Wednesday 21 November 2007
Meditation on the beautiful game
In an effort to be a bit topical, I'm thinking today about that lightning rod of national and international fervour: football. From a Scottish point of view I am of course four days late - the Scotland Italy game has already slipped into the annals of Scottish history; sadly not in the file marked 'Bannockburn'. Now I didn't actually see the game as I was visiting a friend, and didn't even find out the score till next morning. It's true, I'm not the world's biggest football fan (another shocking statistic, never actually been to a stadium game), though have occasionally graced the sidelines of a St Silas team match and do think it's the best sport to watch on telly. Still, mingling briefly with the mayhem in Glasgow city centre on Saturday afternoon a couple of hours before kick-off, I was struck afresh by the talismanic power of the game on the Scottish psyche - a phenomenon replicated of course from Blackburn to Brazil. The supreme sense of 'event', the euphoric feeling of unity with one's countrymen, the gladiatorial spectacle of the game - who could , who would want to, bottle the power of this genie? It's a potent demonstration of the human attraction to a unifying cause - something to really get excited about. And then I think about the national indifference, if not to God, then at least to the Church with a capital C; what's easily labelled 'organised religion'. But also that in parts of the world where the church's centre of gravity has shifted - Asia, Africa, Latin America - the church and the Christ worshipped there are loci of comparable public devotion. And I ponder: what might it take for God to ignite such a flame of passion here in Scotland, in Britain? For God to become as popular as football?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
.JPG)
42 comments:
There was definately a unified feeling about the country. One that crossed sectarian divides - something the church seems unable to do. Dont underestimate the role teams like Rangers and the other lot can play in dealing with our social scourge.
As for your last question, well if god could actually show he was there ........
Billy
PS, Now that you are being topical, what do you think of that young upstart Hitler? :-)
Hi Billy, er, not quite making the topical connection here, but I'm guessing you mean Hitler unifying his country? I did actually watch 'Downfall' on Saturday, the German-made film about Hitler's last days. Superb.
There is no "national church" any more. And God has been around here longer than he has in the areas you mentioned. For God to become as popular as football- an end to the squabbling between religions and sects would be a good start. Some evidence he exists would also be super.
Hi Bruce, it loses its impact when I explain it. You are a few days too late to be topical - I'm just being 70 years too late with my comment. So, those dinosaurs - eh, it's getting you cant go out doors with out being eaten these days - bring back the age of the amphibians I say
Billy
Thanks for clarifying Billy; I clearly need to work on my sense of irony.
Oh, and I should have recalled, hailing myself from south of the border, that the topic's more topical than I thought. We're playing tonight for goodness sake.
Excellent blog Bruce and some interesting comments left. My own personal feeling is that as a Church we need to be more real and actually do what we are called to do which isn't fill our buildings it is to build the Kingdom of God, to reach the lost and poor. To actually involve our God in the lives of people who do not know him and really don't want to know the religion. People want something real and only as Christ followers can we offer them that. Society is fed up of how bad it is they already know that the church has told them that. They need Hope and we need to offer them that hope. The beautiful game offers hope but as we have seen this week it can soon be dashed the hope we should be offering can never be taken away in a result.
Thanks Darren - and nice to have another Christian comment on my blog. It's a jungle out here, though its denizens are in the main good-natured and friendly!
Notice I haven't said much on this thread since Weds night. Funny that.
Darren,
I hope you dont thing I'm being pugnacious, but as an exchristian who found the whole experience disapointing (and I'm being diplomatic here) I have to disagree with you - what hope do you have to offer that can't be taken away?
I at least find hope in something real - like a football game. Why would I find following an invisible god that does not interact with me grounds for hope in any way?
Billy
Let's hope for a change of heart :)
Billy
Sad to hear your story but it isn't an uncommon one. God may be invisible to you but find hope in the fact that you are not invisible to him. Going to church doesn't make you a Christ follower knowing God does. However going to church may make you a Sunday Christian. Maybe you need to hang out with some real Christ followers outside a building?
Hi Darren,
Thanks for the reply, but I'm aware of all that stuff. My question (as part of your target aufdience so to speak) was more to do with challenging the idea that christian hope is in some way more permanent than any other hope. I often find christians make unrealistic claims, that can lead to disappointment when others try it out. This may be something for christians to think about.
Billy
What sort of unrealistic claims?
Hi btw
Hi Free Radical,
You name it, I've probably heard it.
Some include; god can help you sort out your life, repent and god will reward you, or stop HIV, earthquakes, fammine, a relationship with god is ultimately satisfying and brings joy, that god will heal or provide for your needs, or comfort the lonley or the poor of spirit, or that christianity is an exciting journey etc.....
