today but am disappointed you haven't taken my point and probably haven't read most of the posts on this thread, which you started, about 'Deeds not words'. Never mind, I won't mention it again.
Floo can't respond as she has nothing to offer past her question.
Her responses are just put-downs. Usually making herself look even more uneducated about the things she claims to know.
-
Floo can't respond as she has nothing to offer past her question.
Her responses are just put-downs. Usually making herself look even more uneducated about the things she claims to know.
And your posts aren't put downs? Oh for pity's sake don't make yourself look even more silly than you are. ::)
-
It's fair enough, floo, that you wish to respond as you choose. I can't help feeling that I wasted time and thought answering your question, not just on here but on the ''prayiing to saints' thread. I thought you genuinely wanted some answers.
Many of us said quite a bit about 'deeds not words', a sentiment with which I concur - so broadly speaking I agree with you on this one. The majority said we don't talk about what we do which is quite right, our right hand doesn't need to know what our left is doing.
-
Just to return to the thread title; how does one perform deeds on an internet forum like this when its very lifeblood is words?
-
Just to return to the thread title; how does one perform deeds on an internet forum like this when its very lifeblood is words?
By turning people on to the path of righteousness and away from the mythical, magical, superstitious religions.
ippy
-
Just to return to the thread title; how does one perform deeds on an internet forum like this when its very lifeblood is words?
That's a good point Hope.
We can't do anything physically but we can try to be patient and kind or at least courteous. Also not chime in for the sake of it, sometimes keeping quiet is the best option (sez moi!). It's not cowardly to walk away from an argument.
Something I've noticed on forums over the years, not here really but other places, is that posters will sometimes unburden themselves about a problem. It may concern them or a member of their family; their anguish is palpable. What they need is for people to listen and be sympathetic to how they are feeling but very often unasked for advice is dished out. So I would say never give advice unless qualified to do so and it is specifically requested.
In the words of Bill and Ted, ''Be excellent to eachother''.
-
Just to return to the thread title; how does one perform deeds on an internet forum like this when its very lifeblood is words?
I don't think one can count forums as the place to perform good deeds. I have tried on occasions over the years, and from time to time it has come back to haunt me. As far as I am concerned forums are the place to express one's opinions and challenge the views of others. Of course one should not be racist, homophobic or threatening.
-
That's a good point Hope.
We can't do anything physically but we can try to be patient and kind or at least courteous. Also not chime in for the sake of it, sometimes keeping quiet is the best option (sez moi!). It's not cowardly to walk away from an argument.
Something I've noticed on forums over the years, not here really but other places, is that posters will sometimes unburden themselves about a problem. It may concern them or a member of their family; their anguish is palpable. What they need is for people to listen and be sympathetic to how they are feeling but very often unasked for advice is dished out. So I would say never give advice unless qualified to do so and it is specifically requested.
In the words of Bill and Ted, ''Be excellent to eachother''.
Aaargh! You be the wise woman, that you be (with a apologies to Blackadder). I do not speak in jest.
-
I agree, DU and I think it deserves a place elsewhere on the forum.
Hang on a mo.....
-
That's a good point Hope.
We can't do anything physically but we can try to be patient and kind or at least courteous. Also not chime in for the sake of it, sometimes keeping quiet is the best option (sez moi!). It's not cowardly to walk away from an argument.
Something I've noticed on forums over the years, not here really but other places, is that posters will sometimes unburden themselves about a problem. It may concern them or a member of their family; their anguish is palpable. What they need is for people to listen and be sympathetic to how they are feeling but very often unasked for advice is dished out. So I would say never give advice unless qualified to do so and it is specifically requested.
In the words of Bill and Ted, ''Be excellent to eachother''.
A year or so ago I posted something of a cri de couer and I got a reply from Gabriella that I described as a long drink of cold water. But as with many things there are both sides on this.
-
Well when we post from the heart, especially giving details about ourselves, I suppose we deserve what we get in response. I've done it in the past and received goodness knows what in return for it! Well meant of course but not what I needed as I had only wanted to unload. Since then I decided to be a bit more careful about what I say or how I say it; you live and learn. However my previous post was aimed more at those of us who might feel inclined to chime in with advice, which was not asked for. It's easy to fall into that (I can think of two specific occasions when I did and to this day I feel very embarrassed to remember), especially if we know something about the issue. However we don't really know the people concerned and haven't witnessed the situation, we aren't in a position to advise - but we can be kind and concerned.
-
Revealing too much about ourselves on forum is a BIG MISTAKE! It has come back to bite me many times over the years. A couple of posters on this forum take great delight in reminding me of what I am supposed to have said in the past, sometimes exaggerating or putting a spin on it which wasn't intended by me. :o
-
We do live and learn floo, it's quite cringeworthy when we remember some of the things we've shared in the past. Some of what we have said too.
I'm gonna make a general apology for anything tactless or pointless that I've said in response to someone else's anguish. Also, I will ignore any advice given to me :D, very politely, thanking the person, and will divert the conversation.
-
Revealing too much about ourselves on forum is a BIG MISTAKE! It has come back to bite me many times over the years. A couple of posters on this forum take great delight in reminding me of what I am supposed to have said in the past, sometimes exaggerating or putting a spin on it which wasn't intended by me. :o
Ignore them, Roses, or just spit in their eye! :) Nobody's perfect, and time teaches us to make the most of what we have.
-
Revealing too much about ourselves on forum is a BIG MISTAKE! It has come back to bite me many times over the years. A couple of posters on this forum take great delight in reminding me of what I am supposed to have said in the past, sometimes exaggerating or putting a spin on it which wasn't intended by me. :o
You mean like discussing your daughter being a vicar on the BBC forum then complaining when someone brought her into the discussion?
There is no exageration is what they reproduced was there. An atheist praying or something like that...
Double standards come back to bite your butt.
But we have to ;D because you will even argue as you do above that it is exaggerated or a different spin.
A new definition of truth by your standards, Floo. Now I am smiling... ;D
-
Ignore them, Roses, or just spit in their eye! :) Nobody's perfect, and time teaches us to make the most of what we have.
Be careful of her thorns you never know when you will get a nasty prick from them. ;D
-
Be careful of her thorns you never know when you will get a nasty prick from them. ;D
Sass, my dear, I have lived a lifetime of nasty pricks (no pun intended), and have long since ceased to take any of them seriously.
They simply show up the people they come from as indoctrinated bigots. :)
-
Two 'Christian' posters on this forum spend their time condemning the ungodly and other Christians who don't see it their way. If they are the sort of people god wishes to hangout with in heaven, then it would be no sort of paradise, but one filled with highly unpleasant folk, with god as the Psycho in Chief.
Once again I wish to commend Alan Burns for never appearing to take umbrage when we challenge his faith POV. Whilst I will never see it his way I have respect for him.
-
Two 'Christian' posters on this forum spend their time condemning the ungodly and other Christians who don't see it their way.
Seem to remember you making a similatr comment some months ago, only for it to become clear that you were referring to people who weren't even members of 'extreme' Christian groups, but were JWs. Who is it now?
-
Seem to remember you making a similatr comment some months ago, only for it to become clear that you were referring to people who weren't even members of 'extreme' Christian groups, but were JWs. Who is it now?
JWs are one of the nastiest cults, imo. But actually I am not sure I was referring to JWs back then, there were a couple of other 'Christian posters', now banned, whom I thought were beyond the pale.
BTW whilst I dislike intensely your views on homosexuality, I believe you do a lot of good for Twam, the charity you support.
-
Sass, my dear, I have lived a lifetime of nasty pricks (no pun intended), and have long since ceased to take any of them seriously.
They simply show up the people they come from as indoctrinated bigots. :)
Good word 'indoctrinated' is it big enough to keep hiding behind. Before you die you shall return to the LORD, and you will repent because you will see a light and you will know that God never stopped loving you. He never let you go, just gave your body over to the flesh. Nothing like Gods love can be found in man or flesh. Your own heart will see this in time. You will again come to the truth before you time to cast off this mortal coil.
You never once spoke bad words about Christ or God. You have denied the existence of God and yet you still cannot insult them. Have you ever wondered why?
Even live your life on the basis of do no harm. A sheep in wolves clothing... :)
-
As I have said previously, I strongly disagree with Hope's take on faith, but at least he appears to be putting his faith to a practical use where his TWAM charity is concerned.
Sass and TW berate non believers and condemn us to hell, but what to what practical use do they put their faith to make the lives of others better?
-
As I have said previously, I strongly disagree with Hope's take on faith, but at least he appears to be putting his faith to a practical use where his TWAM charity is concerned.
Sass and TW berate non believers and condemn us to hell, but what to what practical use do they put their faith to make the lives of others better?
