Church finsd wonderful, terrible news

[Byzantine Mercenary]

yep, their happy now and good luck to them if they wish to live like that,
but they don't mean that the church is irrelavent if people don't wan't to be christians i don't mind, what i do mind is when an increasing amount of people use this to ridicule my way of life by saying that the church is unessisary.
I can a assure you ive got a lot out of being a christian and think that overall it has benifitted me greatly, if some people think they don't need belief without trying it then good luck to them but it doesn't mean its unnessisary.

[InsaneApache]

Here we go again.

[Red Peasant]

yep, their happy now and good luck to them if they wish to live like that,
but they don't mean that the church is irrelavent if people don't wan't to be christians i don't mind, what i do mind is when an increasing amount of people use this to ridicule my way of life by saying that the church is unessisary.
I can a assure you ive got a lot out of being a christian and think that overall it has benifitted me greatly, if some people think they don't need belief without trying it then good luck to them but it doesn't mean its unnessisary.

Calm down, lah! Who was having a go?

Maybe you need to relax, like the nice young people in this survey

[Byzantine Mercenary]

Calm down, lah! Who was having a go?

Maybe you need to relax, like the nice young people in this survey

i was not angry just responding to being told my that beliefs are immature (though that is not so much having a go as being arrogant)

Once again some supposedly unbiased atheists are using misconceptions and an alomst compleate missunderstanding of christianitys core belief to make religion out as a bad guy (ala richard dawkins) so the church has done bad, often they have compleately ignored the teaching of jesus, your right the church is currupt but that does not mean christianity is wrong i think the world could do with a few more people who loved their neighbours!

im not angry but i do find the situation ridiculous!

[Ja'chyra]

In my view religion as a concept is fine for those who want it, in practice it is so far corrupted from the concept as to be almost counterproductive.

I find it totally normal that more people are moving away from religion and getting on with their lives, and good for them if that's what they want. As for saying that the morals imposed by the church will be greatly missed, I think that is totally pants, I think the morals imposed by the church have stunted the growth of generations to the point where they thought that having a ham shank would send them stright to hell

In the end though it is all down to individuals, if you want to be religious then go right ahead and I hope you have a great time, but it's not for me but at least I don't tell you that you'll burn in hell if you don't agree with me

[InsaneApache]

On the drugs thingy, didn't some German bloke, about 150 years ago, say something like religion is the opium of the masses (sic).

Onto the wider issue on morality and such, I have to agree wholeheartedly with Louis IV the Fat.

I'm no religionista but I don't not kill people because I might get caught. I don't do it because it's wrong. It has nothing at all to do with religion. Similarly I don't steal because it's wrong. Why are they intrinsically wrong as a pose to just morally wrong?

Empathy and a sense of right and wrong. Murder destroys not just the life taken but also those left behind who loved the victim. Theft destroys wealth, which affects us all.

Just a couple of examples.

EDIT:sorry Louis, I left the IV off your name. :)

[English assassin]

Louis IV the Fat and others are on the money. The assertions that we must get our morality from the church are PRECISELY why a post-religious society is better than a religious one.

Call me a hippy, but I think it is an important principle that things should develop their full potential, and also, that they should be what they are. And man is a moral animal capable of making his own moral choices. It is positively better that he does so, and develops his own moral code, rather than that he should slavishly obey what he is told are the dictates of a supernatural being (which is one of Nietzsches main points, but really only a rediscovery of a classical position). In this way he fulfils his full potential.

I find it hard to see how the religious can object to this, since religions are generally insistant that we DO have free will and that we MUST therefore make our own moral choices, furthermore, that God will not intervene in those choices (I think we can say the Holocaust is enought proof of that). The only thing religion adds to the post-religious position above is, having made your own moral choices, if they do not correspond to the supernatural beings you will be punished after you die.

And finally, to those whose view of human nature is so negative that they imagine we would all be raping and killing without the fear of god, although I ought to be able to come up with a clever riposte, your incredible pessimism is interferring with my logical faculties. I will content myself by saying, prove it. A correlation between higher participation in religion and lower crime rates (cough united states cough) would be sufficient...

[Byzantine Mercenary]

lets get a few things straight:

Firstly no christian should ever tell someone that they will burn in hell as no christian not even the pope (especially as im not catholic ) has the right to judge any other man.

