Religious tolerance

When Donald Soper was struck with arthritis in old age he continued preaching , got around by wheelchair , he was an amazing man and so respected

Everyone remembers Donald Soper! Methodist or no.

I accept your word you are a Methodist yet you do not hold the views of your church and I am amazed you said you only a vague recollection of Donald Soper' he only died seventeen years ago

As for your belief that God cursed the Egyptians with the ten plagues , I csnnot, I think what ever happened were acts of nature, but I would because I don't believe in a vengeful God

Thank you, I had not seen your replies to the JW questions.

I have answered elsewhere, probably twice since being on gransnet that I am not a JW.

I have probably said 5 times or more on gransnet that I am a Methodist.

As far as I know, a person cannot possibly be both.

post 17.59pm Yes.

It's interesting, soontobe that you have still not answered the question put to you twice now - are you in fact a JW? It would make more sense than your being a Methodist...

soon, you believe God cursed the Egyptians with the ten plagues? He took the lives of all those first borns?

Phew soon - I find that absolutely incredible!

I think it was me who said that Dawkins and Hawkins had fizzled out but I fear was wrong - one or the other of them is still giving talks. He's so sneery and arrogant.

There is a teeny tiny bit of mileage in reading it in context of its history. Historical document, no[that misses the point of the Bible].
Of course I am still wedded to the literal interpretation of the Bible.

I do not think that Dawkins has fizzled out, more's the pity. I find him aggressive, lacking in gentleness and stridently evangelical - the latter being his worst fault in my book. Evangelism cuts off communication - from both the religious and the non-religious.

My question soon was whether anything had made you think again and question your approach at all. Are you still wedded to a literal interpretation of the bible? Can you see any mileage in approaching it as a historical document to be read in the context of its history and culture? That does not mean that there might still not be spiritual and moral truths underlying the myths and stories.

I did learn that Dawkins appears to have fizzled out.

I did learn that John Rutter[who I had vaguely heard of] writes Christian songs but is not a Christian, which I found interesting, and will look him up, and his writings, at some stage.

Probably other things have seeped in.

Not really on this thread I dont think. On some other religious threads, yes.

Some people [and this is definitely not just myself], do not discuss religion only because of its importance in the world. Not that there is anything wrong with that.

Soon - all it amounts to is this: we all follow our own religion or none; we are interested in discussion about religion, because of its importance in the world. We are not needing your preaching.

No-one else on here is unable to distinguish between discussion/debate and proselytising. I would have thought that by now you would have realised that you are in the minority as regards taking religious texts literally, and that continually quoting them halts the discussion, as there are so few people who view life/religion/the bible in such a doctrinaire way.

Join in the debate by all means, but the essence of debate is that each contributor listens and is open to thinking in new ways. Has anything on here made you think again?

A lot of people die and are not a Christian. I wouldnt dream of saying anything then, unless they wanted to talk about God themselves.

I am not sure where you get this stuff about weak prayers from. I dont think weak prayers exist. Do you?

Elegran, I feel I am talking to a brick wall. Nothing is getting through.

Elegran. Your first paragraph. Definitely not.

True, you can't heal pain soon but you can certainly inflict it and possibly you are succeeding here. I pray you will never be allowed to visit a hospice , you would strut around telling people on a morphine drip - this is what happens if your prayers are weak or you didn't pray

Can you not see you could cause people pain ?

I didnt assume pain.
Some of the posts above, not meaning just Anniebach's, talk about it.

The verse though, is about the things that Anniebach talked about, especially at the beginning.

I could have not written the first sentence at all[may have been best not to!]

X posts, anniebach

I wonder what anniebach's opinion is of her question. Angry certainly, but still rhetorical.

soon, if I wanted an answer to my question to help me I would ask God not you

sson If a child is playing happily and talking with interest about things, would you pat them on the head and say comfortingly "There there, it will be all right. Mummy will make it better" ?

That is what you are doing on here (a lot of the time) to people who are discussing things with interest. That is why you are so often told that you are being patronising.

I wasnt even particularly thinking about you Anniebach. And most definitely not exclusively.

The verse was not taken out of context either.

If you want me in your prayers that is up to you. I have no need, as of this moment.

I cant heal pain Elegran.

Anniebach's original question was not rhetorical.

No, you said it soon "As people seem to be in pain I will write this." YOU were the one who assumed pain. That is what we are telling you!