|
Post by tangent on Sept 11, 2015 2:28:45 GMT
On the other hand, no one takes pastafarians seriously. Like you don't have to believe in God to be a member of the Anglican church You have to believe in God to become a member of the Anglican Church in the UK. One becomes a member at a Confirmation Service during which time the bishop asks the prospective candidates if they are willing to renew their faith in Jesus Christ. It used to be a requirement - and a legal requirement in the UK until recently - that a declaration of faith was made during every service, "I believe in God, the Father Almighty etc" but some Anglican Churches often omit the declaration.
|
|
|
Post by JoeP on Sept 11, 2015 8:49:49 GMT
Don't forget freshly ground pepper.
|
|
|
Post by JoeP on Sept 11, 2015 8:55:49 GMT
That was in response to Moose not Steve ... but it does align with his point on not taking pastafarianism seriously.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2015 10:43:59 GMT
In my tradition we tend to think of Satan being against our values of love and care for others. A Church of Satan would be an organization where greed, egotism, hatred etc were championed. I can't imagine any of the beloved atheists of my acquaintance associating themselves with such an organization. Most of the atheists I know support the same values that I do: integrity, fairness, love and support of those who are destitute and marginalized. I agree with Kye, but would like to add that I have heard even worse things that have been practised among those who call themselves Satanists. In Germany, there was a case in the 90s (I think): a boy was killed by two other teenage boys who called themselves Satanists. Elsewhere, I have heard about taking someone's cat and "sacrificing" it and romours (I hope those were just rumours) of sacrificing babies. If someone claims to be a member of the Church of Satan, I would assume that they do these things. To me, that is completely different from being an atheist.
|
|
|
Post by Moose on Sept 11, 2015 14:00:03 GMT
I think Joe's comment about the Anglican church was a joke
|
|
|
Post by tangent on Sept 11, 2015 15:53:09 GMT
Oh
|
|
|
Post by Miisa on Sept 11, 2015 16:30:57 GMT
What is mentioned here is similar to the remnants of the Satanic Panic, which was a idea going around in the 80's and 90's, but has since been discredited. Those who may have attributed their crimes to Satan were mostly actually Christians with mental problems, and most of the cause of the panic itself wasn't even real crimes but were manufactured by memory suggestion, and it was never any sort of organised movement. Have you read the statements on the pages listed earlier? They are actually quite benign, not really what they have been assumed to be by those condemning them. However, I misspoke originally, I think it isn't actually the actual Church of Satan that is doing the activist work in the US (they are a real church set up back in the 60's, I think, and perhaps the aforementioned theistic Satanists), it is the Satanic Temple, which appears to be purely set up for this kind of activist purposes. And I am not sure using, for instance, Muslims in the same way would work as well. For one thing, they may not wish to get into the fight (though I believe the Hindus expressed an interest in putting up something in front of the Oklahoma courthouse after the Satanic Temple were briefly allowed to put up their statue next to the ten commandments monument), and there is always this idea that they are similar in their interests and thus not a shockingly frightening. That said, especially Muslim comparisons are used a lot as well. Also, perhaps thanks to the idea of Satanist being the very opposite of what Christians value (disregarding what they actually believe), makes them all the more jarring in the comparisons. Wicca also has the same bad reputation amongst many theists, especially Christians.
|
|
|
Post by Miisa on Sept 11, 2015 16:50:52 GMT
Like you don't have to believe in God to be a member of the Anglican church You have to believe in God to become a member of the Anglican Church in the UK. I know Joe's comment was meant tongue-in-cheek, but to respond to reply seriously, there is a difference between being a member and becoming a member. A lot of atheists started out theist and (generally gradually) found they no longer believe, well into adulthood*. I don't know how it works in the UK, but at least here a lot of people just remain members until something prompts them into action to resign. And they remain members while wishy-washy atheists despite paying a church tax out of their salaries. * for a touching but surprisingly entertaining glimpse into this process, listen to Julia Sweeney's Letting Go Of God, it seems to be available on YouTube. It is a 2-hour comedy monologue she did.
|
|
|
Post by Moose on Sept 11, 2015 18:36:10 GMT
As I am unbaptised I am not a member of anything
|
|
|
Post by Miisa on Sept 11, 2015 18:40:47 GMT
I am baptised, but was never enrolled in the church here when we moved when I was a child. At 15 I could join in order to go with all my friends to confirmation camp, but found it would be dishonest, so stayed home and thus never grew up.
|
|
|
Post by juju on Sept 11, 2015 19:20:06 GMT
You can resign from a church? Is that a thing?
