Humans live in a large global space, but in the scheme of things in terms of earth, and that space, the percentage of land we take up is minute.

Since humans have looked to the stars, this has lead to imagination, a very self centered desire for more and a strong element of a constant drive of one-upmanship.

Should we stop looking to the stars, address lives full of constant overdrive and more at our place within the natural world and how we could better fit in?

The most important thing humans can each learn is character that reflects the nature of the creator and cares for all life, behaviour that protects life and the wisdom to understand the purpose of each life. It is just as important to be looking down microscopes as it is telescopes.

Our place is on earth our minds can be in the stars.

Dear Nathan,

I searched the web to help me enter into your discussion
of our place in the universe and came across the link
listed below. It's from the TAIZE Community. I had never
heard of them. It appears that the TAIZE Community is a
ecumenical monastic order founded in 1940 by Brother Roger
Schutz, a Reformed Protestant. in Burgundy,
France, with a strong devotion to peace and justice
through prayer and meditation. It is composed of more than
100 brothers from Catholic and Protestant traditions who
originate from approx. 30 countries around the world.

I found the link quite interesting:

http://www.taize.fr/en_article3645.html

Thank you Foxy!

You may be interested to know that the soothing and comforting songs of Taize are available on the web and Taize-based services are regularly conducted across Australia. I take part in them myself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gVEyrHiSm6Y
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqQsZK57OX8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfUPfWp-F_0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Rmw_TpcM9M

Dear Yuyutsu,

Thank You for the links.

I am always stimulated, sometimes astonished by what
one can learn on this forum.

G'day there NATHANJ...

What a deep almost philosophical topic you've raised today ? I find it immensely hard to even quantify Space as it were. I understand our (Earth's) place within our own Universe, but beyond that, well I simply don't know.

Concerning the proposition that we should search our Universe in order to find another planet that's capable of sustaining life ? Why ever for? There are squillions of acres of arid areas on our own earth now.

Why should we simply abandon or give up on those places? I'm sure our dry, barren deserts would prove far easier to 'tame', ultimately settle and eventually develop now. Rather than traveling incalculable distances, with incalculable costs, in order to discover some other new world or planet, which is capable of being thoroughly plundered to assuage human greed. We're not simply another version of 'Star Trek'.

Hello o sung wu,

One point I am trying to make is that humans need to reflect on how we are living at present, when we are constantly looking for more. So for example when Australia, first had no humans (as a species) living here, these species, connected well and adapted well in a natural way.

In a day and age, where we (as humans) are still facing global problems, such as third world starvation, extremist terrorism, refugee related matters and unaddressed foreign battles that are still ongoing in 2016 - we (as humans) have to decide how or if we are going to "fit into the bigger picture".

If we are not going to consider anything, we will have to reconsider how we live at the present moment. One option was put forward by Foxy, but will people from other religions or atheists for example accept that?

A time for simple reflection by all, may be a starting point for change - but for many that will be difficult.

Those who believe in the gods generally have acted atheistically, or at least made themselves their god. Science-believers can see that when woman invented the he-man they created a carcinogen . Man-eating tigers and phallic horny-rhinos are dead meat like the Grated Barrier Reef and the boiled north pole. Humans swarm in tumour lumps along river-arteries and denuded forests. Colonising cells in the space-station are a final mortal-sign that man is infectious and terminal.

Have you ever looked through a telescope the wonders of the Orion Nebula, Eta Carina, Omega Centauri. How wonderful God must be.

Now go into a children's cancer ward in any hospital, or an amputation ward in a military hospital. Where the absence of God is very profound.

If God existed where should he be spending his time - making astronomical wonders or fixing children so they do not get cancer or healing amputees.

Your God if he exists is either a sadistic megalomaniac or a complete idiot they are the only two options.

Hi (again) NATHANJ...

I'm sorry I didn't quite understand what it was you were getting at? Having read and reread that, which FOXY has kindly shared with us all, I can only say that I understand even less about the topic than before. And that's after FOXY'S cleared reasoning that she always ensures the reader can thoroughly understand.

To be perfectly honest with you, I'm very much a pragmatist in just about all that I do and say, so much of this esoteric material, including the wearing of white robes, and listening attentively to this monotonous type of sub-cultural mood music, is totally beyond me I must confess ! Still best of luck with your topic NATHAN J.

