homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | Register | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   » Community discussion   » Purgatory   » Millennials and the Church (Page 3)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Millennials and the Church
Nick Tamen

Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164

 - Posted      Profile for Nick Tamen     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
The false dichotomy being (theistic evolutionary) creation or blind chance.

Okay, but evolutionary theory itself doesn't create that dichotomy, you are imposing the dichotomy because of the assumptions you are layering on evolutionary theory.

Evolutionary theory does not say that evolution happens by blind chance; indeed, I think that assertion is actually contrary to evolutionary theory. Evolutionary theory includes chance and randomness, but not all evolution is random or by chance. It's a mix of random and non-random.

--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott

Posts: 2557 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
SusanDoris

Incurable Optimist
# 12618

 - Posted      Profile for SusanDoris   Author's homepage   Email SusanDoris   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
It seems to me that for some people, the questions that matter are the ones that can be tested by the scientific method, and if a question cannot be tested by the scientific method it is not worth asking. For others of us, the questions that cannot be tested by the scientific method are the more interesting and meaningful questions.

Thank you.
I think most scientists would say that all questions are worth asking but then need to be allocated to different headings; those where a method can be used to find the answer; those which cannot and are almost certainly fiction; and those which for the moment remain don’t knows.

--------------------
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

Posts: 2947 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
Nick Tamen

Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164

 - Posted      Profile for Nick Tamen     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SusanDoris:
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
It seems to me that for some people, the questions that matter are the ones that can be tested by the scientific method, and if a question cannot be tested by the scientific method it is not worth asking. For others of us, the questions that cannot be tested by the scientific method are the more interesting and meaningful questions.

Thank you.
I think most scientists would say that all questions are worth asking but then need to be allocated to different headings; those where a method can be used to find the answer; those which cannot and are almost certainly fiction; and those which for the moment remain don’t knows.

I can't speak for "most" scientists, SusanDoris. But I know enough scientists who would include a fourth category—those for which the scientific method is not the appropriate way to find an answer—to think they are not a small minority.

quote:
Originally posted by SusanDoris:
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
I grew up Presbyterian, have been a member of several different main stream denominations and never heard a word against evolution. I'm always surprised to hear atheists or agnostics say, "I don't believe in God -- I believe in science...

But that is not what they say. Atheists lack belief in all gods, rather than all gods except one, and believe in the verified Theories of Science, knowing always that they can be challenged and subsequently improved or changed if necessary.
That is what some atheists say. Some atheists believe as you describe, some specifically lack a belief in the Abrahamic God but seem to have no problem believing in spirits of various sorts, and some seem to have as little belief in science as though do in God. Atheists, like everyone else, come in a variety of shapes and sizes.

--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott

Posts: 2557 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SusanDoris:
Those who believe in God - and there is not going to be any but a very small change in that for a hundred or more years I think - add an unnecessary complexity to the world as it is anyway.

As you say, the demographics suggest that belief in God isn't going to die out on a global level within that time. Western countries are predicted to see ongoing disaffiliation from Christianity, but populations in the West are declining, and therefore have less impact on overall figures.

I think it's worth remembering that the acceptance of scientific developments is only one aspect to the growth of atheism or non-religiosity. There are many others. Note that disaffiliation from religion in the UK began among the working classes - not among the middle classes who would have a better grasp of science. Churchgoing is largely a middle class activity in much of the West.

With reference to millennials, it's interesting to note that in Britain, younger Muslims are often more religious than their elders. There are various reasons why, but younger people knowing less science probably isn't one of them.

[ 27. December 2016, 14:25: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]

Posts: 6475 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Interesting point by Svitlana about middle class church-going. It's possible that it began to decline among working class people, not because of scientific knowledge, but because of social hierarchy. I mean, the posh might visit the poor, but did that inspire the poor to read their religious homilies?

It seems rather cartoon-like to argue that along came science, good-bye religion; this ignores the social context of religions. As Svitlana indicated, the middle class presumably had imbibed more scientific knowledge, yet clung to religion.