I have never berated a person simply because they are a none believer. I have told the truth things about yourself.
Example: You making remarks in IGNORANCE OF THE FACTS because you never read the bible but feel yourself educated enough about the bibles cover to comment on the inside. This post of yours show yourself to be guilty of berating believers so you are falsely accusing others of doing what you yourself do.
I have spent the last half of this year getting on to mp's electric boards and water people to get the facilities back for a woman in a wheel chair left with none. We prayed to God and was answered. But where were your prayers or concern for this woman... Not a Christian so cannot be bothered to be concerned or offer any thoughts. Had you bothered to read the topic you would know what we Christians get up to.
http://www.religionethics.co.uk/index.php?topic=11643.0
Looking after my own disabled daughter and running after my sister also now ill and needing a wheelchair.
I have helped others run them for hospital appointments. Took someone to local shops and other places like the hospital and yesterday, having done my own housework and a meal for my family, I spent the afternoon at jb's washing her fridge freezer out and pulling it out to hoover and scrub behind. Hoovered the chalet throughout and I also took her a cooked meal up as I have done the last few days.. Including Yoghurts and fruit as she has absolutely no money.
What have you done ye atheist? Besides sit at home and berate Christians who get of their backside and help people for just two reasons. Love of God and him leading us to help them and a real heartfelt care for others.
You see like our God we are given a heart to really care. We personally do not normally tell others about all the things we do,
For us, it is doing what is really what we should all be doing as normal course.
People do not deserve praise for doing what is the right thing. But God does because since February when I contacted the people including mp and chased them, he made sure she got her electric supply. Just waiting for water now. Perhaps you might want to add a comment of support and prayer on the thread.
-
Sass your posts certainly don't do your faith any favours at all, they are most off putting, but maybe that is your intention.
-
As I have said previously, I strongly disagree with Hope's take on faith, but at least he appears to be putting his faith to a practical use where his TWAM charity is concerned.
Sass and TW berate non believers and condemn us to hell, but what to what practical use do they put their faith to make the lives of others better?
Maybe they don't want to talk about it on here?
Some people like to do good without shouting it out to the world. (That btw is not some kind of attack on those like Hope that do let us know - it's just the way different people work)
-
Maybe they don't want to talk about it on here?
Some people like to do good without shouting it out to the world. (That btw is not some kind of attack on those like Hope that do let us know - it's just the way different people work)
Maybe, but one does have to wonder why some present their faith in a manner which brings it into disrepute?
-
Maybe they don't want to talk about it on here?
Some people like to do good without shouting it out to the world. (That btw is not some kind of attack on those like Hope that do let us know - it's just the way different people work)
It's certainly the way different people work, no question about that.
But there are at least two points against it.
From a Christian perspective - one which you'd naturally think would apply to Hope - there's scriptural backing for not broadcasting your charitable deeds to all the world and his dog. I could supply the appropriate passages if anybody questions this. Others might know chapter and verse off the top of their heads.
And then from a non-religious perspective it can look like the very worst kind of ostentatious attention-seeking or showboating - virtue signalling as they call it nowadays.
-
It's certainly the way different people work, no question about that.
But there are at least two points against it.
From a Christian perspective - one which you'd naturally think would apply to Hope - there's scriptural backing for not broadcasting your charitable deeds to all the world and his dog. I could supply the appropriate passages if anybody questions this. Others might know chapter and verse off the top of their heads.
And then from a non-religious perspective it can look like the very worst kind of ostentatious attention-seeking or showboating - virtue signalling as they call it nowadays.
In defence of Hope, he doesn't go on about his role in the TWAM charity, but brings the charity itself to our attention from time to time, which is fair enough.
-
I have never berated a person simply because they are a none believer. I have told the truth things about yourself.
Example: You making remarks in IGNORANCE OF THE FACTS because you never read the bible but feel yourself educated enough about the bibles cover to comment on the inside. This post of yours show yourself to be guilty of berating believers so you are falsely accusing others of doing what you yourself do.
I have spent the last half of this year getting on to mp's electric boards and water people to get the facilities back for a woman in a wheel chair left with none. We prayed to God and was answered. But where were your prayers or concern for this woman... Not a Christian so cannot be bothered to be concerned or offer any thoughts. Had you bothered to read the topic you would know what we Christians get up to.
http://www.religionethics.co.uk/index.php?topic=11643.0
Looking after my own disabled daughter and running after my sister also now ill and needing a wheelchair.
I have helped others run them for hospital appointments. Took someone to local shops and other places like the hospital and yesterday, having done my own housework and a meal for my family, I spent the afternoon at jb's washing her fridge freezer out and pulling it out to hoover and scrub behind. Hoovered the chalet throughout and I also took her a cooked meal up as I have done the last few days.. Including Yoghurts and fruit as she has absolutely no money.
What have you done ye atheist? Besides sit at home and berate Christians who get of their backside and help people for just two reasons. Love of God and him leading us to help them and a real heartfelt care for others.
You see like our God we are given a heart to really care. We personally do not normally tell others about all the things we do,
For us, it is doing what is really what we should all be doing as normal course.
People do not deserve praise for doing what is the right thing. But God does because since February when I contacted the people including mp and chased them, he made sure she got her electric supply. Just waiting for water now. Perhaps you might want to add a comment of support and prayer on the thread.
There are many people who do all of the above without needing to be told to do so by an imaginary being.
-
In defence of Hope, he doesn't go on about his role in the TWAM charity, but brings the charity itself to our attention from time to time, which is fair enough.
. . . from time to time . . . ???
At the end of every single post actually!
-
Sass your posts certainly don't do your faith any favours at all, they are most off putting, but maybe that is your intention.
What favours... telling the truth is suppose to do me favours. You see how even your thinking is condemned and ugly.
How you deliberately ask....but what to what practical use do they put their faith to make the lives of others better?
then have the nerve to write the above. How evil and twisted are you?
I did nothing wrong in helping JB, I did nothing for self-service and I love the LORD my God.
For what did I do wrong in helping JB and telling you when asked? What was wrong in that post? What disservice did I do myself answering your question honestly?
But the truth is if you look at yourself, you are everything you write about Christians.
You have no power and you have no truth just ugliness and lies about others whom you have never met.
Sad being you...
HONEST ANSWER: NOTHING. The honest truth is you did yourself a disservice.
-
There are many people who do all of the above without needing to be told to do so by an imaginary being.
Name them...
Where were those people who came across Julie all those years and did nothing...
The fact is that God is not an imaginary being but even at your level of thinking he still gets more done than those many people whom you cannot name but did nothing in this case.
-
In defence of Hope, he doesn't go on about his role in the TWAM charity, but brings the charity itself to our attention from time to time, which is fair enough.
Not saying this is wrong, but I think he brings it to our attention all the time, as it is on his strap line every time he posts. So I think we are constantly reminded of the charity and also by inference his role in it.
-
Not saying this is wrong, but I think he brings it to our attention all the time, as it is on his strap line every time he posts. So I think we are constantly reminded of the charity and also by inference his role in it.
Oh come on I don't see anything wrong in using it as a signature, do we actually read a person's signature every time we read their posts, I certainly don't.
-
Oh come on I don't see anything wrong in using it as a signature, do we actually read a person's signature every time we read their posts, I certainly don't.
I made it clear that I didn't necessarily think it wrong, just pointing out that Hope reminds us of this charity and his work associated with it constantly when he posts.
-
There's nothing wrong with promoting a cause that will be close to many people's hearts, letting it be known that you are involved but without blowing your own trumpet, eg, "I did that", "I was responsible for this", "This was built because of my fundraising". No-one on here does that in any way and if they did, it would not go down well.
We are not supposed to let our right hand know what our left is doing with regard to charity and unless we are trying to highlight a particular charity, doing voluntary work is not talked about it any detail. Non-believers feel much the same, it's a bit embarrassing to go on about what we do, boasting even. Shaker says: "And then from a non-religious perspective it can look like the very worst kind of ostentatious attention-seeking or showboating - virtue signalling as they call it nowadays".
We choose to do things, no-one is forcing us.
Floo asked what others did as a 'witness' (my words) to their faith. If they respond and tell us, there's no point in criticising them for it as they were specifically asked to say.
-
This whole thread makes me uncomfortable. I don't like the question asked and I don't like the nature of some of the replies either.
-
. . . from time to time . . . ???
At the end of every single post actually!
Please note: any criticism seen in this response is directed at Floo and not at Hope! For once!
-
Ask for them to be exempted from Christian worship, that should be possible, unless of course it is a church school.
All children have the right to be exempted from religious worship in schools, whether it is a faith school or not.
-
It's only twice a year. I think it's good practice for the weddings and baptisms to come.
On the first point, that may well be true.
