Religion, Science, Scepticism, Philosophy and things metaphysical

[SirRumpole]

Either way, when Christians say "Jesus said peace on earth" they are still blatantly cherry picking, even if you can rationalise away the word sword, the full quote is still saying he didn't come for peace on earth.

And given that the "Jesus character" from the bible almost certainly doesn't/ didn't exist anyway, why put so much effort into twisting and rationalising his words, why not just admit the rubbish bits? And right it off to the poor moral attitudes of the time and move on, constantly rewriting and twisting things to maintain the image of a perfect man and perfect book is stupid.

I doubt the Christians will ever convince you (or me either), but their faith is for them and I doubt we will "unconvince" them either.

It's actually quite an interesting study of human nature. How beliefs form, the ascendancy of rationality, the decline or in some cases the strengthening of religion.

The bottom line is that "rationality" says nothing about life after death, except that there isn't one, and that's where religion steps into that void and as long as it gives people comfort to think that they will not die then religion has a grip, whether we like it or not.

 

[Value Collector]

I doubt the Christians will ever convince you (or me either), but their faith is for them and I doubt we will "unconvince" them either.

It's actually quite an interesting study of human nature. How beliefs form, the ascendancy of rationality, the decline or in some cases the strengthening of religion.

The bottom line is that "rationality" says nothing about life after death, except that there isn't one, and that's where religion steps into that void and as long as it gives people comfort to think that they will not die then religion has a grip, whether we like it or not.

To me there is something deeply saddening to think that people may be using this one life we get as a door mat, because the are convinced there is another greater one waiting for them on the other side.

It's even more horrible when they are convinced so much in an afterlife, and the commandments of gods that they do horrible things to their fellow travellers in this life, or fear embracing people of family for who they are because of the opinion of hysterical people from 2000 years ago.

 

[luutzu]

To me there is something deeply saddening to think that people may be using this one life we get as a door mat, because the are convinced there is another greater one waiting for them on the other side.

It's even more horrible when they are convinced so much in an afterlife, and the commandments of gods that they do horrible things to their fellow travellers in this life, or fear embracing people of family for who they are because of the opinion of hysterical people from 2000 years ago.

An argument from those high above - the politicians and law giver- is that religion, despite its negatives, work to get people in line with the generally accepted moral standards. That is, religion could mess what is objectively moral and right, but often what is objective and rational does not serve the interests of the state, hence society...

Na, that still doesn't make sense.

Imagine.... no religion, above us only air and skies...

 

[cynic]

An argument from those high above - the politicians and law giver- is that religion, despite its negatives, work to get people in line with the generally accepted moral standards. That is, religion could mess what is objectively moral and right, but often what is objective and rational does not serve the interests of the state, hence society...

Na, that still doesn't make sense.

Imagine.... no religion, above us only air and skies...

Imagine all the people, living for today...

 

[luutzu]

Imagine all the people, living for today...

Aha-ah...

Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace... You,..

tun tun ... tun tun....

-----

No wonder we can't imagine that kind of stuff.

No one to kill or die for? No religion?

It'll put a lot of generals and religious leaders out of a job. They might have to start doing something more useful with their life.

 

[cynic]

Aha-ah...

Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace... You,..

tun tun ... tun tun....

-----

No wonder we can't imagine that kind of stuff.

No one to kill or die for? No religion?

It'll put a lot of generals and religious leaders out of a job. They might have to start doing something more useful with their life.

I've heard comments to the effect that mankind requires natural predators to arrest the expansion of its populace, and that wars and famines have somehow assumed that role. (Not enough polar bears to go around, apparently!)

 

[Tink]

So we get rid of the army, the police, the law -- who needs order in this country, is what you are saying?.

As I have said before, interesting these same people see an orderly universe but what to impinge a disorderly lifestyle in this country on us.

 

[luutzu]

I've heard comments to the effect that mankind requires natural predators to arrest the expansion of its populace, and that wars and famines have somehow assumed that role. (Not enough polar bears to go around, apparently!)

