Says this church sign "...Facts don't matter" ?????

[grahamg]

That sign is one of the reasons why I find religion so entertaining & amusing.

There is no reason why amusement shouldn't be sought wherever it can be found, and maybe humour was an intended aspect of those composing the sign.
However, to be bit serious for a moment, if any of us try to imagine the life challenges faced by human beings two thousand years ago, when scientific "facts" we now take for granted were complete mysteries even to the greatest brains, what then would "we" simple people have thought, or wanted to cling on to? Would atheism have furnished us with ideas and inspiration to get us through such uncertain times?

 

[Capt Lightning]

In answer to your question, yes, I believe that humans would and did come up with the necessary solutions. I can understand that people would think that many things must be supernatural, but necessity, not religion is the mother of invention.

 

[Chet]

As far as the sign goes in the original post, I think the pastor was trying to be original and topical at the same time. Don't forget that they put up a new message weekly and sometimes they may not be winners.

 

[Colleen]

It is said that God helps those who help themselves. People who decide they are not going to be cautious because God is going to protect them no matter how foolish they behave are....well...foolish. God didn't say walk out in front of that bus to see if I'll work a miracle and save you from being hit. Better not to step in front of the bus. That pastor is obviously ignorant on so many levels. I wonder how he'll feel when his parishioners get COVID and die?

Well said!! This is what my neighbor believes....that God will protect her no matter what and if He doesn't then it's what He wanted to happen. You can't fix stupid.

 

[grahamg]

In answer to your question, yes, I believe that humans would and did come up with the necessary solutions. I can understand that people would think that many things must be supernatural, but necessity, not religion is the mother of invention.

Does atheism inspire anyone, or give people thoughts/ideas they wouldn't necessarily have come up with otherwise, (if there had been no religions in the world)?
We can speculate but we cant kid ourselves we've got a comprehensive understanding of life before the technologies and medicines we now rely upon.

 

[grahamg]

Well said!! This is what my neighbor believes....that God will protect her no matter what and if He doesn't then it's what He wanted to happen. You can't fix stupid.

You may be right, and certainly not taking reasonable steps to protect yourself and others is ridiculous of course, but I still admire those who do have the kind of faith that allows them to live through difficult times most of us maybe couldn't cope with who do not have that depth of devotion to their beliefs.

 

[Irwin]

God gave us the means to protect ourselves in most cases. If we don't take advantage of our abilities, we're defying God. That said, if I ever get the chance, I'm going to ask him why he created so many a**holes — many of whom claim to be devout followers!

 

[grahamg]

God gave us the means to protect ourselves in most cases. If we don't take advantage of our abilities, we're defying God. That said, if I ever get the chance, I'm going to ask him why he created so many a**holes — many of whom claim to be devout followers!

I suppose we could ask ourselves whether those we think of as you describe, are complete examples of the genre, or whether there is some good somewhere, hidden beneath all the not so good?
Maybe too, so many wish to believe their thinking is correct, or superior, and this failing we can all slip into, even "on those rare occasions we're wrong"!

 

[Irwin]

I suppose we could ask ourselves whether those we think of as you describe, are complete examples of the genre, or whether there is some good somewhere, hidden beneath all the not so good?
Maybe too, so many wish to believe their thinking is correct, or superior, and this failing we can all slip into, even "on those rare occasions we're wrong"!

Primum non nocere, which means: first, do no harm. It's the Hippocratic Oath that I believe doctors are supposed to take.

If people would just abstain from doing harm, the world would be a hell of a lot better place, but there are all sorts of reasons people do harmful things... money, power, low self-esteem, religion, and for some, for the thrill of it.

 

[Judycat]

Yesterday, a member shared, "I saw an article the other day about a "pastor" that is telling his flock that masks are NOT allowed in church and if anyone comes with a mask, they will be asked to leave!"

This is what we all can agree is a statement SO ridiculous that I doubt seriously if the article is legitimate. If it is legit then I'm quite sure the Pastor is not legit. I would go so far as to say it's a smear campaign by a hater.

https://www.rawstory.com/greg-locke-vaccinations/

 

[Lara]

I see your source, but the Pastor, in my opinion, may be a false teacher or it was staged by a hater of "organized religion" (defamation/slander).

There is nowhere in the Bible that says Thou shalt not wear a mask in church, nor Thou shalt not be vaccinated

 

[Jennina]

I see your source, but the Pastor, in my opinion, may be a false teacher or it was staged by a hater of "organized religion" (defamation/slander).

There is nowhere in the Bible that says Thou shalt not wear a mask in church, nor Thou shalt not be vaccinated

I think this is a case of a pastor incorporating his politics into his church.

 

[Sunny]

I've been taught that faith and science/fact compliment each other.

Not necessarily, Cinnamon. And certainly not all the time.

First of all, I assume you mean complement (to complete), not compliment (flatter, say something nice, etc.).