But on the second, you sound a bit stuck in the 1970s - don't forget that the majority of weddings are civil and the vast majority of children aren't baptised.
-
All children have the right to be exempted from religious worship in schools, whether it is a faith school or not.
I thought that that was - or used to be - the case only for sixth formers? Unless I'm mistaken, or the law has changed.
-
I thought that that was - or used to be - the case only for sixth formers? Unless I'm mistaken, or the law has changed.
My daughter was offered exemption at her state primary but chose instead (with the head's backing) not to say the prayers and miss out the bits of the hymns she didn't feel right singing.
-
I thought that that was - or used to be - the case only for sixth formers? Unless I'm mistaken, or the law has changed.
Children have the right to be exempted from religious worship, but it is their parents that must make the request. Sorry if my response was a bit confusing.
-
My daughter was offered exemption at her state primary but chose instead (with the head's backing) not to say the prayers and miss out the bits of the hymns she didn't feel right singing.
The problem is, of course, that the religious elements in an assembly are usually woven into completely secular elements about the school community, who won a prize at the recent music competition, whether the netball team won or lost etc etc. So if you exempt yourself from the religious bit you are also missing out on the non religious stuff too. Would be better if religious worship and school assemblies were entirely separate things making it easier for a child to be exempted from the former without feeling they are somehow missing out on, and not part of, the school community.
-
Name them...
Where were those people who came across Julie all those years and did nothing...
The fact is that God is not an imaginary being but even at your level of thinking he still gets more done than those many people whom you cannot name but did nothing in this case.
Time and again I've heard Christians ask non-believers how they know what moral path to tread when they haven't fot an imaginary friend telling them what to do.
Yet we agnostics and atheists do just that. Unlike you lot who need to be told to do good, unbelievers do,so,of their own volition.
Your post is a tacit admittance that, without your invisible sky pixie to keep you on the straight and narrow, you'd become a slavering monster of depravity. Wheras we unbelievers are quite capable of policing our own morals.
-
Where were those people who came across Julie all those years and did nothing...
Where were they then?
You tell us....you name them, go on.
Were those 'do nothing' people all atheists, all agnostics or were some of them maybe, just maybe - Christians?
-
The problem is, of course, that the religious elements in an assembly are usually woven into completely secular elements about the school community, who won a prize at the recent music competition, whether the netball team won or lost etc etc. So if you exempt yourself from the religious bit you are also missing out on the non religious stuff too. Would be better if religious worship and school assemblies were entirely separate things making it easier for a child to be exempted from the former without feeling they are somehow missing out on, and not part of, the school community.
My daughter didn't want to draw attention to herself so didn't want to not be in assembly at all. The head actually modified the words of some hymns to give them a more secular edge, much to the annoyance of the local minister.
-
On the first point, that may well be true.
But on the second, you sound a bit stuck in the 1970s - don't forget that the majority of weddings are civil and the vast majority of children aren't baptised.
So far the only weddings my kids have been to have been in church but I try to get out of as many of the wretched things as I can. I'm with Colin Firth on weddings - when everyone else is weeping with emotion I'm weeping with boredom. Hence I think the practice of boring harvest festivals and carol services useful.
-
My daughter was offered exemption at her state primary but chose instead (with the head's backing) not to say the prayers and miss out the bits of the hymns she didn't feel right singing.
Before or after you lost your faith... If lost is the right word considering you show no signs of having really held a heart felt faith.
Why was your daughter offered something and not other children? Am I right in thinking you personally asked for her not to take part and this was offered as a compromise. Your daughter indoctrinated from your pagan beliefs. I was a believer from a child very early on do not remember not believing in God. I can see no reason why I would ask for exemption from prayers or hymms unless someone had somehow put it in my head. Thankfully, my parents never forced belief on us. Never forced their beliefs on us, either. I believe eventually children will not thank parents who force their beliefs onto them.
Can you really live an eternity knowing you taught your children the road to eternal separation from God?
As Christ said:
King James Bible
But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.
Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!
My children chose for themselves.... It is important that we do not impose our beliefs on our children.
But we do have a promise from God for our children so do not require that way.
-
Children have the right to be exempted from religious worship, but it is their parents that must make the request. Sorry if my response was a bit confusing.
No! They should be given all the choices and allowed to make the decision.
A parent does not always know best. If we choose we choose according to what we believe.
But children have a natural belief in God which is unaltered if allowed to blossom on it's own.
I believe that eventually we all make our own choice. But atheists have no right to dictate what goes on in a Christian School.
This Country has become a less moral and more hurtful place since they tried to get rid of Christianity and it's moral concepts.
In truth the godless are the ones committing the offences regardless of the walk of life they come from.
It isn't a class thing now it is a damn right of a false cry of 'live and let live' but only if it is by the atheists rules.
-
Time and again I've heard Christians ask non-believers how they know what moral path to tread when they haven't fot an imaginary friend telling them what to do.
What a load of rubbish... I do not believe for one moment that a word of that is correct.
We all know as Christians that if you do not belong to God and Christ, then you belong to devil.
No middle fence to sit on just one side or the other. Faith isn't about a moral path... You made it up and what is more we all know you did.
Yet we agnostics and atheists do just that. Unlike you lot who need to be told to do good, unbelievers do,so,of their own volition.
Again, you making things up. It stands to reason that if Christ said:
King James Bible
Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled.
The truth is that those who seek righteousness are more likely to find the truth about God and Christ so do good than atheists.
We do not need to be told to do good because it is part of our new nature in Christ through the power of God.
Jesus Christ, his good was in that he cured the lame, healed the sick, made the dumb speak, the blind were healed and could see. Where do those good works get done by everyday atheists?
You the good works that Christians do are prepared by God for them.
King James Bible
For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.
Your post is a tacit admittance that, without your invisible sky pixie to keep you on the straight and narrow, you'd become a slavering monster of depravity. Wheras we unbelievers are quite capable of policing our own morals.
Whereas your post just proves that even common sense escapes you. It shows we unlike yourself are capable of seeking truth and capable of knowing the truth. You cannot even be bothered to learn what the NT and OT teaches you about the powers of God that change a believers life. You cannot even learn about Christianity let alone find your way out of a paper bag.
You are fast becoming a laughing stock... Don't see Christians making ignorant statements about atheists do you?
You see believers have seen both sides of the fence. Your way doesn't work because it does not rely on truth.
-
Now you look stupid...
Quote from: Khatru on May 30, 2016, 12:53:34 PM
There are many people who do all of the above without needing to be told to do so by an imaginary being.
Name them...
Where were those people who came across Julie all those years and did nothing...
The fact is that God is not an imaginary being but even at your level of thinking he still gets more done than those many people whom you cannot name but did nothing in this case.
Where were they then?
You tell us....you name them, go on.
Were those 'do nothing' people all atheists, all agnostics or were some of them maybe, just maybe - Christians?
The fact is I am the only Christian who helped Julie, there was not one atheist that could be named.
So who looks stupid now... YOU DO!
-
So far the only weddings my kids have been to have been in church but I try to get out of as many of the wretched things as I can. I'm with Colin Firth on weddings - when everyone else is weeping with emotion I'm weeping with boredom. Hence I think the practice of boring harvest festivals and carol services useful.
Yeah! Why would you care about sharing close family or friends special day and being there for support.
I suppose you never got married because weddings are so boring. If you did get married I guess you had a quickie registry office wedding with no friends and family just two witnesses pulled off the streets.
Yeah right!
-
No! They should be given all the choices and allowed to make the decision.
A parent does not always know best. If we choose we choose according to what we believe.
I wasn't saying what I think should be the case, I was telling you what the current legal position is. And indeed you are correct that most parents will make a decision on the basis of their own beliefs - that said although there are very few actively religious people in the UK (including parents) very few parents decide to remove their children from active religious worship at school. They don't really want to rock the boat.
But children have a natural belief in God which is unaltered if allowed to blossom on it's own.
What planet are you on - most kids (if they had a choice) would happily exempt themselves from religious worship at school. At best they find it boring, at worse pointless and completely wrong. Don't forget that children, once they have reached the age where they can really exercise a choice, are the least religious of all in our population.
I believe that eventually we all make our own choice. But atheists have no right to dictate what goes on in a Christian School.
Hmm, so is it your view that the children of parents who would want to remove their kids from religious worship at school should be given the right to attend against their parents wishes - but you seem to be implying that kids who don't wan't to attend against their parents wishes should still have to attend. So the kids have a choice, but only if they agree with you.
This Country has become a less moral and more hurtful place since they tried to get rid of Christianity and it's moral concepts.
In truth the godless are the ones committing the offences regardless of the walk of life they come from.
It isn't a class thing now it is a damn right of a false cry of 'live and let live' but only if it is by the atheists rules.
