Cycling UK Forum

reohn2 wrote:The in or out issue is a matter of fact from the mainstream Christian doctrine POV.
You either accept Jesus the Christ as your savour,in which case you're saved and become part of christendom,part of God and all the benefits of that inclusion.
Or you don't,in which case you're not part of God and will be separated from God,and be outside It's kingdom.
The Christian Church that doesn't teach that is a watered down version of the Christian faith.
The only thing that saves you from separation from God is the acceptance of the sacrifice Christ made for you by dying in your place on the cross,no amount of good works will get you God's acceptance unless you believe that.
That's the basic fundamental doctrine of Christianity

Which, in human terms would make me wonder about such a deity. It's almost like (s)he is a Trump, more concerned with their own ego than people doing good to others. I would have expected a genuine God to be primarily concerned with people doing good, helping others, etc. not with you worshiping them on a regular basis, etc.. The requirement of belief, worship, continual attention ... very much what Trump seeks ...

Ian

Hi,
Its possible that those who would say they are religious etc, might want / need / to belong and easily led by such.
Many don't want to be branded as sheep but if a member of anything might well be so..................

Those who abstain might well put down a bogus mark.

Psamathe wrote:Which, in human terms would make me wonder about such a deity. It's almost like (s)he is a Trump, more concerned with their own ego than people doing good to others. I would have expected a genuine God to be primarily concerned with people doing good, helping others, etc. not with you worshiping them on a regular basis, etc.. The requirement of belief, worship, continual attention ... very much what Trump seeks ...

Ian

That's probably why the Christian Church is loosing it's support.
The sacrifice issue is a directly descended from the Judeaist tradition of animal sacrifice to assuage God's anger for sins,the human sacrifice of God's only Son was a once and for all sacrifice but the individual has to accept it to reap the benefits.
It's God's way of sorting the wheat from the chaff,the sheep from the goats.The good works are secondary to that acceptance
Weird innit?

To oblige Tangled Metal, I had a true epiphany when I was 15, when I looked up at the stars one night and realised that the whole religion shebang was a load of rubbish. Well, it went more along the lines of "what the hell did a bunch of shepherds know about cosmology?" - I'd been reading books about it. My parents were Norn Iron prods who went to church because that's what everyone did when the kids were growing up, but once we'd flown the coop I don't think they bothered any more - the Rev. Ed Hamilton was an inspiring enough sermonizer for me to be able to tell you that there were 76 courses of bricks between floor and roof in St. Molua's. Although maybe I've got the figure wrong, I haven't been 15 for a year or two now. Whatever: I was brought up in an environment where religion was synonymous with acute boredom.

An interesting point for me is that, for all I detest the abuses that surround religion - not just the major headline items that range from paedophilia to jihad but also the way it provides the petty with the means of browbeating the innocent - the human race has not evolved beyond it. In other words, it's a positive survival characteristic. Whether we like it or not it provides a unifying force and a thrust towards civilized behaviour. The collateral abuses do not seem to diminish this effect.

Another interesting point is that religious belief and modern cosmology have the same roots. As has probably been remarked, the difference is that when a scientific hypothesis is shown to be wrong it's thrown out.

Audax67 wrote:.....
Another interesting point is that religious belief and modern cosmology have the same roots. As has probably been remarked, the difference is that when a scientific hypothesis is shown to be wrong it's thrown out.

I don't see cosmological hypothesis as a question of belief (similarly quantum physics, etc.). I look on such hypothesis as interesting ideas and I fully expect them to develop, change, be discarded, replaced, etc. So with many of these ideas I certainly don't "believe" them.

Ian

Tangled Metal wrote:I find it interesting the way any discussion that ends up being a debate on religion ends up being argued over by atheists. Does anyone with religious views have various view on religion? Serious question, why do these arguments become an atheists' debate and most religious types keep out.

I've been away from this thread for the weekend but going back a few pages there's been a few comments about in or out from Reohn. Not something I recognize from my Christian roots (childhood into teenage years). I rarely went to church only with cubs then scouts once a month for parade. The one thing I've never experienced is the in or out. The church kind of focused on how to b live your life right or lead a "good" life. It was actually inclusive. Even my brief dalliance with RC the priest seemed inclusive. Other churches I've sat through services in under CoE and methodist and RC all seem to be less about in/out or saved / dammed divide. I wonder if that's the extreme end of religion and the views of atheists not actual followers of mainstream religion?