TheAtheist,
So your view since you do not accept the reality of principles of design and purpose is that the world is actually Sadistic, megalomaniac based or completely idiotic; they are the only options in your view.

Obviously we do not look to you for answers for the reality. For this is your actual view of the reality. Much of the problems are human inflicted and we have the God given intelligence to discover the causes and eradicate them.

Josephus " Much of the problems are human inflicted and we have the God given intelligence to discover the causes and eradicate them."

Amen to that Josephus, and how right you are.

Humans have worked out ways to deal with unwanted pregnancies, and indeed how to stop pregnancy beginning at all.
We can also produce babies outside of the uterus, and arrange for infertile couples to have children.

We know how we can help dying people to die when they wish to.

We have found out that homosexual, transgender and trans-sexual people are just another human sexual orientation, like heterosexuals are.

We also know there is no 'reality' at all in believing in any of the hundreds (thousands?) of gods the people of our world have dreamed up for millions of years.....

What a wonderful universe we live in!

"If God existed where should he be spending his time - making astronomical wonders or fixing children so they do not get cancer or healing amputees. "
Hitler lost it , having Parkinson's and probably syphilis, and with a healthy mind could have won. Genghiz Khan had respiratory perhaps TB and a cure could have made Europe Mongolian or a cemetery , as head amputation is a bit too difficult to repair. Cancer won't exist after global radiation is delivered by Putin and Trump and neither will Nazis, Mongols, Russians or Yank-Australians.

Josephus,

You fail to differentiate between proximal and ultimate causes.

<<Much of the problems are human inflicted and we have the God given intelligence to discover the causes and eradicate them.>>

While humans may be the proximal cause of much of the world's ills, what so many Christians who make this limp excuse fail to realise, is that their god, if it exists, would be the ultimate cause of all the world's problems, since it knew what would happen in advance, and knows what is happening now, and still let/lets it happen anyway.

You don't get to credit God for humanity's positive acheivments, only to deny is hand in any of the bad that occurs.

The weather bureau gets abused when rain does or does not fall. They foresee it and are to blame.

nicknamenick,

The weather bureau don't control the whether, and the fact that they foresee it and allow it to happen anyway has nothing to do with indifference.

Hi AJ
Then you would agree to President God checking your ballot and correcting the wrong choice of candidate ? He would block your bankcard for over-consuming when you withdraw cash? Your voice is deleted when giving wrong opinions?

nicknamenick,

That response doesn't absolve you of the glaring oversight in your logic that I pointed to.

But yes, if he could provide me with good reasoning, then I would have no problem with him at least warning me in advance.

It doesn't have to be all or nothing, you know. In fact, here's a little video demonstrating that your god actually only cares about the free will of bad people, since you want to go down the free will route.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1BzP1wr234

There's a difference between not letting people make bad choices and letting them kill or rape others and letting children die of horrid illnesses.

Warning you ? " It's not nice to kick the mother , wouldn't you like to smoke a lung-disease? Um , no here's a warning about nicotine tar. Alright , just a few today , less tomorrow perhaps ? Could we cut back on the nukes as well ? oh , why not.."
Where's the preference on bad peoples' free-will ? Please explain.

Yes, "warning me", nicknamenick.

The video explains how your god only cares (or cares more) about the free will of wrong-doers. That's why I linked to it.

I'm not going to give a brief summary of it here just so you can try to pick holes in that instead, when those holes may never have existed in the complete explanation provided in the video.

Sure mate picking holes is not on. You want to win the Lottery, every week. Bad guys , like the goodies such as your pure self, want the option to reject warnings. Everyone thinks they are pretty good and can justify any acts , crims declare their innocence. Logic please.

The usual atheist trolls have no actual answers to life they continue to focus on negative incidence of their negative view of God assuming it gives answers. Their view of life is a sadistic accident.

nicknamenick,

Your thoughts are very fragmented, aren't they? None of that made much sense at all, and what little I could decipher didn't seem to address anything I said. But it does sound like the video may have hit a nerve.

I see Josephus has joined us again with nothing meaningful or grounded in reality to add. Just snippy assertions about what others believe.