Billy
(I think I lost my last post, but edit this bit out if I did)
Billy, you have your take on the faith business from your experience; just remember others have a very different take, and find in it life long joy, fulfilment and purpose alongside the pain. Your take on it is hardly definitive, and in my view a little humility and reflection might at least lead one to ponder why such a big difference.
Bruce, 3 points
1. The claim that hope in jesus is lasting is false - evidence jonathan and myself. Do you disagree with this? That is my point!
2. I refer to claims that I have heard - do you agree it is right to make such claims in the name of your god (as absolute fact)? If so, I can throw some verses at you about claiminging to know god's mind. If you do think it is wrong, then what is your problem with what I wrote?
3. I have contemplated this. Maybe you should do so and really consider if you could be the one who is wrong. Feel free to come back with evidence I am wrong and god exists!
Billy
Bruce, off the top of my head, here are some reasons why people persist with faith:
Psychological crutch,
need to feel special,
Inability to face the fact that once you are dead, you are worm food.
Social benefits (interestingly I found out recently that someone is not talking to me now because I am an atheist, and a former christian I know is being blanked by her former christian "friends" for being a lesbian)
Love for someone else
Not being able to cope
Life is so bad they need hope
Guilt
maybe Jonathan and Lee could add some more (Interestingly, I can point you to christians that define such reasons)
So please don't acuse me of lack of humility and meditation. Also please read my comments carefully and realise that my experience does not change my comment that it is just wrong to claim that hope in jesus is more permanent than hope in anything material.
Also, the fact religion gives comfort to some people does not mean it is true.
Billy
Will be getting back to you.
Bruce, I'm sure you will.
I forgot to add the desire to see a dead relative again and indoctrination from an early age to the list.
I was reading the latest free church news letter, and the thing that struck me most was that despite adnitting he was challenged by atheism, the only thing the author (David the Dawkins stalker Robertson - I expect to hear Lee, Jonathan and Philip booing pantomine style) had to say was that atheism was a black holeand that we only pretended our lives were fulfilled. He apparently needed some hope in his life. How many christians do you know who believe because they need that hope? I know several - some of whom we both know.
Do you think this is rational?
Cheers
Billy
Sorry for not replying Billy have been busy with Uni work (Trying to avoid it now by typing here). Also apologies if my reply doesn't quite hit the nail on the head haven't had the time to write a thorough response.
One of the main reasons i am a Christian is because the bible makes more and more sense to me. The more a learn about the world the more the bible rings true. That is why I choose to follow the bible and therefore God.
Every time I struggle with something to do with the truths after time the answers come out. For example: No Sex Before Marriage. When I was a little younger (yes i know i am still younger). I never really understood why that was taught. Yet as I've grown up a little I see just how damaging sexual immorality can be, destroying peoples life's. Therefore the bibles truths about life are proven correct, in that case.
So when lots of these things happen where the bible is correct I can then say that well seeing as in the last "X" cases it was correct i'm going to accept that in this case it is correct as well. Sort of saying: "Well I don't understand it now but I will later". Normally a number of months down the line I see that it does make sense.
Of course there are a few obvious counter-arguments:
"The more someone reads the bible, they will come round to the point of view of the bible and therefore I see things through its eyes." Also:
"If someone says they believe the bible to be completely true even the bits that don't make sense then OFCOURSE they think the bible makes sense."
But I think we are all influenced by different things. I do truly believe that if the bible properly contradicted its self OR someone came up with complete proof that there was no God then I would say "ok I was wrong". But for me I am convinced that the God of the bible is true because there isn't anything which I cannot accept.
Also I find that a lot of the "truths" we get taught in Churches are infact 1/2 truthes or just lies. You gave examples such as "Curing HIV" and "God will provide for all your needs".
Yes God can cure HIV but he doesn't always. Jesus doesn't claim that everyone who comes to faith will never die. Look at Acts, almost everyone died in a horrible way.
Similarly "God will provide all your needs" misses out the last bit which is: "God will provide all your needs....to complete the life he wants you to live on earth". Again looking at the bible, I'm sure that John the Baptist could have expected God's provisions for him being:
A life with 1/2 decent food
A wife
A normal old age death.
Yet he didn't get that. God provided him what he needed to get the job done.
It's all about how you interpret the promises of the Bible. Please prove to me that it is wrong. Though mostly my arguement goes back to "Well I believe God has it sorted and that is because from what the bible says about the world all the testable stuff has always been correct" and that is what for me my faith is based on: God has always been right so I have faith that we will be right in the future.
