You're quite right about utopia of course, since the word means literally "no place". I was given the CS Lewis sci fi trilogy to read when I was 10 and found it fascinating and dull at the same time, maybe I wasn't old enough to appreciate it in the way you described. I totally agree with you that, notwithstanding the wonderful achievements of mankind and the progress in equality and education and son, the utopia is nowhere other than in our selves: as Jesus put it, the Kingdom is within you. Politics and Law has its place, but true peace is inner. That seems to be the trajectory of the Biblical writings, yet within Christendom we still have groups obsessed with trying to define what is right and looking for ways to make everybody else comply. Yes I'm talking about certain lefty trends.
Yes , did read that bit and completely agree with you that "if you rely totally on rules to behave well something's wrong, isn't it?" Seems that you and James have produced a lot of text to communicate a relatively simple message, if this is what this whole post is about. And of course you don't need religion to tell you that. And what on earth have Greenbelt done to annoy you? Their web site reads pretty uncontroversial, apart from the Christianity references.
Great, so do you understand my first post better now? Or are you still just focussed on objecting to the little you understand about religion and Christianity?. If you don’t want to read a lot of text on a subject why are you here and why ask questions? You asked for an example then you ask a question that shows you’ve forgotten the reason you asked it. Have a nice weekend.
It just seems a lot of text to make a simple point. And how can you know how much I know about religion as if this (R) is a complex issue. I'm here because a neighbour invited me to listen to s talk by James which took me to his public posts. I then found some inconsistencies in his argumentation eg over Bill Bryson, on evolution which seemed fraudulent to me. So if someone writes publicly with apparently false argumentation I feel I have a duty to voice my objection.
Where on earth do you get the idea that the left are strongly associated with state control? I don't think that applies to any of the labour governments in the 20 century .
And you've gone quiet on the Bryson/evolution point. Have you been nobbled?😉
And you haven't explained how you see Greenbelt as having gone left which you say is controlling rather than right which you say means liberty. I always think of the left as supporting the underprivileged as opposed to powerful right
Yes, the left is traditionally more on the side of the working class and more directly monetarily supportive to the needy, which I thoroughly support. But the left is also strongly associated with state control, control in general actually, and a kind of pharisaical need to be thought more righteous. Which nobody is.
The false argument was in his post on Finding the god particle. He used the Bryson quote about us being highly improbable as if this supports the idea of a creator but fails to point out that Bryson then goes on to explain how complex structures like us are perfectly explainable over billions of years of evolution. To me that's cherry picking quotes which seems fraudulent to me. And James obviously didn't like that but didn't respond to my criticism
A different subject of course but I tend to agree with you concerning evolution, and I’m not convinced by the so called fine tuning argument. I do believe in God however.
Still not sure what you are getting at without some examples. How can you live in a society that does not have laws which by their nature require compliance? Even the NT has commands that require compliance so how is that different from the OT and today's laws.
With respect, did you read the bit where I said laws have their place? We have tons of laws, many of them very good ones. And of course we have mores, conventions, standards, all that is fine. But in the context of ecclesia, Christian communities, or even Christianity within the wider culture of this country, the reliance on those constraints to create anything remotely approaching a utopia, or even a harmonious community, is misplaced, in my view. Example: The Greenbelt faith arts and justice festival and year-round community, seems to me to have moved very much leftwards in its non-diversity of viewpoints political framing of faith. I'm happy to be disagreed with on this, of course, and I'm sorry if I have not been able to elaborate or articulate what I mean. I'm really just referring not the inability of laws and mores to create utopia, and the value of genuine changes of hearts and minds. Rules are to be upheld, I believe, I'm not an anarchist, but if you rely totally on rules to behave well something's wrong, isn't it?
Ultimately, the rules and laws don't do the one thing that we need which is change to the heart, so we either don't need the rules or we want to obey them willingly. That's the one thing that all these utopias fail to address. We bang on about that on the podcast.
