Christian Grans

It's all meaningless is a very negative way to respond. I am agnostic and certainly don't feel that way. My children were told that I did not have the answers and neither does anyone esle; but that life is full of meaningful things - our love for our familes being just one of many: courage, kindness, humour.

Life is chaotic. There is no god. Simplest, and most believable, explanation yet.

It certainly made me happier when I realised there was no 'big daddy' up there allowing bad things to happen.

Of course no-one can explain when awful things happen and the present day search for reasons, in my opinion, often leads to looking for someone to blame. Is it more comforting to a child to say, 'It's all meaningless waste'? This Christian isn't obsessed with blood and torture. Lots of churches have no images at all. The early images of Christ were often of 'Christ enthroned in heavenly splendour' rather than of the cross. I think each age and culture focuses on the images that suit them best. And if course, artists choose the image they most want to present.

I remember looking at the tortured figure of Christ on a crucifix when I was a child, and wondering what sin I could possibly have committed that would need someone to die so horribly to atone for it - and how somebody else could atone for my sins anyway. It made no sense then, and it still doesn't.
I also asked why god would create a species that would turn out so badly he would need to wipe out most of them - the only reply was that he gave us free will. I supposed you could say I was denying my children free will when I stopped them putting their hand in the fire.
Two little school-friends, aged 8 and 10, died from carbon monoxide poisoning from a faulty flue and we all had to attend the requiem mass. Again, I asked the nuns why god let such a thing happen. Apparently , this was to test the faith of their parents! I have heard this nonsense put forward as an explanation of children being born grossly handicapped.
I feel a bit sorry for ministers when they have to mouth some platitudes after a horrible tragedy as they have no answers either. I remember that one women vicar lost her faith after her partner was killed in the London bombings.
Perhaps some of our Christian friends can supply some answers? Other than just saying we have to have faith......why?

The kind of metaphor which leads the non-religious to believe that Christians are obsessed with blood and suffering and torturing the son of their deity.

Yep. A disgusting metaphor.

Go on Lilygran. Fancy that!

It's a metaphor!

Agreed, absent. Primitive ritual sacrifice and all that. Yuck.

Being bathed in the blood of the lamb is a particularly disgusting image.

I take the view that nothing is sacred – in the sense of not being open to question – so that would explain why my posts lack religiosity. I simply don,t approach life from a religious point of view. This, of course, is a perfectly valid and acceptable way to approach life, and it seems to ve getting increasingly common.

OK. So I now understand that you think elsiejoy was complaining about the relative lack of religion (christianity in particular) on gransnet. If I were to use her choice of imagery, she was saying/implying that we are not sufficiently bathed in the blood of the lamb in our day-to-day gransnet bletherings. Is that right, in your view?

Well, it takes all sorts.

She might find more of what she wants on dedicated christian sites as, I think, someone suggested.

'OED 1971 gives as one of the definitions of 'secular': 'Belonging to the world and its affairs as distinguished from the church and religion; civil, lay, temporal. Chiefly used as a negative term with the meaning non-ecclesiastical, non-religious or non-sacred'. I don't expect ElsieJoy intended to use it negatively but simply as a true description of the posts. It's quite common usage in my experience while the use as meaning specifically about the separation of faith and state is actually quite restricted.'. I posted this on Tuesday Bags and I don't think I need to elaborate.

lily, I mean the question I asked in my post at 1953 yesterday about which meaning did (or do you think) the OP had in mind – did she mean non-religious or irreligious by her use of the word 'secular'? There is a subtle but important difference between the two which I tried to illustrate with hypothetical posts about knitting. "Irreligious", which you seemed to be favouring as the right interpretation, has connotations of actual opposition to religion, whereas non-religious suggest to me that religion just doesn't feature, probably because it's not relevant, but with no connotation of actual opposition.

So I'm asking if you think the OP was saddened because she thinks there is too much opposition to religion in posts on gransnet, or was she saddened because she thinks there is simply a lack of religion in posts on gransnet?

elsiejoy, I'm asking you the same question if you would care to answer it. A clear answer from you would elucidate a lot of what has caused fierce (but friendly) discussion on this thread .

I would have thought it was blatantly obvious that if you hold a religious ceremony of any kind you are excluding all the people who don't share that religion. By all means let those who want to say prayers together find some place to do it but do not inflict it on those who do not share your beliefs
I can't believe you actually need to ask that question.

Which question, Bags? It was putting prayers on the agenda that was unlawful. If the members of the council wanted to have a full-scale prayer meeting but did not count it as part of the meeting, they would be able to. And how silly, when mayors and Lord Mayors have chaplains and civic services in churches and cathedrals!

Because it's unlawful according to the High Court in the Bideford case back in
February. The link is to the Beeb article. We also had a thread on gransnet at the time which presumably is still somewhere.

Are you evading my question, lily, or have you just not got round to answering it yet?

Greatnan you still haven't explained why prayers should be banned from public occasions.

Quite logical to me!

Phew!

Thanks, pals

Yes.

OK - yes.

Someone say yes.