JHS addresses 'cult' rumours

Teetonetal

BBBlues said:

Any decent historian would never deny that Jesus was actually a real person and the gospels in the New Testament reflect events that actually happened. I mean, if we are going down the route of science explaining all etc, then you also need to actually look at real historical evidence too. Most Christians I meet believe in evolution, not opposed to same sex marriage and are genuinely pretty nice people. They would point out however that they don't feel their "moral code" makes them a Christian, but the belief in Jesus does. The rest is kinda up for debate.

But this is yet another difficult point. Can you have a pick n choose faith? Like it or not the bible is pretty clear about those issues and you could argue that you can't really say I believe in God / Jesus bit I don't agree with his attitude towards gay rights....

Religion is by design not moderate. Do it our way or go to hell is more or less the point isn't it? What is the point of believing in god if you don't do the things he asks?

colourofsound

Teetonetal said:

BBBlues said:

Any decent historian would never deny that Jesus was actually a real person and the gospels in the New Testament reflect events that actually happened. I mean, if we are going down the route of science explaining all etc, then you also need to actually look at real historical evidence too. Most Christians I meet believe in evolution, not opposed to same sex marriage and are genuinely pretty nice people. They would point out however that they don't feel their "moral code" makes them a Christian, but the belief in Jesus does. The rest is kinda up for debate.

But this is yet another difficult point. Can you have a pick n choose faith? Like it or not the bible is pretty clear about those issues and you could argue that you can't really say I believe in God / Jesus bit I don't agree with his attitude towards gay rights....

Religion is by design not moderate. Do it our way or go to hell is more or less the point isn't it? What is the point of believing in god if you don't do the things he asks?

This isn't my experience of it. Maybe in the middle ages, but not now. Most religious folk have enough nouse about them to know that religion is a guide, something to be inspired by - not an instructional book.

This is the reason why people who take the bible literally are very, very scary. There is some pretty awful shit in the Old Testament. Spoiler: Women get a hard time.

I believe 'picking and choosing' is a human prerogative of any aspect of cultural or religious belief systems. You engage with what works for you.

A bit like picking overdrive pedals...

digitalscream

colourofsound said:

Teetonetal said:

BBBlues said:

Any decent historian would never deny that Jesus was actually a real person and the gospels in the New Testament reflect events that actually happened. I mean, if we are going down the route of science explaining all etc, then you also need to actually look at real historical evidence too. Most Christians I meet believe in evolution, not opposed to same sex marriage and are genuinely pretty nice people. They would point out however that they don't feel their "moral code" makes them a Christian, but the belief in Jesus does. The rest is kinda up for debate.

But this is yet another difficult point. Can you have a pick n choose faith? Like it or not the bible is pretty clear about those issues and you could argue that you can't really say I believe in God / Jesus bit I don't agree with his attitude towards gay rights....

Religion is by design not moderate. Do it our way or go to hell is more or less the point isn't it? What is the point of believing in god if you don't do the things he asks?

This isn't my experience of it. Maybe in the middle ages, but not now. Most religious folk have enough nouse about them to know that religion is a guide, something to be inspired by - not an instructional book.

This is the reason why people who take the bible literally are very, very scary. There is some pretty awful shit in the Old Testament. Spoiler: Women get a hard time.

I believe 'picking and choosing' is a human prerogative of any aspect of cultural or religious belief systems. You engage with what works for you.

A bit like picking overdrive pedals...

The problem with this is that it says "This was written by a human, interpreting the Word of God, so it's a bit flawed" - OK, there's some logic there. The next though, though, has to be "How do you determine which bits are the Word of God, and which bits aren't?". Let's not forget, the Word of God is a) infallible, and therefore b) unchanging. There is no flexibility, because there can't be; it's "obey or disobey; no grey area".

One of the fundamental tenets of Christianity, for example, is that it's impossible for a human to know God's mind. Therefore...by picking and choosing, you'd be breaking that and no longer able to call yourself a true Christian.

Of course, the more rational approach is to realise that almost 100% of Christianity's teachings were actually malleable and reflective purely of the society that hosted it. The same goes for most other religions...the difference is that Christianity adapted through a number of different societies before its book got set into stone, so there are more influences than most (and, therefore, more contradictions).

crunchman

digitalscream said:

Besides - the existence of your deity of choice or not - the Christian assumption that there can be no good without a belief in God is thoroughly disproven by the existence of non-monotheistic societies with the same basic values.

The Bible gives an alternative explanation for that.  (Romans 2:14,15)

14 Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.

english_bob

digitalscream said:

english_bob said:

digitalscream said:

Besides - the existence of your deity of choice or not - the Christian assumption that there can be no good without a belief in God is thoroughly disproven by the existence of non-monotheistic societies with the same basic values.

I'm not sure that is a Christian assumption. I'm not actually sure exactly what you mean at all. 

I didn't say it was exclusively a Christian assumption. Although...you might be right - it's more of an assertion.

However, if you're struggling with the meaning, this might help. You'll note that almost every single article is either written by a Christian-leaning author, or an atheist author debunking it.

Ah, with you.