--------------------
the main fear that flat-earthers face is sphere itself.

Posts: 9708 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365

 - Posted      Profile for Freddy   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SusanDoris:
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
[QUOTE]I do think that it is pretty interesting to ask what it would take to arrange things on the planet so that there was universal peace, kindness and prosperity.

An impossibility, I'm afraid! We have evolved to survive and that means the maintenance of genes which would enable us, if the world became such a hostile environment, to have enough of the fittest to survive.
Yet you can't deny that the world is changing. Why wouldn't it continue to change with respect to the relative quality of peace, kindness and prosperity?

Our genes are certainly a limiting factor, but only relatively so.

--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg

Posts: 12832 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
The false dichotomy being (theistic evolutionary) creation or blind chance.

Okay, but evolutionary theory itself doesn't create that dichotomy, you are imposing the dichotomy because of the assumptions you are layering on evolutionary theory.

Evolutionary theory does not say that evolution happens by blind chance; indeed, I think that assertion is actually contrary to evolutionary theory. Evolutionary theory includes chance and randomness, but not all evolution is random or by chance. It's a mix of random and non-random.

Yes, the idea of selection seems to counter pure randomness, doesn't it? I suppose you can have random selection, as in lotteries, but natural selection ain't it. It's one of the interesting things about mimicry and camouflage, that an animal's environment begins to be painted on its back.

As well as Monod, this reminds me of Simone Weil, 'Gravity and Grace', maybe this would attract the millenials, as it is mind-bending in places.

--------------------
the main fear that flat-earthers face is sphere itself.

Posts: 9708 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
Gramps49
Shipmate
# 16378

 - Posted      Profile for Gramps49   Email Gramps49   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Boy, go to bed, for a long winter's nap, and I miss out on the discussion on the other side of the world.

I am not interested in discussing theistic evolution. I was only pointing out that science and technology do not answer all the questions.

Someone testified to the theories of science. As I remember my philosophy of science, a theory only seeks to explain what is being observed, but those theories are subject to change as new data accumulates. Astrophysics, for instance, seems to be changing daily.

Yes, I am amazed we have been able to land a probe on a comet, but that took a lot of calculus to figure it out, thanks to supercomputers working overtime to determine precisely when and where. For me, as a believer, it goes to show the majesty of God.

The problem with the western concentration on science and technology we are emphasizing the left side of the brain. I had two professors who studied the right side of the brain. They purposely studied what we would call primitive cultures and they discovered that there was such a wide world of experience out there we are not even aware of. We only have a taste of that world in music, poetry, creative writing, maybe intuition. I would argue that the sense of the Divine comes from the right side of the brain.

The earliest known reference to an Apostle's creed is in a letter from Ambrose to Pope Sinicus in 390 CE. I am not sure if it was originally written Latin or Greek, but I do know the Greek word ποιητὴν (creator) comes from the same word from which means poet. I mentioned this as an aside, I certainly was surprised this would generate such a discussion.

Posts: 2067 | From: Pullman WA | Registered: Apr 2011  |  IP: Logged
SusanDoris

Incurable Optimist
# 12618

 - Posted      Profile for SusanDoris   Author's homepage   Email SusanDoris   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
I can't speak for "most" scientists, SusanDoris. But I know enough scientists who would include a fourth category—those for which the scientific method is not the appropriate way to find an answer—to think they are not a small minority.

What method do they use then to reach a conclusion, or even a theory? What procedure do they follow? In all my years on forums, I have never heard of such an alternative method.
quote:
Originally posted by SusanDoris:
But that is not what they say. Atheists lack belief in all gods, rather than all gods except one, and believe in the verified Theories of Science, knowing always that they can be challenged and subsequently improved or changed if necessary.

I meant to edit that and say , ‘….believ the verified…’ and leave out the word ‘in’.
quote:
I saidThat is what some atheists say. Some atheists believe as you describe, some specifically lack a belief in the Abrahamic God but seem to have no problem believing in spirits of various sorts,
Yes, there are those who seem to have no difficulty believing things where 100% faith is needed and it is quite puzzling , but the number of such scientists in the Physics, chemistry and Biology fields is, I understand very low.
quote:
some seem to have as little belief in science as though do in God. Atheists, like everyone else, come in a variety of shapes and sizes.
Yes, that is true! No argument there!

