It is interesting to see the absolute worshipping of the Pope by the multitudes when he takes one of his gun-proofed glass rides (surely God would protect him,or he would welcome the going to such a wonderful place as heaven). People who barely know the man cry and sob in the streets.

The trouble with a lot of religions is they pay more attention to worshipping a messenger then they do to just having faith in one divine or maybe more than one divine forces in the universe. This force being called God.

Mohammed and Jesus were only self proclaimed messengers, not God and yet they are worshipped and their dictates and decrees followed as though they are God.

As soon as mankind stops actually worshipping men in the form of messengers or priests and just believes in:-
One God who’s overriding message would surely be, try your utmost to do good and not harm whilst on this earth. And yes we all do know right from wrong.

There would then be no need for religious conflict between competing doctrines. Man has little knowledge of the biological and spiritual composition of such an alien force as a God entity. If you want to contest that last statement then describe to me in detail what God looks like or is.

Or do you really prefer in your mind to worship man in the form of Jesus and Mohammed.

TRUTHNOW78<if God does not exist who’s going to tell me how to behave & think.

If you don’t know what’s right or wrong honest and true, then your brain must be malfunctioning. God does not take the serial killer off the street on earth, man has to do that himself for the protection of society.

So in that sense wrongdoing will be punished and society and the people in it will send a strong message that we see this as harmful and wrong in a peaceful society. I never saw a serial killer yet that was or could be stopped by any belief in God. People who have worked to try and rehabilitate them with religion,or phyco training have had very limited success.

Some of the Sicilian Godfather mafia men were vey religious, their belief in the existence of God didn’t seem to increase their sense of the right and wrong thing to do. You need look no further then the muslim religion and in past centuries the Christian religion who were never stopped from murdering people in holy wars, on the contrary it gave them more of a reason to excuse their actions.
It’s a sad world when people have to be told what’s right and what’s wrong and hurtful. They already know that, but choose to not know out of selfishness whether they believe in God or not

Pericles:

<<It is obviously a struggle for you, Stephen.>>

Not at all. I feel that I belong with my church and that it nourishes me spiritually, but the article was a small project aimed at working out why as an “unbeliever” I do feel that way.

<<Clearly, etymology is only useful up to a point. And turning the simple "I believe" into the more complicated, emotionally freighted "I give my heart to", is more than a step too far.>>

The etymological excursion was actually meant to show that after some centuries many Christians lost that original understanding of the creed as an utterance of deep trust and loyalty (fiducia and fidelitas).

<<Fact is, there is no logical and empirical truth in any part of religion.>>

Not quite so. I would agree that empiricism is far outweighed by analogical and symbolical perception in religion. There is plenty of logic though – mainly in theology. It may be simply that you don’t agree with the basic premise from which a particular logical argument begins.

<<The obvious next step, Stephen, is to accept that you don't actually - believe any of it. And that you and the Anglican Church have gone as far as it is possible to go together, and it is time for you to part amicably.>>

Not at all, Pericles. The Anglican Church is a liturgical and non-confessional church. Anglicanism is not defined by doctrine so much as through worship. To quote the former Archbishop of Perth (who was also the Primate of Australia for some years): “Just as the Creeds are recited in the context of prayer and worship, so they must be understood from within this context...In response to the initiative of God [Anglicans]first respond in faith and trust...Only then do they begin to reflect upon, and express in abstract doctrinal form, what is grounded in their concrete experience.” (Reflections in the Glass, by Archbishop Peter Carnley, Harper Collins 2004. Page 73)

Pelican:
Thanks for your comments. I think we are very close in our views on human relationships with each other and the natural environment. I know there are quite a number of priests and laypeople in my church and other churches who have pursued the issue in great depth. I agree it is worth much more discussion – may be even an article or two one day.

Jon J:
<<When the last Christian turns the lights out in the last church and turns to take a look back at the trappings of their spiritual 'progress' through the twenty-first century they will see this written above the altar: "We had to destroy God in order to save him." Do you honestly think your non-existent but oh-so-important God is really fooling anyone?>>

Sorry, your statement just doesn’t make sense to me. God is indestructible, although human understanding of God does evolve. You seem to have a deeply ingrained hostility towards Christianity and my article, but apart from that I just can’t work out what point you are trying to make.

AGIR:
I can agree that there is a certain basic core of belief (faith as “assensus”) that I think is necessary for one to be a Christian. One needs to accept the centrality of God, the centrality of Jesus, and the centrality of the scriptures. From that starting point countless directions can be taken, depending on the person’s experience of those three. The path will be right to the extent that the person’s faith (in the three relational senses) is strong.

"The Anglican Church is a liturgical and non-confessional church.
"Anglicanism is not defined by doctrine so much as through worship."
Posted by crabsy, Thursday, 16 December 2010 7:50:48 PM

Some Anglicans are more equal than others, though. In Australia, and also world-wide with the various alliances such as Gafcon/FOCA in response to over-emphasised indiscretions.

@ CHERFUl,

So is adultery alright or not, and why?