My understanding of the argument is that god is the ultimate source of objective moral values, not that belief in god is required in order to be moral (since your belief would have no bearing on god's existence or non-existence).

Since Christianity holds that God created all people "in his image"- that is, with aspects of God's nature and character- it would follow that societies (or individuals for that matter) with no belief in god to exhibit those characteristics regardless.

digitalscream

crunchman said:

digitalscream said:

Besides - the existence of your deity of choice or not - the Christian assumption that there can be no good without a belief in God is thoroughly disproven by the existence of non-monotheistic societies with the same basic values.

The Bible gives an alternative explanation for that.  (Romans 2:14,15)

14 Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.

Sooo...the people who don't obey the law are basically God's screwups - he didn't quite get it right with them.

But...God's infallible, so that can't have happened.

Like I said - contradictions

english_bob said:

Ah, with you.

My understanding of the argument is that god is the ultimate source of objective moral values, not that belief in god is required in order to be moral (since your belief would have no bearing on god's existence or non-existence).

Since Christianity holds that God created all people "in his image"- that is, with aspects of God's nature and character- it would follow that societies (or individuals for that matter) with no belief in god to exhibit those characteristics regardless.

See above

crunchman

digitalscream said:

Sooo...the people who don't obey the law are basically God's screwups - he didn't quite get it right with them.

But...God's infallible, so that can't have happened.

Free will.

english_bob

digitalscream said:

crunchman said:

digitalscream said:

Besides - the existence of your deity of choice or not - the Christian assumption that there can be no good without a belief in God is thoroughly disproven by the existence of non-monotheistic societies with the same basic values.

The Bible gives an alternative explanation for that.  (Romans 2:14,15)

14 Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.

Sooo...the people who don't obey the law are basically God's screwups - he didn't quite get it right with them.

But...God's infallible, so that can't have happened.

Like I said - contradictions

english_bob said:

Ah, with you.

My understanding of the argument is that god is the ultimate source of objective moral values, not that belief in god is required in order to be moral (since your belief would have no bearing on god's existence or non-existence).

Since Christianity holds that God created all people "in his image"- that is, with aspects of God's nature and character- it would follow that societies (or individuals for that matter) with no belief in god to exhibit those characteristics regardless.

See above

No, both just say that certain objective moral values exist, and that all people know "instinctively" (for want of a better word) when something they have done or said adheres to or contravenes those values.

UnclePsychosis

I also frequent a Scottish football forum. The language on there can be quite...robust. 

So, to borrow a phrase:

"off topic for this pish"

:-)

Teetonetal

colourofsound said:

Teetonetal said:

BBBlues said:

Any decent historian would never deny that Jesus was actually a real person and the gospels in the New Testament reflect events that actually happened. I mean, if we are going down the route of science explaining all etc, then you also need to actually look at real historical evidence too. Most Christians I meet believe in evolution, not opposed to same sex marriage and are genuinely pretty nice people. They would point out however that they don't feel their "moral code" makes them a Christian, but the belief in Jesus does. The rest is kinda up for debate.

But this is yet another difficult point. Can you have a pick n choose faith? Like it or not the bible is pretty clear about those issues and you could argue that you can't really say I believe in God / Jesus bit I don't agree with his attitude towards gay rights....

Religion is by design not moderate. Do it our way or go to hell is more or less the point isn't it? What is the point of believing in god if you don't do the things he asks?

This isn't my experience of it. Maybe in the middle ages, but not now. Most religious folk have enough nouse about them to know that religion is a guide, something to be inspired by - not an instructional book.

This is the reason why people who take the bible literally are very, very scary. There is some pretty awful shit in the Old Testament. Spoiler: Women get a hard time.

I believe 'picking and choosing' is a human prerogative of any aspect of cultural or religious belief systems. You engage with what works for you.

A bit like picking overdrive pedals...

Yes. But then it's no longer religion, it's individual belief.

So then comes the really difficult part if you don't believe - whats the difference between someone who believes in Jesus and someone who believes in "mother earth" or small gods (see Terry Pratchett) where are the boundaries and who far is belief allowed to go? 

professorben

I prefer amp drive. 

jonnygreentrees

I believe this will bring both divergent aspects of this thread back together

jimbobsugg

BBBlues said:

Any decent historian would never deny that Jesus was actually a real person and the gospels in the New Testament reflect events that actually happened. I mean, if we are going down the route of science explaining all etc, then you also need to actually look at real historical evidence too. Most Christians I meet believe in evolution, not opposed to same sex marriage and are genuinely pretty nice people. They would point out however that they don't feel their "moral code" makes them a Christian, but the belief in Jesus does. The rest is kinda up for debate.