Yes, Andy - you're right that Greenbelt doesn't have a wide range of political views, but that's not really new, as it's been that way decades. I went a couple of years ago - and it was business as usual on that score.
Still not sure what you mean by groups trying to define what is right. Examples? What's wrong with that so long as you do not impose your view unless it is widely accepted and then with minority safeguards.
It's a darn huge subject Thomas, but for one thing, it's the reliance on defining, enforcing or coercing behaviour or right thinking as the predominant means of improving society, rather than transforming the soul. A top down religion rather than a bottom up one, if you like. The OT was top down, the NT bottom up. Not saying laws and mores don't have their place, of course - but there is a spectrum, in Christianity, from laws of compliance to the law of love, and some denominations, branches, movements etc are, I feel, more to the left (control) and some more to the right (liberty).
I can’t really see those as lefty trends, in themselves. I’m referring more to the increasing belief in effecting societal improvement by control and authority, whether that be political “correctness” or equivalence of Christian faith with activism.
If you admitted you were a creationist and believe everything in the Bible it would at least explain your rather extreme belief in the supernatural and apparent disinclination to debate important issues without distorting your sources.
You also don't seem to get much response to your blog's so not sure what the point of them is?
This is very different from other conspiracy blogs and web sites.
And your vision of utopia seems just wishful thinking of what might be whilst forgetting the wonderful accomplishments of mankind despite the sheer horror some people experience.
And your god is just a petty authoritarian figure who promises everything but does not deliver ( except in people's minds)
When you start calling out the hypocrisy of Israel claiming their right to the "promised land" , which is just an attempt to justify land theft, I might have more respect for you.
But you just appear to want to hide quietly behind your blogs and not respond to serious issues.
You're quite right about utopia of course, since the word means literally "no place". I was given the CS Lewis sci fi trilogy to read when I was 10 and found it fascinating and dull at the same time, maybe I wasn't old enough to appreciate it in the way you described. I totally agree with you that, notwithstanding the wonderful achievements of mankind and the progress in equality and education and son, the utopia is nowhere other than in our selves: as Jesus put it, the Kingdom is within you. Politics and Law has its place, but true peace is inner. That seems to be the trajectory of the Biblical writings, yet within Christendom we still have groups obsessed with trying to define what is right and looking for ways to make everybody else comply. Yes I'm talking about certain lefty trends.
Andy
Yes , did read that bit and completely agree with you that "if you rely totally on rules to behave well something's wrong, isn't it?" Seems that you and James have produced a lot of text to communicate a relatively simple message, if this is what this whole post is about. And of course you don't need religion to tell you that. And what on earth have Greenbelt done to annoy you? Their web site reads pretty uncontroversial, apart from the Christianity references.
Great, so do you understand my first post better now? Or are you still just focussed on objecting to the little you understand about religion and Christianity?. If you don’t want to read a lot of text on a subject why are you here and why ask questions? You asked for an example then you ask a question that shows you’ve forgotten the reason you asked it. Have a nice weekend.
It just seems a lot of text to make a simple point. And how can you know how much I know about religion as if this (R) is a complex issue. I'm here because a neighbour invited me to listen to s talk by James which took me to his public posts. I then found some inconsistencies in his argumentation eg over Bill Bryson, on evolution which seemed fraudulent to me. So if someone writes publicly with apparently false argumentation I feel I have a duty to voice my objection.
It’s not just a simple point. It’s a massive subject. Where do you see the false argumentation?
Andy
Where on earth do you get the idea that the left are strongly associated with state control? I don't think that applies to any of the labour governments in the 20 century .
And you've gone quiet on the Bryson/evolution point. Have you been nobbled?😉
But hey! Perhaps I have misunderstood his point about Bryson and evolution. In which case I will apologise to him. 🙂
And you haven't explained how you see Greenbelt as having gone left which you say is controlling rather than right which you say means liberty. I always think of the left as supporting the underprivileged as opposed to powerful right
Yes, the left is traditionally more on the side of the working class and more directly monetarily supportive to the needy, which I thoroughly support. But the left is also strongly associated with state control, control in general actually, and a kind of pharisaical need to be thought more righteous. Which nobody is.