--------------------
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

Posts: 2947 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
SusanDoris

Incurable Optimist
# 12618

 - Posted      Profile for SusanDoris   Author's homepage   Email SusanDoris   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Gramps

[Big Grin] Thank you for an interesting thread - it has been a really nice day, reading, thinking and responding !!

--------------------
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

Posts: 2947 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
SusanDoris

Incurable Optimist
# 12618

 - Posted      Profile for SusanDoris   Author's homepage   Email SusanDoris   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
Yet you can't deny that the world is changing. Why wouldn't it continue to change with respect to the relative quality of peace, kindness and prosperity?

Of course I agree it can change and most people will hope for a time when they can get on quietly with their lives, but anger, aggression and the fight/flight response will remain, won't it, because without it the evolutionary drive to survive would not be available if our species is in danger of imminent extinction. This is vanishingly unlikely to happen while I live, but, and I do not write this with any overtones of scorn or anything, prayers will not produce any help from any god
quote:

Our genes are certainly a limiting factor, but only relatively so.

Thank you - as I have just said to gramps, this has been such an interesting day.

--------------------
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

Posts: 2947 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
Aye Nick, I deliberately missed out what Jacques Monod said: chance AND necessity. You didn't! You engaged in the false dichotomy first, I just ran with it.

Still not seeing a false dichotomy, Jacques Monod's conclusion that human life emerged by chance notwithstanding.

And I think, at least in evolutionary theory terms, the operative words are "random" and "non-random."

In other words chance and necessity.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17019 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mark Wuntoo
Shipmate
# 5673

 - Posted      Profile for Mark Wuntoo   Email Mark Wuntoo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Interesting point by Svitlana about middle class church-going. It's possible that it began to decline among working class people, not because of scientific knowledge, but because of social hierarchy. I mean, the posh might visit the poor, but did that inspire the poor to read their religious homilies?

It seems rather cartoon-like to argue that along came science, good-bye religion; this ignores the social context of religions. As Svitlana indicated, the middle class presumably had imbibed more scientific knowledge, yet clung to religion.

And I think economics played a significant role in the decline of religious participation. The more expressive forms of Christianity were supported best by the poor (Lanternari: The religions of the oppressed - I keep mentioning!). So, with upward social and economic mobility religious expression became less ('pentecostal') or disappeared. I am pretty sure I have observed this in my own lifetime with the (Caribbean) black-led churches in Britain - goodness me, even the longer established black-led churches join in the ecumenical activities of organisations they once thought beyond the pale. [Biased]

--------------------
Blessed are the cracked for they let in the light.

Posts: 1917 | From: Somewhere else. | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Mark Wuntoo
Shipmate
# 5673

 - Posted      Profile for Mark Wuntoo   Email Mark Wuntoo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SusanDoris:
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
Yet you can't deny that the world is changing. Why wouldn't it continue to change with respect to the relative quality of peace, kindness and prosperity?

Of course I agree it can change and most people will hope for a time when they can get on quietly with their lives, but anger, aggression and the fight/flight response will remain, won't it, because without it the evolutionary drive to survive would not be available if our species is in danger of imminent extinction. This is vanishingly unlikely to happen while I live, ......
And you, the Incurable Optimist?! [Big Grin]
I think I agree with you - but I like to hope that you are wrong, that humankind will come to its senses and evolve into something more beautiful, less with feeling the need to survive by eliminating those with whom it disagrees.
Yep, I've been called naive before.

--------------------
Blessed are the cracked for they let in the light.

