Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Philosophy/religion

Join our Philosophy forum to discuss religion and spirituality.

Do you feel it is important to share your views on faith or atheism?

999 replies

gingerdodger · 04/07/2014 15:03

This is a genuine question, I am not asking to promote a faith vs atheism debate as we have plenty of those.

My question is whether people feel that it is part of their faith to share those beliefs with others? How far do you take this and how do you approach it? Similarly for those who are atheist, do you feel it is important to share your opinions and in what ways do you do this?

I know some faith groups see this as absaloutely fundamental to their faith whilst others are more relaxed. I also see that those who do not believe in God(s) also often wish to share their opinions widely. It interests me to think about what this achieves in terms of sharing opinions, understanding of each other etc.

From my point of view I strive to be open about my faith, I like to listen to other's perspectives as this makes me think (providing they are listening, I tend to bow out when it starts to feel adversarial and not inquisitorial). I don't feel compelled to actively knock on doors (metaphorically or otherwise) to share my faith but rather subscribe to the view that I hope my approach to life and openness about faith allows me to discuss my faith openly and honestly. I do believe actions speak louder than words and the best form of 'preaching' is to live Christian values of love (not saying I am good at this).

OP posts:
Hakluyt · 12/07/2014 17:05

"you don't like it when Christians talk about God's power flowing through them"

I don't mind Christians talking about that at all. What I mind is people suggesting that it is impossible to be altruistic or moral without God's power flowing through them, and that people who have God's power flowing through them have a right to special privileges paid for by central government funding, and have a guaranteed say in policies that will affect everyone, Christian and non Christian.

capsium · 12/07/2014 17:11

But the if Divinity was only a human construct, not that I believe it is, there is still a message in anything written in what it tells you about us and the human condition.

When I read very old pieces of writing what strikes me and what sends shivers down my spine is the immediacy of the voices, which are centuries old, with the same loves, concerns and hopes as our own.

capsium · 12/07/2014 17:20

Hak I get it. However our political system is full of people with un-democratic powers and privileges. There are peers, people sitting on Quangos, people with money and those who run Mass Media who affect the way our country is run. Not all are religious. The clergy in the House of Lords is just the tip of the iceberg.

SixImpossible · 12/07/2014 17:22

I find it interesting that, despite being a person of faith, I agree entirely with Hakluyt on this thread.

Is it because I am not a fundamentalist, or because I am not a Christian, I wonder?

Hakluyt · 12/07/2014 17:23

"The clergy in the House of Lords is just the tip of the iceberg."

But religion is what this thread is about. It's daft to say that there are lots of other un democratic things so the Bishops in the Lords is fine.

Hakluyt · 12/07/2014 17:24

"Is it because I am not a fundamentalist, or because I am not a Christian, I wonder?"

I would imagine it's because you care about a fair society.

capsium · 12/07/2014 17:27

I didn't say it was fine Hak. I don't really have a very strong opinion, since I believe the unelected can be as corrupt or incorrupt as the elected. If you were asked to give your opinion, from an unelected position, in law making, would you believe you would be capable of making a contribution?

combust22 · 12/07/2014 17:28

"combust

But it works because religion is man made.

How do you know this?"

Because there is no evidence to the contrary.

pommedeterre · 12/07/2014 17:34

I don't share my non faith unless asked and I react very badly to others trying to share their faith. I do not give a shit what anyone else believes and it is a waste of breath so save it for someone who cares would be preachers.

I am friends with people of faith, of course, but they are respectful people who don't preach at adults who have reached their own conclusions.

Hakluyt · 12/07/2014 17:47

"I don't really have a very strong opinion, since I believe the unelected can be as corrupt or incorrupt as the elected"

But people who share your faith have unelected positions in the legislature. How can you not have a strong opinion about that, unless you don't have strong feeling about democracy?

capsium · 12/07/2014 17:51

pomme but would you care about/be interested in, what someone very close to you believes? Beliefs affect our motivations, what we say, what we do, how we view the world. Essentially beliefs become part of us as we internalise them. If you truly accept someone, as they are, have a relationship with them, are you really not interested, at all? Do they have to hide/deny a part of the self from you?

capsium · 12/07/2014 17:56

Hak because I believe we don't have it so bad with the political system in this country, comparatively. I don't know of anywhere that is better. There are certainly injustices that happen but I don't think full democracy would necessarily make things better.

Hakluyt · 12/07/2014 17:58

So would you be happy to get rid of Christianity's special privileges?

capsium · 12/07/2014 17:59

combust do you believe anything for which there is, at present, no conclusive evidence?

capsium · 12/07/2014 18:01

If it happened Hak, I would be. However part of my belief means I believe I am blessed.

Hakluyt · 12/07/2014 18:04

"If it happened Hak, I would be. However part of my belief means I believe I am blessed."

I don't understand. You're not saying, surely, that you have a right to the special privileges...........

Hakluyt · 12/07/2014 18:07

"combust do you believe anything for which there is, at present, no conclusive evidence?"

I don't think I do. I know there are things that happen that we do not yet have the full explanation for. But I don't think I believe in anything that there is not at least some evidence for.

capsium · 12/07/2014 18:07

No, Hak. I get what I am given. It is unearned, a free gift.

capsium · 12/07/2014 18:10

Hak I said conclusive evidence. There is some evidence for God and Biblical events. Not enough to be, beyond doubt conclusive, in the empirical sense though. Hence the need for Faith.

Hakluyt · 12/07/2014 18:10

"No, Hak. I get what I am given. It is unearned, a free gift."

And you never look at that gift and think "actually, it's not fair that I've got all this- I must give some of it away"?

capsium · 12/07/2014 18:12

Of course I do, give some away, Hak. This is what love and charity is about.

Hakluyt · 12/07/2014 18:15

"Of course I do, give some away, Hak. This is what love and charity is about."

But not your right of admission to more schools than non Christians and an automatic Christian viewpoint in legislature!

capsium · 12/07/2014 18:18

Hak I believe schools should be inclusive, no matter what the beliefs of the parents.

How do you define Christian viewpoint? Many Christian beliefs are shared by Christians and non-Christians alike.

capsium · 12/07/2014 18:22

The place where I would guess our views are different,Hak is that I am happy that children have the opportunity to worship within in school. I have seen my DC benefit from this.

Hakluyt · 12/07/2014 18:31

Great. So you don't believe in faith schools. Fantastic. We're getting somewhere.

Now, how does my desire for a secular education (I am assuming that we all know the difference between atheism and secularism) stack up against your desire for worship in schools? Seeing that you have 18 hours to worship with your children,and I am only asking your children to refrain from collective prayer (private prayer is obviously up to them) for 6 hours of the day.

And as for the Bishops in the House of Lords, they mean that there are automatically 25 votes against, for example, any liberalization of abortion rights, against stem cell research and against gay marriage. To name but 3. Once again, how can you justify this?