Rubbish - in all sorts of respects our country is far, far more moral and respectful than it has ever been. Back in your 'Christianity' days we used to systematically discriminate against people if they weren't male, or white, or straight. All of those things were morally abhorrent and we have made great strides (we aren't quite there yet) in moving to a fundamentally more moral situation in which we respect people for whom they are regardless of their gender, race or sexuality.
-
"But children have a natural belief in God which is unaltered if allowed to blossom on it's own."
That is not true, my grandson certainly didn't. When he was two he asked his mother why she believed in Jesus as she couldn't see, feel or hear him!
I didn't naturally believe in god either as a child, I gave into the pressure I was under to get saved eventually, but not until I was eleven.
-
I wasn't saying what I think should be the case, I was telling you what the current legal position is. And indeed you are correct that most parents will make a decision on the basis of their own beliefs - that said although there are very few actively religious people in the UK (including parents) very few parents decide to remove their children from active religious worship at school. They don't really want to rock the boat.
Judging by the posts on this forum, seems some more than willing to rock the boat and sail it.
What planet are you on - most kids (if they had a choice) would happily exempt themselves from religious worship at school. At best they find it boring, at worse pointless and completely wrong. Don't forget that children, once they have reached the age where they can really exercise a choice, are the least religious of all in our population.
I believe religious studies did not bother anyone till we had other foreigners enter the country then want to teach their own religion in predominantly Christian Schools. I also believe that it is good for children to learn about all religions.
But you cannot call Religious Education brain washing. I live on planet earth as where else would you find life? :D
As for the last comment....I am the opposite proof that where a child does not lose the knowledge of the presence of God from childhood they never turn away from it.
Hmm, so is it your view that the children of parents who would want to remove their kids from religious worship at school should be given the right to attend against their parents wishes - but you seem to be implying that kids who don't wan't to attend against their parents wishes should still have to attend. So the kids have a choice, but only if they agree with you.
I didn't say that... I said: I believe that eventually we all make our own choice. But atheists have no right to dictate what goes on in a Christian School.
I said we eventually make our own choice. ATHEISTS have no right to dictate what goes on in a Christian School.
School is about education I believe it is wrong to suggest religious education is brain washing. As I believe science is not brainwashing... Only teaching no God and science as if it relates to God is the real serious brain washing that can be done by atheists in a school. But Children are not idiots and we in schools do not tell them what to believe we simply present the facts and let them choose. 1+ 1 = 2 but it won't make them bad or good to know this. Won't add to their stature but might stop them getting ripped off. :)
Rubbish - in all sorts of respects our country is far, far more moral and respectful than it has ever been.
Really! and they say Christians wear Rose Coloured Spectacles.
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/six-men-charged-connection-child-10749311
Six men charged in connection with child sexual exploitation in Rochdale.
Joshim Miah, 31, of Yorkshire Street, Rochdale , has been charged with two counts of rape and one count of trafficking a person within the UK for sexual exploitation. The charges relate to one alleged victim.
Mohammed Sadeer, 27, of Brimrod Lane, Rochdale, has been charged with one count of rape, relating to one complainant.
Naheem Akhram, 39, of Manley Road, Rochdale, has been charged with one count of rape, which relates to one alleged victim.
A fourth man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, has been charged with four counts of rape relating to two people.
Ittefaq Yousaf, 25, of Stanley Street, Rochdale, has been charged with one count of sexual assault and one count of causing/inciting a girl to engage in sexual activity. These charges relate to two alleged victims.
Arfan Iqbal, 25, of Park Road, Rochdale, has been charged with one count of attempted rape, relating to one person.
All six men are due before Bury and Rochdale Magistrates Court on Thursday, January 21
Spot the English, Scottish or Welsh man amongst them. They call the British people and insult us. Treat their own women
badly. They abused our children... Where is their respect for our Country and way of life. When did our children become second class citizens and abuse fodder for foreigners. Respect... in your dreams
How many celebrities have been accused of molesting children? How many so called respected people turned a blind eye?
We have become the breeding ground for those who call themselves moral to do their immoral acts using our children.
Nah! No such moral or respect exists.
Back in your 'Christianity' days we used to systematically discriminate against people if they weren't male, or white, or straight. All of those things were morally abhorrent and we have made great strides (we aren't quite there yet) in moving to a fundamentally more moral situation in which we respect people for whom they are regardless of their gender, race or sexuality.
I have news for you... there are more atheist who discriminate against people if they were male, or white or straight.
In parts of America racism is as bad as ever. Christians do no discriminate against anyone not being male, female, white or straight.
In Christ there is no male or female, Jew or Gentile, Black or White. We are the body of Christ representative of the things Christ did.
Your discrimination against Christians is quite plain to see. I have don't have problems with the above.
-
Child abusers come from ALL walks of life, religions, colour or creed. Think how many Christians have abused children, the pastor at our Pentecostal church touched me up when I was 14!
-
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/six-men-charged-connection-child-10749311
Six men charged in connection with child sexual exploitation in Rochdale.
Joshim Miah, 31, of Yorkshire Street, Rochdale , has been charged with two counts of rape and one count of trafficking a person within the UK for sexual exploitation. The charges relate to one alleged victim.
Mohammed Sadeer, 27, of Brimrod Lane, Rochdale, has been charged with one count of rape, relating to one complainant.
Naheem Akhram, 39, of Manley Road, Rochdale, has been charged with one count of rape, which relates to one alleged victim.
A fourth man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, has been charged with four counts of rape relating to two people.
Ittefaq Yousaf, 25, of Stanley Street, Rochdale, has been charged with one count of sexual assault and one count of causing/inciting a girl to engage in sexual activity. These charges relate to two alleged victims.
Arfan Iqbal, 25, of Park Road, Rochdale, has been charged with one count of attempted rape, relating to one person.
All six men are due before Bury and Rochdale Magistrates Court on Thursday, January 21
Spot the English, Scottish or Welsh man amongst them. They call the British people and insult us. Treat their own women
badly. They abused our children... Where is their respect for our Country and way of life. When did our children become second class citizens and abuse fodder for foreigners. Respect... in your dreams
How do you know the nationality of those named?
Unless there is more information in this link, and if so you haven't mentioned it, these people could well be UK citizens. Since you mention 'Scottish', I'd add that two of my grandson's friends have traditional Asian names and they are no less 'Scottish' than is my grandson.
Your post could be read as being racist, given that you are generalising from this one case, even if that wasn't the impression you intended to give.
-
The fact is I am the only Christian who helped Julie, there was not one atheist that could be named.
Where were all the other Christians that could have helped Julie?
Seems a pretty poor response from your fellow believers. Only one person in the whole world - or did a Hindu or a Muslim help as well??
-
Perhaps the others didn't make such a point of telling everyone.
-
Perhaps the others didn't make such a point of telling everyone.
Well that could be the case - but Sassy is pretty definite that she was the only Christian to help. ???
-
Well that could be the case - but Sassy is pretty definite that she was the only Christian to help. ???
Sassy is pretty (should read extremely, totally, utterly) definite in absolutely everything that she posts, even when it is known, by everyone except Sassy, to be total and utter rubbish and Fundamentalist Christian propaganda with no basis in truth - except, of course, her definition of "the Truth".
-
But atheists have no right to dictate what goes on in a Christian School.
If that school is falling below the standards of education that we expect from our schools then the state/local authority has every right to intervene.
It doesn't really matter what the ju-ju is, whether it be Christian, Islamic, Jewish, etc, that is not the issue.
Personally I would see all faith schools abolished as they are divisive and place their superstitious mumbo jumbo ahead of Maths, English, Sciences, etc
-
If that school is falling below the standards of education that we expect from our schools then the state/local authority has every right to intervene.
It doesn't really matter what the ju-ju is, whether it be Christian, Islamic, Jewish, etc, that is not the issue.
Personally I would see all faith schools abolished as they are divisive and place their superstitious mumbo jumbo ahead of Maths, English, Sciences, etc
Ah, but it has been posted on here that it is Sciences that are the mumbo-jumbo.
-
Yeah! Why would you care about sharing close family or friends special day and being there for support.
I suppose you never got married because weddings are so boring. If you did get married I guess you had a quickie registry office wedding with no friends and family just two witnesses pulled off the streets.
Yeah right!
If only I were more like you, Sass.
-
Christians do no discriminate against anyone not being male, female, white or straight.
What planet are you on Sassy?
Religious organisations, including Christian ones, are the last bastions of institutionalised discrimination in the UK, sadly. So just taking our two largest Christian denominations in the UK, the CofE and RCC. Both overtly discriminate against gay people, refusing to permit openly gay people attain positions of responsibility (e.g. priest, Bishop etc) within their organisations and/or blocking their promotion within the church due to their sexuality.
