what happened to free speech

[Gibbon]

Nobody denies that religion is in decline in Europe. Christianity is still a big deal in the States, and very much so in South America and Africa. That will continue to be the case so long as "...the vast majority are mired in ignorance and superstition."

It's "disingenuous", by the way. Maybe you should attempt to stick to words you know the meaning of?

Stop deflecting with the spelling police. I know full well the meaning of the word. You however tried some pretty poor misdirection.

[d000hg]

stick a turban on his 'ead
and it becomes even oftener

On Jesus or t'other bloke?

[d000hg]

The proper answer (and it is not inconsistent with religion) is that morality exists within a cultural and social context, and that the fact that morality exists (you might argue) is a sign of God's will to guide us through his living Church within the societies which tha Church serves.

No I'd argue that morality is absolute but we are just not very good at understanding it. We've taken great steps in asserting that all people are equal regardless of gender and race, but that doesn't follow that the more permissive we get, the better we're doing. The fact that marriage is in some way special is not open to negotiation for instance, regardless of the fact it's seen as old-fashioned.

I respectively disagree.

Christianity has had neigh on 2000 thousand years to convince of it's
doctrine and it's thankfully a failed experiment.

It's not an experiment, and it hasn't failed.

The decline in the seats of Christian power is there to see.

Take Anglican, do more people go to church in London than not even discounting the faithful of other religions?

Take Catholic, do more people go to church in Rome than not?

There have historically been declines and revivals in the church as I'm sure YOU know well. However to look only at church attendance isn't valid. It used to be socially expected to attend church and now if anything the opposite is true... BUT these days a greater % of church attendees (in the UK) are actually believers going out of choice. There are lots of green shoots of revival even in the West, young energetic charismatic churches taking over from the traditional institutions. In places like China there is a HUGE explosion of conversions.

People have been saying for centuries that religion is outmoded and about to expire... but it hasn't and it won't.

[Mich the Tester]

Hopefully you get an opportunity to repent before the facing the ultimate test.

You mean they're going to hire me to test his SAS reports?

[OwlHoot]

Ah yes.

The Illuminati.

Sasgurati

(as he obviously considers himself one of them)

[hyperD]

Great thread, that's why 1,000 miles away, having young virgin waitresses serve me chilled offerings on my wooden altar, I keep reading CUK.

All praise be to Mr Admin and his disciples.

[Gibbon]

No I'd argue that morality is absolute but we are just not very good at understanding it. We've taken great steps in asserting that all people are equal regardless of gender and race, but that doesn't follow that the more permissive we get, the better we're doing. The fact that marriage is in some way special is not open to negotiation for instance, regardless of the fact it's seen as old-fashioned.

It's not an experiment, and it hasn't failed.

There have historically been declines and revivals in the church as I'm sure YOU know well. However to look only at church attendance isn't valid. It used to be socially expected to attend church and now if anything the opposite is true... BUT these days a greater % of church attendees (in the UK) are actually believers going out of choice. There are lots of green shoots of revival even in the West, young energetic charismatic churches taking over from the traditional institutions. In places like China there is a HUGE explosion of conversions.

People have been saying for centuries that religion is outmoded and about to expire... but it hasn't and it won't.

I'm with you btw on marriage, not from religous conviction though.

The rest, nicely argued and defended.

[speling bee]

No I'd argue that morality is absolute but we are just not very good at understanding it. We've taken great steps in asserting that all people are equal regardless of gender and race, but that doesn't follow that the more permissive we get, the better we're doing. The fact that marriage is in some way special is not open to negotiation for instance, regardless of the fact it's seen as old-fashioned.

It's not an experiment, and it hasn't failed.

There have historically been declines and revivals in the church as I'm sure YOU know well. However to look only at church attendance isn't valid. It used to be socially expected to attend church and now if anything the opposite is true... BUT these days a greater % of church attendees (in the UK) are actually believers going out of choice. There are lots of green shoots of revival even in the West, young energetic charismatic churches taking over from the traditional institutions. In places like China there is a HUGE explosion of conversions.

People have been saying for centuries that religion is outmoded and about to expire... but it hasn't and it won't.

So if morality is absolute, we have always been wrong to deny gay people marriage. Now we will correct that wrong.

Is witch killing right or wrong in absolute terms? Remember: thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.

And religion is happy to change its views on marriage. How many wives did King Solomon have? Did God see this as sinful or not real marriage? In absolute terms is polygamy right or wrong?

[d000hg]

Taking individual verses and quoting them is not a sound basis for argument, for either side. It's like a tabloid taking a misleading soundbite/quote.

I don't see the point in arguing if specific things are right or wrong - my original argument is simply that you can't rationally expect a religion to change in order to fit in with a world-view that religion doesn't follow.

I would say that there are some issues the bible (or other holy books) specifically say are right/wrong, and others that are not explicitly discussed.

I would also assert that an atheist cannot possibly defend the idea of moral absolutism. TBH I find the whole idea of morality without a higher power to be as daft as you consider a religious group telling the world they know what 'the truth' is.

[xoggoth]

TBH I find the whole idea of morality without a higher power to be as daft as you consider a religious group telling the world they know what 'the truth' is

Who cares about morality? An ordered society is about serving our needs in a practical way. We may not know why but it is in our nature to seek certain things like happiness, emotional comfort and mental stimulation and to avoid others like, pain, loneliness and boredom. Man is a social animal and to maximise our experience of life we cooperate with our fellows. We don't need the ten commandments to tell us that stealing or violence is wrong, nature tells us that by making us unhappy when we experience them.

I would also assert that an atheist cannot possibly defend the idea of moral absolutism

You're quite right on that one. No atheist would ever be daft enough to believe in moral absolutism!