Anyway can I ask everyone posting on here to state their religious or non-religious views. Are your RC, CoE methodist or atheist or agnostic? Were you ever a follower of a religious tradition and how long ago did you leave that tradition? I think it would be interesting to know where posters on this religious topic are coming from.

well I am Venusian and just find this all rather funny, what silly Earthlings get up to. In fact back home we just broadcast it all as a sitcom - has very high ratings - We all know the Big One is the true One.

Psamathe wrote:

Audax67 wrote:.....
Another interesting point is that religious belief and modern cosmology have the same roots. As has probably been remarked, the difference is that when a scientific hypothesis is shown to be wrong it's thrown out.

I don't see cosmological hypothesis as a question of belief (similarly quantum physics, etc.). I look on such hypothesis as interesting ideas and I fully expect them to develop, change, be discarded, replaced, etc. So with many of these ideas I certainly don't "believe" them.

Ian

I suspect you mean you don't believe it to be the final and definitive fact,more the cosmos as we currently upstand it and subject to change when more is understood.
That's the problem with religion the 'facts' were found hundreds sometimes thousands of years ago and can't be changed,more so Islam which believes the Koran to be the final word on that matter is irrefutable and cannot be added to or subtracted from.

Psamathe wrote:

Audax67 wrote:.....
Another interesting point is that religious belief and modern cosmology have the same roots. As has probably been remarked, the difference is that when a scientific hypothesis is shown to be wrong it's thrown out.

I don't see cosmological hypothesis as a question of belief (similarly quantum physics, etc.). I look on such hypothesis as interesting ideas and I fully expect them to develop, change, be discarded, replaced, etc. So with many of these ideas I certainly don't "believe" them.

Ian

The root is simply the need to explain how the world works. A whacks B on the head with a rock, B dies and A did it. C gets frizzled by lightning, C dies and who dunnit? Thee and me know that it's simply static electricity and C was a convenient conductor, but Ug the cave-dweller needs to supply a perp - or, since tossing lightning-bolts around is obviously beyond the powers of Ug and his chums, maybe something much more oomphier - something like a god?

Every known civilization has developed some system for explaining the world. Science provides yet another. The main difference between science and religion is that science is self-correcting and makes predictions that are falsifiable. Religion isn't and doesn't.

I have just been watching "The Last Kingdom" about Alfred the "Great". Well the series doesnt do much for the Christians - A load of pious fools and the biggest is Alfred the king of fools who has dreams of a united kingdom but has very little understanding of the world he lives in other than how to manipulate poor old Utred the Dane who keeps on saving ALfreds butt. One good part was when the arrogant and weaselly & scheming Abbot who married off Utreds beau to his arch enemy with a proxy gets a gut full of dagger The poor fool is so god intoxiated he has no clue what is to befall him as he keeps on taunting Utred. The programme maker chose the actor who played the abott well as he had the face and bearing of arrogance , and I bet all the viewers were aching and panting to see him opened up, through the various episodes - had it been in the cinema there would have been cheers The only shame is that Alfred's wife a most pious lady, doesnt suffer the same fate I am glad I am a pagan.

This in/out idea intrigues me. I can get how it comes about from parts of the Bible but every contact I've had with religion hasn't been like that. Vicar never gave any sermon about believing or damnation. None of this in our out aspect mentioned upthread.

TBH my contact with Christianity has always been a case of believera taking from it whatever they want. I guess that's the less extreme fundamentalist side of Christianity. The ones which pick and choose which aspect of of the Bible to believe and follow. I'm certain that's the greatest part of UK Christianity.

Whatever the case as an atheist who also lost religion at 15 years. Further confirmed 4 weeks into my A levels when a very religious teacher evangelized at every opportunity. I didn't dislike the teacher just because of that but being a chemistry teacher I appreciated every digression from the subject. Whether it was stories about his before teaching jobs, past exploits of former students often involving home made explosives similar to TNT or religion. We all just took turns at keeping him talking rather than teaching. As much as a lot of us hated the religion it was better than taking notes from the board.