Both fail to provide complete equality on there basis of gander - so women are completely banned from becoming priests etc in the RCC, and while the CofE does allow women priests and latterly bishops there isn't complete equality as congregations can demand to the placed under the authority of a male bishop if they don't like a woman being in that position, but the converse isn't the case.
On race, well there is little overt discrimination, but there is little evidence that there is equality in practice. Given that the RCC and the wider Anglican community (lead by the Archbishop of Canterbury) are likely majority black organisations it seems somewhat odd (if there is equality in practice) that we have seen neither a black pope, nor a black ABofC.
-
The fact is I am the only Christian who helped Julie, there was not one atheist that could be named.
So who looks stupid now... YOU DO!
Of all of the other people who came across Julie and did not help in the past - were none of those people Christians?
Name all of those people who did not help her in the past and give their religion.
Go on.....
-
since February when I contacted the people including mp and chased them, he made sure she got her electric supply.
Is the MP, who made sure that she got her electric supply, a Christian?
-
Rhiannon said, yesterday: This whole thread makes me uncomfortable. I don't like the question asked and I don't like the nature of some of the replies either.
I feel a bit queasy about it, tried to respond but not sure I could get across precisely what I meant. Not to worry. I'm sure we all do what we can when we can, how much varies from time to time, but we don't really want to talk about unless there is a sound reason. There is a good reason sometimes.
The very title is - 'goading', for want of a better word. I don't know why (edit:) Floo started it.
(I originally put "Sassy" instead of floo, came back and altered it, very sorry)
-
The very title is - 'goading', for want of a better word. I don't know why Sassy started it, it's not her usual.
Sassy, NOT goading!
I am sorry Brownie but she does nothing else.
Anyone who dares to question her interpretation of the bible, its contents and/or the interpretation thereof is immediaely dismissed as ignorant and not knowing what they are talking about!
The fact that it is the "revealed Word of God" should make it entirely unnecessary for it to be interpreted by mere humans! Even one so erudite on the bible as Sassy.
She even has the gall to inform me that I don't know what paganism is all about. How does she know this? Because she knows ONE witch! One witch who probably tells her just what she wants to hear just to shut her up.
I seerm to remember that you have claimed Sassy as a personal friend - this friendship seems, at times anyway, to blind you to the Sassy that others on her see.
-
Rhiannon said, yesterday: This whole thread makes me uncomfortable. I don't like the question asked and I don't like the nature of some of the replies either.
I feel a bit queasy about it, tried to respond but not sure I could get across precisely what I meant. Not to worry. I'm sure we all do what we can when we can, how much varies from time to time, but we don't really want to talk about unless there is a sound reason. There is a good reason sometimes.
The very title is - 'goading', for want of a better word. I don't know why Sassy started it, it's not her usual.
She didn't. Floo did.
-
Ive just noticed, so sorry to Sassy!
I was reading a couple of your posts on this thread Sass and that must have been where the connection was made.
:-[ :-[ :-[
So sorry to Floo too, I've amended the original post and explained. Hopefully. :-[ :-[ :-[
Owl, I don't have ''personal friends'' on forums. You have to spend time and break bread with someone before you become friends. On forums there are people whose humour you appreciate, find their posts interesting, come across as genuinely decent people, and as far as that goes, I like most fellow posters but I don't know them and they don't know me.
-
So far the only weddings my kids have been to have been in church but I try to get out of as many of the wretched things as I can. I'm with Colin Firth on weddings - when everyone else is weeping with emotion I'm weeping with boredom. Hence I think the practice of boring harvest festivals and carol services useful.
Who says that everyone else is weeping with emotion, Rhi. I've been to several weddings (though not as many as I might as most of my friends got married whilst i was living abroad), and never wept. Instead, I feel that I'm there to support the couple and their families in their promises. A far more positive, interesting and involving process than either weeping or being bored. After all, why else would they have invited me to the wedding (unless it was to do the sound/projection/music, etc)?
-
Supporting the couple and their families in their promises, besides being an odd idea in itself, for a few hours on just one day at the very start of the marriage seems downright peculiar, given that it's the months, years, even decades following when any such support is more likely to be needed.
-
I was going to make exactly the same point.
-
Ah, but it has been posted on here that it is Sciences that are the mumbo-jumbo.
Yes indeed, no doubt by people like Dr Georgia Purdom who sometimes writes for "Answers In Genesis"
If anyone has the intestinal fortitude, they can get her take on science right here....
www.scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/03/16/shermer-at-the-creation-museum/
Ugh. Georgia Purdom is a blind weasel: for example, she berates Christian evolutionists for “interpreting” the bible instead of reading it literally, and then says, "We know from scripture that the earth is no more than 6000 years old:. The bible says nothing of the kind. That is a product of peculiar interpretations of the book.
Then when Shermer presses her on what kinds of experiments she would do to test her assertions, she says," We wouldn’t do that because we know there’s no point in doing that, because the Bible has the answer.” There’s no science there; that’s a plain admission.
-
Yes indeed, no doubt by people like Dr Georgia Purdom who sometimes writes for "Answers In Genesis"
If anyone has the intestinal fortitude, they can get her take on science right here....
www.scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/03/16/shermer-at-the-creation-museum/
Actually it was posted by Sassy earlier in this thread I think.
-
Sassy's post: #208 on: Today at 08:47:47 AM »
I didn't want to quote it in full.
Sass I found that post quite disturbing and I wonder who the 'other foreigners' are that have come to our country, and who are worth mentioning.
Frankly, the post seemed reactionary in the extreme and somewhat racist.
As we've moved onto weddings, I must admit I find a lot about them boring, if they go on too long. I am, however, always interested to see the couple and their attendants in their finery and have been known to shed a tear when they take their vows. (2-5 years later I might shed a tear when they divorce).
-
Sassy's post: #208 on: Today at 08:47:47 AM »
I didn't want to quote it in full.
Sass I found that post quite disturbing and I wonder who the 'other foreigners' are that have come to our country, and who are worth mentioning.
Frankly, the post seemed reactionary in the extreme and somewhat racist.
Racist - yes, it is, but the Rochdale case was a spectacular demonstration of the attitude of some Pakistani men to white girls of any ethnic origin. It is not just in Rochdale either - it is the same in the area where I live - Hounslow/Southall.
Racist - yes, but in cases like this the immigrants and their English-born descendants do themselves no favours.
-
I understand what you are saying Owlswing, there are little 'pockets' in certain areas where there are groups of unscrupulous men of 'Asian', Muslim, origin. We see that in your part of London and bits of the East End. In other parts of Britain, eg sections of Birmingham and Bradford in Yorkshire, there are many problems often centred around mini cab firms (there was a Birmingham poster on an old forum who shared with us that his 15 year old daughter had fallen under the influence of one particular minicab firm owner who manipulated her for his own gain. He was quite distraught. Thankfully, she got out of it and was OK). However, if the abuse highlighted happened in a neighbouring area, the perpetrators wouldn't have Asian names. When there were fewer people from the Indian subcontinent living here, the list would have comprised of 'English' names. There have always been such goings on, I remember hearing about the same things when I was a teenager and another distinct ethnic group got the blame for much of it! Now it is Asian Muslims and Russians but we mustn't forget perpetrators from the indiginous population, who have always been doing it here in different ways and always will.
When I was speaking of 'racism' I was more concerned about the 'foreigners' who have been allowed to come here, polluting and diluting 'our' culture, whatever that is, and was wondering what constitutes a 'foreigner' nowadays. How many of us have pure Anglo-Saxon roots or even know much about our ethnic origins. I remember hearing the grown ups muttering about ''these foreigners'' when I was a kid, they were suspicious, hostile and largely ignorant. Alf Garnett springs to mind. You don't hear the phrase, ''These foreigners'' much nowadays, it sounds anachronistic.
-
Child abusers come from ALL walks of life, religions, colour or creed. Think how many Christians have abused children, the pastor at our Pentecostal church touched me up when I was 14!
So you reported him and he went to prison?
The point was made in relation to...
Rubbish - in all sorts of respects our country is far, far more moral and respectful than it has ever been.
If you had read it, you would see that it did point out that the abusers come from everywhere in life. Like the celebrities
which were mentioned.
How many celebrities have been accused of molesting children? How many so called respected people turned a blind eye?
We have become the breeding ground for those who call themselves moral to do their immoral acts using our children.
Nah! No such moral or respect exists.
As you can see the point was about the moral and respectful comment being proved false.
-
If that school is falling below the standards of education that we expect from our schools then the state/local authority has every right to intervene.
The education matter is totally different matter.
It doesn't really matter what the ju-ju is, whether it be Christian, Islamic, Jewish, etc, that is not the issue.
