StanBalaban Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 For what it's worth, I actually agree with most of the above tbh, I don't believe in the vast majority of Christianity, and particularly Catholicism, because it's far too influenced by man and not a 'superior being', as suggested. That said, I disagree with the writings of people like Marx and Freud who suggest it has been developed to suppress people, and that it is 'neurosis of the mind'. But nor to I agree with the Pope, that it should be followed word for word. I think the answer lies somewhere in the middlebrow the two, and religion is useful for some to a certain extent. A question Verb, as I'm genuinely interested, if I may? It would seem that you're a theist, yet you do not believe the Bible is the word of god. You also mention that you don't believe in the vast majority of Christianity. Just wondering what your 'version' for want of a better word, your impression of god is, why you believe in that particular god - as opposed to the gods in the Hindu faith for example - and what makes you believe in a god at all? Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted July 6, 2012 Author VT Supporter Share Posted July 6, 2012 It's terrifying, it really is. We shouldn't be allowed near fire let alone anything else - we're too thick. Potentially a significant portion of the most powerful nation on earth believes in guardian angels. We're doomed. I'm beginning to think you're right. Crossposted from the Higgs Boson thread: This twitter feed is hilarious, retweeting the reactions of hardcore religious people to the news of the discovery of the "God Particle". https://twitter.com/#!/derpparticle Do read it. You won't know whether to laugh or cry. Makes me want to punch them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legov Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 but Christianity (on the whole) teaches a good set of values, that if we all lived by, we would be a little better off. :? Doing "good" because you were told to isn't really good at all. If people are good only because they fear punishment, and hope for reward, then we are a sorry lot indeed. Albert Einstein Religious morality is on very shaky ground IMO and it always bemuses me that it is held up as some moral standard . It is based on fear , greed and obedience yet is lauded as a positive ideal . A non believer who does "good" because they have worked out for themselves that it makes the world a better place has a far greater grasp of morality than any believer who is following orders or seeks heaven/fears hell. I mean really....Do you have to be told that killing each other is a bad thing ? It's insane when you think about it . This, this, this. Although I'd say that sadly for some people, tangible rewards in exchange are necessary to compel them to do good deeds. If religion can fill this void, I say why not - better that they do charitable works for the wrong reasons, than do nothing at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legov Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 This twitter feed is hilarious, retweeting the reactions of hardcore religious people to the news of the discovery of the "God Particle". https://twitter.com/#!/derpparticle Do read it. You won't know whether to laugh or cry. Makes me want to punch them. **** scientists just had to name it the God particle. What do you call people who only read the headlines whenever they open the newspaper? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StanBalaban Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 It's terrifying, it really is. We shouldn't be allowed near fire let alone anything else - we're too thick. Potentially a significant portion of the most powerful nation on earth believes in guardian angels. We're doomed. I'm beginning to think you're right. Crossposted from the Higgs Boson thread: This twitter feed is hilarious, retweeting the reactions of hardcore religious people to the news of the discovery of the "God Particle". https://twitter.com/#!/derpparticle Do read it. You won't know whether to laugh or cry. Makes me want to punch them. Wow! Just wow! :shock: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted July 6, 2012 Author VT Supporter Share Posted July 6, 2012 Although I'd say that sadly for some people, tangible rewards in exchange are necessary to compel them to do good deeds. If religion can fill this void, I say why not - better that they do charitable works for the wrong reasons, than do nothing at all.Complete the sentence: "The only thing that keeps me from committing crimes is..." You'd kind of hope that the answer would be "A conscience", or "An awareness of right and wrong", wouldn't you? There was a local TV programme on the other night about some modern version of a youth club, where unemployable chav scrotes go to do creative stuff (read: rapping. Sigh) that keeps them off the streets. And one of them completed that sentence with ...coming to this place". Shameless, indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legov Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 Although I'd say that sadly for some people, tangible rewards in exchange are necessary to compel them to do good deeds. If religion can fill this void, I say why not - better that they do charitable works for the wrong reasons, than do nothing at all.Complete the sentence: "The only thing that keeps me from committing crimes is..." You'd kind of hope that the answer would be "A conscience", or "An awareness of right and wrong", wouldn't you? There was a local TV programme on the other night about some modern version of a youth club, where unemployable chav scrotes go to do creative stuff (read: rapping. Sigh) that keeps them off the streets. And one of them completed that sentence with ...coming to this place". Shameless, indeed. Again, lesser of two evils. Better that they do right because of the wrong reasons, than do wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted July 6, 2012 Author VT Supporter Share Posted July 6, 2012 Although I'd say that sadly for some people, tangible rewards in exchange are necessary to compel them to do good deeds. If religion