And that's where the difference between religion and faith comes into play; for example Jesus didn't say you have to wear fancy robes, carry a big stick, wear a mitre etc when you're a church minister/lead a church - Man made up this rule, which makes it doctrine/religion/rules and regulations. The bible calls for church to be a family community, young and old, rich and poor, sharing life together, helping each other out, praying together, eating together, supporting people inside and outside 'church'. It is not about 'you must do this and that or you'll go to hell'. That's religion and it stinks, and that's what causes the hurt in the world in the name of God because it excludes and divides.  Even focussing on a Sunday to 'do' church is wrong. Church is the people, not the building, so it's either 7 days a week or none. The whole 'cult' label gets rolled out for any type of church that isn't formal C of E type - in actual fact the majority of churches in the UK are independent/charismatic/evangelical churches, C of E is a minority now, as is the Catholic church. Here in Cambridge we have 5 large independent churches which are growing very quickly and spend more time helping out the local community than having services. That says something very positive about them. 

juansolo

robinbowes said:

@juansolo  Yup, that's the one.

R.

Yup async clipping and probably a 47n input cap rather than 22n (I think) on the input. Otherwise it's all stock screamer.

WarpedSounds

Jebus! You leave a thread for a couple of days... My email notifications have been going mental.

As a good friend of mine once said: "We're all going to die so let's be nice."

BBBlues

Teetonetal said:

BBBlues said:

Any decent historian would never deny that Jesus was actually a real person and the gospels in the New Testament reflect events that actually happened. I mean, if we are going down the route of science explaining all etc, then you also need to actually look at real historical evidence too. Most Christians I meet believe in evolution, not opposed to same sex marriage and are genuinely pretty nice people. They would point out however that they don't feel their "moral code" makes them a Christian, but the belief in Jesus does. The rest is kinda up for debate.

But this is yet another difficult point. Can you have a pick n choose faith? Like it or not the bible is pretty clear about those issues and you could argue that you can't really say I believe in God / Jesus bit I don't agree with his attitude towards gay rights....

Religion is by design not moderate. Do it our way or go to hell is more or less the point isn't it? What is the point of believing in god if you don't do the things he asks?

How well do you know the bible? Jesus didn't say a single thing about loving gay relationships. They simply didn't exist. Most references to homosexuality in the bible are actually also accounts of rape and telling people at the time that is wrong.

Again, the bible says that actually all you need to do to go to heaven is believe in Jesus.

Any scripture read out of context is pointless to quote. It becomes meaningless.

alalalkasar

Heartfeltdawn

If Devi Ever turns out to be Jesus, then we're all fucked. 

Teetonetal

BBBlues said:

Teetonetal said:

BBBlues said:

Any decent historian would never deny that Jesus was actually a real person and the gospels in the New Testament reflect events that actually happened. I mean, if we are going down the route of science explaining all etc, then you also need to actually look at real historical evidence too. Most Christians I meet believe in evolution, not opposed to same sex marriage and are genuinely pretty nice people. They would point out however that they don't feel their "moral code" makes them a Christian, but the belief in Jesus does. The rest is kinda up for debate.

But this is yet another difficult point. Can you have a pick n choose faith? Like it or not the bible is pretty clear about those issues and you could argue that you can't really say I believe in God / Jesus bit I don't agree with his attitude towards gay rights....

Religion is by design not moderate. Do it our way or go to hell is more or less the point isn't it? What is the point of believing in god if you don't do the things he asks?

How well do you know the bible? Jesus didn't say a single thing about loving gay relationships. They simply didn't exist. Most references to homosexuality in the bible are actually also accounts of rape and telling people at the time that is wrong.

Again, the bible says that actually all you need to do to go to heaven is believe in Jesus.

Any scripture read out of context is pointless to quote. It becomes meaningless.

It's been a long, long time since I even opened a bible, so Google was my friend..

Well in OT the verses often cited are:

Leviticus 18:22: " Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination." 3. Leviticus 20:13: "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." 4.

NT doesn't really make much mention of it, if at all although Jesus does reference a genesis verse about marriage being between a man and a woman. Hence in some circles the "church" being against Gay marriage.

The NT from a Christian point of view is the only part of the bible that matters and as you say the only requirement is to believe in Jesus. So, Jesus himself was against religion (as born out by the Pharisee / temple episode), requiring only belief. 

This though all gets mixed up. With many christians citing OT verse to justify many homophobic or sexist views as they believe that both OT and NT are the word of God, where as Christianity is really supposed to be built around NT only, with Jesus dying for our sins and us being able to seek forgiveness.

But strip away the religion and all you are left with is a belief system - which is demonstrably no better or worse than anything else you may choose to believe in. Which is why religious institutions like to cling on to the religion bit.

menamestom

My senior school tried to get me to believe in religion but even at a young age I thought it didn't all sound very transparent.  I said it's not for me, so they labelled me a resistor.  They said Jesus loves you, it's true.  Bypass, that's what I did.  I said ' I don't believe ', they said 'IC'.  They thought I'd lose my way, end up wearing a cap and smoking the pot, being a bit of a jack-the-lad or a right case.  I told them I didn't need religion, I just didn't want to sing their chorus.   I didn't delay, I left the school and it gave me a right boost.  The head master said I'd live a life of sin if I rejected religion.  I said, don't be a cry baby....and don't think any of it will stay in my memory, man.   

I was then free of sin and free of the burden of guilt.  I could choose my own morality and had free will for the first time in my life.  Now, what were those russian big muffs I'd heard all about?