You never learn so where it comes to pupils who cannot really take things in when taught, it isn't about standards.
You read and write but you cannot take in any other side to an argument or understand the arguments put forward.
No amount of good education can open a permanently closed bias mind.
Re-education cannot remove the prejudices that come from a persons heart. It requires truth and they cannot accept of admit it.
Personally I would see all faith schools abolished as they are divisive and place their superstitious mumbo jumbo ahead of Maths, English, Sciences, etc
I would see all faith schools abolished except the Christian and Jewish schools.
Because they are basically what our Countries Faith is all about.
I would not allowed any other temples to be built to defile our land with idol and false God worship.
But then I think it doesn't matter eventually Christ will return and even atheists who grit their teeth will realise that it was for nothing that they dissed Jesus and God. Because they were the only persons who really cared and they dissed them.
-
So you reported him and he went to prison?
The point was made in relation to...
If you had read it, you would see that it did point out that the abusers come from everywhere in life. Like the celebrities
which were mentioned.
As you can see the point was about the moral and respectful comment being proved false.
I did report him to my parents, but as usual in those days nothing was done!
-
I understand that floo, indeed most of us wouldn't even have told our parents. As you said, nothing was done anyway but I do feel people were generally more naive in those days, things like child abuse were one-off horrific attacks that were read about in newspapers, no-one had much idea about friendly, higher status people who were doing it on a regular basis, getting into the minds of kids. We are more streetwise nowadays and so are children, but I have no problem in believing that many adults, including those who perhaps should have known better, honestly didn't believe such things went on in their own circle and shied away from hearing about them. The children who did speak out were considered to be indulging in some infantile make-believe (as if you'd 'make believe' about something so horrible), or 'dreaming'; they certainly wouldn't be believed over a teacher, doctor or clergyman.
Kids have it far better now, thank goodness. They are listened to for a start and their feelings considered.
-
I understand that floo, indeed most of us wouldn't even have told our parents. As you said, nothing was done anyway but I do feel people were generally more naive in those days, things like child abuse were one-off horrific attacks that were read about in newspapers, no-one had much idea about friendly, higher status people who were doing it on a regular basis, getting into the minds of kids. We are more streetwise nowadays and so are children, but I have no problem in believing that many adults, including those who perhaps should have known better, honestly didn't believe such things went on in their own circle and shied away from hearing about them. The children who did speak out were considered to be indulging in some infantile make-believe (as if you'd 'make believe' about something so horrible), or 'dreaming'; they certainly wouldn't be believed over a teacher, doctor or clergyman.
Kids have it far better now, thank goodness. They are listened to for a start and their feelings considered.
My mother who thought all clergy were gods, didn't believe me, and my father thought it amusing, LOVELY!
-
Oh my word, floo, that is so horrible. That's the sort of thing that is difficult to forgive. What can mitigate it is frank talk about how confused and hurt you were, let down by them, and for them to understand and to agree that they would do it differently, etc, apologising unreservedly.
I know exactly what you mean though. People didn't really believe it happened (except those who did it). Tbh, the police weren't much good at that sort of thing either, they always looked to smooth things over and make it seem as though it was a misunderstanding. They weren't particularly nice to children either.
---------
Sass, you say you would not allow any faith schools except Christian and Jewish, and then say you would not allow any temples/places of worship for other religions. They are not faith schools, they are private places of worship. Teaching goes on in them, as it does for us in church. It would be a very unwelcoming place - well, some would say that's no bad thing, not me - an unfriendly place, hostile even. The country would be the loser, we are known to be cosmopolitan and that is part of our nation's rich tapestry. The social outreach of the Hindu and Sikh's temples is a very helpful set up. Let people worship in their accepted way. People are not going to be happy all the time, that's life, but a temple or whatever is something they can have that will bring them happiness.
---------------------------
Back to floo: Ah well, the 'noughties' bring us new concerns but for all that, I am glad we are living in the present times.
-
Supporting the couple and their families in their promises, besides being an odd idea in itself, for a few hours on just one day at the very start of the marriage seems downright peculiar, given that it's the months, years, even decades following when any such support is more likely to be needed.
Shakes, since I am generally invited to the weddings of relatives and close friends, or to those who I know from church, I see nothing odd about supporting the couple and their families at the very start of their marraige, especially when one is also involved in their lives on a regular basis for years after.
It's your assumption that one isn't thus involved down the line, in some way or other, that seems odd to me.
-
I was going to make exactly the same point.
And I'd make the same point to you, as I made to Shakes. I attend the wedding because I anticipate being involved in the couple's life further down the track - either as an uncle or other relative, a close friend and/or someone they will meet regularly at church.
-
I believe religious studies did not bother anyone till we had other foreigners enter the country then want to teach their own religion in predominantly Christian Schools. I also believe that it is good for children to learn about all religions.
Whilst I would agree with your last sentence here, Sass, I'm not sure where you get the idea that RS (and it's more often that not referred to as RE [Religious Education] nowadays) 'did not bother anyone until we had other foreigners ...' I'm glad that you have acknowleged that we already had 'foreigners' living in Britain/the UK - we've had Jews living here for centuries, not to mention French, Dutch, Scandinavians, central Europeans, etc - and OK they might not have been called by these nationalities in the past.
But you cannot call Religious Education brain washing. I live on planet earth as where else would you find life? :D
It is no less brainwashing than the teaching of history, science, languages, craft, geography, cooking, ... ;)
-
And I'd make the same point to you, as I made to Shakes. I attend the wedding because I anticipate being involved in the couple's life further down the track - either as an uncle or other relative, a close friend and/or someone they will meet regularly at church.
Which is fine. But you cannot assume that by my non-attendance and/or boredom at the day itself I'm not intending to offer my support in the future, if it's ever wanted.
-
Oh my word, floo, that is so horrible. That's the sort of thing that is difficult to forgive. What can mitigate it is frank talk about how confused and hurt you were, let down by them, and for them to understand and to agree that they would do it differently, etc, apologising unreservedly.
I know exactly what you mean though. People didn't really believe it happened (except those who did it). Tbh, the police weren't much good at that sort of thing either, they always looked to smooth things over and make it seem as though it was a misunderstanding. They weren't particularly nice to children either.
---------
Sass, you say you would not allow any faith schools except Christian and Jewish, and then say you would not allow any temples/places of worship for other religions. They are not faith schools, they are private places of worship. Teaching goes on in them, as it does for us in church. It would be a very unwelcoming place - well, some would say that's no bad thing, not me - an unfriendly place, hostile even. The country would be the loser, we are known to be cosmopolitan and that is part of our nation's rich tapestry. The social outreach of the Hindu and Sikh's temples is a very helpful set up. Let people worship in their accepted way. People are not going to be happy all the time, that's life, but a temple or whatever is something they can have that will bring them happiness.
---------------------------
Back to floo: Ah well, the 'noughties' bring us new concerns but for all that, I am glad we are living in the present times.
Oh well that is all in the past, and in all honesty it didn't really upset me, unlike the religious aspect of my childhood which really did my head in.
-
Sassy's post: #208 on: Today at 08:47:47 AM »
I didn't want to quote it in full.
Sass I found that post quite disturbing and I wonder who the 'other foreigners' are that have come to our country, and who are worth mentioning.
Frankly, the post seemed reactionary in the extreme and somewhat racist.
As we've moved onto weddings, I must admit I find a lot about them boring, if they go on too long. I am, however, always interested to see the couple and their attendants in their finery and have been known to shed a tear when they take their vows. (2-5 years later I might shed a tear when they divorce).
I often wonder why the women always wear the same dress? The white one?
ippy
-
I often wonder why the women always wear the same dress? The white one?
ippy
Because they are all virgins! Why else?
-
I often wonder why the women always wear the same dress? The white one?
ippy
Hee hee, there does seem to be a trend at the moment for women to wear a traditional white wedding dress at their second or third wedding (NOT the same dress, 1980s big sleeves and flounce would hardly be appropriate in 2016!). Nothing wrong with that but one would think they'd get fed up with it. I was told that white symbolised (not only virginity which I would have thought was extremely unlikely), a fresh start. Fairynuff.
How 'traditional' is the white dress though? It has seemed to be so all my life but I'm sure in years gone by different types of attire were considered to be appropriate for brides.
Anyway, back in 1975, I wore a blue evening dress for my wedding so there. I thought big white bridal dresses were naff.
-
I wonder how many brides are actually virgins on their wedding day, a very small minority I should imagine.
I think it crazy not to have sex with your intended before tying the knot, you need to know if you are compatible. She might want it ten times a day, and him once a month! :D
-
A very small number indeed, floo, and most have lived together for a while.