Most people in Britain are baptised but then never go again unless for weddings and funerals, so I guess formally resigning wouldn't be an issue, if it even exists here. Also, we don't have confirmation camps - not many kids get confirmed unless their parents are particularly religious.
|
|
|
Post by Miisa on Sept 11, 2015 19:29:50 GMT
It is a difference between here and there I have noticed: you are either in a church registry (and we have two state churches) or the civil one, and if you leave the church, it has to be official and your paperwork gets transferred to the civil registry. But there is always some registry that knows your vitals, address, etc. Also means that if you move house you only have to notify one place and everything will follow. Also no need for a census as they already have an up-to date list on everyone all the time.
Confirmation camps are mostly tradition here, though my son found his one last year very churchy and boring. We also did offer him the chance to go to the new secular alternative (the Prometheus camp), and he loved that one. But not going at all means you really miss out on an important coming-of-age things that all your peers have undergone. Other reasons most kids go to confirmation camps is because of other traditions; if you are not confirmed and a member of the church you cannot get married in a church and you also can't become an official godparent. Until just a few years ago you also couldn't get buried in a churchyard.
|
|
|
Post by Kye on Sept 11, 2015 21:30:00 GMT
Wow! That's much more churchy than here! Here, confirmation is really at the discretion of the family. (These days it's often just the grandparent that wants it.) (I kept seeing concentration camps instead of confirmation camps... )
|
|
|
Post by Moose on Sept 11, 2015 21:33:14 GMT
Antti told me that he only went to his confirmation camp thingy to try and get laid. Apparently, he didn't.
|
|
|
Post by robert on Sept 12, 2015 3:31:04 GMT
I understand the symbolism thing about Satan and it's opposition to Christian doctrine, but by calling it Satanism one, I think, is asserting a deity of some sort at least indirectly. To me, it would be more sensible to call it nihilism, or deontology or something. I think Theistic Satanism makes more sense as far as worshiping and revering what the name of the religion implies. I mean I think it is absurd, but at least the name makes sense to the doctrine or belief system.
|
|
|
Post by robert on Sept 12, 2015 3:33:00 GMT
It should be called the Church of the Emergent Consciousness.
|
|
|
Post by Alvamiga on Sept 12, 2015 7:56:21 GMT
I thought the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster was pure satire. It was set up in response to various issues with state bodies imposing rules that people did not agree with. I think there's a decent amount of satire thrown in!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2015 20:44:58 GMT
You can resign from a church? Is that a thing? Most people in Britain are baptised but then never go again unless for weddings and funerals, so I guess formally resigning wouldn't be an issue, if it even exists here. Also, we don't have confirmation camps - not many kids get confirmed unless their parents are particularly religious. In Germany, you pay church tax if you are a member of the bid Protestant or Catholic church. So people do make the decision to leave so they won't have to pay it. Most kids do confirmation here because they tend to get lots of money from their relatives.
|
|
|
Post by tangent on Sept 12, 2015 21:39:19 GMT
A good reason if any
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2015 21:57:20 GMT
A good reason if any I didn't get to do it because we were in the Baptist Church when I was that age. Sometimes I was a little jealous of the other kids.
