Why shouldn't superstition be ridiculed?

[Lucia39]

In answer to the OP regarding the 'chattering classes' who 'sneer at Christianity' I would answer thusly.

If people living in the 21st century and who depend upon the advances made in science and technology to benefit their lives still desire to cling on to infantile beliefs that a big daddy in the sky is really running the show and one day he is going to make it all better for them, then they deserve everything they get.

Why can't these people put away such childish things and just grow up?

both origins of touch wood are correct according to this or this

ummnusaybah, yeah, I get that you don't get it. I don't much get the esteem Muhammad is held in, but there you go.

OldLadyKnowsNothing, the Christian definition of idolatry is a little more involved than that through the NT, but I can direct you to Romans 1 as a starting point.

Lucia, well, funnily enough, I believe that the Deity of Christ is taught in the New Testament, as did most of the early church, to the point that it took until the 300's for them to need to define it in credal form.

just looking at the wiki touch wood entry, apparently in the UK it may have originated from the children's tag game "Tiggy-touch-wood"

you learn something every day, I'd always thought it was just a pagan trees thing too!

Cheers for that, BetsyBoop; given the apparent widespead use of the phrase in different languages I think I'll stick wuth the sprite explanation and assume that Christianity imposed it's own ideas - like Christmas and Easter.

AS Kay says, its about motivation- a lot of people attempting to mock faith forget the free will aspect. Regardless of whether you beleive it, it's still part of the Church belief system.

TFM is right- some of us do know the rguments. there are even some of us that don't necessarily like the Church as a structured body in the way it is now. But faith- you either have it or you don't. you cannot force yourself to either beleive or, crucially, not. I sepct years trying to do that, gave up in the end and am fitting the belief to the variant instead and off to my first Quaker meeting this weekend if I get up the nerve. I am not stupid or uneductaed.

The trinity stuff even my professor of Theology struggles with understanding that in pure Scientific terms; every explanation anyone who felt they had a hold it gave was immediately labelled under one or other heresy. He says, as I agree, that it's about faith.... you don't know, you accept. Isn't that the key to faith?
The whole God made Man thing- it reminds me a lot of Buddhist Koans I guess. I'm not a Creationist by any stretch anyway but can see the value of meditating on meanings with most OT texts

Peachy, so with you on the not thing. I can't even begin to imagine how much easier the last ten years would have been if I could just do the not thing...

ummnusaybah, there are scientific truths in the Qur'aan? Could you give an example or two? Thanks!

Just popping head round door. I don't live here any more.

I'm not getting involved because this has been done before, too much, and has gone nowhere. But I just wanted to say that
a) Lucia is not me, and
b) Madeleine Bunting is only saved from being the most irksome character in the Grauniad by the existence of Theo Hobson. Her article on "new atheism", which I encountered a while back, is inflammatory bollocks - there is no "new atheism", there is only atheism. And it's the same thing it's always been.

Don't know if anyone has quoted this, the Catholic view of superstition;

Superstition is a deviation of religious feeling and of the practices this feeling imposes. It can even affect the worship we offer the true God, e.g., when one attributes an importance in some way magical to certain practices otherwise lawful or necessary. To attribute the efficacy of prayers or of sacramental signs to their mere external performance, apart from the interior dispositions that they demand is to fall into superstition. Cf. Matthew 23:16-22 (para. #2111)

So I guess this says that superstition is purely superficial action whereas religion has some thought behind it.

kay!
what is it u know of Muhammad tht you dont get? or, is it, what the people attribute to Muhammad that you dont understand?

an please dont feel im attacking u or christianity! im not. Allah says in the Quraan the closest people to us is the the christians, i respect u guys! and i also come from a huuuge christian family. my jamaican family are gospol pentacostal christians whilst my mothers white family side practise their faith a little more ''quieter''! its just that whenever i have a discussion with christians, even now, no one has been able to explain christianity to me, still!!!! and every other christian will have a different version, and they always seem to get confused in trying to explain to ME!!!
1st comandment jesus came with. forbidence in worshiping graven images on land, sea and air, no exceptions. he walked on land. he didnt say, that rule applies to everything EXCEPT me...so WHO decided AFTER HIM, that he now becomes the exception. id rather take the word of a prophet of God, that someone one else who is not when it comes to revelation!

Lucia39 Tue 14-Apr-09 16:18:48 Add a message | Report post | Contact poster

Scienceteacher:
And Jesus died for them"

No he didn't. The crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth was ordered by the Roman Governor of Judaea, because he believed him to be guilty of Sedition. This followed his organised Messianic entrance into Jerusalem and his attack on the Sadducean establishment of the Temple - which was pro-Roman. His activities appear to have coincided with what, in all probability, was a Zealot led [Jewish Nationalist] insurrection against the Romans.