Have heard of something like that... that wars are necessary, or at least the result of, over population.

Not true.

Wars has always been the result of extreme wealth inequality and high taxation (civil wars) and result from having land but not enough arms and troops to protect it (wars of liberation and civilisation and democracy nation-building, and stuff).

So wars would reduce the population, but it is not over-population that caused wars - it's always income non-distribution.

Take any empire and regime... it's always the case that the rich merchants and aristocrats that get and own pretty much the entire country. This small group of people own practically everything, have everything while the masses have not much at all.

The imbalance eventually tipped and the rulers and nobility got all their mansions and castles and heads taken from them.

This tend to kill a lot of people; burn the established orders and it all begin the cycle again with the leaders of the people's revolution doing their own house cleaning (against honest revolutionaries) then start moving into those vacant mansions and castles to enjoy the fruits of their labour (and others' sacrifices).

If the country is lucky enough, the neighbours and imperial powers nearby are busy or not paying enough attention while this revolution takes place... Sometime they aren't so lucky and either the people are so poor and weak, with the elite so corrupt that treasuries are emptied... Do gooders of foreign faith comes in and take over.

Then it starts again. Only on a bigger scale at each stage.

 

[SirRumpole]

So wars would reduce the population, but it is not over-population that caused wars - it's always income non-distribution.

No it's not. The Romans attacked much poorer peoples just for the fun of it.

Germany was richer than Poland when Hitler invaded.

Germans-Romans, it was megalomania that caused those wars, belief in the superiority of their race/technology/culture etc.

 

[luutzu]

So we get rid of the army, the police, the law -- who needs order in this country, is what you are saying?.

As I have said before, interesting these same people see an orderly universe but what to impinge a disorderly lifestyle in this country on us.

Lao Tzu says, it is the sign of insecurity and lawlessness when the country is in great need of armies and peace officers; It is a sign of corruption and moral decay when citizens relies on law and lawyers to deal with each other.

He doesn't mean there is no need for armies or police or law and legal codes... he mean that when you see too much reliance on it, the country's stuffed - something has gone wrong.

----

I don't think other people enjoying themselves or wanting equal rights and freedom, and those freedom of theirs does not harm anyone or impedes anyone else's freedom... well how does it impede or bring disorder?

Sometime people who doesn't believe in Christian values, does not go to Church but to Mosques or Temples or bars and clubs... they do it not to upset or insult the Christians or anyone else but merely to enjoy themselves, waste time and waste their own money.

What we believe in or what we like tend not to matter that much to other people. It doesn't mean they hate us or want to upset us.

 

[luutzu]

No it's not. The Romans attacked much poorer peoples just for the fun of it.

Germany was richer than Poland when Hitler invaded.

Germans-Romans, it was megalomania that caused those wars, belief in the superiority of their race/technology/culture etc.

Was referring to Civil wars.. .but it's true for both - if you really think about it

First, when there are extreme income and wealth inequality, the nation will have the vast majority of the masses poor with a very small minority of elite owning and running everything.

Second, such conditions always mean a poor economy and thereby a weak military - can't pay troops or buy arms; Weakened further because the masses do not support their King and aristocrats, without support, rebellion and terrorism rise, results in more policing and more night terror of the legitimate kind.... Round and round that goes until a more civilised neighbour thought to intervene or internal mobs takes over.

 

[Value Collector]

So we get rid of the army, the police, the law -- who needs order in this country, is what you are saying?.

As I have said before, interesting these same people see an orderly universe but what to impinge a disorderly lifestyle in this country on us.

I don't think anyone is saying get rid of the Army, police and law, those things add value, and make our life better.

Your second paragraph makes no sense, like you are a bit hysterical.

 

[Tink]

Just adding an article of what Western Culture/Western Civilization is ---

Western culture, sometimes equated with Western civilization, Western lifestyle or European civilization, is a term used very broadly to refer to a heritage of social norms, ethical values, traditional customs, belief systems, political systems, and specific artifacts and technologies that have some origin or association with Europe.