By the way, my apologies to NathanJ for this digression, but to me, bad arguments are like pimples you've just gotta pop.

Susie thinks she has all the answers because humans have learned to murder the unborn in the womb, and by chemically removing fertility. All of which interferes with normal human functions and has health complications. She believes the answer to life is being able to kill the aged by poison.

As far as transgender: CNS News reports, Dr. Paul R. McHugh, the Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins University and former psychiatrist–in-chief for Johns Hopkins Hospital, who has studied transgendered people for 40 years, said it is a scientific fact that “transgendered men do not become women, nor do transgendered women become men.
All such people, he explained in an article for The Witherspoon Institute, “become feminized men or masculinized women, counterfeits or impersonators of the sex with which they ‘identify.’”
Dr. McHugh, who was psychiatrist-in-chief at Johns Hopkins Hospital for 26 years, the medical institute that had initially pioneered sex-change surgery – and later ceased the practice – stressed that the cultural meme, or idea that “one’s sex is fluid and a matter of choice” is extremely damaging, especially to young people

Yes susie has the answers to normality!

AJ
You hit my optic nerve and you do have a nerve saying God is the ultimate cause of all the world's problems . You say any action is limited to a warning , by your choice, then blame God because you limit him . Do you have kids who think in that style - what age would that be?

Why is that, nicknamenick?

<<...you do have a nerve saying God is the ultimate cause of all the world's problems .>>

Because, if it’s just because I’ve said something about your god that offends you, then that’s not a good enough reason to claim that I have a nerve demonstrating that your god would be the ultimate cause of all the world’s problems.

I’ve believe I’ve provided sufficient reason to support my claim.

<<You say any action is limited to a warning , by your choice, then blame God because you limit him .>>

This sentence doesn’t actually make any sense.

What actions are limited to a warning? I have not placed any limits on your god, or blamed him for anything because of those limits. It is precisely because I place no limits on him that I say he would be ultimately responsible for all the bad in the world had he actually existed.

<<Do you have kids who think in that style - what age would that be?>>

In what style? I don’t even know what style of thinking I’m dealing with now, let alone the style of thinking you’re trying to describe.

I'm starting to think it might be best if I just smile while slowly stepping backwards.

AJ
"But yes, if he could provide me with good reasoning, then I would have no problem with him at least warning me in advance."
You repeated "warning me".
Then you say God is wrong for letting bad things happen.
You want it both ways.

Yes, nicknamenick, I repeated that.

<<You repeated "warning me".>>

If he could warn people of the bad consequences that would result from some of the actions they may be contemplating, then that would be nice. That’s not taking someone’s free will away from them.

He could also intervene when bad things happen. That’s another option.

<<Then you say God is wrong for letting bad things happen.>>

Absolutely. He’s evil.

He has the time to help believers find their car keys and win football matches, but apparently he can’t spare a moment to feed millions of starving children. What kind of a disgusting god is that? He needs to re-assess his priorities.

<<You want it both ways.>>

Want what both ways? I see no contradiction in the above.

You're still not making much sense.

AJ Philips, believes believes the reality of the world is evil, We are all doomed! That is the problem with atheists they see no purpose or hope in their world view. It is a pity they are so negative about life.

Life and hope are divine, fear of death and hopelessness are evil. The important thing is to believe in life and have hope in a better future, and be part of creating that future.

Josephus thinks that humans should only use their intelligence for scientific truths if they follow his Christian beliefs. Anything that disproves his beliefs must be evil.
Why is that Josephus?

Who is to say that my beliefs are 'evil' while yours are not, simply because you believe in fairy tales of invisible gods?
Why should the wider community have to go along with the crazy beliefs of a few, on subjects such as abortion, contraception, euthanasia, same-sex marriage, and homosexuality?

Luckily, the majority of the community DO support euthanasia and same-sex marriage, so, like abortion, contraception and homosexuality, they will soon be accepted as law in our country. And not before time.

*The important thing is to believe in life and have hope in a better future, and be part of creating that future.*

Exactly. So when a 35 year old woman who lives on the Manilla rubbish tip, has her 8th child and pleads with the hospital to tie her tubes and they deny her request as it is seemingly evil, people like me point out the suffering and poverty created by religion and we protest loudly. We hope to create a better future than that.

