Has anyone tried the Alpha course?

[Bizzy]

Indiepanda

It sounds like you've had some unfortunate eperiences with religion. I personally don't know much about JW, or the Catholic Church.

It's true, there are plenty of Churches that look after themselves, and it doesn't take long to find out, which is a cue to move on to another Church in my opinion. On the other hand, there are Churches that do pray for everyone, and not just their own congregation. There are also Churches that do a lot for their community.

Exclusive groups - that is true for many groups out there, religious or other. Belonging to a Christian group shouldn't be seen as something exclusive, as it's their aim to bring as many people to Christ.

[RosieH]

Thanks indiepanda - to be honest I know nothing of the Alpha Course.

Belonging to a Christian group shouldn't be seen as something exclusive, as it's their aim to bring as many people to Christ.

Bizzy, what's your take on people who aren't interested? Do you persist in trying to convert? And what's your reply to the anti-gay stance indiepanda mentioned?

I know that hypocrisy can be rife in organised religion, but I think that's more a purely human trait than a religious one. I suspect I sound like a big hippy, but on religion (as on many things) unless it's hurting someone, then live and let live. That said, I'd still get narky if having politely declined attempts at saving my soul, someone continued to try to convert me.

[Huguenot]

Bizzy, you have no knowledge of religion turning against religion? Go look up the Huguenots, or the crusades, or Northern Ireland or the Inquisition etc. etc. Organised religion is a political weapon.

You have a strangely rose-tinted view of religion that suggests either a limited historical knowledge or that you're cherry picking the pretty bits. If you're in denial you'll reject the role that religion played in the examples above. That wouldn't be reasonable.

Just because you find Bible fables inspiring, doesn't mean you have to abdicate rational judgment.

You call me ignorant either to call me uninformed, or as a pointless insult. However I consider myself reasonably versed up on 'Jesus's world view' and share some of the ideals. I also seem to be considerably better informed than you about the outside world.

So in effect you're calling me ignorant because you think I don't believe in God, alongside Santa and the Tooth Fairy. If that is the case then I hope you see the irony?

[Mark]

Bizzy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Simply put, God doesn't expect people to believe in God...

You are making a statement based on the assumption that there is a god. I think that's what I find odd about all these religions, people make statements and get together and have the same thoughts based on the fact that there is is someone/thing that acts like a person. "He wants you to do something", "he says this", "we spread his word" which to an rational outsider like myself is strange and unnerving, when you see people who talk about something mythical as if it's real then you just want them to be less blinkered and see what they're doing through normal eyes.

I understand that it makes some people feel better to believe in something like this however from my experiences in life the only person who can get me through things is me. I take responsibility for the things I do. Nature's occurrences aside, the good things and bad things in life are mainly caused by people, not by a god, so the people should take responsibility for them.

Bizzy, I hope it comes across that I do respect that you have a belief and as much as you want to tell people "The Word of God" I would like to ground people by reminding them about reason and science how it's our responsibility to look after this world we live in. There is not another life after we die so let's make the most of this one, if you need to believe in something to help you through that then fair enough but please don't preach falsities to people, it's just another step backwards for the progression of humanity when you do.

[Bizzy]

RosieH

Can't give you my stance on sensitive issues without backing up what I say, and as this is seen as *preaching* I will refrain from answering. People who aren't interested - I don't persist, and to be honest I don't go out to convert. If it arises in conversation I will talk about it but I don't wake up thinking I?m going to convert 13 people today.

Huguenot

I read your posts and am still none the wiser as to what your point is. All I seem to get from them is some kind of hostile damning of everything I believe and how good you are (I dunno what the correlation is). Who are you trying to impress? If you're looking for an argument you won't get one from me.

I also seem to be considerably better informed than you about the outside world. - I may not be better informed than you, but I get by with what I know. I certainly wouldn't say something like that to someone else even if it was true.

Mark

It wasn't my intention to *preach*, but to explain some points I had to go into a bit of detail. Point taken.

[Huguenot]

Good me? Nah never. My point is that organised religion has a history of crimes against humanity based on the abdication of rational judgment.

You don't need religion to be moral, nor to believe in some of the philosophies that christianity espouses.

It's not a zero sum game - organised religion has set an inescapably destructive precedent. It has history and it's bad. The persistence and evangelicism of organised religion represents a significant threat to both our current society and the future of humanity.

[Brendan]

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Good me? Nah never. My point is that organised

> religion has a history of crimes against humanity

> based on the abdication of rational judgment.

So has organised government, organised politics, organised idealism, organised liberation, organised social reform, organised industrialisation and organised commerce.

So don?t be so hard on religion it?s being organised that seems to be humanity?s problem.

[RosieH]

My point is that organised religion has a history of crimes against humanity based on the abdication of rational judgment.

It may be semantics, organised religion is after all just a body of men, but it strikes me that man has always been, and will always be, violent towards his fellow man. Religion is just a politically expedient excuse. Take it away and I doubt there'll be less fighting, just different reasons.

[Huguenot]

Quite true, but it remains that the rejection of rationalism and individual responsibility is a pre-requisite of religion, but only a by-product of the others.

[Brendan]

True but perhaps we assume that because we come from a culture where rationalism and individual responsibility are concepts that actually exist within our world view whether we choose to adopt them or not.

But that is a whole different anthropological question.

[Cassius]

Religion used to be a way by which man made sense of the world around them, it explained the sun and the moon, the seasons and day and night. Omnipotent beings were better than chaos. Religion also helped form a moral order by which man could live (although it played a huge part in social domination both within and between societies). Therefore religious beliefs and practices could be said to have a practical function.