The term has come to apply to countries whose history is strongly marked by European immigration, such as the countries of the Americas and Australasia, and is not restricted to the continent of Europe.

Western culture is characterized by a host of artistic, philosophic, literary, and legal themes and traditions; the heritage of Celtic, Germanic, Hellenic, Jewish, Slavic, Latin, and other ethnic and linguistic groups, as well as Christianity, which played an important part in the shaping of Western civilization since at least the 4th century.

Also contributing to Western thought, in ancient times and then in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance onwards, a tradition of rationalism in various spheres of life, developed by Hellenistic philosophy, Scholasticism, humanism, the Scientific Revolution and the Enlightenment.

Values of Western culture have, throughout history, been derived from political thought, widespread employment of rational argument favouring freethought, assimilation of human rights, the need for equality, and democracy.

Historical records of Western culture in Europe begin with Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome.

Western culture continued to develop with Christianization during the Middle Ages, the reform and modernization triggered by the Renaissance, and with globalization by successive European empires, that spread European ways of life and European educational methods around the world between the 16th and 20th centuries.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We are lucky to be building on the achievements of our ancestors, and the important thing is to maintain them and to not throw them away

The secular liberties on which our cultural and intellectual life depends would not exist, but for the Christian inheritance

 

[pixel]

No it's not. The Romans attacked much poorer peoples just for the fun of it.

Germany was richer than Poland when Hitler invaded.

Germans-Romans, it was megalomania that caused those wars, belief in the superiority of their race/technology/culture etc.

You don't suggest that only the Romans and Hitler waged wars to build empires, do you?
Start in antiquity with the Persians, Alexander "The Great", Genghis Khan. Move on to Spanish conquistadors, don't forget Napoleon, and last, not least, the builders of the British Empire.

We agree on the point that the aggressor always justifies the invasion by a "belief in the superiority of their race/technology/culture etc." For the Spanish, the pretense was Christianity; the real reason was gold because the Royals were broke. And the only succeeded because they had firearms and horses, not because they were "richer" than the South-Americans.

 

[Value Collector]

Just adding an article of what Western Culture/Western Civilization is ---

Western culture, sometimes equated with Western civilization, Western lifestyle or European civilization, is a term used very broadly to refer to a heritage of social norms, ethical values, traditional customs, belief systems, political systems, and specific artifacts and technologies that have some origin or association with Europe.

The term has come to apply to countries whose history is strongly marked by European immigration, such as the countries of the Americas and Australasia, and is not restricted to the continent of Europe.

Western culture is characterized by a host of artistic, philosophic, literary, and legal themes and traditions; the heritage of Celtic, Germanic, Hellenic, Jewish, Slavic, Latin, and other ethnic and linguistic groups, as well as Christianity, which played an important part in the shaping of Western civilization since at least the 4th century.

Also contributing to Western thought, in ancient times and then in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance onwards, a tradition of rationalism in various spheres of life, developed by Hellenistic philosophy, Scholasticism, humanism, the Scientific Revolution and the Enlightenment.

Values of Western culture have, throughout history, been derived from political thought, widespread employment of rational argument favouring freethought, assimilation of human rights, the need for equality, and democracy.

Historical records of Western culture in Europe begin with Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome.

Western culture continued to develop with Christianization during the Middle Ages, the reform and modernization triggered by the Renaissance, and with globalization by successive European empires, that spread European ways of life and European educational methods around the world between the 16th and 20th centuries.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We are lucky to be building on the achievements of our ancestors, and the important thing is to maintain them and to not throw them away

The secular liberties on which our cultural and intellectual life depends would not exist, but for the Christian inheritance

Yes the Christian myths and legends are part of or past and some people still take the mythology seriously, so what?

None of the good things you attribute to "Christianity" rely on it, we can cut out the myths and legends and still retain all that is good and build on it.