Do I, Josephus?

<<AJ Philips, believes believes the reality of the world is evil…>>

The world, or the “reality” of it (I’m not sure what the difference is in this context), as a whole isn’t necessarily evil.

Oh, the stuff you crazy kidders will invent to avoid facing an uncomfortable truth about your god. Cognitive dissonance is a bitch, ain’t it?

<<We are all doomed!>>

...he says sarcastically, as if that were an accurate portrayal of my mindset.

On the contrary, that’s more a Christian belief. Your holy book even prophesised about doom and gloom as a sign of the end times that so many of you think is just around the corner (and have thought for so 2000 years). That’s why you lot are always on about how the world’s supposedly going to pot. The State of Israel has once again been created, all you guys need now is a nuclear war to bring on judgement day. You fundamentalist Christians are a dangerous as you are nuts.

It is in fact myself who is continuously reminding the stuffy old conservative majority on this forum that violence has continued to decline since early human history; as has the overall crime rate.

You’re a lost cause, Josephus. You come onto this forum and mumble to yourself about how supposedly hopeless and purposeless life must be for those who aren’t gullible enough to believe the same nonsense that you do. What hope or motivation to improve anything is there in a doctrine that has people convinced that the world in which they live the only life they know they're going to get is just a place to wipe their feet.

I would rather an uncomfortable truth than a reassuring lie.

//That is the problem with atheists they see no purpose or hope in their world view//

Why do I need to be Christian to be hopeful, Josephus? As far as I can tell, hope is an emotion shared by all people regardless of their faith. People were clearly devoting thought to the subject well before Christianity was invented; I'm sure we're all familiar with the ancient Greek myth of Pandora's box, in which hope plays crucial role. So the idea that Christians have a monopoly on hope would seem to have about as much evidential basis as homeopathy.

I find that I hear far more doom & despair coming from certain types of Christians ("Evolutionary theory! Gay marriage! Contraception! Caitlyn Jenner! Ethics classes! Catholics! - The end of the world is nigh! Never mind that the Book of Revelations is very specific on the signs that foretell the end times, and there is absolutely no mention of gay marriage or contraceptives but lots of stuff about strange mythical creatures like seven-headed dragons and sea-monsters showing up, because as a fundamentalist wacko I choose to read Genesis literally but Revelations figuratively, and I'll get very stroppy and start making personal attacks if anybody points out the inconsistencies in my approach to the Bible.") than I do from people of other faiths, who in my experience exhibit just as much hope as the nut-free Christians.

Why do you feel the need to negatively caricature people who don't share your faith, Josephus? Is it because of some niggling doubt or insecurity that makes you feel the need reassure yourself of your Christian virtue by denigrating non-Christians? Is it some sort of strange new evangelism strategy - the "treat 'em mean and keep 'em keen" approach to winning converts to Christianity (I don't think it's working)? Do you believe that your God looks favourably on this sort of behaviour? What benefits for inter-religious dialogue do you think will be achieved by being rude and unpleasant about other people's faiths (or lack thereof)?

>>Why do you feel the need to negatively caricature people who don't share your faith, Josephus? … What benefits … do you think will be achieved by being rude and unpleasant about other people's faiths (or lack thereof)? <<

An admonition very much to the point, but was it really only Josephus who “caricatured people who don’t share his faith” (or unfaith), e.g. by writing “you believe in fairy tales of invisible gods” ?

AJ
"He could also intervene when bad things happen. That’s another option."
Good thinking AJ. So back to my q. - God can block your vote , bank withdrawals and spoken opinions.
Interesting to imagine that. And imagine your expression when it happens.

Toni I was merely responding to some attitudes of people posting their views of the world on this topic. They themselves post negative views of others and do not explain their positive views. At least Dawkins can post some positive views, even of Christians world view.

Toni Lavis,
You also 'get very stroppy and start making personal attacks if anybody points out the inconsistencies in arguments pertaining'... to Israel. I've seen you act this way, people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
Quote 'Why do you feel the need to negatively caricature people who don't share your'... beliefs on Israel?
Look I'm not going to quote your whole paragraph - just change things to Israel or Jews and read your own argument, don't be a hypocrite.

