Congratulations, Great Britain! (agnostic, gospel, pray, believers)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Great post! And I think it's a sign that people are beginning to really think about things more deeply; of course some surely think it's "scary" or something that people are moving away from religion but I believe it's quite the contrary. The farther away from organized religion we get, the closer we come to understanding the importance of personal responsibility and that it is necessary for a healthy, successful society- which, though many christians ignore or simply do not see, is exactly what jesus christ himself was trying to teach.
However, I think before we even begin to make assumptions about the percentage of "religious" people we think we have as per surveys like this, we really need to remember why people give the answers they do- and how valid the answers really are (or not). Not that anyone is knowingly fibbing, or saying they are religious or christian when they're not- but it's that I think there is a serious lack of understanding among most people when it comes to what it means to really BE religious- not to mention what it means to be CHRISTIAN- as per the standards of the religion itself. I think there are an awful lot of people who kind of blindly just say they're "christian" without even thinking about it- many of whom don't even go to church regularly! And I can attest to this personally...
...lately, I've lbeen sort of pressing many of my friends about religion, and the fact that they refer to themselves as "Christian". Cos quite frankly, when they say that they are, it irks me; only because I know they really are NOT, and it befuddles me as to why they still find comfort in attaching such an unbecoming label to themselves- when it isn't even appropriate.
SO I've found it quite interesting that, when I ask friends who say they are christian, I ask them why (and keep in mind I DO have a few friends that I know are devout christians and practice what they preach- I do not ask them this). The answers I get...they answer with such vague things as 'well I'm a good person, and I do unto others and I like Jesus and yadda yadda.."...and then when I ask them, "well, do you believe that jesus christ is your personal saviour, and that he died for your sins"? They ALL say, "well, no...". Which I find infinitely interesting...
SO- I guess my point is that with regard to these surveys- I think a lot of people's responses are inaccurate, and that Great Britain, as well as any place else, is probably even LESS religious than these surveys state. And mostly because it's just that a good lot of people really just lack the basic understanding of what religion in general means- much less the very one they claim to follow, or attach to themselves a label by which to be recognized, such as christianity. I think it's more about comfort than anything, and some people either don't really want to think about it- or are perhaps frightened to admit that they do actually have some doubts about that which they were taught and bred to believe, irregardless of the fact that they do live their lives as thinking, non-religious people.
Great post! And I think it's a sign that people are beginning to really think about things more deeply; of course some surely think it's "scary" or something that people are moving away from religion but I believe it's quite the contrary. The farther away from organized religion we get, the closer we come to understanding the importance of personal responsibility and that it is necessary for a healthy, successful society- which, though many christians ignore or simply do not see, is exactly what jesus christ himself was trying to teach.
However, I think before we even begin to make assumptions about the percentage of "religious" people we think we have as per surveys like this, we really need to remember why people give the answers they do- and how valid the answers really are (or not). Not that anyone is knowingly fibbing, or saying they are religious or christian when they're not- but it's that I think there is a serious lack of understanding among most people when it comes to what it means to really BE religious- not to mention what it means to be CHRISTIAN- as per the standards of the religion itself. I think there are an awful lot of people who kind of blindly just say they're "christian" without even thinking about it- many of whom don't even go to church regularly! And I can attest to this personally...
...lately, I've lbeen sort of pressing many of my friends about religion, and the fact that they refer to themselves as "Christian". Cos quite frankly, when they say that they are, it irks me; only because I know they really are NOT, and it befuddles me as to why they still find comfort in attaching such an unbecoming label to themselves- when it isn't even appropriate.
SO I've found it quite interesting that, when I ask friends who say they are christian, I ask them why (and keep in mind I DO have a few friends that I know are devout christians and practice what they preach- I do not ask them this). The answers I get...they answer with such vague things as 'well I'm a good person, and I do unto others and I like Jesus and yadda yadda.."...and then when I ask them, "well, do you believe that jesus christ is your personal saviour, and that he died for your sins"? They ALL say, "well, no...". Which I find infinitely interesting...
