ARmy Rumour SErvice

Originally Posted by billybongo

I don't suppose there would be too many christians who would agree with you. Be that as it may, however, it's as valid a faith as Islam, Hinduism or Scientology. Nothing christianity has sets it above the other faiths and/or religions, despite your protestations that JC was super special.

Actually BSL has a point. Christianity has struggled to represent Christ since it was formated. Hence breakaway orders of Monks which were ultimately sublimated. It's a point I made a lot earlier. The Church has nothing to do with Christianity, it is merely the organ by which the state sanctifies itself and replaces earlier pagan practices. HB knows this quite well if he has been to funerals and such like. Its a means by which we express internalised feelings about death etc which are to all intents and purposes illogical. It's one of the reasons I don't go to church either because to follow the example of a particular person is not seated in a religious faith. I made that distinction some years ago.

Originally Posted by LeoRoverman

Christianity has struggled to represent Christ since it was formated.

That's because it was founded by a man who never met Christ. Paul's the one who did away with the Jewish rituals Christ observed to make it more palatable to Gentiles - Messianic Jews have a better claim to being followers of Christ than Christians do.

Originally Posted by LeoRoverman

Actually BSL has a point. Christianity has struggled to represent Christ since it was formated. Hence breakaway orders of Monks which were ultimately sublimated. It's a point I made a lot earlier. The Church has nothing to do with Christianity, it is merely the organ by which the state sanctifies itself and replaces earlier pagan practices.

Even the breakaway monks called themselves christians; perhaps they sought a different way of representing JC. No matter, however christians represent JC it is as it is - christianity in its many (and equally valid) forms. As for the church having nothing to do with christianity, I find that notion a little far-fetched.

Originally Posted by Koschei

Rubbish - we are animals, no two ways about it. Innate social behaviours such as morality predate religion by hundreds of thousands of years and are present in hundreds of thousands of other species.

I hear this narrative that the sentient, sensate, human being in all her irrational (gloriously so), non-conformist volition is somehow subject to the call of the wild. It's a political statement either way by both of us K; I think we have vested interest because we want to see life and ourselves in a certain frame plus deal with our consciences by means of narratives that give us peace. Personally I still think it is a wicked notion that opens the door to horrors. Us as a reflection of God in all God's (whatever God finally is) embodied glory offers a greater notion of prizing what this life gives us. I am more than an animal and some. You and some of the nasty tooled-up bovver boys standing on street corners to mug me in my cassock on the way to buy Women's Weekly here however...

Originally Posted by BoomShackerLacker

I hear this narrative that the sentient, sensate, human being in all her irrational (gloriously so), non-conformist volition is somehow subject to the call of the wild. It's a political statement either way by both of us K; I think we have vested interest because we want to see life and ourselves in a certain frame plus deal with our consciences by means of narratives that give us peace. Personally I still think it is a wicked notion that opens the door to horrors. Us as a reflection of God in all God's (whatever God finally is) embodied glory offers a greater notion of prizing what this life gives us. I am more than an animal and some. You and some of the nasty tooled-up bovver boys standing on street corners to mug me in my cassock on the way to buy Women's Weekly here however...

I don't see why the proposition scares you so much. Social animals avoid behaviours that damage the cohesion of their social groups. Billions upon billions of social animals co-exist perfectly well without any concept of God or religion, and so did we for approximately 194,000 years of anatomically modern human existence before your God appeared on the scene 6000 years ago.

That said, shut yer yap and gimme yer wallet before I chib you, soft lad.

Originally Posted by billybongo

I do hope that you're not suggesting that society, community and morality require a church to function effectively and that we atheists are incapable of altruistic behaviours simply because we don't have faith.

No, not that simple at all. In fact a lot of this debate is far from as it appears. However, inspite of the insipient dull religious elements that emerged alongside what is a transformational message, the church in its fallenness has provided a great deal for its communities. I think the label atheist and Christian are misnomas. Although I don't see secular movements that have been there for their communities in quite the same way with the all round organised care, spiritual and physical, and I'm not convinced they will be. A recent funeral from the more evangelical end of the CofE spectrum was a remarkable occasion with the community of its members providing great care of the exceptional long-term consistent variety and will be there for years to come. They were part of that community, committed to it, and their widower will receive care for years by dint of it. However, one of the most significant friends who'd cared for this friend and is what I'd term 'Christ like' professes no faith that I'm aware of. But, the structure of support was in place by combined action. I don't see what the current atheist message is saying other than be rational, follow your innate moral compass and avoid religion. Personally it's not leaderful but rather prone to non-community action in my view. When Christ died for a purpose and this purpose can be carried on I see people who may not have the rational capabilities you do recovering their spiritual well-being. The 'think for yourself' message is important though, but it's not enough I feel for many who are subject to the waves breaking across their lives.

Originally Posted by Koschei

I don't see why the proposition scares you so much. Social animals avoid behaviours that damage the cohesion of their social groups. Billions upon billions of social animals co-exist perfectly well without any concept of God or religion, and so did we for approximately 194,000 years of anatomically modern human existence before your God appeared on the scene 6000 years ago.

That said, shut yer yap and gimme yer wallet before I chib you, soft lad.

Morality and social behaviour are mostly synonyms for the understanding (either consciously or instinctively -and the large grey area betweet the two) of reciprocity. Most animals, including us, get that.
I see BSL's evasion of that as a measure of his desire to see the world in a romantic way. The unbearable lightness of our being shines a cold hard light through is soft focus lense and disturbs him. Nothing wrong with wanting to see the world like that, but please be honest about it.

Originally Posted by BoomShackerLacker

No, not that simple at all. In fact a lot of this debate is far from as it appears. However, inspite of the insipient dull religious elements that emerged alongside what is a transformational message, the church in its fallenness has provided a great deal for its communities. I think the label atheist and Christian are misnomas. Although I don't see secular movements that have been there for their communities in quite the same way with the all round organised care, spiritual and physical, and I'm not convinced they will be. A recent funeral from the more evangelical end of the CofE spectrum was a remarkable occasion with the community of its members providing great care of the exceptional long-term consistent variety and will be there for years to come. They were part of that community, committed to it, and their widower will receive care for years by dint of it. However, one of the most significant friends who'd cared for this friend and is what I'd term 'Christ like' professes no faith that I'm aware of. But, the structure of support was in place by combined action. I don't see what the current atheist message is saying other than be rational, follow your innate moral compass and avoid religion. Personally it's not leaderful but rather prone to non-community action in my view. When Christ died for a purpose and this purpose can be carried on I see people who may not have the rational capabilities you do recovering their spiritual well-being. The 'think for yourself' message is important though, but it's not enough I feel for many who are subject to the waves breaking across their lives.

Not really a convincing argument for the veracity of the core arguments, but I don't deny that it is useful as a vehicle to provide that warm, rosy feeling for those that need it. However, society is perfectly capable of creating the same environment without the smothering blanket of faith.