// but was it really only Josephus who “caricatured people who don’t share his faith” (or unfaith), e.g. by writing “you believe in fairy tales of invisible gods” ?//

Quite right, the term 'fairy tales' is bang out of order: fairies are found in European folklore, not middle-eastern folklore. And the term it carries with it negative connotations, because we usually consider fairy tales to be childish things (although for the life of me I can't figure out why - I'm a big fan of Neil Gaiman's 'American Gods', a book which features a leprechaun and a kobold as important characters. It also contains quite a lot of violence, some sex, plenty of strong language and all manner of adult themes, and is definitely not for kids. There's nothing wrong with adults reading fairy tales). Calling the Bible fairy tales is a like calling Dreamtime stories fairy tales: it's inaccurate because Australian folklore also lacks fairies and it's a bit offensive. A far more appropriate term would be 'myths', which lacks the childish connotations of the term 'fairy tales', and accurately reflects the lack of fairies in the Bible.

The bit about 'invisble gods' is only half wrong: Christianity is monotheistic so the use of the plural 'gods' is inaccurate. As I understand Christian mythology, God is supposed to be invisible. If he were visible it would create some problems. It's the old Babel fish argument:

"I refuse to prove that I exist," says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."
"But," says Man, "being visible is a dead giveaway, isn't it? It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don't. QED."
"Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.

So in summation: a more accurate and less condescending description of Christianity would be 'belief in myths of an invisible god'.

//Toni I was merely responding to some attitudes of people posting their views of the world on this topic.//

No you weren't. Let me remind what you wrote since you seem to have forgotten:

//That is the problem with atheists they see no purpose or hope in their world view. It is a pity they are so negative about life.//

What you've done there is taken some very dodgy assumptions about a minuscule sample size of some atheists and generalised it to all atheists. That's not very reasonable now is it? How could you possibly have any insight into the psychology of the countless atheists you've never encountered?

//At least Dawkins can post some positive views, even of Christians world view.//

Well blow me down, the great Dicky Dawkins posts on our little one-horse forum? Where? When? I have lots of biology questions I want to ask him.

AC,

Still got your nose out of joint because I ridiculed your dream of the Great Australian Dicatorship? You're off topic and trolling. Again. Don't you have a hobby or something?

Why thank you, nicknamenick.

<<Good thinking AJ.>>

That was what I was referring to in the first place though.

<<So back to my q. - God can block your vote , bank withdrawals and spoken opinions.>>

No, he can’t, because he doesn’t exist. But if he did exist, then he could, but he wouldn’t be a very nice god if he did. He would finally be intervening, but in a way that was not very nice.

Instead, he could limit his power to helpful deeds such as, oh, I don’t know… curing the cancers of children, or not inventing those cancers in the first place; not allowing Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot and Mao to be conceived, or guiding their lives in a different direction in the same way he helps Christians find their car keys while millions starve; not waiting 198,000 years to intervene while humans live short, brutish lives, scrounging around for food, constantly worrying about who might want to kill them.

You are appealing to the, “God doesn’t want robots”, argument and it’s nonsense. As the video (that you clearly haven’t watched) pointed out, your god only cares about the free will of evil-doers.

He was, however, happy to intervene before the invention of video cameras. But unfortunately, he was the instigator of much of the evil when when he was intervening, so perhaps that’s why he no longer intervenes? We have done much better since then, come to think of it.

Now there’s an argument you can use.

<<Interesting to imagine that. And imagine your expression when it happens.>>

Yes, my expression would probably be one of frustration because he would be using his powers of intervention in a not-so-nice way. So he'd still be a bit of a dick, just in a different way. That's why I spoke of warnings before. Perhaps, in the absurd instances that you provide, he could simply warn the person?

AJ
". he helps Christians find their car keys . your god only cares about the free will of evil-doers"
erm , cof cof.
The bad men were voted in by people who are as good as you. So it's very nice when God blocks your vote by intervening as you suggested .

What bad men, nicknamenick?

<<The bad men were voted in by people who are as good as you.>>

And who are these people I suggested were as good as me?

<<So it's very nice when God blocks your vote by intervening as you suggested .>>

When did I suggest that? And why would that be nice?