SO- I guess my point is that with regard to these surveys- I think a lot of people's responses are inaccurate, and that Great Britain, as well as any place else, is probably even LESS religious than these surveys state. And mostly because it's just that a good lot of people really just lack the basic understanding of what religion in general means- much less the very one they claim to follow, or attach to themselves a label by which to be recognized, such as christianity. I think it's more about comfort than anything, and some people either don't really want to think about it- or are perhaps frightened to admit that they do actually have some doubts about that which they were taught and bred to believe, irregardless of the fact that they do live their lives as thinking, non-religious people.
Another ^^^ that demonstrates they don't know the difference between "Biblianity"/"Churchianity" (Secular Religion) and "Christianity".
Christianity being a philosophy based on the message passed down through the ages in the legend of the man known as Jesus the Christ (thus the CHRISTianity designation)...and has it's core and basis in the mandates given to us through that message...to, "Love Each Other" and "Treat Others as You Would Want Them to Treat You".
No secular church attendance or literal readings of adulterated/polluted ancient writings are required to be a Christian.
Also, in case you didn't know it...ALL of us will fall short of a perfect adherence of those mandates...to a greater, or lesser, degree--Regardless of proclaimed true belief in the philosophy. Such inevitable human failings does not deny one having true faith/belief in the concept/viewpoint/mindset, and thus the designation of Christian.
Just as the inevitable lack of absolute/perfect adherence to the tenants of ANY philosophy/theology/concept doesn't deny one the designation...as long as that is what they truly believe.
You know I read the article and I came away with the feeling that, okay, there are fewer people in Great Britain that claim to be Christians but at the same time there is a noticeable increase of those who say they are not Christians, (51% now say they have no religion). But I wonder if that 51% believe in a different type of deity, it doesn't specify as to whether they are atheists or not.
It is interesting also to note that in the United States that one of the fastest growing beliefs is Wicca, I wonder what the percentage of Pagans are in Great Britain.
Another ^^^ that demonstrates they don't know the difference between "Biblianity"/"Churchianity" (Secular Religion) and "Christianity".
Christianity being a philosophy based on the message passed down through the ages in the legend of the man known as Jesus the Christ (thus the CHRISTianity designation)...and has it's core and basis in the mandates given to us through that message...to, "Love Each Other" and "Treat Others as You Would Want Them to Treat You".
No secular church attendance or literal readings of adulterated/polluted ancient writings are required to be a Christian.
Also, in case you didn't know it...ALL of us will fall short of a perfect adherence of those mandates...to a greater, or lesser, degree--Regardless of proclaimed true belief in the philosophy. Such inevitable human failings does not deny one having true faith/belief in the concept/viewpoint/mindset, and thus the designation of Christian.
Just as the inevitable lack of absolute/perfect adherence to the tenants of ANY philosophy/theology/concept doesn't deny one the designation...as long as that is what they truly believe.
Where is it in my post that I have led you to believe that I do not know the difference between "Biblianity"/"Churchianity" (Secular Religion) and "Christianity", as you say? I didn't even delve into that aspect, as that has nothing to do with what I was trying to say, and goes into a far deeper level that has absolutely nothing to do with the subject at hand as I believe I addressed it. But if you wish to pick apart what I was talking about, I guess I was mostly referring to the "secularly religious" people.
While I can appreciate and understand what you are saying- I think you missed my main point...which was, nothing more than saying that there are many people who 'think' they are part of something- be it a movement, religion, or anything else- without really understanding the core tenet and practices thereof.
There's a saying that says "going to church doesn't make you any more a christian than standing in a garage makes you a car". And perhaps that was one of the points you were making? Well taken, and understood. UNDERSTANDING is the part where I think people fall short, not their level of devotion insofar as ritualistic practices, such as going to church and so forth. And yes, I do know there are MANY different levels, degrees and views within EVERY religion. But again, my point was that there ARE many people who claim to be members of certain religions and even other movements without even really thinking and taking time to truly understand their core tenets. Does their own personal attachment make these people viable members of such groups? In their own minds, perhaps, and sure- let them have it if that makes them comfortable. But will I challenge them, and ask them questions in hopes that they will either back up and explain why they believe as they do- or, maybe even digress, and rethink their beliefs? You bet. And I welcome others to question me in the same way. I can't help but question such people insofar as their credibility to discern WHO they are as people, and where they stand on their own beliefs and how to best represent themselves and according beliefs/tenets. Nor does it make any sense to me- not to mention it definitely does throw a wrench into such studies/polls when it comes down to trying to nail down who really believes what with regard to religion, and that's really all I was trying to say.