You said:
"1. The claim that hope in jesus is lasting is false - evidence jonathan and myself. Do you disagree with this? That is my point!
2. I refer to claims that I have heard - do you agree it is right to make such claims in the name of your god (as absolute fact)? If so, I can throw some verses at you about claiminging to know god's mind. If you do think it is wrong, then what is your problem with what I wrote?
3. I have contemplated this. Maybe you should do so and really consider if you could be the one who is wrong. Feel free to come back with evidence I am wrong and god exists!"
1. Can you define "Hope in Jesus"? If by that you mean following Jesus then of course not everyone has or always will have hope in Jesus. Just as child can choose not to do what their parents say.
2. I don't think that Followers of Christ should be making up claims. Those people honestly annoy me the most because it undermines what i believe. I think that we should just be saying what god promises from the bible. Therefore we know what he says as absolute fact.
3. Hopefully you'll see that I've kind of answered this in my bing answer at the beginning.
This has proven to be a longer reply that i thought hope i didn't bore you.
Graham
Free_radical-
"I do truly believe that if the bible properly contradicted itself OR someone came up with complete proof that there was no God then I would say "ok I was wrong". But for me I am convinced that the God of the bible is true because there isn't anything which I cannot accept".
Why do you need COMPLETE proof that there is no God? Conversely, do you have complete proof that God exists? Why should the burden of proof be higher for those who say there is no God than for those that do?
And if there isn't anything that you cannot accept, that's a good thing. It means you're at least open to the possibility that there is no God.
Billy-
BOO! HISS! BOO! HE'S BEHIND YOU! BOO!
Nice to see you're already getting into the pantomime mood Jonathan. Let's just hope it doesn't all degenerate into farce. Night all, more tomorrow.
Hi Graham,
You didn't bore me at all. When people preach, I get bored.
I'm glad we agree that christians often make claims that are wrong.
I have to disagree that sex before marriage is wrong. Sex does not ruin relationships. The important things are love and respect, and when trust is broken, that is the worst thing. Sex doesn't come into it. If anything, it enhances a loving relationship. Even christian marriages fail, but sex is not to blame. I think the same about homosexuality - what is wrong about two people expressing their love physically? All relationships carry elements of risk, so why do you focus on sex? Lies and broken trust are worse.
What testable things do you think are true? I find the prophecies jesus claims to have fulfilled are contrived - read micah 5:2 in context for example - and in several different translations. Have you read this essay?
http://www.bidstrup.com/bible.htm
Jonathan has a thread on it on his blog
To me and other atheists we require evidence first. Most christians go the otherway as you do. Have you been brought up a christian? What would you consider as evidence that god did not exist?
I've kind of been vague on "hope in Jesus", as it means different things to different people. What does it mean to you? and how would that be something you gould give someone else and not have it taken away?
What it meant to me, was the hope that I was in a relationship with god and that there was a higher purpose, and that I would become more like jesus.
Johnathan OH NO HE ISN'T!
Billy
OK… now the thread has warmed up a little bit – time to jump in.
I had thought it was mainly about football…
Darren wrote:
The beautiful game offers hope but as we have seen this week it can soon be dashed the hope we should be offering can never be taken away in a result.
I have evidence for football, and I can have hope that my teams wins… it makes me feel better a little when they do, but it doesn’t really matter in my day to day life.
Having hope in an unproven entity is really wishful thinking, and has no use what so ever… apart from the benefits from self-delusion – whatever that is?
Darren wrote:
God may be invisible to you but find hope in the fact that you are not invisible to him.
Excellent, the classic – just because you don’t believe in < insert name of god here > doesn’t mean < insert name of god here > doesn’t believe in you.
So Darren, your statement seems a little empty to me – meaningless without evidence for < insert name of god here > and her belief in me.
Bruce wrote:
you have your take on the faith business from your experience; just remember others have a very different take, and find in it life long joy, fulfilment and purpose alongside the pain
People are free to have their “personal experience” in whatever they like; so long as it does not affect me or my community in anyway.
Some people take alcohol or “recreational” drugs for their “personal experience” and “life long joy”. Are these feelings any more “real” than those who get their “kicks” from God?
Just a thought…
Billy wrote
the fact religion gives comfort to some people does not mean it is true.
Agreed… also see above with regards to “recreational” drugs.
I’m told you can get some “weird” experiences and feelings with some drugs. Just because the “feeling” is “comforting” does not mean it does not have a natural explanation (or is healthy for the body or mind)
Billy wrote
here are some reasons why people persist with faith
…
maybe Jonathan and Lee could add some more
Not really, you have covered most I can think of, so I will just repeat yours in my own words.