can fill this void, I say why not - better that they do charitable works for the wrong reasons, than do nothing at all.Complete the sentence: "The only thing that keeps me from committing crimes is..." You'd kind of hope that the answer would be "A conscience", or "An awareness of right and wrong", wouldn't you? There was a local TV programme on the other night about some modern version of a youth club, where unemployable chav scrotes go to do creative stuff (read: rapping. Sigh) that keeps them off the streets. And one of them completed that sentence with ...coming to this place". Shameless, indeed. Again, lesser of two evils. Better that they do right because of the wrong reasons, than do wrong.Sure. But it is a sign of the times. When I wor a lad, there was just as much petty crime, with the same types committing it. The difference is that if they were interviewed on TV they would deny it strenuously, swearing that they were little angels. Nowadays they're all like that "Fast Show" character - "I'm a little bit 'whey', I'm a little bit 'whoa', I'm a dodgy geezer, me". They are seemingly quite proud of their antisocial behaviour, and have no fear of public disapproval (let alone punishment). At best they might blame society. There's no concept of choosing not to commit crimes at all. I don't suppose fear of God would work on them either, mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legov Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 The difference is that if they were interviewed on TV they would deny it strenuously, swearing that they were little angels Somehow I doubt this have no fear of public disapproval (let alone punishment) What if the punishment in question was "you'll be burned in hell forever if you do xxx"? The litany of punishments detailed in the Christian and Islamic religions are (at first glance, at least) far, far more frightening than any prospect of public shame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted July 6, 2012 Author VT Supporter Share Posted July 6, 2012 The difference is that if they were interviewed on TV they would deny it strenuously, swearing that they were little angels Somehow I doubt this I'm talking about 40-50 years ago. There just wasn't that level of "**** you" on display. It may have existed, but it wouldn't have been shown in the media. And if it had there would have been a MASSIVE public outrage. Now, it just gets taken for granted. I'm not saying that delinquent behaviour has got worse, just that people take it more for granted. Which is possibly less hypocritical and self-delusional, I dunno. I think what I'm getting at is that back then it would have gone: "I'd be out robbing people if I didn't come down here and play skiffle with me mates" "WHAT? You ADMIT that you're a robber? Have you no SHAME? You should be in JAIL, not playing pop music at the public's expense!" But now, it's: "I'd be out robbing people if I didn't come down here and do rap with me mates" "Oh, splendid. Nice to see you doing it, then. Well done social services". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legov Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 Ah, it all comes together nao. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limpid Posted July 6, 2012 Administrator Share Posted July 6, 2012 **** scientists just had to name it the God particle. They didn't/don't. Scientists call it the Higgs Boson. Leon Lederman wanted to call it the "Goddamn Particle" in his book title, but the publishers insisted on the stupid term everyone bandies about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted July 6, 2012 Author VT Supporter Share Posted July 6, 2012 I wonder how the idiots on that Twitter thread would have reacted if it had been called (say) "The Darwin Particle", or "The Dawkins Particle"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legov Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 **** scientists just had to name it the God particle. They didn't/don't. Scientists call it the Higgs Boson. Leon Lederman wanted to call it the "Goddamn Particle" in his book title, but the publishers insisted on the stupid term everyone bandies about. Sorry, forgot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 6, 2012 Moderator Share Posted July 6, 2012 Now they've discover this God particle, I believe in Higgs Boson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limpid Posted July 6, 2012 Administrator Share Posted July 6, 2012 I "believed" in it before Blandy. Matter has mass and the standard model says it's because of a field generated by the particle predicted by Higgs. The standard model has proven time and again what a good fit it is for the universe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 The "God particle" is full of crap! the big bang theory is just rubbish, Science is full of shit! Higgs can kiss my ass!!!! Actual comedy gold, I didn't know people like that could use a keyboard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumerican Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 The "God particle" is full of crap! the big bang theory is just rubbish, Science is full of shit! Higgs can kiss my ass!!!! Actual comedy gold, I didn't know people like that could use a keyboard. The Big Bang Theory is not brilliant by any means . It's formulaic , predictable and has a laughter track but it isn't rubbish . It's light hearted fun with a bit of education thrown in . The characters are likeable and there are a few genuine belly laughs per episode. I don't know what this guys problem is . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumerican Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 But seriously.... "Science is full of shit" when written over the internet (One of THE great scientific inventions of all time) is a tad ironic no ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted July 6, 2012 Author VT Supporter Share Posted July 6, 2012 But seriously...."Science is full of shit" when written over the internet (One of THE great scientific inventions of all time) is a tad ironic no ? Don't be ridiculous, everybody knows God gave us the internet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts