Sunday Selection

12346

Comments

  • Funnily enough, GFB - I didn't have ANY wine yesterday.....image

    And nor am I planning to have any today.image But I did get through a massive amount of Highland Spring Water! image

  • I'm not having any all week - but it's only because I need to lose weight image
  • Wow!  This has gone on and on and on, which is fantastic. 

    That's all!

    Sass (a Christian by profession!)

  • LSR then church.

    Or even both at the same time if you allow recording a bible reading, while out on a training run, which was played in church at the same time as I was half way round FLM.

    For the record I'm one of the leaders at our junior church, the children that come along to our groups on a Sunday have parents who already believe in God or who are just starting out learning about God themselves. We try to put on a range of activities that will the children will enjoy and also give them the opportunity to ask questions that they might not get the chance to ask otherwise. Yesterday we even roped in one of the parents who has severe hearing loss so that they could explore what it is like to go from being able to hear to having to deal with being deaf. It was very illuminating for all of us, not just the children.

      

  • Theres about 10 people from our church including the pastor doing our local half marahon on Saturday. image
  • OK I have a religion based question....

    I went and saw a play at the weekend called "inherit the wind" which is about the creationism verses evolution/darwin debate.
    My understanding of christianity is that the bible is the word of God and that in the bible it states that God created the earth in 7 days. Science has proved (certainly to me) that animals and plants are the way they are today because of millions of years of evolution and that therefore there's no way that things were put on this earth in its present form (by God or any other force).

    So do those of you who are religious believe in :

    A) Creationism and ignore the scientific 'proof' that the earth was not created in seven days as stated in the bible
    OR
    B) Evolution which (I assume) would mean that you accept that the bible is incorrect

    I was always brought up to undersatnd that those who are religious cannot 'believe' in evolutionism because it goes against what the bible states.
    Obviously I don't want to sound flippant or dismissive of someones religion, nor do I want to stir up a massive debate but I've not had the opportunity to ask this question before and I'd just like to know what opinions other people have

  • Lou-Lou - I'm both a Christian and an evolutionist. 

    The creation account in Genesis 1 was written at a time in Jewish history when the nation of Israel was encountering other cultures that believed in many gods and had their own creation myths. The "seven days" of Genesis 1 is probably a response to this - its a literary structure rather than a historical one. The point for the original writers and readers, in my view, was that one God made the earth, the sun, the stars, the land and sea, etc, rather than a different god ruling over each one. 

    The language of Genesis 1 isn't ordinary prose of the kind that you might expect in a historical narrative. It isn't poetry, but it isn't ordinary Hebrew either. I'm not sure that there is a modern equivalent, but the closest might be a kind of ceremonial language. 

    The kind of literalist interpretation that both creationists and their evolutionist opponents tend to take is, in my view, wrong. If Genesis had been written in the 19th century, it would probably have been written as a literal, scientific account of the origins of life. But it wasn't written in the 19th century - it was written in a time and culture that wrote history in very different ways to the way that we do. I don't see a contradiction between Genesis and evolution because I don't think that Genesis 1-3 was ever intended to be read as literal history. Even in Britain, literalist readings didn't become the main way of reading the Bible until around the 17th or 18th century.

     If you're interested in this topic, two books that are worth a look are Creation or Evolution: Do We Have to Choose? by Denis Alexander (a Christian and a biologist) and Can a Darwnian be a Christian? by Michael Ruse (atheist and philosopher of science).  

  • Only fundamentalists believe that every word in the bible represents historical truth.

    The creation stories, and there are two in the bible, come from an oral tradition, which I think dates back far longer than any of the other contents. Understandably given the subject matter.

    Personally I believe that evolution fits the evidence better than creationism. And does not diminish God as evolution is also Gods creation.

    If you are a Christian but not a fundamentalists, then the creation story tells us something about the relationship of God to us and the rest of his creation.

  • Problem is, with all religious texts, that sections can be taken literally to fulfil the readers own beliefs. Which is why we religous fundementalists of all persuasions believing it is their god given duty to kill or assimilate those of other beliefs.

    There has to be a distintion between those who believe that God created the universe, and those that adhear to a religion.

     Within a religoin there seems to be varieties of sects with their own interpretations. I think those who follow an organised religion fall into two groups. The first group reqire to be shown leadership and given the promise of eternal life if they follow the rules. The other group use religion to exercise personal power.

    I'm an agnostic.  There a various flavours of agnostic belief too, mine is that we don't have an explanation - yet, and may never have one, but an am positive that all religions are the invention of mankind for their own purpose, be it comfort or control.

  • Mak's friend wrote (see)

    Problem is, with all religious texts, that sections can be taken literally to fulfil the readers own beliefs. Which is why we religous fundementalists of all persuasions believing it is their god given duty to kill or assimilate those of other beliefs.

    That can be true of lots of texts, not just religious ones. Lots of people read Darwin and concluded that they should give evolution a helping hand by wiping out those parts of humanity that they didn't want to see reproducing.

    That's why responsible interpretation is important. If you spend serious time looking into culture and context, then the more extreme misreadings become far less likely. 

  • I think that correct suspicion of anyone, be they priest or Dawkins, who claims to have all the answers, is the responsible position.....
  • FR - can I borrow a pint of milk?image
  • Mak's friend wrote (see)

    Problem is, with all religious texts, that sections can be taken literally to fulfil the readers own beliefs. Which is why we religous fundementalists of all persuasions believing it is their god given duty to kill or assimilate those of other beliefs.

    There has to be a distintion between those who believe that God created the universe, and those that adhear to a religion.

     Within a religoin there seems to be varieties of sects with their own interpretations. I think those who follow an organised religion fall into two groups. The first group reqire to be shown leadership and given the promise of eternal life if they follow the rules. The other group use religion to exercise personal power.

    I'm an agnostic.  There a various flavours of agnostic belief too, mine is that we don't have an explanation - yet, and may never have one, but an am positive that all religions are the invention of mankind for their own purpose, be it comfort or control.

     I think there is some truth in what you say Mak's friend;

    People do grab the bits they fancy from religious texts to support their plans.What Aardvark said about the same happening with all texts is valid

    Assimilating those of other beliefs - I really have issues with evangelism which some believe is a fundamental part of Christianity. If you listen to a group of runners they are very similar to some Christians believing their lifestyle is 'the way' and dismissing those who don't run. I think any obsession/hobby etc can make you evangelical but religious types have had a nasty habit of acting superior with it

    No..... disagree with that paragraph. Fundamentalists believe word for word but talk to the rest of us and you'll probably find a broad range of belief with a single denominator being the resurrection

    I would neither describe myself as the group requiring leadership nor the group using religion to exercise personal power. I break rules and not everyone that knows me would know of my faith (they might think I'm a control freak but unrelated to religion)

    I think religion has often been and is still exploited by mankind to exercise power - don't think it was invented for that but it has evolved because of that........to it's detriment
  • Religion was invented? Sounds like an atheistic viewpoint to me.

    Very interesting bit of news today:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/sep/04/religion.uk

    (Chrome won't let me do links.)

    Whilst I'm prepared to be open-minded about the origins of the Universe (the physics of which quite honestly blow my mind, and I can't contemplate a singularity existing and then exploding into the universe), I really do think organised religion is a bunch of arse. Last time I was at a church wedding all the paraphenalia and what-not reminded me of Harry Potter. And as for Islam, well I'm sorry but I'm not digging any religion that doesn't let me have a beer, I'm sorry. that's just total madness. I've been drinking beer for years now, enjoy a pack of frazzles and have probably committed a multitude of other outrageous transgressions, but have yet to be struck down by lightning.

    I'm sure if I started worshipping Thor and held my services in public and stuck pamphlets through people's letterboxes uninvited and appeared on BBC1 doing "Battle Hymns of Praise" with a bit of pillaging and rape after the watershed, everyone would think I've gone crackers. So why is it that Christianity is treated seriously?

    Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, until that is forthcoming I'll stay in bed on Sunday mornings. In the event that God makes his presence felt (perhaps by Blackburn Rovers winning the FA Cup), I'll be somersaulting down to the altar with the best of them.

    There's so many things that stack up against religion, and it makes followers tie themselves up in knots to rationalise these facts in the context of their beliefs. e.g. the fossil record was placed there by God to test our faith. Proof denies faith, therefore to believe in God we must discount proof. Oh come on, it's just silly!

    Just ice up a cold one, sit back and enjoy your life and stop worrying about it all.
  • One final thing ... when Mrs Blumenwald was getting shoved into the oven at Auschwitz, why didn't God make His presence felt then? What was he doing that day, sorting the garden out? Why didn't he intervene? Did it take place in the absence of God, or was it just a test of faith?

    It must bve a difficult thing for people to countenance if they have true faith?
  • Hebrews 11 BCDB, Hebrews 11....image
  • Hebrews 11 Palestinians 0?

    image
  • Blackburn winning the FA Cup? Now that IS unbelievable.
  • The problem I have is the beginning. What was before God? What was before the big bang?

    I'll grant that mathematics and physics take us back, in a human derived model ,to the big bang, but can't explain what caused it.

    I've further concerns that the big bang model is not correct. An example of an incorrect model is Newtonian mechanics, which define how things accelerate, stop and move. When Netwon derived his laws of motion they fitted perfectly with the observations of the time. It wasn't until later when that pesky chap Einstien came along with the laws of relativity that suggested that the laws weren't quite right, but by such a small amount the effect was not measurable using current techniques. Then Eddington devised an expriment that showed light from a disant star bending during a solar eclipse, which confirmed Einstiens theory.

    And today we use relativistic equations without realising it. Did you know that your Garmin GPS watch has to include the relatvisitc effects of the movement and timing of signals from the GPS satalites?

    And saying God is, and always was doesn't answer the question either.

  • Mak's friend wrote (see)

    The problem I have is the beginning. What was before God? What was before the big bang?

    Bruce Forsyth of course!image
  • Ah! that explains it all. I'll rest easy now.
  • Nice to see you Mak's friend, to see you.....image
  • B.C.D.B. has asked one of the really difficult questions.

    Broadsword Calling Danny Boy wrote (see)
    One final thing ... when Mrs Blumenwald was getting shoved into the oven at Auschwitz, why didn't God make His presence felt then? What was he doing that day, sorting the garden out? Why didn't he intervene? Did it take place in the absence of God, or was it just a test of faith? It must bve a difficult thing for people to countenance if they have true faith?

    In response Here is a quote from anotherwebsite:

    "It was not God who failed during the Holocaust or in the Gulag, or on 9/11, or in Bosnia. It is not God who fails when human beings do barbaric things to other human beings. Auschwitz is not what happens when the God who says "Thou shalt not murder" and "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself" is silent. It is what happens when men and women refuse to listen."

    I have heard a better response, and here is a version of it:

    "A History of God, Karen Armstrong describes the episode thus:

    <blockquote>

    It took the child half an hour to die, while the prisoners were forced to look him in the face. The same man asked again: “Where is God now?” And Wiesel heard a voice within him make this answer: “Where is He? Here He is—He is hanging here on this gallows.” "

  • oops

    i was just going to post something really trivial and i have walked into the long standing why does god let bad things happen?
    either you believe or you don't, and if you don't then you don't and nothing that can be said will persuade you and you can go on nitpicking for ever
    Christians are happy in their belief, and as long as it is like that and not used as a brick to hit people with then i can't see what the problem is
    as with all faiths it is those who choose to use that faith to their own advantage who cause problems
    for the majority of Jews, Christians, Muslims, Hindu's etc their faith is a daily part of their lives and enriches them

    right

    anyway - what i was going to say was that i went on my long run and then had to shower quickly and get dressed and straight to mass - and now my legs are bliddy killing me!!

  • Yes, some people just believe and some don't. And if your religious beliefs are a private matter for you then you shouldn't be forced to hold them open to scrutiny.

    Equally some people find it difficult to rationalise the existence of a benevolent creator but wouldn't consider themselves fully-f;ledged atheists. They find themselves uncertain as to the origins of the Universe and find tehmselves questioning it. There's nothing wrong with that, either,

  • Quaker meeting lasts 1 hour exactly, plus about 1/2 hour of socialising afterwards, and it is in Ely for me, which has great places to go running imagehttps://us.v-cdn.net/6027274/uploads/forum/smilies/smile_smiley.gif' /> for the LSR.

    Exception was this week, as my beloved needed some help with some work, so we did the work then I did my LSR, then did some of my own work this afternoon.

    60 minutes, non-stop run, estimated around 8km distance today.

    Helen
  • lurker

    oops indeed

    Sorry things got heavy just when you wanted to post.

    Today MrsBD wanted to go to a not so local village, to a church there, which is now based in a school and is trying to sell the old church buildings. (see previous stuff about church being the people not the building)

    And she wanted me to go too, which, was OK with me, so long as I was allowed to do the return journey as my LSR. Which I did.(14.4miles)

    On getting home I did preparation for this evenings food. (making pizza dough and frying onions)

    Then we went to our usual church in the evening, which went on longer than expected,and I was a bit late with cooking our nosh. We had a visiting preacher who went on about back to church Sunday, which is in a couple of weeks.

  • Kiwihelen wrote (see)
    Quaker meeting lasts 1 hour exactly, plus about 1/2 hour of socialising afterwards,

    Crikey! Some of ours go on for hours.....imagehttps://us.v-cdn.net/6027274/uploads/forum/smilies/confused_smiley.gif' />

    *looks up Quaker meeting houses in area*imagehttps://us.v-cdn.net/6027274/uploads/forum/smilies/smile_smiley.gif' />

  • We start at 10.30 and finish around 12.30 then the tea and buns!  (Thats when we aren't on the music then we're there since 8.00 imagehttps://us.v-cdn.net/6027274/uploads/forum/smilies/big_smile_smiley.gif' /> ) And then from Oct to June we have a youth meeting at 7.00!!
  • Quaker meetings

    http://www.quaker.org.uk/fam/

    You just have to put up with an hour of silence imagehttps://us.v-cdn.net/6027274/uploads/forum/smilies/smile_smiley.gif' />
Sign In or Register to comment.