Of course, having never been religious, I can only speak from the “outside looking in”.
My idea is that people persist with faith because they “need” an answer, they “need” a reason, they “need” to know that life has a “purpose”, they “need” a comfort blanket for life.
People are scared of death, and cannot understood that when someone dies why they still have a memory and love for that person which will just not go away… they “need” the idea of an afterlife when everything will have a “reason”, a “purpose” and “everything will be alright” in the end and where they can “be” with their love ones once again.
A thought…
Watch a young child who “needs” their mother… the mother leaves the room leaving the child alone… the child cries because they do not understand what is going on… they “need” their mother and that is all that they know. They “need” their “comfort blanket” and love from their mother. When their mother is around, everything is alright – their mother will always protect them they feel.
When the child grows up and become an adult and they understand the world better, they do not cry when their mother leaves them alone in a room… they can live without the comfort blanket, they understand that their mother is just in the next room watching them on a TV screen since it is all part of some experiment in “understanding”.
Just an idea…
free_radical wrote:
One of the main reasons i am a Christian is because the bible makes more and more sense to me. The more a learn about the world the more the bible rings true. That is why I choose to follow the bible and therefore God
The only way I can read the bible, and for it to make sense is to assume that it is a man-made invention with no input from any god with supernatural knowledge or power.
If I read the bible with the assumption that an all-powerful, all knowing God DOES exist, then the bible taken as a whole makes no sense what so ever.
Example?
Let’s assume God exists, and the bible is true representations of the events of the life of Jesus. Fair?
OK… questions arise for me.
God is Jesus and Jesus is God right?
And now the snowball of other questions… and why the bible makes no sense to me if I think try and believe in it.
Is God all-powerful? All Knowing?
Then why did God come down to Earth in the form of a man, Jesus, born to a “virgin”, and had to wait 30 years to “grow up” and be a man, merely to be killed on a cross in a blood sacrifice to forgive mankind for all their sins (which consisted of Adam and Eve eating a fruit from a tree which gave them knowledge of right and wrong, which assumingly before they did not know?). This act of forgiveness from God required God to kill himself in the form of Jesus, for an act that man could not know was a bad act since they did not know what was right or wrong before they ate the fruit?
Making sense? Not to me… but there is more…
The result of coming to Earth as a baby resulted in the killing of thousands of innocent male 2 years olds (if you believe the bible and this was our assumption when we started)
I do not accept this free-will nonsense on this point, God should have known this was going to happen, and instead came to Earth as an adult (or didn’t God have the power to forgive our sins if he came down as an adult?)
And what did God hope to learn coming down to Earth as a baby and growing up for 30 years?
Nothing assumingly happened in this time, since next to nothing is written in the bible… so what was the point? It does not make sense?
If God is all knowing, then there is nothing to learn by growing up for 30 years… however it means mankind had to wait for another 30 years for forgiveness? Why?
Why couldn’t God just “click His mighty fingers” and say “Sin be gone – mankind you are forgiven, it was only a fruit and you didn’t understand” – what is the point of this silly Jesus story IF you believe Jesus is God, and God is Jesus (and I’ve not even started on the holy ghost…)
I could go on… but I hope you get the point, that is, the bible does NOT make sense if you believe in an all powerful, all knowing God.
You have to filter out the nonsense (how I wonder?) – But then the bible is not the true word of God, since God would not make mistakes in his autobiography now would He?
The bible makes a LOT more sense if you say the bible is just a book written by man. Try it…
However, the BIGGEST problem I have (and no one who knows me will be shocked by this) is the lack of independent evidence for ANY of the miracles mentioned in the bible. No evidence for God.
An aside, one interesting thing though that I am noticing when talking to different theists on threads like this is that no two theists are the same, they do NOT believe in the same God. So even to a theist, there is not enough evidence to allow them to agree on what the bible is about. How it should be “interpreted”... which comes to another point.
free_radical wrote:
It's all about how you interpret the promises of the Bible
Is the word of God open to interpretation now? How does man do that BTW?
And why couldn’t the bible be clear so NO interpretation is required? God is not clever enough to do that? Does not have the power?
free_radical wrote:
[if] someone came up with complete proof that there was no God then I would say "ok I was wrong"
If someone gave me “complete proof” FOR God, I would also say “OK, I was wrong…” – Not happened though, and I would not expect 100% proof – a good probability for God is all I need…
OK, back to your point… can you give me a clue? “Complete proof” takes time, and so I need some pointers. (BTW, do you need complete proof that you will grow old and die? That if only eat junk food you will get fat? Just wondering)
So what evidence could I provide to you that there is “no God”? What experiment/test can I perform that would falsify God for you?