Posts: 1917 | From: Somewhere else. | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Wuntoo:
I think economics played a significant role in the decline of religious participation. The more expressive forms of Christianity were supported best by the poor (Lanternari: The religions of the oppressed - I keep mentioning!). So, with upward social and economic mobility religious expression became less ('pentecostal') or disappeared. I am pretty sure I have observed this in my own lifetime with the (Caribbean) black-led churches in Britain - goodness me, even the longer established black-led churches join in the ecumenical activities of organisations they once thought beyond the pale. [Biased]

I wouldn't disagree with you here. All churches in Britain face the same formalising, upwardly-mobile impulses that the sociologists have noted. Once disdainful groups eventually seek the prestige of association with traditional churches.

However, I'm not sure if it's so wonderful that (millennial + other) working class black Pentecostals become discouraged and leave the church. They don't necessarily become more 'scientific' and 'rational' as a result, but they may lose the mutual support and cultural capital that they had previously had. (Some of them of course became Rastafarians, or more recently, Muslims. You might not see that as an improvement....)

The largest Black British Pentecostal denomination is now African, as you may know. It was probably more upwardly mobile movement than the Caribbean churches when it began. I assume it's already working with the mainstream churches occasionally, but the latter are becoming very weak in some places, so the social cachet of such partnerships is perhaps not what it was.

David Voas said that the future of British Christianity was in the hands of black believers, and if immigration continues, this may indeed be so. Christianity certainly isn't projected to be facing decline in Africa over the next century.

Posts: 6475 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
Nick Tamen

Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164

 - Posted      Profile for Nick Tamen     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SusanDoris:
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
I can't speak for "most" scientists, SusanDoris. But I know enough scientists who would include a fourth category—those for which the scientific method is not the appropriate way to find an answer—to think they are not a small minority.

What method do they use then to reach a conclusion, or even a theory? What procedure do they follow? In all my years on forums, I have never heard of such an alternative method.
How do you know what music you find beautiful and meaningful, and why? How do you decide whether to marry someone, or whether you love someone? How do you know, for sure, that someone loves you? How do you decide who to vote for in the next election? How do you decide whether to keep up medical treatment in hopes of a cure or whether to call in hospice? How do you decide what justice looks like in a particular context and what is unjust in a particular context? How do you decide what things in life you value and what things you don't?

Yes, some scientific knowledge of human behavior and the like may help with some of these questions. And yes, many people answer these questions without consideration of God or the divine. The point is, there are lots of question that matter for which the scientific method is an inappropriate way to find an answer.

Meanwhile, in the context of this thread, I think it's very important to remember that rejection f chick, by millenials or anyone else, is not necessarily rejection of belief in God. People reject church for all kids or reasons, including rejection of institutions generally or a (justifiable) belief that church is mysogenist, racist, homophobic, classist and/or irrelevant. Hence the growing segment of the population here that identifies as "spiritual but not religious."

--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott

Posts: 2557 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
Mark Wuntoo
Shipmate
# 5673

 - Posted      Profile for Mark Wuntoo   Email Mark Wuntoo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:

However, I'm not sure if it's so wonderful that (millennial + other) working class black Pentecostals become discouraged and leave the church. They don't necessarily become more 'scientific' and 'rational' as a result, but they may lose the mutual support and cultural capital that they had previously had. (Some of them of course became Rastafarians, or more recently, Muslims. You might not see that as an improvement....)


I don't disagree with your general points. But, for some, presumably the social ties and support offered by the church were no longer needed and/or could be found anew in different communities (religious or otherwise).

quote:

David Voas said that the future of British Christianity was in the hands of black believers, and if immigration continues, this may indeed be so. Christianity certainly isn't projected to be facing decline in Africa over the next century.

This is a bit problematic. Seen from the inner city where I live, most 'mainstream' congregations are majority black. So it may be true to say that for cities but not for other areas: I cannot see the 'decline and fall 'of suburban and rural Christianity happening yetawhile.

Ah, I've forgotten that this thread is about millenials .... so I may be wrong.

--------------------
Blessed are the cracked for they let in the light.

Posts: 1917 | From: Somewhere else. | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Nick Tamen

Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164

 - Posted      Profile for Nick Tamen     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
Meanwhile, in the context of this thread, I think it's very important to remember that rejection f chick . . . .