I think it takes living together to know whether or not you are compatible. It's so much more than sex and sometimes the sex wears off, especially if other things about living together are difficult, wearing in some ways. If a couple can get through all that and still have high regard for eachother, after about ten years they could consider tying the knot :D.
-
A very small number indeed, floo, and most have lived together for a while.
I think it takes living together to know whether or not you are compatible. It's so much more than sex and sometimes the sex wears off, especially if other things about living together are difficult, wearing in some ways. If a couple can get through all that and still have high regard for eachother, after about ten years they could consider tying the knot :D.
I am of the opinion it is sensible to live together for a while before making it permanent. Of course my parents would have gone crazy if I had lived with my husband before we wed. However, my husband and I were pleased our two married daughters lived with their spouses for a couple of years first. One has been married for 18 years, the other 16 years which isn't bad by today's standards.
-
I am of the opinion it is sensible to live together for a while before making it permanent. Of course my parents would have gone crazy if I had lived with my husband before we wed. However, my husband and I were pleased our two married daughters lived with their spouses for a couple of years first. One has been married for 18 years, the other 16 years which isn't bad by today's standards.
"Isn't bad!"
No, it isn't bad - it's damn close to a bloody miracle these days
-
"Isn't bad!"
No, it isn't bad - it's damn close to a bloody miracle these days
My husband and I have managed 47 years in August and haven't murdered each other yet, now that is a miracle! :D
-
Hee hee, there does seem to be a trend at the moment for women to wear a traditional white wedding dress at their second or third wedding (NOT the same dress, 1980s big sleeves and flounce would hardly be appropriate in 2016!). Nothing wrong with that but one would think they'd get fed up with it. I was told that white symbolised (not only virginity which I would have thought was extremely unlikely), a fresh start. Fairynuff.
How 'traditional' is the white dress though? It has seemed to be so all my life but I'm sure in years gone by different types of attire were considered to be appropriate for brides.
Anyway, back in 1975, I wore a blue evening dress for my wedding so there. I thought big white bridal dresses were naff. Y
So Brownie you're telling me that the white dresses are all different designs and not all the same, adjusted for size of course.
Only my wife says to me when she sees a bride, "what a beautifull dress" and there am I thinking "it's white one, the same as the last one", ?
ippy
-
So Brownie you're telling me that the white dresses are all different designs and not all the same, adjusted for size of course.
Only my wife says to me when she sees a bride, "what a beautifull dress" and there am I thinking "it's white one, the same as the last one", ?
ippy
Ditto! Just with a higher price tag!
-
No amount of good education can open a permanently closed bias mind.
Please bear your above statement in mind and then read your below statement again....
I would see all faith schools abolished except the Christian and Jewish schools.
Because they are basically what our Countries Faith is all about.
I would not allowed any other temples to be built to defile our land with idol and false God worship.
But then I think it doesn't matter eventually Christ will return and even atheists who grit their teeth will realise that it was for nothing that they dissed Jesus and God. Because they were the only persons who really cared and they dissed them.
You're not biased but you would abolish freedom of religion if you had your way?
Our country's faith is actually about no faith. Latest demographics show that non-religion is in the majority now. That's the trouble with Christianity, it can't compete on an open playing field and you know it; that's why you would outlaw all other religions except your own. It's called Christian privilege and it's been imposed on our society by believers for far too long. Now, bit-by-bit, it's being removed and all you people can do is shout "persecution!" because you're afraid that without its unfair advantages, your myth will disappear. Well, looks like you're right.
So let's say you get your way and all superstitions and myths (except your particular superstitions) are abolished. Of course that will be the thin end of the wedge, so.....what next?
Abolish LGBT rights?
Make church going compulsory and impose fines and imprisonment on those who don't attend. Christians did that before you know.
Make heresy and blasphemy a crime again?
Reintroduce the death sentence for witches?
What a cosy little world you would have us living in.
Thankfully, your ju-ju has had its day and it's being put on the bookshelf marked "mythology".
-
Please bear your above statement in mind and then read your below statement again....
You're not biased but you would abolish freedom of religion if you had your way?
Our country's faith is actually about no faith. Latest demographics show that non-religion is in the majority now. That's the trouble with Christianity, it can't compete on an open playing field and you know it; that's why you would outlaw all other religions except your own. It's called Christian privilege and it's been imposed on our society by believers for far too long. Now, bit-by-bit, it's being removed and all you people can do is shout "persecution!" because you're afraid that without its unfair advantages, your myth will disappear. Well, looks like you're right.
So let's say you get your way and all superstitions and myths (except your particular superstitions) are abolished. Of course that will be the thin end of the wedge, so.....what next?
Abolish LGBT rights?
Make church going compulsory and impose fines and imprisonment on those who don't attend. Christians did that before you know.
Make heresy and blasphemy a crime again?
Reintroduce the death sentence for witches?
What a cosy little world you would have us living in.
Thankfully, your ju-ju has had its day and it's being put on the bookshelf marked "mythology".
A masterly post but do you honestly expect Sassy et al to see it that way?
THEY are the only people being persecuted, persecuted by the ungodly! Everyone except Christians deserves to be persecuted for their blasphemy of disbelief and questioning of the "Truth" as the Christians see it.
Their belief, at the level that they hold it, allows for no other belief and never will.
And yes, I truly believe that, if they and their ilk thought that they could in any way get away with it, they would form a Christian Daesh to impose it upon the world, not just the witches. All hail the Inquisition.
-
I thought Sassy's post was a bit strong, saying she would only allow faith schools if they were Christian or Jewish. I replied to it at the time in more detail than today, no point in repeating now, as it bothered me but Sass may not have seen my post. I hope she comes back and explains, or amplifies, what she said, though it looks pretty clear >:(.
-
I thought Sassy's post was a bit strong, saying she would only allow faith schools if they were Christian or Jewish. I replied to it at the time in more detail than today, no point in repeating now, as it bothered me but Sass may not have seen my post. I hope she comes back and explains, or amplifies, what she said, though it looks pretty clear >:(.
If faith schools have to remain why not have unionist schools as well? the justification for having unionist schools would be about equal to the argument for having faith schools.
The thing about having faith schools for me, although people have every right to hold faith based beliefs; having various faith based schools affords the various faiths an unwarrented amount of importance.
In the light of these rapidly diminishing outmoded beliefs/faiths, isn't it only a matter of time before they have to go? Preferbly the faiths and beliefs should all go into the private and personal areas where they belong and should have gone years ago.
ippy
-
If faith schools are to remain, ALL religions should be permitted to set them up. No religion is greater than another, as all are more than likely human creations.
-
Pagan schooling would be a blast. :D
-
Pagan schooling would be a blast. :D
Ain't that the truth! Or A truth anyway!
Even then though we would have to have a Pagan faith schools for Gardnerian Wicca, Alexandrian Wicca, Asatru, Celtic, Norse, Heathen, American Botched/Bullshit Wicca, Non-deity-specigic paganism - the list would be never-ending!
-
Rhiannon said: "Pagan schooling would be a blast! ;D "
I bet! From what I've read, there used to be Hedge schools in Ireland at one time....I'll get me coat.
I think faith schools are quite narrow in some respects; I went to three. My son went to a school for a couple of years which was a Christian foundation but they didn't make a thing out of it because anyone, of any faith or none, could go there if they had the ability. There were plenty of Hindus, Muslims and Jews, one or two Sikhs from what I remember and, undoubtedly, a lot of nominal Christians. However, some time after he had left that behind he told me that he had disliked the fact that, when being taught RE (which then was mainly Judeo-Christian though they did learn a bit about other faiths), they were told, ''This is how it is'', whereas at his next school, they were taught, ''This is what some Christians believe''.
I understood how he felt and have always thought that people should say, ''I believe...'', and not present any religious belief as fact. I may believe in something but I cannot impose my belief on anyone else. My faith schools were, without a doubt, far more hard-line when it came to religion.
Off the top of my head I can think of three faith schools near to me (secondary), one Catholic comp, one private convent 'grammar-type' school for girls and an Islamic boarding school for boys. Oh there is also a Catholic sixth form college. The Catholic comp and Vlth form have a fairly liberal and realistic approach towards faith which one would expect from state schools nowadays but what control would there be over the private sector?
The Lubavitcher schools, primary and secondary single sex schools in Stamford Hill, north London, have an extremely narrow curriculum and everything centres on the Torah and Talmud, especially for the boys who seem to learn little else. I mean no disrespect to the Chassidic Jewish people, many of whom I have known through my working life, but quite honestly if they were not Jewish, the schools would fail OFSTED, be considered failing or failed schools and radical change would be implemented. The people themselves, who live as a community, believe the teaching is quite sufficient for the adult lives the children will eventually embrace but it's very odd when grown men and women (the men are worse), fill in forms and write notes in a sort of pigeon-English.