Secondly many people say that they are religious but do not hold to the teachings of the religion, in which case it is not the teaching that is at fault but humans, as we all sin. This does not mean that the teaching is wrong or should be gotten rid of but that it should be understood more by those that profess to follow it (including me, i am not sayign that i am any better then anyone else in this respect).

people are not intrinsicly evil, i have never said that a society without religion would be anarchy, many of the atheists i have seen hold to the moral codes of christians these rules are not designed to control people but to protect them from the guilt and addiction that can be accocieted with sin, i am free, all christians are, christianity does not restrict my daily life or my scientific learning. I try and adhere to its rules because i know what the consequences would be, not in the next world but in this world.

[InsaneApache]

I'm sorry but I don't sin. It's just impossible for me to sin.

[Kääpäkorven Konsuli]

yep, their happy now and good luck to them if they wish to live like that,
but they don't mean that the church is irrelavent if people don't wan't to be christians i don't mind, what i do mind is when an increasing amount of people use this to ridicule my way of life by saying that the church is unessisary.
I can a assure you ive got a lot out of being a christian and think that overall it has benifitted me greatly, if some people think they don't need belief without trying it then good luck to them but it doesn't mean its unnessisary.

I have nothing against church, if it is a sunday club were peoples sing and braise their god. But the problem is, at least in Finland, that church wants influence in earthy things.

For example, church has right of taxation. Private person, who doesn't belong to
church doesn't need to pay the tax. But all corroborations must. Even if it owned by pagan.

Churches are okay, state religion is not.

[English assassin]

Wait up. My point was really summed up in the second passage I quoted. that doesn't describe shallow hedonists living empty lives and craving the next consumer gadget, it describes well rounded adult human beings.

I have nothing against an individual user of religion. But I really DO have an issue with an organisation that can find this

"There is no need to posit ultimate significance elsewhere beyond the immediate experience of everyday life.” The goal in life of young people was happiness achieved primarily through the family. The researchers were also shocked to discover little sense of sin or fear of death.

And see it as a PROBLEM ?!? Finding significance in everyday life, valuing happiness in the family, little fear of death, QUICK. They might decide they don't need us. Roll out the Auto da fe...

[doc_bean]

And see it as a PROBLEM ?!? Finding significance in everyday life, valuing happiness in the family, little fear of death, QUICK. They might decide they don't need us. Roll out the Auto da fe...

The article seems to be making fun of the Church, like I said, you can feel the gloating.

If there is a 'problem' for the church is that they are no longer needed (which isn't true, of course) which every organization, every business would see as a problem. They have costs and expenses too, and they'd like to support charity, so they need people giving them money. Another possible 'problem', at least to the very religious people in the Church would be that all these kids will go to hell (at least they would be 'sure' of this), and this could certainly be seen as a problem for someone who cares about people.

But yes, organised religion can be an ugly thing. I just don't see this as a particulary bad sign, when they call for a crusade, I'd start worrying...

[Sjakihata]

Is this the time where the object of The Enlightenment has been reached?

[English assassin]

Is this the time where the object of The Enlightenment has been reached?

My hope exactly.

[Papewaio]

If there is a 'problem' for the church is that they are no longer needed (which isn't true, of course) which every organization, every business would see as a problem. They have costs and expenses too, and they'd like to support charity, so they need people giving them money.

Well if you want to go down the charity beat, I would like to see every version of Christian churches auditied and see how much money actually does go to the needy. For a set of charity organisations some of them have a lot of valuables that have nothing to do with serving either God or their fellow man.

"So much bling that a Kings Cross Tranny would be ashamed to wear it"

Another possible 'problem', at least to the very religious people in the Church would be that all these kids will go to hell (at least they would be 'sure' of this), and this could certainly be seen as a problem for someone who cares about people.

Way I read it is that the way to Salvation is through a personal relationship with Christ not through monetary donations, works, lifestyle or the particular building you turn up to to pray in.

[doc_bean]

Well if you want to go down the charity beat, I would like to see every version of Christian churches auditied and see how much money actually does go to the needy. For a set of charity organisations some of them have a lot of valuables that have nothing to do with serving either God or their fellow man.

"So much bling that a Kings Cross Tranny would be ashamed to wear it"

They need money to pay the clergy,
they need money to maintain the churches and buildings,
they need money to keep/restore their 'art' objects,
they need money to fund their charity projects.