{sigh}. I really did use preview post. That should have been rejection of church.

--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott

Posts: 2557 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
Gramps49
Shipmate
# 16378

 - Posted      Profile for Gramps49   Email Gramps49   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
You are welcome, SusanDoris, though I have to admit this thread has taken different twists and turns than I expected.

I think there are certain historical and economic factors that do play into the rise and fall of religious attendance. Looking back at the history of my country, while we claim to be a religious nation our overall attendance has seldom been above 40%. Religious attendance reached its peak in the 50's, and I think two contributing factors were the return of servicemen from WWII and the rise of prosperity at that time.

However, if you compare that to the return of veterans from the Vietnam War there was not as much religious fervor among them.

It is true when times are tough people do turn to safe institutions such as the church when times are good people have other pursuits. Personally with the change of administration in the US, Brexit, the rise of nationalism in many democratic nations combined with worldwide economic fragileness we may be on the cusp of seeing a turnaround in religious attendance.

However, I think the "Evangelical" brand of Christianity will be shown to be fraudulent because of their support of the president-elect.

BTW, SusanDoris, I just read in my local paper that an atheist group has formed a Sunday Assembly in Salt Lake City, the center of Mormonism. This is based on the Sunday Assemblies in Britain. I like their motto: Live better; help often; wonder more. I think I can do business with them.

Posts: 2067 | From: Pullman WA | Registered: Apr 2011  |  IP: Logged
Gramps49
Shipmate
# 16378

 - Posted      Profile for Gramps49   Email Gramps49   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Nick wrote

quote:
People reject church for all kids sic of reasons, including rejection of institutions generally or a (justifiable) belief that church is mysogenist, racist, homophobic, classist and/or irrelevant.
I admit even in many liberal churches there were times when they have been misogynist, racist, homophobic, classist, and irrelevant. Fact is, there is a movement within the ELCA (#decolonizetheELCA) that argues in our desire to become integrated we actually put up more barriers to integration--long story. We have a lot of sins to confess in this regard. However, I would argue that we have done a lot to evolve into better institutions. Sometimes, though, we can be as slow as molasses on a cold winter's day, which I think frustrates many of the millennials I whom I have been working.
Posts: 2067 | From: Pullman WA | Registered: Apr 2011  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
BTW, SusanDoris, I just read in my local paper that an atheist group has formed a Sunday Assembly in Salt Lake City, the center of Mormonism. This is based on the Sunday Assemblies in Britain. I like their motto: Live better; help often; wonder more. I think I can do business with them.

I wish more Christians I know had that motto.

--------------------
“Religion doesn't fuck up people, people fuck up religion.”—lilBuddha

Posts: 63203 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Wuntoo:
Seen from the inner city where I live, most 'mainstream' congregations are majority black. [...] I cannot see the 'decline and fall 'of suburban and rural Christianity happening yet awhile.

Ah, I've forgotten that this thread is about millennials .... so I may be wrong.

Churches may be stronger in some well-heeled suburban areas, but in many rural areas congregations are frequently struggling, or have already closed.

In any case, to have a future, the average church needs to have younger members as well as older ones. Most people don't suddenly join a church when they reach middle age, or when they retire. So the absence of millennials isn't a minor issue.

As you say, there may be other good sources of support and community for millennials - but not many, ISTM, for young working class black men in the cities.

[ 27. December 2016, 23:58: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]

Posts: 6475 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
Gramps49
Shipmate
# 16378

 - Posted      Profile for Gramps49   Email Gramps49   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Another article to contribute to the discussion: My Emancipation from American Christianity.

Note, the article indicates he still believes in Christ, just not the Christ that is identified in American Christianity. Granted he paints in a very broad brush. But I think he voices the thoughts of those who would say they are spiritual, just not religious.

Posts: 2067 | From: Pullman WA | Registered: Apr 2011  |  IP: Logged
SusanDoris

Incurable Optimist
# 12618

 - Posted      Profile for SusanDoris   Author's homepage   Email SusanDoris   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
In other words chance and necessity.