It would be like those six blind men...standing next to sixty sighted people...and the six blind, telling the sixty sighted...that they were all either "liars and/or delusional", when they claimed to be looking at, and seeing, what they said they were looking at.
And that they came to this determination because NONE OF THOSE SIX were able to see it...thus objectively proving that there wasn't really anything there to see...and furthermore, that was objective proof those sixty sighted people, "were not right in the head and imagining things".
THAT is the comparative analogy.
No it isn't. You have it wrong because every time, the theist begins from an assumption that their Interpretation of the experience is the right one. Each of those fellows saw something different and that's why the claim to be 'sighted' is not untrue - no -one says that is untrue, but their different theist - based interpretations shows that none of them are to be trusted as regards their interpretation.
The analogy of the elephant is good enough but it begs the question, what is this 'elephant'?
You can call it 'god' but that is so often just another theist -based interpretation of the experience. You don't know and anyone who says they do know is illogical, blind and obtuse. To claim that your interpretation is right - it is the 'elephant' is just anothe blind claim. Truly blind.
The skeptic who accepts the reality of the experience but does not fall into the logical trap of claiming correct interpretation without valid cause is the one who can see better.
"Blessed those who have not seen yet have believed." Doubting Thomas had to see to believe, others did not need to see.
Thanks for reminding us of a salient example of the brainwashing trickery of Theism.
You will not of course have given a moment's thought to the fact (well let's say very strong evidence) that this episode is utterly fictitious. It does not fit in with the rest of the gospels and makes no sense.
It was invented by John and is there simply as a rhetorical trick to take the claim of a Jesus - divinity - proving event as reasons why we should believe this nonsense without question two thousand years later.
It is false, trickery and deceit, and that is what the whole resurrection account and indeed, the entire New Testament is about.
Where is it in my post that I have led you to believe that I do not know the difference between "Biblianity"/"Churchianity" (Secular Religion) and "Christianity", as you say? I didn't even delve into that aspect, as that has nothing to do with what I was trying to say, and goes into a far deeper level that has absolutely nothing to do with the subject at hand as I believe I addressed it. But if you wish to pick apart what I was talking about, I guess I was mostly referring to the "secularly religious" people.
While I can appreciate and understand what you are saying- I think you missed my main point...which was, nothing more than saying that there are many people who 'think' they are part of something- be it a movement, religion, or anything else- without really understanding the core tenet and practices thereof.
There's a saying that says "going to church doesn't make you any more a christian than standing in a garage makes you a car". And perhaps that was one of the points you were making? Well taken, and understood. UNDERSTANDING is the part where I think people fall short, not their level of devotion insofar as ritualistic practices, such as going to church and so forth. And yes, I do know there are MANY different levels, degrees and views within EVERY religion. But again, my point was that there ARE many people who claim to be members of certain religions and even other movements without even really thinking and taking time to truly understand their core tenets. Does their own personal attachment make these people viable members of such groups? In their own minds, perhaps, and sure- let them have it if that makes them comfortable. But will I challenge them, and ask them questions in hopes that they will either back up and explain why they believe as they do- or, maybe even digress, and rethink their beliefs? You bet. And I welcome others to question me in the same way. I can't help but question such people insofar as their credibility to discern WHO they are as people, and where they stand on their own beliefs and how to best represent themselves and according beliefs/tenets. Nor does it make any sense to me- not to mention it definitely does throw a wrench into such studies/polls when it comes down to trying to nail down who really believes what with regard to religion, and that's really all I was trying to say.
You are right and Gldnrule is right, too, in a way. Doing religion does not mean one is a religious believer. Not doing religion does not mean that one is not a religious believer.
I don't think I need labour the point. Bear that in mind as you read the various posts about religion, both those who are quite convinced that their own particular readings of their holy book ar the only right ones and those who insist that they are on a Hot line to God even if they have nothing to do with organised religion.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