I wish you would make up your mind Lucia on the other thread Jesus was not a real person, could not possibly be and you only just stopped short of calling for my instant dimissal for allowing students to investigate his existence.

Just want to respond to a quote directly from the OP:

''...cling on to infantile beliefs that a big daddy in the sky is really running the show and one day he is going to make it all better for them, then they deserve everything they get.

Why can't these people put away such childish things and just grow up?''

Two points:

1. No Christian I know has this belief system. Christians believe that God has already made things great for us, it's just up to us to make the most of the world we live in by living in the way God intended.

1. The poster obviously has the belief that they are more mature and intelligent than all Christians/ other religious thinkers (references to 'infantile' beliefs and 'childish things') which seems very patronising and immature to me!! Many great thinkers throughout history have believed in God. Does the opening poster honestly believe that they have moved 'beyond' the stage of believing in some kind of God? Can they not just acknowledge that their thinking has led them in a different direction?

Ah but umm that depends on who you beleive the Prophet is. And not a lot else, tbh.

I have a decent knowlewdge of ISlam (several degree modules in fact) and really, it does alrgely coem down to tht; if you beleive Christ is God's Messiah then you an't be a Muslim: if you beleive He was a Prophet and that someone came after him called Mohammad- then you have the makings of a Muslim(iobv more to it LOL).

A Christian means someone who believes in Christ (as oppsoed to Jesus)and the Trinity any mroe than that and you get very complex with interpretations of Bible and is it literal etc etc. They believe in the Jesus Commandment.
But the same thing exists in Islam- Sufi Muslims, Shi'a....... in fact in every religion bar afaik Jainism it exists. Variants that evolve.

The science thing is one of those things that soem accept others dismiss; certainly we know though that a lot of advances in maths and the filds were amde in early Islamic culture, and I'd be surprised if these weren't refered to in any hadith or Sura writings.

gosh isn't the OP rude.
How very belittling to people not of her scientfific understanding to deride them as infantile, puerile, childish, blah blah.

It's pretty narrowminded and bigoted to assume that science has all the answers as well actually - if it did already have all the answers then there would be no need for further research.

Develop some manners, lady.

I am assured of the existence of Jesus the eprson (as oppsoed to Christ the Messiah obv) by my next door neighbour, an agnostic PHd Theology holding Lecturer with a similar qqual in another faith (wont say which, outing online unfair).

ummnusaybah, I honestly doubt that I'm going to be able to explain Christianity to your satisfaction, tbh, certainly not in this medium, it's far from ideal.

My issue with Muhammad is that he just doesn't seem a very nice man if you didn't go along with what he believed he had been taught by God - a number of instances where he had people killed for mocking him and so on. I don't really find the 'mighty warrior' thing very compelling, I guess.

Also I want to respond to the title.
Perhaps if you are someone who has no moral standards it is fine to ridicule superstition.
Personally, as someone who believes in right and wrong I think it is wrong to ridicule the beliefs of anyone, particularly if the intent is malicious.

But the Christian God isn't terribly "nice" either, especially in the OT? Lots of smiting and so on.

OldLadyKnowsNothing, absolutely, not at all. I was responding to a specific question about Muhammad.

Sorry Kay, I'm really not having a go, but if you don't find the violent aspect of Mohammed very appealing, how can you worship an equally violent God?

oldlady - I know what you mean re the violent God thing, but to me Jesus is the God that Christians worship, and he was a pretty nice guy
I think the OT is presented in an old fashioned way that is not as relevant to life today and we should look at the NT first and foremost (just my view though - there are probably many Jewish people and christians for that matter who disagree!)
I think some people NEED to think of God as being more harsh etc... they respond to it better (not me though!)

You know Kay I think in context of his time in history, Mohammad was quite a wise considered man (ka'ba etc)

I mean, it talks aout taking Jews hostage etc but the Jes were directly involved in the warfare of the time, and indeed (I am told) would have sumamrily killed people that Mohammad only reduced to slavery (I say only with huge recognition of the horrors of it)

mersmam, I honestly think that Christians shouldn't refer to the OT at all, but it is the same God.

(I am ex-CofS, btw)

I think the idea is same God viewed through different cultural eyes isn't it?An evolving relationship sort of thing.

Now, I personally struggle with that and dislike the OT immensely (esp. certain paragraphs celebrating harming children) but it is the background to Christ rather than something he preached; he rpeached kindness and love, bit like adding a further section to a will if you like; it changes things.