As I understand it, life began by chance; it might have begun and quickly become extinct several times, but we know it began once. From then on, there is an unbroken line of life where those which have randomly mutated are lucky to have adaptations which enable them to survive changing conditions. I think it is an estimated 95 milion species that became extinct. Combined with natural selection and survival of the fittest, the process continues. Do you agree?

--------------------
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

Posts: 2947 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
SusanDoris

Incurable Optimist
# 12618

 - Posted      Profile for SusanDoris   Author's homepage   Email SusanDoris   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Wuntoo:
quote:
Originally posted by SusanDoris:
This is vanishingly unlikely to happen while I live, ......

And you, the Incurable Optimist?! [Big Grin]
I think I agree with you - but I like to hope that you are wrong, that humankind will come to its senses and evolve into something more beautiful, less with feeling the need to survive by eliminating those with whom it disagrees.
Yep, I've been called naive before.

My character, which includes optimism!, must be from my genetic make-up, but I’m also a realist and like to know things clearly, not through any disguising filter. I hope that enables me to appreciate better the infinite capacity of the brain to imagine. There is a margin between fact and fiction which will never disappear and where there are unknowns but it is becoming less as time goes on.

And back to those millennials! I do hope more and more of them are able to work towards a mor peaceful world – they will earn the respect and gratitude of millions – but to change the instinct of humans to total gentleness and love it would be necessary to intervene at such an early stage in evolution … and if that had happened, I think it is safe to say we would have become extinct before we started!

--------------------
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

Posts: 2947 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
SusanDoris

Incurable Optimist
# 12618

 - Posted      Profile for SusanDoris   Author's homepage   Email SusanDoris   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
The point is, there are lots of questions that matter for which the scientific method is an inappropriate way to find an answer.

Thank you. As you can see I have taken this sentence out to respond to first. The scientific method, which I have just checked on Wikipedia, starts with a question, but that needs to be followed by observations via one or more of our senses. If this is not objectively possible, then the scientific method cannot be followedand it is the best and well-tried and tested method there is. What I have not seen yet is any other method of finding an objective answer to questions such as, ‘why are we here?’
quote:
How do you know what music you find beautiful and meaningful, and why? How do you decide whether to marry someone, or whether you love someone? How do you know, for sure, that someone loves you?
Apart from the fact that a very long time ago now!) I made a disastrous mistake there, all questions involving aesthetics are personal, subjective, and are formed in the brain which itself is entirely material.
quote:
How do you decide who to vote for in the next election? How do you decide whether to keep up medical treatment in hopes of a cure or whether to call in hospice?
I think about it and make a personal decision based on the best info I can find andtake responsibility for that decision..
quote:
How do you decide what justice looks like in a particular context and what is unjust in a particular context?
On this subject, my personal opinion might not be the same as the Law’s, but the code of law is the best people can do at present and in any case is constantly modified.
quote:
How do you decide what things in life you value and what things you don't?
By what I have observed, learnt, etc but there is no independent method by which we all might or must decide on what we value or not. Again basically it is subjective.
quote:
Meanwhile, in the context of this thread, I think it's very important to remember that rejection of chirch, by millenials or anyone else, is not necessarily rejection of belief in God. People reject church for all kinds of reasons, including rejection of institutions generally or a (justifiable) belief that church is mysogenist, racist, homophobic, classist and/or irrelevant. Hence the growing segment of the population here that identifies as "spiritual but not religious."
Yes, I agree.

--------------------
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

Posts: 2947 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
SusanDoris

Incurable Optimist
# 12618

 - Posted      Profile for SusanDoris   Author's homepage   Email SusanDoris   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
BTW, SusanDoris, I just read in my local paper that an atheist group has formed a Sunday Assembly in Salt Lake City, the center of Mormonism. This is based on the Sunday Assemblies in Britain. I like their motto: Live better; help often; wonder more. I think I can do business with them.

Excellent!! I wish there was one near me!