|
|
|
Post by robert on Sept 12, 2015 22:48:38 GMT
Hail Satan ha
|
|
|
Post by tangent on Sept 13, 2015 8:27:39 GMT
I know Joe's comment was meant tongue-in-cheek, but to respond to reply seriously, there is a difference between being a member and becoming a member. A lot of atheists started out theist and (generally gradually) found they no longer believe, well into adulthood*. I don't know how it works in the UK, but at least here a lot of people just remain members until something prompts them into action to resign. And they remain members while wishy-washy atheists despite paying a church tax out of their salaries. Im not very good at spotting tongue-in-cheek comments. Many people drift away from the church not because they stop believing in God, although some do, but because they find it boring or irrelevant. Or perhaps they joined without knowing what they believe in. It was the custom many years ago for young teenagers to be confirmed, probably because it was expected of them. Today, in my church and probably the majority of Anglican churches, it's always the older teenagers and adults who are confirmed so the presumption is they know what they're doing. Confirmation is just one part of being a member. You can also sign a piece of paper to join the electoral roll, which means you can attend an annual general meeting and vote for the church officers. You must have attended the church regularly for six months to be able to do that. The electoral roll is renewed every six years so basically it comprises a list of current members. By law, the list must be pinned to the church door every year just before the AGM (or in some other prominent position) so we know who can attend the meeting.
|
|
|
Post by kingedmund on Sept 13, 2015 15:22:14 GMT
Just one big mess. I don't want any religion. Can one believe in god but not religion. I don't follow a church or a person preaching about it mostly because every church or religious person thinks they are more right about some 2000+ year old book.
|
|
|
Post by tangent on Sept 13, 2015 15:53:46 GMT
That's in America. It's different in Europe.
|
|
|
Post by JoeP on Sept 13, 2015 16:28:31 GMT
Very different.
|
|
|
Post by Moose on Sept 14, 2015 20:46:01 GMT
Actually it's not so different. In what way is it different? There might not be as much biblical literalism but you, Steve, have said yourself that you think that the JEsus story would 'hold up in court' (I do not!). So ultimately you are doing what Brett says
|
|
|
Post by tangent on Sept 14, 2015 20:58:58 GMT
I don't follow a church or a person preaching about it mostly because every church or religious person thinks they are more right about some 2000+ year old book. Perhaps, KE, I might have misunderstood your comment. Could you give us an example of what you mean? If you're saying one group of Christians believe in infant baptism and another group doesn't then I would agree with you. Furthermore, I would say it's not unhealthy for two people to have different views. In that sense, America and Europe are the same. But if you're saying American groups cannot co-exist unless they believe the same things in minute detail, I would say that Europe has a more tolerant attitude in accepting different views. Anglicans do not try to convert baptists in the UK but they do in America. Actually it's not so different. In what way is it different? There might not be as much biblical literalism but you, Steve, have said yourself that you think that the JEsus story would 'hold up in court' (I do not!). So ultimately you are doing what Brett says I think it depends on what Brett is saying.
|
|
|
Post by Moose on Sept 14, 2015 21:09:32 GMT
I understood him to mean that - well every religious person (and non religious person, indeed) is secretly convinced that they are right. I am able to accept that religion might be true but deep in my heart I simply do not think that there is a God and that it's all, sorry to use this word but - nonsense and fairy tales. But you think that you're right and everyone else thinks that THEY'RE right. I am certainly not saying that my opinion is better or more valid than anyone else's but that I sometimes feel wearily amused that no matter who you speak to and what their faith is, the feel deep down that it's correct. My friend Islam keeps trying to convince me that his religion is the correct one. I do not think that it is. But at the same time, I suppose it's just as likely to be true as Christianity is. And I do not think that either is.
|
|
|
Post by tangent on Sept 14, 2015 21:25:29 GMT
Yes, I can see where you're coming from. We're looking at this from slightly different angles.
"But you think that you're right and everyone else thinks that THEY'RE right." Yes, because that's faith. Not many people think, "I believe in Christianity but maybe I should be a Muslim."
|
|
|
Post by kingedmund on Sept 15, 2015 3:43:15 GMT
To clarifying my stance. I could not care less about what other people are following. I just stated that I believe that there is a god but I just don't follow what some one else says on how they interpret a book or idea. In fact I really see the bible as a passed down hearsay. Take the goodness out of it and throw away the rest of the trash. God has more important things to do than worry about how I live as long as it honest, happy, does no harm to others, and etc..
|
|