This sounds rather similar to a question I asked on another thread here:-
"What positive experiment/observation/result would you require to start to NOT to believe in God?"
I do start to repeat myself very quickly these days!
Thanks
Lee
Lee, Billy, where do you find the time for this? No disrespect; on the contrary, hats off.
Hi Bruce - I guess we are just special :-) I wrpte my last one in about 10 mins after coming home about 11:00 from a brights meetig last night.
Seriously though, I think it just reflects the fact we have given it a great deal of thought.
Our friend JC is on Jonathan's blog just now discussing the subjectivity thread. I believe this is something you are interested in. His posts are always eloquent and thought provoking. You may find yourself challenged.
Billy
Billy wrote:
I guess we are just special
I'm not... my take me ages to write.
Lee
Thanks for the replies guys. Interesting stuffs. I've got some reports to do but ill try and get something written by tonight.
Free_Radical-
feel free to stop by my blog as well. Always welcome new comments.
http://musingsofastrangemind.blogspot.com/
This is an interesting thread but getting a bit too long for me to follow and comment on. As Bruce says, 'Where do you get the time?' - I can't keep up! I think these discussions would be better over a beer!!
Darren
Or even a game of football?! You're right Darren, problem is we've got participants from as far afield as Bedford, Australia and, dare I say it, Clydebank! So it wd have to be a virtual beer. Or a real beer over a conference call!
You can do beer and cake on facebook - mine's an fresh OJ
Unfortunately my achilles injuries prevents me from running, but there is always the playstation.
Billy
Clydebank is no problem. I'm from Bedford and have lots of family there so you never know when I might be in the area. Australia? Folks ask me if I'm from Australia when they try to place my English/Scottish twang on the phone (don't know why I don't sound Australian!) and I have a friend who lives there but ... a bit far for a Fosters for me I'm afraid!!!
Darren
Hi Darren,
Australia? Folks ask me if I'm from Australia when they try to place my English/Scottish twang on the phone (don't know why I don't sound Australian!)
I'm from Lancashire originally - and for some reason people over here think I am from Ireland and sometimes Scotland?
No idea...
a bit far for a Fosters for me I'm afraid!!!
Funny thing... no one drinks Fosters (by name - though it seems they own nearly all the beers drunk in Victoria.)
Mines a VB (Victoria Bitter)...
Now there is a good idea... I'm off to the fridge.
Cheers
Lee
Re Loci
It is a universal fault in human nature to fail to appreciate that which we already have
I feel that Christians need to appreciate more what God "is" doing in Scotland and the fact that there is so many Christian churches in Scotland and so much opportunity for anyone to hear the gospel
God always saves the same amount of people at a time -one-
We need to appreciate what God is doing in Scotland, appreciate His church, hold our ground and concentrate on the one's whose hearts He is reaching out and touching.
Hi Jimmy,
God always saves the same amount of people at a time -one-
Stupid question I'm sure, but from who or what is God saving us from?
Also, why can't God multi-task?
Lee
Lee
God saves us from being judged for our own sin, because of the judgement for our sin that was placed upon Christ.
The cross only holds-one-person and each individual salvation is deemed by God to be the whole and complete work of Christ for that one person.
Are you the same "Anonymous" who commented on my blog? What's your name?
Anonymous, I find it strange that god does not just forgive sin - You dont need to bother explaining propitiation - I find it odd that a god who can do anything would find himself restrained.
Also, why meddle in human affairs?
Billy
PS I'm not aware of any of this being foretold in the OT. This is a signifcant departure fron the OT god who punishes sin on earth ans then forgives when he decides enough punishment has been dealt out (often on the innocent). In fact, if you read the book of Jonah, all that is required is repentance.
BTW are you Jimmy?
Billy
Jonathan
I didn't mean to be anonymous on your blog or here
my name didn't post
Jimmy
Jimmy wrote:
The cross only holds-one-person and each individual salvation is deemed by God to be the whole and complete work of Christ for that one person.
So Jimmy, you claim that God saves only one person at a time, right?
Only one cross… one person?
So how long does it take to be saved? You would have hoped that God spent a little time on your salvation – maybe a week, or a day… an hour perhaps? A doctor at least speaks to you for 10 mins when you go and see them…
I just did some quick maths… we have something like 6 billion souls on Earth today, if God spent just 1 second on each it would take 190 years to complete the task. Hope I live that long eh?
Silly… yes.
It’s a bit like the question “How does Father Christmas visit each house in just one night?”…
Hint: He doesn’t exist… it is just a story.
Lee
Post a Comment