Europe is better off with rampant secularism? There is little hope for Europe, it can’t even reproduce itself. As Pope Benedict XVI said Europe sees children as a burden rather than a source of joy. In this respect the decadence of Europe must be compared with the fall of the Roman Empire. http://www.atimes.com/atimes/front_page/ED08Aa01.html

Its true religion is the greatest force for good or evil. Even more reason to understand and not explain away religion with “teddys”, for the charge of escapism is suitably applied to a westerner who refuses to take a proper account of the life of Jesus. Besides, how was Jesus’ obedience unto death, to God the Father, some kind of comfort blanket? Perhaps you can tell him that when you meet him.

So a convicted murderer is likely to believe in God – so what?! The demons believe in God and tremble. Satan has no doubt about the existence of God.

Look Christianity hasn’t been tried and found wanting its been found hard and not tried. Do you want to take up your cross and follow him? No ? The cross is folly to you?

How many could articulate philosophical atheism? I have great respect for people like JS Mill who looked carefully but could not believe. How many like this?

Determinism? are you trying to say you believe free will an illusion? That religion inhibits the investigation of the natural world?

http://chronicle.com/temp/reprint.php?id=tqm4xd5mqkk5px43d968m19qmf4w3g5y

It was Christianity that championed reason. Greek philosophy had no effect on Greek religion, nor did it win over Muslims. Reason applied to commerce – capitalism, and nature – science have their seeds in Mediaeval Christendom.

The best example of humanity we have, this luminous Nazarene - Jesus Christ, from whom all good we have has come. What do you call him?

Atheism had no effect on the barbarity of communist atrocities? You can subtract atheism from the full fledged communist world view? mmmm lol
The two monsters weren't really atheists because they picked up bits of Christianity from their surrounding culture. That rules you out too then Kieran

SHONGA,
Your rudeness toward faith and racism is the point of this post. If you do not wish to participate please refrain from abuse. Get a real life! That you treat life as a mere hobby is demonstration of your shallowness of mind.

Quote, "All this carry on because some Jew girl couldn't get her own way, I suggest you'all gwt a hobby!

>>Correlations are interesting things<< says Martin.

O-o-o-okay. So try this one.

>>Religious people have lower rates of mental disease<<

A couple of weeks ago, Abdul Rahman was reprieved from the gallows on the basis that he is mentally unfit to stand trial for the crime of apostasy. In his case, this was simply because he was a Christian.

Leaving aside the world's moral outrage that enabled his life to be saved, the fact remains that his crime, and the verdict, prove conclusively that mental illness is a social construct.

If we take the Afghani society, it is only a small step from this verdict to the proclamation that Christianity itself is a mental illness. I may not agree with this conclusion, but a) it might save a lot of lives and b) would guarantee that in Afghanistan at least, it could be shown that Christians have a 100% record of mental illness.

How's that for correlation Martin?

your protestations on the ability of Christians to think freely...

>>are you trying to say you believe free will an illusion? That religion inhibits the investigation of the natural world?<<

...you provide an example that is headed "How Christianity (and Capitalism) Led to Science", in which the argument proceeds as follows:

“The most convincing answer to those questions attributes Western dominance to the rise of capitalism .... [which] achieved that miracle through regular reinvestment to increase productivity ...but, if one digs deeper, it becomes clear that the truly fundamental basis not only for capitalism, but for the rise of the West, was an extraordinary faith in reason ... [and w]hile the other world religions emphasized mystery and intuition, Christianity alone embraced reason and logic as the primary guides to religious truth.”

This sort of logic does not even pass the gentlest of examinations. While Christianity may embrace reason and logic as guides to religious truth (although even that is vigorously arguable – ID anyone?), there remains no connection with the primary claim, that it has anything to do with scientific enquiry.

The argument is a house of cards, built on sand.

Martin Ibn Warriq

"No wonder the people and societies that struggle admit to a belief in God, they clearly need Him the most."

They are also more likely to believe in witch doctors.

"Religious people have lower rates of mental disease and are happier than non-believers. It seems to help people cope with life-just what we’d expect from the good God."

If this supposition is correct, though personally I doubt it, it could be explained by the fact that people have to suspend all judgement and reason if they are to accept religious teachings. And obviously if you don't think very deeply you can't stress your mental faculties to the point of illness.

No person who thinks rationally could possibly believe in the existence of heaven and an eternal life. I guess though that if you could empty your head to that extent you probably would be happy. You probably wouldn't trouble your mind too much about many other issues that the rest of us have to grapple with either. Believing that the world's problems are simply the will of God absolves people from having to take some personal responsibility which no doubt helps in remaining happy.

People who do take the bible literally will have to do some serious (not to mention creative) thinking if they are to reconcile its teachings with the recently discovered Gospel of Judas. Apparently the representation of Judas in this tome is quite at odds with his long accepted portrayal in the New Testament. One can only wonder at how many hours will be wasted in explaining away this little mystery.

"Premarital sex, something all religious traditions prohibit, leads to unwanted babies and therefore tempts us to kill our offspring. Secularism teaches ‘explore your sexuality!’ Those without faith kill their growing babies at a ghoulish rate."

What a nonsense to try and link secularism with promiscuity as you have attempted to do here. If you can't use reasoning and/or evidence to back up such wild claims don't make them. Especially to this audience. Most of us don't believe in blind acceptance.

Martin

From my 30 or so years of mental health nursing experience, nothing could be further from the truth.

Indeed, the contrary applies from my experience. The most disturbed mentally ill people I have nursed, have come from an indoctrinated faith. Some examples are: Roman Catholicism, The Bretherin, and especially The Mormons.

I have nursed many Nuns who have been profoundly psychotic - using "fs and cs" abundantly. When they became well, of course they were mortified, and inevitably lapsed into a very black whole of depression. Absolutelly trajic stuff.

Regards
Kay

Bron
there were many 'pseudo' gospels in the days of the early church.

The key point which is promoted about this 'gospel' is that Judas is not the 'hated' figure, but more an 'assistant' to the fulfillment of Christs crucifixion destiny.. does that change the meaning, purpose and result of his actual death on our behalf ? Nope..not a bit.

It might change how Judas is regarded, but to be honest, he is just about the last biblical character I think about.

The most important outcome of study of this document, will probably be nothing more than further help in understanding the use of Koine greek. There may be other documentary 'pearls' which emerge, it may support some historical incidents..

Have a peak at this reference please

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/gospeljudas.html

The gospel of Judas was mentioned by an early church father Irenaeus.
Its just one among many false gospels, like that of Bartholomew and others.. rejected by the Church due to knowing where they came from.

Knowing what it actually 'says' in 2006 will not change the fact that it was rejected with good reason by the early Church in the fixing of the Canon.

Cheers