Anyway another teacher (gcse English) for me thinking for myself. Both politically and religiously. Helped by reading animal farm, 1984 plus a few other enlightening books. Add in Aldous Huxley, Joseph Heler, etc. Got me thinking and moved me away from religion.

However with age I've mellowed from the all religion is bad view, which it seems to me some in here have, to a view that it has positives and negatives. My dad's side of the family are catholics (converted parent = devout). So in my younger days I often made my dad angry with the vitriol I spouted after some catholic atrocity. It got me thinking more about religion. No matter what religion says its ppl who decide to act in good or bad ways. Those catholic priests who abused kids did it not through religion but because it was in them. That tendency is in religious and non-religious ppl.

All I know is I do not believe in religion but I can see good in it. I think some in here need to Lighten up and realize you can't blame religion on everything, some things are down to ppl.

That's a fair post. To be honest I always find certain other posts in this type of thread a bit odd. I mean, half the discussions on here are cyclists objecting to people choosing extreme examples, claiming against all the evidence that they are representative, ignoring the fact that their friends and neighbours who participate are quite different from the people in their examples, and thus concluding that the whole lot are really dangerous. We are staggered that the people saying those things have missed all the good stuff that's going on under their noses, and wonder how they could manage to do so

What like cyclists jumping red lights aren't the norm or cyclists without adequate braking killing pedestrians aren't the norm just like extremist religious types aren't the norm.

You're totally wrong about that. You can say what you like about religion and their followers but do not criticize cyclists on here. That's pure unadulterated heresy on this forum. You'll be hounded out of here with that view!

You know for a forum that doesn't like religion its does start to sound like a cult when you read threads about cyclists being prosecuted or criticized. Or at least groupthink!

Tangled Metal wrote:This in/out idea intrigues me. I can get how it comes about from parts of the Bible but every contact I've had with religion hasn't been like that. Vicar never gave any sermon about believing or damnation. None of this in our out aspect mentioned upthread.

TBH my contact with Christianity has always been a case of believera taking from it whatever they want. I guess that's the less extreme fundamentalist side of Christianity. The ones which pick and choose which aspect of of the Bible to believe and follow. I'm certain that's the greatest part of UK Christianity.

The individual can think what they like,whether they attend a Christian Church or not,but like it or not Christianity isn't an all inclusive faith,it requires something of it's following,at very least the things I posted above,the Anglican church and I think Rc church recite the Nicene Creed whenever Holy Communion(RC mass)is taken:-

The Nicene Creed
WE BELIEVE in one God,
the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all that is, seen and unseen.

We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made,
of one Being with the Father.
Through him all things were made.

For us and for our salvation
he came down from heaven:
by the power of the Holy Spirit
he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary,
and was made man.

For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered death and was buried.
On the third day he rose again
in accordance with the Scriptures;
he ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.

He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end.

We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son.
With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified.
He has spoken through the Prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come.

Amen
.

All I know is I do not believe in religion but I can see good in it. I think some in here need to Lighten up and realize you can't blame religion on everything, some things are down to ppl.

I too can see some good in it but the problem is all too often it's used as a vehicle for power over the masses,people are the religion,but instead of stopping to realise that and thinking for themselves they listen to the latest guff that promises them a better future usually in an after life though not exclusively,but at the expense of others.
It's politricks.

Edited for clarity and to add the Nicene Creed

The memsahb and I are both born and raised Anglicans hence, not at all religious.
For interesting parish churches to pop into on a bike ride, rites of passage , excellent Easter, Harvest and Christmas services you really cannot beat our dear old CofE.

HaroldBriercliffe wrote:...
For interesting parish churches to pop into on a bike ride....

Out on a ride day before yesterday MetOffice forecast fine weather so when it started to rain 15 miles from home I thought no worries, there is a church I can shelter in half a mile ahead (or at least shelter in the foyer). No - completely locked and nowhere to shelter. But in fairness to that village, the village where I live does the same so "we" don't provide shelter either. Trend seems to be for extra wire grill gates at the entrance to the foyer you can see through to the main heavy locked doors (sort of double security). In practice they are not that secure but obviously enough to keep an honest person seeking shelter out.

Ian