Latest British Social Survey finds 52% of the Country are non Religious

[Eric Cartman]

Why are we so concerned what those who cannot think believe?

[Bluebirdman Of Alcathays]

Why are we so concerned what those who cannot think believe?

There's often an egomaniacal assurance and a supposed path to an absolute "truth" that has led us down some foolish and dangerous socio-political paths.

[Gofer Blue]

Why are we so concerned what those who cannot think believe?

Wow.

[UNDERHILL1927]

Matt 18:3: And he said: “I tell you the truth, unless you change and become like little children*, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.

*Note: childlike not childish. Think on.

Just because people put loopholes in the Bible to emotionally blackmail people into staying in the religion, doesn't make it right. You may as well quote Star Wars scripts to me

[UNDERHILL1927]

Religion summed up for me.... Tyson Fury, God will give me the victory, Deontay Wilder, God will give me the victory......... Fury wins, God gave me the victory, Wilder loses, God was teaching me a lesson....... God loves boxing, doesn't seem to care for children with cancer.

[SLUDGE FACTORY]

In over 5 decades of having an interest in matters of fauth, I can only recall members of one group taking such violent and deadly actions. Unfortunately their understanding of their own prophecies means that many of them believe that they can personally accelerate the end-time events by bringing about such world instability.
In contrast those who read and understand Biblical Prophecy know that God is alone in control of all such future events and their timing on the world stage.

Well if god is in control of future events then he's either very mean or forgets

Only someone very mean would allow hitler to try and slaughter half of Europe

Either he's mean or he can't control future events 🤷

[gabbsthenewt]

Well if god is in control of future events then he's either very mean or forgets

Only someone very mean would allow hitler to try and slaughter half of Europe

Either he's mean or he can't control future events 🤷

Which one are we talking about tho? Allah or Joe Pesci?

[robjohn44]

The Survey is wrong we have created the new secular religions of Woke and intersectionality which is destroying the usa and now us people just love a cause to hate on others.

[delmbox]

The Survey is wrong we have created the new secular religions of Woke and intersectionality which is destroying the usa and now us people just love a cause to hate on others.

Don't forget the religion of people talking shite on the internet which you're clearly a devout follower of

[SLUDGE FACTORY]

The Survey is wrong we have created the new secular religions of Woke and intersectionality which is destroying the usa and now us people just love a cause to hate on others.

I think ignorant religious people are the worst haters of them all

[Croesy Blue]

The Survey is wrong we have created the new secular religions of Woke and intersectionality which is destroying the usa and now us people just love a cause to hate on others.

Touch grass you ****ing dork

[SLUDGE FACTORY]

Or how about the theory that Jesus was a real man from the middle east, who was a reformer fighting against corruption in the theocracy he was living in, until they had him killed. His popularity remained and his story was embellished, so that by 100 years after his death all the magic parts were added to the story, like him rising from the dead, curing the sick etc. to perpetuate the following by people who stood to benefit from it.

I will go with that version

[Canton Kev]

Or how about the theory that Jesus was a real man from the middle east, who was a reformer fighting against corruption in the theocracy he was living in, until they had him killed. His popularity remained and his story was embellished, so that by 100 years after his death all the magic parts were added to the story, like him rising from the dead, curing the sick etc. to perpetuate the following by people who stood to benefit from it.

Who could’ve imagined an “event” from over 2000 years ago in a time where most people couldn’t read or write and who spoke a different language might’ve had some alterations and embellishments.

English as a language from 1000 years ago would be incomprehensible to us, yet the bible used back then and the bible used now are supposedly the original unaltered writings of Jesus’ disciples.

[Taunton Blue Genie]

Who could’ve imagined an “event” from over 2000 years ago in a time where most people couldn’t read or write and who spoke a different language might’ve had some alterations and embellishments.

English as a language from 1000 years ago would be incomprehensible to us, yet the bible used back then and the bible used now are supposedly the original unaltered writings of Jesus’ disciples.

I think you are confusing language with interpretation of events - and events that were uncannily similar to events assigned to other pre-existing deities in the same geographical area. Did the snake in the Garden of Eden talk or did the equivalent of Chinese whispers create that story? If the latter, how can anyone believe anything from such religious tomes?

[lisvaneblue]

Who could’ve imagined an “event” from over 2000 years ago in a time where most people couldn’t read or write and who spoke a different language might’ve had some alterations and embellishments.

English as a language from 1000 years ago would be incomprehensible to us, yet the bible used back then and the bible used now are supposedly the original unaltered writings of Jesus’ disciples.