-
Pagan schooling would be a blast. :D
Too ugly for reality of telling school children that parents use to sacrifice them to their pagan gods.
So not a blast at all a real down point - after all the history is important when it comes to the fact it was built on the slaughter of innocent blood.
So Paganism not a good subject for young children. Always someone somewhere willing to go back to the old school way. :o :)
-
Too ugly for reality of telling school children that parents use to sacrifice them to their pagan gods.
So not a blast at all a really down point - after all the history is important when it comes to the fact it was built on the slaughter of innocent blood.
So Paganism not a good subject for young children. Always someone somewhere willing to go back to the old school way. :o :)
But your religion is based on sacrifice!
You think your god killed his son (for a bit)
-
Too ugly for reality of telling school children that parents use to sacrifice them to their pagan gods.
So not a blast at all a real down point - after all the history is important when it comes to the fact it was built on the slaughter of innocent blood.
So Paganism not a good subject for young children. Always someone somewhere willing to go back to the old school way. :o :)
Do you type your posts in a foreign language and run them through Google Translate?
-
Too ugly for reality of telling school children that parents use to sacrifice them to their pagan gods.
So not a blast at all a real down point - after all the history is important when it comes to the fact it was built on the slaughter of innocent blood.
So Paganism not a good subject for young children. Always someone somewhere willing to go back to the old school way. :o :)
Sass, at school now my kids are taught about Protestants burning Catholics and Catholics burning Protestants as sacrifices to keep your God happy. In fact there's a memorial plaque to one such young man who displeased God by being the wrong kind of Christian on my local town hall. Nothing ancient about this history, Sass.
-
Too ugly for reality of telling school children that parents use to sacrifice them to their pagan gods.
So not a blast at all a real down point - after all the history is important when it comes to the fact it was built on the slaughter of innocent blood.
So Paganism not a good subject for young children. Always someone somewhere willing to go back to the old school way. :o :)
Considering how very nasty some aspects of Christianity are, and how much violence it has caused over the years, that is twaddle, Sass!
-
If faith schools are to remain, ALL religions should be permitted to set them up. No religion is greater than another, as all are more than likely human creations.
Let's have schools minus religion, where we are all brought up together and save the religious beliefs for every individual person's private time, then hopefully we may have a far better chance of meeting each other, understanding each other and getting allong with each other.
ippy
-
Let's have schools minus religion, where we are all brought up together and save the religious beliefs for every individual person's private time, then hopefully we may have a far better chance of meeting each other, understanding each other and getting allong with each other.
ippy
I think that is a far better idea.
-
I think that is a far better idea.
Thanks Floo, yes I would even include mixing with the the Welsh and the Irish amongst that that lot as well.
ippy
-
Thanks Floo, yes I would even include mixing with the the Welsh and the Irish amongst that that lot as well.
ippy
That is kind I live in Wales, but I have Irish nationality as well as British.
-
That is kind I live in Wales, but I have Irish nationality as well as British.
OK Floo, good on you, but that's not enough to prevent a gentle wind on the handle.
ippy
-
I have a bit of Northern Irish in me, can I join? Also a bit of Jewish, my paternal grandfather's grandparents who came over here from France, so that probably counts too. Hee hee, we are all mixed race, ain't it grand?
-
Too ugly for reality of telling school children that parents use to sacrifice them to their pagan gods.
So not a blast at all a real down point - after all the history is important when it comes to the fact it was built on the slaughter of innocent blood.
So Paganism not a good subject for young children. Always someone somewhere willing to go back to the old school way. :o :)
Will you please give me checkable and verifiable evidence that "parents use[d] to sacrifice them to their pagan gods.
Please note - verifiable evidence not assetions with no basis in historical fact!
-
A masterly post but do you honestly expect Sassy et al to see it that way?
THEY are the only people being persecuted, persecuted by the ungodly! Everyone except Christians deserves to be persecuted for their blasphemy of disbelief and questioning of the "Truth" as the Christians see it.
Their belief, at the level that they hold it, allows for no other belief and never will.
And yes, I truly believe that, if they and their ilk thought that they could in any way get away with it, they would form a Christian Daesh to impose it upon the world, not just the witches. All hail the Inquisition.
Thanks
I'm not sure whether Sass will respond - lately she's taken to leaving me with unanswered questions.
-
Too ugly for reality of telling school children that parents use to sacrifice them to their pagan gods.
So not a blast at all a real down point - after all the history is important when it comes to the fact it was built on the slaughter of innocent blood.
So Paganism not a good subject for young children. Always someone somewhere willing to go back to the old school way. :o :)
Says the person whose beliefs are based on blood, torture, sacrifice and death.
-
But your religion is based on sacrifice!
You think your god killed his son (for a bit)
God didn't kill his son... You appear mistaken between dying for sins in someone elses place and being an actual sacrifice.
Christ clearly told us... "NO ONE TAKES MY LIFE FROM ME, I GIVE IT UP FREELY."
Men like you put Christ to death.
Christ said he allowed them to take his life. The bible makes it clear he only had to say the word and Angels would rescue him.
He was without sin so angels would have stopped him being put to death he only had to ask.,
Men took his life and he allowed it. Adam died because he sinned. Jesus had no sin and so having died his death brought life for all who believed and accepted his laying down his life for another/others.
More to everything than meets the eye.
-
Yeh right! :D
-
More to everything than meets the eye.
Not when the eyes are as blind as yours!
-
I know that I am not a Christian but even I, a Pagan, am getting more than a little fed up with you. You are a real "one-trick-pony", and topics that you start are monotonously repetitive - everyone on this forum knows that you are about as rabid an anti-Christian atheist as it is poossible to be.
To be honest I am amazed that any of the Christians on the forum are bothered to even read your topics. I certainly shall not be in the future; responses, yes, possibly - topics, NO!
Owlswing Just popped in to see what is on offer noticed your reply to floo. Thank you it was a good honest reply,must dash take care.
~TW~
-
Owlswing Just popped in to see what is on offer noticed your reply to floo. Thank you it was a good honest reply,must dash take care.
~TW~
As you have just done! POT KETTLE BLACK!
-
There are some Christians who do a lot for others, but would probably do so even if they were non believers. However there are other Christians who think they have done their bit by running off at the mouth about their faith, but do nothing practical to help those in need! Deeds are much better than words, imo.
As a Christian what do you do to help others in need?
Mind your own business.
-
Not when the eyes are as blind as yours!
Clanging gong... manhole more appropriate in your case.. ;D
-
Considering how very nasty some aspects of Christianity are, and how much violence it has caused over the years, that is twaddle, Sass!
OK, Floo, and I've unuccessfully challenged you to this before, please provide 3 or 4 examples of (very) nasty aspects of Christ's teachings?
-
OK, Floo, and I've unuccessfully challenged you to this before, please provide 3 or 4 examples of (very) nasty aspects of Christ's teachings?
I was taking about the Biblical god not Jesus, who was all human and no sort of god! However that guy was far from perfect too, just like the rest of us, and I have often pointed out things he supposedly said and did which were crazy. Telling people to leave their responsibilities and follow him was not sensible. Cursing the fig tree was silly. Trashing the Temple was vandalism. Frighten the pigs over the cliff, when playing exorcism hocus pocus, was cruel to the pigs and detrimental to the farmer, who lost his livelihood! Will that do?
-
OK, Floo, and I've unuccessfully challenged you to this before, please provide 3 or 4 examples of (very) nasty aspects of Christ's teachings?
It's all rubbish she does not have any and you won't get any.
-
Sending people to hell is pretty nasty, isn't it?
-
Sending people to hell is pretty nasty, isn't it?
Well I think so, especially if they are good people and their only 'crime' is unbelief!
-
Revelations 19
“And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war”, “His eyes were as a flame of fire”, clothed in a vesture dipped in blood“, and “out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.””
Not that nice.
Obey or else!
He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. Matthew 10:37
If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children,and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. Luke 14:26
Whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire. Matthew 5:22
Yet he often called his critics and disciples fools.
Ye fools and blind. Matthew 23:17, 19
Ye fools. Luke 11:40
O fools, and slow of heart to believe. Luke 24:25
God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death. Matthew 15:4
Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death. Mark 7:10
Fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear him. Luke 12: 5
Sounds more like a mafia boss.
-
If you want a direct quote from Jesus:
"The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;
And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth." Mt. 13: 41-2.
-
Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men ... whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come. Matthew 12:31-32, Mark 3:29, Luke 12:10
I think the Holy Ghost is a complete and utter tosspot.
That's me done then.
Can I repent now?
-
Yup for a small fee, I take cash or paypal please.