(Paraphrased from essay)

However in the 21st century does religion still have any practical function?

[Marmora Man]

A coherent set of values - if enough could agree on what those values should be - would have a practical function. It is unlikely that any one of many competing religions should provide the template for such values, given the history of every single religion.

"NEW" religions (in the sense of a set of beliefs) such as humanism can, perhaps, set the right tone without the baggage of history. The problem is that to "convert" a majority from their existing religion (set of beliefs) to a new religion (set of beliefs) is very very difficult as this discussion has illustrated. Perhaps, over time, greater rationality and understanding of science will allow people to migrate from a belief in a supreme being to an understanding that mankind and nits future depends upon mankind and its actions.

[SteveT]

You vent the sound of reason MM.

Someone once wrote east is east and west is west and ne'er the twain shall meet. (Kipling I think)

What a refreshing thought to dump all the existing religions and become humanists, will we see it in our lifetime?

Certainly not in mine.

The same problem will remain whichever road mankind chooses to take, and that is? I hear some one say.

Population control.

[indiepanda]

If anyone is interested, this is what the newhumanist magazine had to say after trying the Alpha course.

http://newhumanist.org.uk/1000

[pk]

indiepanda Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> snorky Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Why does the Pope still force followers of his

> > brand of religion to live shitty, poverty

> ridden

> > lives , banging out kids every year or so , cos

> > they cant use decent contraception - is this

> the

> > same god ?

>

> I am no great fan of the catholic church having

> been raised a catholic, but this is a bit

> overstated.

it's offensive and probably intended to be so

i've never really understood why people are so comfortable insulting the catholic community

[Jeremy]

You can't understand why people would wish to insult the Catholic church?

Start by taking a look at the Catholic church's offensive and outrageous views regarding homosexuality, contraception, abortion... and that's just scratching the surface. The church's position is indefensible... and the followers have to take some responsibility too.

[snorky]

pk Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> indiepanda Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > snorky Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > Why does the Pope still force followers of

> his

> > > brand of religion to live shitty, poverty

> > ridden

> > > lives , banging out kids every year or so ,

> cos

> > > they cant use decent contraception - is this

> > the

> > > same god ?

> >

> > I am no great fan of the catholic church having

> > been raised a catholic, but this is a bit

> > overstated.

>

> it's offensive and probably intended to be so

>

> i've never really understood why people are so

> comfortable insulting the catholic community

really ?

[lozzyloz]

Add to that this mornings story about the Pope reinstating a Priest that denies the Holocaust happened and that Gas Chambers never existed.

[pk]

snorky Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> pk Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > indiepanda Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > snorky Wrote:

> > >

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> >

> > > -----

> > > > Why does the Pope still force followers of

> > his

> > > > brand of religion to live shitty, poverty

> > > ridden

> > > > lives , banging out kids every year or so ,

> > cos

> > > > they cant use decent contraception - is

> this

> > > the

> > > > same god ?

> > >

> > > I am no great fan of the catholic church

> having

> > > been raised a catholic, but this is a bit

> > > overstated.

> >

> > it's offensive and probably intended to be so

> >

> > i've never really understood why people are so

> > comfortable insulting the catholic community

>

>

>

> really ?

yes, really

to me, to describe people as being forced to live shitty, poverty ridden lives is likely to be offensive to those people

obviously not to you

any other groups you think should be insulted for the lives they choose to live? what are your views on the lives of the many millions of muslims in the world for example?

[dulwichmum]

pk Wrote:

> i've never really understood why people are so

> comfortable insulting the catholic community

Try this pair of priests on for size:

The Roman Catholic church facilitated these vipers by moving them on, into further positions of trust instead of handing them over to the authorities. And these two, were at one time working in the same small parish! Shame on the lot of them.

[pk]

dulwichmum Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> pk Wrote:

>

> > i've never really understood why people are so

> > comfortable insulting the catholic community

>

> Try this pair of priests on for size:

>

> The Roman Catholic church facilitated these vipers

> by moving them on, into further positions of trust

> instead of handing them over to the authorities.

> And these two, were at one time working in the

> same small parish! Shame on the lot of them.

i doubt that this is who he was referring to when he was talking about e.g. banging out babies out each year

do you believe that it fair to say that catholics (as a group) support paedophilia?

[dulwichmum]

No, I do not. But I do believe that the Roman Catholic church is an organisation that goes out of its way to accommodate them.

[pk]

dulwichmum Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> No, I do not. But I do believe that the Roman

> Catholic church is an organisation that goes out

> of its way to accommodate them.

my comments have been around the use of offensive, inaccurate generalisations against followers of the catholic faith, not about 'the church' which i have intentionally not commented on (not least because i don't know enough of the facts and don't find 'evidence' based on the testimony of unnamed ex-cons that reliable)

[dulwichmum]

OHMYGOD!

So, you would not be prepared to believe the evidence of those against whom these offences have been committed because they may have ended up becoming "ex cons" as you put it. How nice to live in your world.

Many of these "ex cons" are named.

Much of their evidence is substantiated.

Many of these vile preditors have admitted their offences anyway.

[pk]

dulwichmum Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> OHMYGOD!

>

> So, you would not be prepared to believe the

> evidence of those against whom these offences have

> been committed because they may have ended up

> becoming "ex cons" as you put it. How nice to

> live in your world.

>

> Many of these "ex cons" are named.

>

> Much of their evidence is substantiated.

>

> Many of these vile preditors have admitted their

> offences anyway.

as i said, i don't know enough about the facts and therefore choose not to make unsubstantiated generalisations, the reference to 'excons' was in relation to the article you posted:

"The sick goings on inside the Curragh Prison are laid bare by a former inmate" which i don't find too compelling