--------------------
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

Posts: 2947 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I find it amusing that atheism doesn't know how to be incarnational either, doesn't even know, like that which it despises, that that is all that's needed and it wants to emulate the useless unincarnational model of that which it despises.

[ 28. December 2016, 10:15: Message edited by: Martin60 ]

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17019 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
I find it amusing that atheism doesn't know how to be incarnational either, doesn't even know, like that which it despises, that that is all that's needed and it wants to emulate the useless unincarnational model of that which it despises.

Not quite sure what you mean by incarnational, in relation to atheists, but certainly I know some Buddhists who (to me), embody life, I mean they live life to the full, they are open to life, and other people, and so on. Nowt to do with God.

Do atheists despise religion? News to me.

[ 28. December 2016, 10:29: Message edited by: quetzalcoatl ]

--------------------
the main fear that flat-earthers face is sphere itself.

Posts: 9708 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
Mark Wuntoo
Shipmate
# 5673

 - Posted      Profile for Mark Wuntoo   Email Mark Wuntoo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
I find it amusing that atheism doesn't know how to be incarnational either, doesn't even know, like that which it despises, that that is all that's needed and it wants to emulate the useless unincarnational model of that which it despises.

Neither do I understand what you mean, can you flesh it out a bit.
However, here's one (non-theist) atheist who does not despise what I think you think I despise! My guess is that most atheists who have thought the issues through are too concerned about other things to despise very much at all.

--------------------
Blessed are the cracked for they let in the light.

Posts: 1917 | From: Somewhere else. | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I get the sense of 'incarnational' that all things are sacred, or life is sacred, and also that the profane and the sacred are one. Oh damn, does this mean that I have to produce an argument for that? No, I just assert it, as I am in the liminal space between Xmas and New Year, when all things are in the sacred womb.

--------------------
the main fear that flat-earthers face is sphere itself.

Posts: 9708 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365

 - Posted      Profile for Freddy   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SusanDoris:
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Wuntoo:
quote:
Originally posted by SusanDoris:
This is vanishingly unlikely to happen while I live, ......

And you, the Incurable Optimist?! [Big Grin]

My character, which includes optimism!, must be from my genetic make-up, but I’m also a realist and like to know things clearly, not through any disguising filter.
I think that a realist ought to recognize that there are trends that are moving in a positive direction with respect to crime, child mortality, literacy and health that are likely to continue.

--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg

Posts: 12832 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
SusanDoris

Incurable Optimist
# 12618

 - Posted      Profile for SusanDoris   Author's homepage   Email SusanDoris   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Wuntoo:
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
I find it amusing that atheism doesn't know how to be incarnational either, doesn't even know, like that which it despises, that that is all that's needed and it wants to emulate the useless unincarnational model of that which it despises.

Neither do I understand what you mean, can you flesh it out a bit.
I was wondering whether to ask politely for a translation, please!
quote:
][/However, here's one (non-theist) atheist who does not despise what I think you think I despise! My guess is that most atheists who have thought the issues through are too concerned about other things to despise very much at all.
Also, religious beliefs have been such an integral part of history since before writing was invented that it would be foolish indeed to despise them. The more we know about them, the better future generations will be able to consider whether the various deities really exist or not.

--------------------
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

Posts: 2947 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
There are positive things in society; however, I think somebody has already mentioned, the ongoing mass extinction is pretty awful. I see cheetahs are the latest animal under threat. And of course, climate change is a big black mark. I don't blame Christianity for these things.

--------------------
the main fear that flat-earthers face is sphere itself.

Posts: 9708 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
SusanDoris

Incurable Optimist
# 12618

 - Posted      Profile for SusanDoris   Author's homepage   Email SusanDoris   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
I get the sense of 'incarnational' that all things are sacred, or life is sacred, and also that the profane and the sacred are one. Oh damn, does this mean that I have to produce an argument for that? No, I just assert it, as I am in the liminal space between Xmas and New Year, when all things are in the sacred womb.

Ah, okay, I can understand that - thank you! [Smile]

--------------------
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

Posts: 2947 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I like that q, embody life as translation for incarnationality.