As you say who would have imagined that an event from over 2000 years ago marks time as we know it today, that THE BOOK...(from the Greek) is the bible, yet people dismiss the contents as a non event or fiction.As the bible says...'He dwelt amongst them and they know him not'

[SLUDGE FACTORY]

Leviathan............shove it !

[Canton Kev]

I've noticed that this theory often comes up. Please explain who were these people who "stood to benefit" in the early days of the Christian church? The early Christians were persecuted and martyred for their faith - not exactly a benefit I'd have thought! And yet Christianity flourished despite all attempts to strangle it at birth.

You’ve never embellished a story to make it a bit better down the pub? People exaggerate and people lie all the time. I’m guilty of it and I’m sure most people on here can admit to it as well as you.

Even if John didn’t, do you not think it’s possible that over the last 2000 years the story could’ve evolved and expanded? Especially in a time when reading and writing was very rare and most stories would’ve been word of mouth.

[Gofer Blue]

You’ve never embellished a story to make it a bit better down the pub? People exaggerate and people lie all the time. I’m guilty of it and I’m sure most people on here can admit to it as well as you.

Even if John didn’t, do you not think it’s possible that over the last 2000 years the story could’ve evolved and expanded? Especially in a time when reading and writing was very rare and most stories would’ve been word of mouth.

I agree that people down the pub may embellish stories of course but that doesn't answer my question about who were these people who so-called "stood to benefit" in the early days of the Christian church? The inescapable fact is that the Christian church came into being very soon after the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus. Why would those early apostles initiate and perpetuate a movement based on something which they knew was untrue – again, where was the “benefit” to them knowing that they risked death or persecution by being involved?

[Rjk]

I agree that people down the pub may embellish stories of course but that doesn't answer my question about who were these people who so-called "stood to benefit" in the early days of the Christian church? The inescapable fact is that the Christian church came into being very soon after the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus. Why would those early apostles initiate and perpetuate a movement based on something which they knew was untrue – again, where was the “benefit” to them knowing that they risked death or persecution by being involved?

Clearly there is a benefit if you are at the head of a small but growing splinter religion to convince as many more people to join by sexing its history up a bit. Even if they risked death or persecution by being involved. There are groups that are still doing it today, being a member of something like ISIS in a western country or indeed most countries will unsurprisingly not work well in your favour if it comes out, but that doesn't men they aren't there. And do they embellish history and current events to become more effective anti west propaganda - absolutely. I'm sure most of them absolutely believe they are doing the right thing. And those at the top will absolutely want to retain and extend their power. Whether the early apostles really believed in the "magic" jesus stories, or they just really believed in what he stood for before his execution and would happily lean into the magic stuff if they thought it would help their ultimate cause. A very different example, but you see all kinds of spurious "evidence" all over the internet on just about any controversial subject or conspiracy theory:- plandemic/pandemic, palestine v israel, brexit and anything else you can think of. We've all probably seen bogus information being gleefully shared on any of these topics - the people who generated the original items must surely know that they are making it up? but they think the end justifies the means, or they believe it to be true, so they will fabricate some "evidence" for it so other people can find the "truth" . So the argument that the resurrection etc must have happened because the people who said it did risked being executed by just being involved doesn't really follow for me. If they are motivated to make their cause succeed - whether thats for personal power, or a belief in doing the right thing then people are definitely able to lean into a narrative that they know deep down isnt true, or are able to suspend their disbelief entirely.

[Gofer Blue]

Clearly there is a benefit if you are at the head of a small but growing splinter religion to convince as many more people to join by sexing its history up a bit. Even if they risked death or persecution by being involved. There are groups that are still doing it today, being a member of something like ISIS in a western country or indeed most countries will unsurprisingly not work well in your favour if it comes out, but that doesn't men they aren't there. And do they embellish history and current events to become more effective anti west propaganda - absolutely. I'm sure most of them absolutely believe they are doing the right thing. And those at the top will absolutely want to retain and extend their power. Whether the early apostles really believed in the "magic" jesus stories, or they just really believed in what he stood for before his execution and would happily lean into the magic stuff if they thought it would help their ultimate cause. A very different example, but you see all kinds of spurious "evidence" all over the internet on just about any controversial subject or conspiracy theory:- plandemic/pandemic, palestine v israel, brexit and anything else you can think of. We've all probably seen bogus information being gleefully shared on any of these topics - the people who generated the original items must surely know that they are making it up? but they think the end justifies the means, or they believe it to be true, so they will fabricate some "evidence" for it so other people can find the "truth" . So the argument that the resurrection etc must have happened because the people who said it did risked being executed by just being involved doesn't really follow for me. If they are motivated to make their cause succeed - whether thats for personal power, or a belief in doing the right thing then people are definitely able to lean into a narrative that they know deep down isnt true, or are able to suspend their disbelief entirely.

