Floods are a judgement on society, say bishops

[sssshhhh]

Originally Posted by Nugget

But surely the fact that, using this thread as an example, most people (religious or not) have pretty much agreed that he's out of touch, why would you think that you're not equal to your peers. I can't speak for anyone else obviously but, in my opinion, you are anyway

Thank you I believe I am equal to my peers. Unfortunately many others don't. I see it in my workplace, amongst family and friends, on the Tv etc etc. And comments like the Bishops really sadden me. Whilst as you say many people will agree that he's out of touch, many will digest what he has said. And I don't just mean the sexuality issue but all his comments.

I only had a relative telling me last week that it was ok me being gay as he loved me, but he didn't agree with it as far as anyone else was concerned. I merely responded with 'thank you for giving me permission to be me' and left it at that.

---------- Post added at 14:46 ---------- Previous post was at 14:41 ----------

Oh my, I was merely responding to the comments of the bishop. I was simply pointing out that I see it as being ridiculous that someone like me could be held partly responsible for the mass flooding across the country by this idiot. I was merely pointing out that some people will take the bishops comments on board as being true. I didn't for one minute want to attack anyone's faith, or opinion. Apologies if I have offended anyone. And thank you foreverwar for trying to explain better than I can my point.

Originally Posted by sssshhhh

Oh my, I was merely responding to the comments of the bishop. I was simply pointing out that I see it as being ridiculous that someone like me could be held partly responsible for the mass flooding across the country by this idiot. I was merely pointing out that some people will take the bishops comments on board as being true. I didn't for one minute want to attack anyone's faith, or opinion. Apologies if I have offended anyone. And thank you foreverwar for trying to explain better than I can my point.

I for one am not offended. I just prefer an ongoing, two-way discussion to a quick posting of opinion.

And I'm still mad keen to point out that I don't think the Bishop was singling out 'someone like you'. His comments were aimed at society as a whole, that is, everyone. He may have used certain examples to illustrate his point but when you read what he said, his overall meaning is clear.

Originally Posted by Chris T

...snip....
On the other hand we could just skip straight to the point where threads like this usually end up getting closed, with any and all attempts at serious analysis dropped in favour of name-calling, parodies and cliches.

Chris, I have tried to be even-handed and not call anyone names all the way through this thread, as I believe it is a very complex subject with no easy answer - however, I do object strongly to gays being called "morally degraded" and "illegitimate" (which has to be a prime example of name-calling, parodies and cliches) by a senior member of the Church I attend regularly.

btw, the quote "an out-of-touch old religious bigot" was made by you in post #92

[Ramrod]

Originally Posted by Chris T

And I'm still mad keen to point out that I don't think the Bishop was singling out 'someone like you'. His comments were aimed at society as a whole, that is, everyone. He may have used certain examples to illustrate his point but when you read what he said, his overall meaning is clear.

The fact that he used homosexuality as an example of something we are being punished for would suggest that he and by extension, the christian religion, has a problem with homosexuals....

[sssshhhh]

for one am not offended. I just prefer an ongoing, two-way discussion to a quick posting of opinion.

And I'm still mad keen to point out that I don't think the Bishop was singling out 'someone like you'. His comments were aimed at society as a whole, that is, everyone. He may have used certain examples to illustrate his point but when you read what he said, his overall meaning is clear.

Sorry, am I not allowed to make a quick comment when I see a post? And I don't believe he was just singling out people like me either, I obviously haven't worded my posts correctly. I picked out the issue that was most relevant to me, and gave me a platform from which to comment. Whilst I appreciate what you are saying, and take it all on board, surely I'm still allowed to voice my own opinion?

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Chris T

And I'm still mad keen to point out that I don't think the Bishop was singling out 'someone like you'. His comments were aimed at society as a whole, that is, everyone. He may have used certain examples to illustrate his point but when you read what he said, his overall meaning is clear.

Is that not just an easy cop out? The message that he conveys is 'it is not ok to lead a life style that is not endorsed by the church', and the recent flooding is a result of such life styles. And people that lead a life style that is should be comforted by the fact that it's not directly aimed at them? Frankly, it sounds like a full frontal assault.

Incidentally, I'm still interested to hear if you think the Bishop is out of touch. I suspect you don't.