I wish the atheist Sunday Assemblies well, more than well, may they spectacularly succeed in showing Christianity up, showing it the way in embodying life.

But I suspect they can't, despite the fine motto, a bit like Peter Cook's Permissive Society which met on a Tuesday evening at eight at a bedsit in Neasden.

Western Buddhism, atheist Sunday Assemblies, like Christianity are tiny minority pursuits all helplessly failing to embody life sacrificially, effectively beyond a mild lifestyle influence to the extent where anyone can say, yeah, that.

Islam now, wow!

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17019 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
SusanDoris

Incurable Optimist
# 12618

 - Posted      Profile for SusanDoris   Author's homepage   Email SusanDoris   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
There are positive things in society; however, I think somebody has already mentioned, the ongoing mass extinction is pretty awful. I see cheetahs are the latest animal under threat. And of course, climate change is a big black mark. I don't blame Christianity for these things.

Earlier this week I listened to a book called 'The Elephant whisperer' by Laurence Anthony which was excellent. A conservationist to his fingertips, Laurence Anthony died at the age of 62 in 2012 which is so sad when people like him are so needed. (He was the man who saved the Baghdad zoo.)

--------------------
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

Posts: 2947 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Oooh and Mark, I fully acknowledge that you are no despiser, I've always liked your contributions.

Atheist despising is pace the despite-arch, Dawkins and the sophomoric atheist self-congratulators all over FaceBook who will always fail as they can't love their enemies. Which SusanDoris genteelly flirts with.

I think I might be backsliding in to gnomic obscurantism, nay obscurity here ...

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17019 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mark Wuntoo
Shipmate
# 5673

 - Posted      Profile for Mark Wuntoo   Email Mark Wuntoo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
Oooh and Mark, I fully acknowledge that you are no despiser, I've always liked your contributions.

Thanks.

quote:
Atheist despising is pace the despite-arch, Dawkins and the sophomoric atheist self-congratulators all over FaceBook who will always fail as they can't love their enemies.


I don't see Hawkins as any sort of representative although I like some of what he says. And I don't do Facebook so cannot comment. I know few atheists who would bother to push their ideas on to others.


quote:
I think I might be backsliding in to gnomic obscurantism, nay obscurity here ...
I wouldn't be so unkind as to agree - oh, I don't know ... yes, I would .... I understand what you are saying! [Big Grin]

--------------------
Blessed are the cracked for they let in the light.

Posts: 1917 | From: Somewhere else. | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Mark Wuntoo
Shipmate
# 5673

 - Posted      Profile for Mark Wuntoo   Email Mark Wuntoo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SusanDoris:
quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
BTW, SusanDoris, I just read in my local paper that an atheist group has formed a Sunday Assembly in Salt Lake City, the center of Mormonism. This is based on the Sunday Assemblies in Britain. I like their motto: Live better; help often; wonder more. I think I can do business with them.

Excellent!! I wish there was one near me!
I think there is one near you - google their website.
For me, it seems to be too alike to church although I have never attended one. Church is still too close for me.

--------------------
Blessed are the cracked for they let in the light.

Posts: 1917 | From: Somewhere else. | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
SusanDoris

Incurable Optimist
# 12618

 - Posted      Profile for SusanDoris   Author's homepage   Email SusanDoris   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Wuntoo:
I think there is one near you - google their website.
For me, it seems to be too alike to church although I have never attended one. Church is still too close for me.

Thank you - I googled, and yes there is one in Bournemouth. I go with an atheist friend to Humanist group meetings there when we feel we want to listen to the talk. I'm very independent of course and wil go train/taxi or all taxi but there are times when only some peripheral vision is realy very annoying!

--------------------
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

Posts: 2947 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
Gramps49
Shipmate
# 16378

 - Posted      Profile for Gramps49   Email Gramps49   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I spoke once at a humanist association meeting. My topic was on how Jesus in his day could be considered a free thinker. The talk was well received.
Posts: 2067 | From: Pullman WA | Registered: Apr 2011  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
Check out Reform magazine
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
  ship of fools