There we go once more. For the umpteenth time of asking - who were these so-called "people at the top"? The early church was just a collection of ordinary people who met in each other's homes. This is from Acts 4, 32-35:

“Now the large group of those who believed were of one heart and mind, and no one said that any of his possessions was his own, but instead they held everything in common. And the apostles were giving testimony with great power to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and great grace was on all of them. For there was not a needy person among them, because all those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the proceeds of the things that were sold, and laid them at the apostles’ feet. This was then distributed for each person’s basic needs.”

These verses are part of a consistent New Testament picture that points to radical generosity, self-sacrifice, and concern for others over ourselves. Further, they point also to the New Testament emphasis on the local church as an intimately connected faith community in stark contrast to the world around them. Does this sound like a bunch of people "at the top" manipulating others?

How can you compare this group of people with ISIS!!

[truthpaste]

You’ve never embellished a story to make it a bit better down the pub? People exaggerate and people lie all the time. I’m guilty of it and I’m sure most people on here can admit to it as well as you.

Even if John didn’t, do you not think it’s possible that over the last 2000 years the story could’ve evolved and expanded? Especially in a time when reading and writing was very rare and most stories would’ve been word of mouth.

Much of historic literature is in fact written long after the event, in fact in many cases hundreds of years later. However the Books of the BIBLE that make up the New Testament were in fact written by eye witnesses of the Resurrection, and as far as the Gospels are concerned that speak of Christ raised from the dead, we see below that they must have been written BEFORE the fall of Jerusalem in 70AD....

The first three Gospels, and possibly also the fourth, were apparently written while the city of Jerusalem was still standing. Each of the first three Gospels contains predictions by Jesus concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple (Matthew 24; Mark 13; Luke 21), but none records the fulfillment. We know that Titus the Roman destroyed the city and Temple in A.D. 70. Hence, the composition of the first three Gospels most likely occurred sometime before this event, otherwise their destruction would have been recorded. The fact that all four gospels are written from the perspective that the city of Jerusalem and the temple had not been destroyed gives evidence of an early date.

[Baloo]

As you say who would have imagined that an event from over 2000 years ago marks time as we know it today, that THE BOOK...(from the Greek) is the bible, yet people dismiss the contents as a non event or fiction.As the bible says...'He dwelt amongst them and they know him not'

Yes and we look up today at Mars, Jupiter, Mercury, Venus and Saturn and sail across the Atlantic Ocean.

[Canton Kev]

Much of historic literature is in fact written long after the event, in fact in many cases hundreds of years later. However the Books of the BIBLE that make up the New Testament were in fact written by eye witnesses of the Resurrection, and as far as the Gospels are concerned that speak of Christ raised from the dead, we see below that they must have been written BEFORE the fall of Jerusalem in 70AD....

The first three Gospels, and possibly also the fourth, were apparently written while the city of Jerusalem was still standing. Each of the first three Gospels contains predictions by Jesus concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple (Matthew 24; Mark 13; Luke 21), but none records the fulfillment. We know that Titus the Roman destroyed the city and Temple in A.D. 70. Hence, the composition of the first three Gospels most likely occurred sometime before this event, otherwise their destruction would have been recorded. The fact that all four gospels are written from the perspective that the city of Jerusalem and the temple had not been destroyed gives evidence of an early date.

Does the document from before 70AD still exist? Could I look at it and read the words written on it 1950+ years ago?
Today, I could write about my experiences at Ninian Park but that isn’t proof I wrote about it before it was knocked down.

[truthpaste]

Does the document from before 70AD still exist? Could I look at it and read the words written on it 1950+ years ago?
Today, I could write about my experiences at Ninian Park but that isn’t proof I wrote about it before it was knocked down.

Many of the Dead Sea Scrolls date right back to 200BC, so there's no shortage of material to read if you are serious.

Sure you could write about Ninian Park, but it's extremely unlikely that you would not include a comment about the CCS to give the reader a perspective from 2021.

[UNDERHILL1927]

just reading the comments put me right off. i'll stay ignorant and faithless

Same. It's sad to see