What you need to realize is that society has been getting better and better for hundreds of years, and it's the religious myths that slow down he progress.

 

[luutzu]

Just adding an article of what Western Culture/Western Civilization is ---

Western culture, sometimes equated with Western civilization, Western lifestyle or European civilization, is a term used very broadly to refer to a heritage of social norms, ethical values, traditional customs, belief systems, political systems, and specific artifacts and technologies that have some origin or association with Europe.

The term has come to apply to countries whose history is strongly marked by European immigration, such as the countries of the Americas and Australasia, and is not restricted to the continent of Europe.

Western culture is characterized by a host of artistic, philosophic, literary, and legal themes and traditions; the heritage of Celtic, Germanic, Hellenic, Jewish, Slavic, Latin, and other ethnic and linguistic groups, as well as Christianity, which played an important part in the shaping of Western civilization since at least the 4th century.

Also contributing to Western thought, in ancient times and then in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance onwards, a tradition of rationalism in various spheres of life, developed by Hellenistic philosophy, Scholasticism, humanism, the Scientific Revolution and the Enlightenment.

Values of Western culture have, throughout history, been derived from political thought, widespread employment of rational argument favouring freethought, assimilation of human rights, the need for equality, and democracy.

Historical records of Western culture in Europe begin with Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome.

Western culture continued to develop with Christianization during the Middle Ages, the reform and modernization triggered by the Renaissance, and with globalization by successive European empires, that spread European ways of life and European educational methods around the world between the 16th and 20th centuries.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We are lucky to be building on the achievements of our ancestors, and the important thing is to maintain them and to not throw them away

The secular liberties on which our cultural and intellectual life depends would not exist, but for the Christian inheritance

"European immigration"; "globalization". No C and G word at all

How exactly does Christianity permit the existence of secular liberties?

Christianity, like all other religion, is the thing that kept all these liberties and rights back.

An old, self-serving document - one that serves the interests of the Nobility - that then enable the secular and legal rights of the plebs and the coloured folks... that document is the Magna Carta. Not the Bible; and of course not any other religious text either.

I mean, gays still have problems being recognised as equal citizens.. Why? God apparently doesn't like them.

 

[Tink]

Luutzu, I have already posted the connection of the Magna Carta and Christianity.

Magna Carta: Law, Liberty, Legacy

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...publishing-world-famous-charter-10318826.html

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On 15 June 1215, with England on the brink of civil war, King John met with the barons at Runnymede and put his seal to what was in effect a peace treaty: Magna Carta. Today, that Charter has become one of the most celebrated and influential documents in history, rightly seen as the foundation for Democracy worldwide. Lord Denning described it as “…the foundation of the freedom of the individual against the arbitrary authority of the despot.”

Common law means a legal system based upon the English legal system; a mixture of customary law, judge-made law and parliamentary law. At least until the early 19th century, the common law was heavily influenced by Christian philosophy. This philosophy argues that there is a divine reason for the existence of fundamental laws, and that such laws are superior to human-made legislation, thus reflecting universal and unchangeable principles by which everyone should live. This assumption was expressed, among other things, in the Magna Carta of 1215, a charter which guaranteed the basic rights and privileges to the English barons against the king.

Professor Aroney explains Christianity’s ideological influence upon the Magna Carta:
From [the time of Alfred] the kings of England have traditionally recognised their submission to God. At their coronations they take an oath before the Archbishop acknowledging the Law of God as the standard of justice, and the rights of the church. They are also urged to do justice under God and to govern God’s people fairly. Magna Carta was a development of these themes.

At the time of Magna Carta (1215), a royal judge called Henry de Bracton (d. 1268) wrote a massive treatise on principles of law and justice. Bracton is broadly regarded as ‘the father of the common law’, because his book De legibus et consuetudinibus Anglia is one of the most important works on the constitution of medieval England. For Bracton, the application of law implies ‘a just sanction ordering virtue and prohibiting its opposite’, which means that the state law can never depart from God’s higher laws. As Bracton explains, jurisprudence was ‘the science of the just and unjust’. And he also declared that the state is under God and the law, ‘because the law makes the king
The Christian faith provided to the people of England a status libertatis (state of liberty) which rested on the Christian presumption that God’s law always works for the good of society.