You’re back to not making any sense again. Your thoughts are utterly scrambled. There seems to be a strong correlation with the poignancy of what I say and the lack of intelligibility in your response that follows.

You wouldn't happen to be related to oneundergod by any chance, would you?

Is English not your 1st language?
People vote. Voting is choosing pollies by marking a piece of paper. Paper is made of paper. People who vote are people like you.
Germans are people and they vote. They died for Hitler and some still are willing. A fifth of the planet thought Mao was good like AJ and you could get your pic on the gateway if you are a good atheist.
You said God could intervene . It's nice you said so and nice when when your vote gets intervenisationalised. Try and say that sensibly.

Yes, English is my mother tongue, nicknamenick. I was going to ask you the same question.

<<Is English not your 1st language?>>

I understand every word you say - individually. But your sentence structure and flow renders your rambling incoherent, as does your thought patterns. What little I can make out of what you say doesn’t seem to bear any relation to anything that I’ve said.

Have you ever been diagnosed with Thought Disorder? In all seriousness, the rest of your post is symptomatic of it.

<<People vote.>>

Yes. I take it you’re referring to political elections here.

<<Voting is choosing pollies by marking a piece of paper.>>

Correct.

<<Paper is made of paper.>>

Yes, but what does this have to do with anything?

<<People who vote are people like you.>>

Yes. Again, relevance?

<<Germans are people and they vote.>>

Yes.

<<They died for Hitler and some still are willing.>>

Some did and still are. Many Nazi soldiers fought purely to stay alive and for no other reason.

So what?

<<A fifth of the planet thought Mao was good...>>

Or were forced to act as though they did. So what?

<<You said God could intervene .>>

If he existed, he could. Yes.

<<It's nice you said so and nice when when your vote gets intervenisationalised.>>

I take it you mean ”interventionalised”, and not even that’s a word.

But why is it nice that I said that God could intervene, and why would having someone intervene whilst one votes be nice?

You’re still not making the slightest bit of sense.

Well NATHAN J...

I had a good listen and read the lyrics attached to this 'Taize' music as referenced by YUYUTSU & FOXY. Apart from the 'easy listening' aspect of the music, and the hopeful all inspiring lyrics, I can't seem to grasp the their concept that we should all endeavour to get on with each other.

As I mentioned in my earlier thread, I'm very much the pragmatist and I just can't see us all happily living together, given our varying cultures, and widely alienating religious proclivities. There are parts of Sydney, if you're of ordinary European appearance, you'd be lucky not to attract a mouth full of invective from those in the majority. Should you be wearing blue - expect much worse, you can believe me on that !

Look NATHAN J, if it could be achieved - great ! However (sadly) it'll never happen, we'll destroy ourselves beforehand I suspect ?

This thread has deteriorated into an attack on Christian belief. The atheists here have not posted one intelligent purpose of what life is and why.
So let us look at what Christians believe and why. Christians follow the life and teachings of Christ. His mission was to improve the health and well being of the people in his day. To teach forgiveness and restore people in character to the values of God and a healthy society. Ultimately to give his life in service to raise the sick, the outcast and the oppressed. By doing these things you improve a society.

It does not happen by evolution: or selective breeding as Hitler thought. It does not happen by aborting millions of healthy unborn or by euthanizing the unproductive. It happens by care of the young and the disadvantaged. Briefly that gives others hope and purpose

Josephus, I hope you aren't suggesting that those who lived before the amazing Jesus Christ, or all those non-Christians in the world past and present, are not able to care for young people or the disabled? That would be a lie wouldn't it?
Not to mention the fact that we all know some "Christians" who couldn't care less about others.

There are also many Christians who support women's choice for abortion, and the right of people to decide whether they want to die at a time of their own choice.
This universe, thankfully, has room for people of all types, and no one group should take precedence over any others, no matter what they believe...

Susie, You had better decide what you believe.

Quote: "Luckily, the majority of the community DO support euthanasia and same-sex marriage, so, like abortion, contraception and homosexuality, they will soon be accepted as law in our country. And not before time".
Posted by Suseonline, Saturday, 28 May 2016

"This universe, thankfully, has room for people of all types, and no one group should take precedence over any others, no matter what they believe"...
Posted by Suseonline, Sunday, 29 May 2016

Do you believe laws should override others beliefs? Or are you confused?