[TheBlueRaja]

Bishops are a judgement on society if you ask me...

[Saaf_laandon_mo]

Originally Posted by Ramrod

The fact that he used homosexuality as an example of something we are being punished for would suggest that he and by extension, the christian religion, has a problem with homosexuals....

I'm no expert on the Christian religion but thats the impression I'm under too. What confuses me that there is no consistency regarding homosexuals and Christianity. When I was growing up and attending a church of England school, and attending Church sermons, from what I was told, homosexuals would go to hell. Now some Christians say that homosexuality is ok is Christianity. One of my neighbours who is a regular church goer says its forbidden and they(homosexuals) will go to hell under Christianity.

In Islam homosexuals risk going to hell fullstop. There is no middle ground/blurred area regarding it, but we are told/taught that God is most merciful and can forgive you for anything, so although a homosexual is quite likely to end up in hell, this is not always the case.

I'm not saying either or both stances are right, just making the comparison and wondering how something so fundamental is so widely interpreted. Are Christians (and the churches) that say homosexuality is ok, doing so in order to make the church more accesible to a wider range of people, or even so they are not going to be accused of being politically incorrect, or is there a genuine argument in Christianity that homosexuality is permissable.

By homosexuality I am referring to 2 people of the same sex who are also involved in a sexual relationship.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by danielf

Is that not just an easy cop out? The message that he conveys is 'it is not ok to lead a life style that is not endorsed by the church', and the recent flooding is a result of such life styles. And people that lead a life style that is should be comforted by the fact that it's not directly aimed at them? Frankly, it sounds like a full frontal assault.

<Frankie Howerd>

Oooooohhhh!

</Frankie Howerd>

I don't see it as a cop-out because the Bible doesn't really make a distinction between homosexual and hetrosexual adultary. Sexual sin is sexual sin regardless of orientation. IMO the Bishops should have made this a lot more clear.

Originally Posted by Saaf_laandon_mo

I'm no expert on the Christian religion but thats the impression I'm under too. What confuses me that there is no consistency regarding homosexuals and Christianity. When I was growing up and attending a church of England school, and attending Church sermons, from what I was told, homosexuals would go to hell. Now some Christians say that homosexuality is ok is Christianity. One of my neighbours who is a regular church goer says its forbidden and they(homosexuals) will go to hell under Christianity.

The Bible says nothing about homosexuality being wrong, it just puts gay sex on par with hetro adultary. Some Christians take it too far and automatically assume all gays have penetrative sex (which is not the case) therefore 'all homosexuals are condemned to hell'. This is NOT something I support or agree with by the way.

Originally Posted by Saaf_laandon_mo

Are Christians (and the churches) that say homosexuality is ok, doing so in order to make the church more accesible to a wider range of people, or even so they are not going to be accused of being politically incorrect, or is there a genuine argument in Christianity that homosexuality is permissable.

I don't know about others but I say it (I don't actually say it's 'OK' - rather it's not the evil that many people believe it to be) to counter the views of the numerous armchair experts who take a tiny amount of knowledge and perpetuate falsehoods.

Originally Posted by sssshhhh

Sorry, am I not allowed to make a quick comment when I see a post? And I don't believe he was just singling out people like me either, I obviously haven't worded my posts correctly. I picked out the issue that was most relevant to me, and gave me a platform from which to comment. Whilst I appreciate what you are saying, and take it all on board, surely I'm still allowed to voice my own opinion?

Whatever you intended when you first posted, it seems to me now like you're looking for an argument. No matter how many times I re-read my post I can't see how you can take it to mean that I was allowing, or disallowing, you anything.

Originally Posted by danielf

Is that not just an easy cop out? The message that he conveys is 'it is not ok to lead a life style that is not endorsed by the church', and the recent flooding is a result of such life styles. And people that lead a life style that is should be comforted by the fact that it's not directly aimed at them? Frankly, it sounds like a full frontal assault.

Sorry, but that is such a poor parody of what the Bishop said that there's no way I'm going to validate it by using it as a platform to discuss the issue.

Incidentally, I'm still interested to hear if you think the Bishop is out of touch. I suspect you don't.

Suspect all you like, I'm keeping my own counsel on that point for the time being.

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Chris T

Suspect all you like, I'm keeping my own counsel on that point for the time being.