Stephen Langton, Archbishop of Canterbury, played a central role in drafting the charter, which was signed by King John at Runnymede, Surrey. At least 11 other bishops were present.
A briefing note issued to members of the Synod reads: “The Church in England was central to the development of legal and human rights centuries before the French Revolution, now generally credited (along with the Enlightenment) for the secular genesis of human rights: the first parties to the charter were the bishops – led by Stephen Langton of Canterbury, who was a major drafter and mediator between the king and the barons; and its first and last clauses state that ‘the Church in England shall be free’.

 

[luutzu]

Luutzu, I have already posted the connection of the Magna Carta and Christianity.

Magna Carta: Law, Liberty, Legacy

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...publishing-world-famous-charter-10318826.html

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On 15 June 1215, with England on the brink of civil war, King John met with the barons at Runnymede and put his seal to what was in effect a peace treaty: Magna Carta. Today, that Charter has become one of the most celebrated and influential documents in history, rightly seen as the foundation for Democracy worldwide. Lord Denning described it as “…the foundation of the freedom of the individual against the arbitrary authority of the despot.”

Common law means a legal system based upon the English legal system; a mixture of customary law, judge-made law and parliamentary law. At least until the early 19th century, the common law was heavily influenced by Christian philosophy. This philosophy argues that there is a divine reason for the existence of fundamental laws, and that such laws are superior to human-made legislation, thus reflecting universal and unchangeable principles by which everyone should live. This assumption was expressed, among other things, in the Magna Carta of 1215, a charter which guaranteed the basic rights and privileges to the English barons against the king.

Professor Aroney explains Christianity’s ideological influence upon the Magna Carta:
From [the time of Alfred] the kings of England have traditionally recognised their submission to God. At their coronations they take an oath before the Archbishop acknowledging the Law of God as the standard of justice, and the rights of the church. They are also urged to do justice under God and to govern God’s people fairly. Magna Carta was a development of these themes.

At the time of Magna Carta (1215), a royal judge called Henry de Bracton (d. 1268) wrote a massive treatise on principles of law and justice. Bracton is broadly regarded as ‘the father of the common law’, because his book De legibus et consuetudinibus Anglia is one of the most important works on the constitution of medieval England. For Bracton, the application of law implies ‘a just sanction ordering virtue and prohibiting its opposite’, which means that the state law can never depart from God’s higher laws. As Bracton explains, jurisprudence was ‘the science of the just and unjust’. And he also declared that the state is under God and the law, ‘because the law makes the king
The Christian faith provided to the people of England a status libertatis (state of liberty) which rested on the Christian presumption that God’s law always works for the good of society.

Stephen Langton, Archbishop of Canterbury, played a central role in drafting the charter, which was signed by King John at Runnymede, Surrey. At least 11 other bishops were present.
A briefing note issued to members of the Synod reads: “The Church in England was central to the development of legal and human rights centuries before the French Revolution, now generally credited (along with the Enlightenment) for the secular genesis of human rights: the first parties to the charter were the bishops – led by Stephen Langton of Canterbury, who was a major drafter and mediator between the king and the barons; and its first and last clauses state that ‘the Church in England shall be free’.

Maybe there was a connection between Christianity and the Magna Carta, but it wasn't the good kind.

The MC was first and foremost a treaty between the King and "free men" - Free Men being the landowners, the nobility, the aristocrats and other imbreds. Free men does not apply to serfs and other low birth; certainly does not apply to women either.

For Christianity, or for the Lords and nobility at Runnymede, to claim credit for the eventual liberties and freedom ordinary White plebs and African slaves and women managed to eventually gain for themselves after literally centuries of fightinga and dying to get it - all the while the Church was at the centre of all that was established and being fought against.... So that's taking credit where it is not due.