As should any thread even remotely related to Christianity, Josephus.

<<This thread has deteriorated into an attack on Christian belief.>>

I wouldn’t say “deteriorated”, though. It makes it sound so bad.

<<The atheists here have not posted one intelligent purpose of what life is and why.>>

Purpose is an individual and personal thing. There is no objective purpose independent of our own personal preferences.

<<[Christ’s] mission was to improve the health and well being of the people in his day.>>

Then why couldn’t he do something as simple as inform them about bacteria and the benefits of bathing once a week to prevent illness? Instead, he perpetuated superstition with his talk of demon possession. An oversight that no doubt perpetuated hundreds of years of fear-inspired torture and burnings.

Josephus, of course laws should override some others beliefs.
Otherwise, wouldn't we have the radical Christians in our society madly stoning the adulterers amongst us in the streets, or the radical Muslims cutting off the hands of theives as they tried to steal an apple!

Thank goodness we don't let the beliefs of some people stop laws that govern how we live, and how or if we get punished. Even someone like yourself would surely be thankful our laws don't allow the beliefs of some Muslims to override our laws, let alone some of the old superstitious Christian beliefs?

Dear O Sung Wu,

The community of Taize is ecumenical, which means that it is not only tolerant of other religions but in fact embraces them all. The community around the monastery of Taize was hiding hundreds of Jews during the holocaust and I am fully accepted and feel an integral part of this community despite not being a Christian myself. Nobody there, in many years that I am involved, has ever tried to convert me.

As a Hindu, it is obvious for me that "There is one Lord, one faith, one baptism, there is one God who is father of all". I often sing this and other Taize songs in my Hindu community. Among our saints we have an image of Buddha and an image of Jesus - we garland them all with flowers.

While we do not at present have members of Muslim background, they would be more than welcome - in both in my Taize and Hindu communities. Bhagawan Sri Sathya Sai Baba exemplified the inherent unity between Hinduism and Islam: he included many Muslim chants in his Hindu community. Watch this amazing amalgamation between Hinduism and Islam, where "Allah Hu Akbar" receives a very different meaning than what you see in the news: http://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/sai-babas-arabic-islamic-flavour
While I personally cannot be everywhere at once, I would find myself at home in this hybrid religious community just as well.

Let us continue to build bridges: cultural differences are not a barrier for religion; religion is one, we should not be bothered at all that its external and superficial expressions are coloured by the various cultures of the devotees.

To quote from http://scriptures.ru/sb_mm.htm :

"I have come Not to disturb or destroy any Faith, But to confirm Each in his own faith So that, the Christian becomes A better Christian The Muslim a better Muslim A Hindu a better Hindu"

"to each is given a goal to which God turns him; then strive together towards all that is good..." (The Quran II:148)

Yuyutsu,

A nice post. I always thought the Taizé community was physically bound to the place in France of that name. Or do various Taizé communities, with membership lists etc, exist in different places throughout the world? Or is there a “virtual” (via internet) global Taizé community?

Toni Lavis,

Did you mean to say that “believing in fairy tales of invisible gods” is NOT a caricature of Christianity’s basic tenets? Would you also say that “believing in fairy tales (referring to e.g. superstring theory) of invisible entities (referring to elementary particles and fields)” is NOT a caricature of what theoretical physics is all about?

If not, what benefit would this selective disrespect for alternative views of reality (that “ordinary people” cannot understand hence have to resort to uncritical beliefs or unbeliefs) achieve?

Please disregard this post if I misunderstood you and you did not mean to justify the phrase “you believe in fairy tales of invisible gods”.

Dear George,

Taize services are conducted in Australia both by churches (Catholic, Anglican, Uniting) and by individuals. The services are typically monthly and as far as I know there are no formal communities, but often there are E-mail lists to remind about the next service or inform about changes and special events.

I initially found out about it when my friend visited Taize in France and was so impressed that he started his own Taize evenings in his local church.

The following link is unfortunately not quite up to date, the actual list should be much longer: http://www.taize.fr/en_article3489.html