I never said they were a purely charitable organization. I said religion/church was also part of our culture and heritage, they need money to preserve cultural items too. The state often restores old buildings and gives money to museums doesn't it ?

Now, I'm not saying there are no freeloaders amongst the clergy, I personally know some (well, they're retired, might have done some good back in the day). But it isn't a money grabbing organization that provides great monetary gains for the top (anymore).

Way I read it is that the way to Salvation is through a personal relationship with Christ not through monetary donations, works, lifestyle or the particular building you turn up to to pray in.

Most religious people believe some sort of faith is needed to be saved, most young people don't believe and are even ignorant of what they 'should' believe in order to be saved, according to the study. How can they have a personal relationship with Christ if they don't know Him ? They'll burn (is what the most of the clergy will think), and I can certainly understand why the clergy would wan tot prevent that.

[Blodrast]

Wait up. My point was really summed up in the second passage I quoted. that doesn't describe shallow hedonists living empty lives and craving the next consumer gadget, it describes well rounded adult human beings.

I have nothing against an individual user of religion. But I really DO have an issue with an organisation that can find this

"There is no need to posit ultimate significance elsewhere beyond the immediate experience of everyday life.” The goal in life of young people was happiness achieved primarily through the family. The researchers were also shocked to discover little sense of sin or fear of death.

And see it as a PROBLEM ?!? Finding significance in everyday life, valuing happiness in the family, little fear of death, QUICK. They might decide they don't need us. Roll out the Auto da fe...

I see it as a problem too. A LOT of the so-called "common sense" moral values have been traditionally...well, enforced, or perpetuated, or whatever you might wanna call it, by the church. Let's not get into an argument of whether the church did overall more good than bad or viceversa.
I wholeheartedly agree with doc_bean's first post - spot on !

Yes, I believe that the church can/could/should instill some sense of moral virtues, and so on, in people. If not from the church, where are they going to get it from ? TV? Internet ?
Their "free-spirited" peers ?

As for the little sense of sin, I don't think that's right either. What's stopping me from killing someone (assuming I don't get caught by the police) ? Nothing, because I don't have a notion of sin. I can't understand how you can agree with that, but that is what not having a sense of sin is all about - not just dodging the law, and everything is fine if you could get away with it.

And no, I'm not a zealot, nor do I agree with everything that the church says - but it has its good parts, and, whether you like it or not, it did play a big part in the Christian societies' moral values and spirituality. Unless/until something else appears that can take its place, it should stay where it is and try to continue to fill that gap.

[rory_20_uk]

Apes as far t have religion. Yet somehow against the odds they manage to exist in groups without a sense of sin bieng instilled into them.

And although we are supposed to be evolved apes, it seems some think we have lost these innate qualities

The church might like to think that it is still so important in our lives, but that is only because it has taken over far more basic features of our species and perverted them to its own slant on things.

Some religions are OK, especially those that let us be ourselves. The highly regimented, strictly indoctrinated hirachical ones are as needed in the 21st century as the Inquisition.

[PanzerJaeger]

The researchers were also shocked to discover little sense of sin

Amorality. Say what you like about Christianity, but the morals instilled by the church will be missed greatly when it disappears.

By all means celebrate the end of Christianity. In the absense of religion, wait and see what will rise.

[Sjakihata]

Say what you like about Christianity, but the morals instilled by the church will be missed greatly when it disappears.

By all means celebrate the end of Christianity. In the absense of religion, wait and see what will rise.

I should think Nietzsche has a perfect answer for that in Zur Genealogie der Moral

[Joker85]

By all means celebrate the end of Christianity.

I believe Christianity is the largest religion in the world, and the largest or 2nd largest growing religion in the world.

Combine that with the fact that 90+% of the world believes in some form of religion and I think people are a bit too giddy over a small study out of the UK.

The world does not revolve around 18-25 year old British subjects.

While old Europe (I mean that in the literal sense not as the buzz word it has become recently) is becoming more secular no doubt, they are also dealing with an influx of Muslims into their populations as well. Instead of going from Christianity to no religion, they may very well go from Christianity to Islam.

By the way my post was not at you Panzer, I just used your quote to touch on the theme that this thread seems to be taking.