Yes a lot of our/Western liberties and legal principles derive from MC... but that's just the result of a great deal of redefition and hard won battles by the masses... It weren't given or won at Runnymede, and not given by the Church and its moral high ground either.

To be fair to the Church, maybe the Bible and all the Bishops and high priests only go along to get along when Kings and emperors thought it'd be nice to stretch their arms and bring Missions to civilise the savages - starting with them being coolies and slaves first to earn God's love... But fact is all the rights and freedom we all enjoy, all of us... they were gained by the sacrifices of the masses and never at the benevolence of the State or the Church.

Hell, the Church still takes Churchgoers monies everyday, three times a day... and most of it goes towards some Trust and some Bishop's controlled account, not to save the Children or feed the poor.

Then there's the thing against gays, transgender, contraception, birth out of wedlock, marriage outside the faith, abortion - even in cases of rape or incest.

We can't pick the good things that good people of Christian faith does and say that that's what Christianity is about. Can't do that and then ignore the other stuff nastier Christians have done, or done because it's in the good book.

I think it's only fair to say that when you do good, it is because you are good, not because you are a Christian or a woman or an Australian. Just you do good things, some time... And if a person do bad... not because they aren't Christian enough, or too Christian.

Works out better for everyone thinking that way.

 

[Tink]

Luutzu, you are entitled to your opinion and as I have said -- we should all be free to speak, no matter what we want to say.

Freedom of speech is a fundamental right for all people in this country.

No one is telling you to be a Christian or join the Christian movement, I have said many times, you get good and bad in all people -- all I said, was that our heritage is Christian.
That is a fact.

We have Easter and Christmas as public holidays.
We also have penalty rates on a Sunday -- if you don't think this country has a Christian heritage, then remove them.
There is no reason for them to be there.

I agree with you, that our ancestors all made sacrifices in this country, and in my view, they should be appreciated for the good they have achieved and given.

I don't appreciate people trying to tear down our history.

 

[luutzu]

Luutzu, you are entitled to your opinion and as I have said -- we should all be free to speak, no matter what we want to say.

Freedom of speech is a fundamental right for all people in this country.

No one is telling you to be a Christian or join the Christian movement, I have said many times, you get good and bad in all people -- all I said, was that our heritage is Christian.
That is a fact.

We have Easter and Christmas as public holidays.
We also have penalty rates on a Sunday -- if you don't think this country has a Christian heritage, then remove them.
There is no reason for them to be there.

I agree with you, that our ancestors all made sacrifices in this country, and in my view, they should be appreciated for the good they have achieved and given.

I don't appreciate people trying to tear down our history.

Thanks, I know I'm lucky enough to be able to say what's on my mind without being dragged off somewhere dark.

But you do repeat it as though it's a regret, as though sometime it shouldn't apply to some people - ala ValueCollector, That guy is a handful.

--------

History is there - it is what it is.

So while we all try to paint better pictures of it or smudge it, those are just temporary and people will see its uses and abuses. So leave that to the patriots and lefty commies. Our job is to learn from our own history and those of others and to build a better society for today - tomorrows belong to the rising oceans we apparently can't and shouldn't do anything about because God promised Noah he'll only flood the world once and no more!

Didn't occur to those idiots that maybe God didn't do it this time round.

Anyway...

oh yea, Sunday rates may have been sold as a Christian thing, it is not. It's more likely that the unions got together and said, look mate - Sundays and Weekends and public holidays are when people got off work, take their family out and that mean a very very busy working hour so we deserve a bit extra - for both the extra work and for not hanging out with our own family.

Now... the businesses are saying that, look Canberra, the people are getting poorer and poorer and weekends or not, only a few well to do could afford to take anyone out, and those other plebs need to save up a fair bit to do it - so there's no extra work really. That or they'd just say, remember those thousands we "donate" to your campaign? When's the last time any shift worker donate to you guys? So do the right thing and not be Christian.