The false argument was in his post on Finding the god particle. He used the Bryson quote about us being highly improbable as if this supports the idea of a creator but fails to point out that Bryson then goes on to explain how complex structures like us are perfectly explainable over billions of years of evolution. To me that's cherry picking quotes which seems fraudulent to me. And James obviously didn't like that but didn't respond to my criticism
A different subject of course but I tend to agree with you concerning evolution, and I’m not convinced by the so called fine tuning argument. I do believe in God however.
Andy
Still not sure what you are getting at without some examples. How can you live in a society that does not have laws which by their nature require compliance? Even the NT has commands that require compliance so how is that different from the OT and today's laws.
With respect, did you read the bit where I said laws have their place? We have tons of laws, many of them very good ones. And of course we have mores, conventions, standards, all that is fine. But in the context of ecclesia, Christian communities, or even Christianity within the wider culture of this country, the reliance on those constraints to create anything remotely approaching a utopia, or even a harmonious community, is misplaced, in my view. Example: The Greenbelt faith arts and justice festival and year-round community, seems to me to have moved very much leftwards in its non-diversity of viewpoints political framing of faith. I'm happy to be disagreed with on this, of course, and I'm sorry if I have not been able to elaborate or articulate what I mean. I'm really just referring not the inability of laws and mores to create utopia, and the value of genuine changes of hearts and minds. Rules are to be upheld, I believe, I'm not an anarchist, but if you rely totally on rules to behave well something's wrong, isn't it?
Ultimately, the rules and laws don't do the one thing that we need which is change to the heart, so we either don't need the rules or we want to obey them willingly. That's the one thing that all these utopias fail to address. We bang on about that on the podcast.
Yes, Andy - you're right that Greenbelt doesn't have a wide range of political views, but that's not really new, as it's been that way decades. I went a couple of years ago - and it was business as usual on that score.
Still not sure what you mean by groups trying to define what is right. Examples? What's wrong with that so long as you do not impose your view unless it is widely accepted and then with minority safeguards.
Majority opinion seems a poor way of determining truth.
True but by widely accepted I mean properly examined in depth as opposed to just giving into opinions
It's a darn huge subject Thomas, but for one thing, it's the reliance on defining, enforcing or coercing behaviour or right thinking as the predominant means of improving society, rather than transforming the soul. A top down religion rather than a bottom up one, if you like. The OT was top down, the NT bottom up. Not saying laws and mores don't have their place, of course - but there is a spectrum, in Christianity, from laws of compliance to the law of love, and some denominations, branches, movements etc are, I feel, more to the left (control) and some more to the right (liberty).
Andy. Interested to know what you mean by "certain lefty trends". Black lives matter, anti-slavery campaign against statues?
Hugh
I can’t really see those as lefty trends, in themselves. I’m referring more to the increasing belief in effecting societal improvement by control and authority, whether that be political “correctness” or equivalence of Christian faith with activism.
James
If you admitted you were a creationist and believe everything in the Bible it would at least explain your rather extreme belief in the supernatural and apparent disinclination to debate important issues without distorting your sources.
You also don't seem to get much response to your blog's so not sure what the point of them is?
This is very different from other conspiracy blogs and web sites.
And your vision of utopia seems just wishful thinking of what might be whilst forgetting the wonderful accomplishments of mankind despite the sheer horror some people experience.
And your god is just a petty authoritarian figure who promises everything but does not deliver ( except in people's minds)
When you start calling out the hypocrisy of Israel claiming their right to the "promised land" , which is just an attempt to justify land theft, I might have more respect for you.
But you just appear to want to hide quietly behind your blogs and not respond to serious issues.
Hugh
Hugh