No disrespect meant but I wonder if I should be more worried about what you don't say than about what you do say.

[sssshhhh]

Originally Posted by Chris T

Whatever you intended when you first posted, it seems to me now like you're looking for an argument. No matter how many times I re-read my post I can't see how you can take it to mean that I was allowing, or disallowing, you anything.

No, I'm not looking for an argument And I think it's best if i just don't post any more on this thread.

Originally Posted by Saaf_laandon_mo

I'm no expert on the Christian religion but thats the impression I'm under too. What confuses me that there is no consistency regarding homosexuals and Christianity. When I was growing up and attending a church of England school, and attending Church sermons, from what I was told, homosexuals would go to hell. Now some Christians say that homosexuality is ok is Christianity. One of my neighbours who is a regular church goer says its forbidden and they(homosexuals) will go to hell under Christianity.

In Islam homosexuals risk going to hell fullstop. There is no middle ground/blurred area regarding it, but we are told/taught that God is most merciful and can forgive you for anything, so although a homosexual is quite likely to end up in hell, this is not always the case.

I'm not saying either or both stances are right, just making the comparison and wondering how something so fundamental is so widely interpreted. Are Christians (and the churches) that say homosexuality is ok, doing so in order to make the church more accesible to a wider range of people, or even so they are not going to be accused of being politically incorrect, or is there a genuine argument in Christianity that homosexuality is permissable.

By homosexuality I am referring to 2 people of the same sex who are also involved in a sexual relationship.

If the Islamic world took as liberal a view of the Qu'ran as the West takes towards the Bible, things would probably be very different.

The west is extremely liberalised, the Islamic world generally far less so. The authority of the Bible has been challenged in our universities for over a century now and that ongoing challenge to its authority allows the development of liberal theology, because you can discount or explain away the passages in the Bible that are not convenient to your point of view.

That, in a nutshell, is why you see such disagreements, although please understand I am vastly over-simplifying things for the sake of brevity!

---------- Post added at 15:39 ---------- Previous post was at 15:33 ----------

Originally Posted by danielf

No disrespect meant but I wonder if I should be more worried about what you don't say than about what you do say.

I see no reason for you to worry, no matter what I say, or fail to say. I'm just another bloke on the end of a keyboard after all.

I don't suppose it occurred to you that some people might like to think through issues, and do background research, before posting opinions on some things, rather than submit to the temptation to be an instant expert? I know the world of forums can conspire to demand instant comment and opinion but I don't feel constrained by that and neither should you.

Originally Posted by sssshhhh

No, I'm not looking for an argument And I think it's best if i just don't post any more on this thread.

Seriously, I think it would be best if you stopped trying so hard to take offence at whatever people say to you. I suspect whichever relative it was you let rip at last week might agree with that.

[Saaf_laandon_mo]

Originally Posted by Chris T

.
.
The west is extremely liberalised, the Islamic world generally far less so. The authority of the Bible has been challenged in our universities for over a century now and that ongoing challenge to its authority allows the development of liberal theology, because you can discount or explain away the passages in the Bible that are not convenient to your point of view.
.
.

By challenging the authority of the Bible are you not in danger then of challenging God's authority. The point I am trying to make is that if God is supposedly all knowing, then surely what he prescribed in the days of Jesus/Muhammed (depending on what religion you wnat to follow) would be applicable in 2007 as they were in the times of those prophets.

Because society has become liberal does this mean that the religion should change to allow for the facilitation of things which were previously forbidden. For example homosexuality is now seen as being socially acceptable, whereas a while back both society and religion were in agreement that it was wrong (or perceived to be wrong in society).

By changing religion to make it acceptable or developing it based on liberal theology, are we then not implying that God is not the the all knowing entity that we think he is, or that his original commandments only applied at the time they were made?

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Chris T

I don't suppose it occurred to you that some people might like to think through issues, and do background research, before posting opinions on some things, rather than submit to the temptation to be an instant expert? I know the world of forums can conspire to demand instant comment and opinion but I don't feel constrained by that and neither should you.

I guess I'm just a very quick thinker

Seriously, I don't claim to be an expert, and I value the dialogue. See where others are coming from and all that. I think a lot of interesting points were raised since this morning.