If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
I'm arguing against a particularly naive, unsophisticated and rather literal interpretation of religion/spirituality/magick.
In your opinion.
An opinion which is shared my many people with a more sophisticated view of belief than you seem to have.
Look, this is a debating forum - part of debate is challenging ideas and concepts that are presented - if you feel secure in your religion, then thats great, but you cannot expect everyone to feel the same about it - or to just accept that it is what you say it is.
I do understand it and I do accept the concept - I just think that the language you use to describe it is somewhat naive.
Belief is a powerful thing and I think that all religions are expressing universal truths, but they are not physical truths, so to say that you "know" Jesus in the same way as you know, say, your gran, is not true.
You are expressing things too literally, when they are metaphors, allegorys for certain aspects of human experience and the human psyche that can't easily be talked about.
And no, this is not "Christian baiting". It's an attempt to discuss these things in a more sophistiacted manner.
Tatchell stormed the most important religious ceremony of the year for all Anglicans. Are you telling me that every single Anglican is a homophobic bigot who should have their religion and their beliefs trampled upon?
I don't care if someone believes in God or not, but that doesn't give them the right to do that. If I went into a Mosque and didn't take my shoes off I would be rightly condemned- what Tatchell did is far worse than this.
Anyway, the CofE's attitude to homosexuality isn't that bad anyway. I haven't yet seen Tatchell complaining about the holiday resort company Sandal's.
Not the same as pissing in yer gran's bed though.
No, not literally. But it is just as disrespectful.
No?
I'm not sure how this will go down in such places as the Deep South
There's criticism and there's pointless attacks.
And there's criticism and telling someone that they are wrong for having faith.
It's all about respect, hon. You don't seem to ahve quite grasped that concept yet.
it was better before they started ask whether they accpet gays or not, before all this debate happened, it was widely accepted that there were a lot of gay preists, but they had their faith and done their job well
its odd before they started discussing it, it was more tolerant, cause if you ask questions on whether to allow, it says there is a difference between the 2 groups, when really there isnt
as long as a preist is belebate i dont give a toss bout their actuual sexuality
What's the point of that?
Absolutly. Being told that I have an unsophisicated view of hte world because of the belief I hold is also thoroughly objectionable. You know for a fact that I am not stupid, that I do not accept things just because I've been told them. You all know that. If you don't then you need to learn to read. I know Christ, I know him personally, if you can't understand it that's fine, but belittling it is unacceptable.
You do NOT know Christ like you know your gran - you've never touched him, sat down to have lunch with him, hugged him goodbye.
You may however feel that you are spiritually in touch with a Christ like concept/feeling. That I understand.
Why are religous people so defensive? If your faith was strong, you wouldn't give a fuck.
Otherwise we should stop laughing at Bush's claims that God "talks to him" and "dictates his policy". Same difference, isn't it?
Do you have to touch someone or have lunch with someone or hug someone to 'know' them?
You know what GWST and Fiend mean. Like they said, you can seek their reasons for their beliefs but it is simply disrespectful to tell them what they mean by 'to know Christ personally'.
come on blagsta, by applying this logic, why do you respond when people say hunting should not be banned and that it is okay? if you are really firm in your beliefs about hunting then you wouldn't give a fuck about those think differently. BUT NO, you have to defend your position. when someone undermines or challenges what you hold as fact and truth you get upset, likewise when you try to tell someone what they believe is wrong and a pile of pants then they have everyright to defend their beliefs.
spill the beans then please