Second, what is "faith" telling you? There are many faiths, and while there are areas of agreement, they often contradict each other. And they very often contradict science/fact. Science (real science, not quack theories) leads us to the same conclusions no matter where in the world the lab is located in. The truth is the same, regardless of the nationality, race, or religion of the scientist.

Faith is different. Most of them claim to have a handle on the truth, with no proof, only the word of a holy book or a "holy teacher." Faith gives us hundreds of versions of "the truth."

If your faith tells you that the earth was created in six days, how does that complement science? One is true, the other is not.
Women were created out of a man's rib? How does that complement science? Noah and his ark? Moses parting the Red Sea?
If you have enough faith in what the pastor of this church is telling you, you won't get Covid, vaccines are unnecessary?

There are hundreds of other examples. What might be said, however, even by nonbelievers, is that science deals with the truth, facts, realism. Faith deals with a poetic, philosophical description of what is true.

Where we run into trouble is when some people get the two confused, and think the poetry of the faith they have been taught is the literal, factual truth. And nothing will turn "faith" into truth when dealing with hard facts, such as a lethal virus. The sign on that church in the OP is promoting blind obedience, It is dangerous, and ignorant statements like this are the cause of many needless deaths.

 

[Judycat]

I see your source, but the Pastor, in my opinion, may be a false teacher or it was staged by a hater of "organized religion" (defamation/slander).

There is nowhere in the Bible that says Thou shalt not wear a mask in church, nor Thou shalt not be vaccinated

The Pastor is like many Protestant non-denominational pastors whose flock is taught it is a sin to question.

 

[Jennina]

As far as the sign goes in the original post, I think the pastor was trying to be original and topical at the same time. Don't forget that they put up a new message weekly and sometimes they may not be winners.

Wanting to be original and topical does not justify making dangerously stupid statements. His flock trusts him to lead them to eternal salvation. That is an enormous responsibility and power. It's his job to not say stupid things.

If he came up with a lackluster message because he couldn't deal with the weekly pressure of writing killer copy for his church marquee, that's okay. But in this case, he is teaching his flock a way of thinking, a dangerous way of thinking. It is a statement manipulative people make so no one would dare question anything they say.

I apologize if I sound rude. You seem like a really compassionate and tolerant guy. But, no Chet, there is no excuse.

 

[Jennina]

I've been taught that faith and science/fact compliment each other.

Same here. I was told science answers the question how and religion answers the question why.

But later on, I learned a different point of view. We can't marry religion and science. For example, it's either you believe in evolution or you believe that God created the world in 6 days.
You cant believe both. If you believe in evolution, then there's no Adam and Eve. Without the "first couple," there's no original sin. Without original sin, there's no need for Christ. And that made sense to me.

I don't profess to have an in depth knowledge of both religion and science; so, I can't cite examples of how religious beliefs complement scientific principles.
Perhaps you can share your thoughts on this?

I do have an open mind. If I receive new information that would prove that what i believe to be true is in fact incorrect, then I change my position, but not without
evidence or at least, some semblance of logic.

 

[grahamg]

Wanting to be original and topical does not justify making dangerously stupid statements. His flock trusts him to lead them to eternal salvation. That is an enormous responsibility and power. It's his job to not say stupid things.
If he came up with a lackluster message because he couldn't deal with the weekly pressure of writing killer copy for his church marquee, that's okay. But in this case, he is teaching his flock a way of thinking, a dangerous way of thinking. It is a statement manipulative people make so no one would dare question anything they say.
I apologize if I sound rude. You seem like a really compassionate and tolerant guy. But, no Chet, there is no excuse.

I'm sure no one needs me to speak for them, but the pastors words only become un-excusable surely, if we can be entirely sure what he meant by them is what you've interpreted them to mean, (and the man himself hasn't had even a chance to defend his words has he, and in a tolerant society we'd all like to see that kind of accommodation made wouldn't we?).

 

[CinnamonSugar]

@Jennina and @Sunny, I’ll be glad to continue discussion after I get some rest. Don’t have two brain cells to rub together right now

 

[Jennina]

I'm sure no one needs me to speak for them, but the pastors words only become un-excusable surely, if we can be entirely sure what he meant by them is what you've interpreted them to mean, (and the man himself hasn't had even a chance to defend his words has he, and in a tolerant society we'd all like to see that kind of accommodation made wouldn't we?).

The thing is he spoke in plain English. Not a parable that you need to interpret. No figures of speech either. It was direct to the point. I don't know how else to interpret the clause "Facts don't matter."

And although it was a conditional statement, the hypothesis is a requirement of the church isn't it? You're supposed to have deep faith. So essentially, he"s making a general statement here. Do you agree?

What's your interpretation of his message, anyway. I'm curious.

 

[grahamg]

The thing is he spoke in plain English. Not a parable that you need to interpret. No figures of speech either. It was direct to the point. I don't know how else to interpret the clause "Facts don't matter."
And although it was a conditional statement, the hypothesis is a requirement of the church isn't it? You're supposed to have deep faith. So essentially, he"s making a general statement here. Do you agree?
What's your interpretation of his message, anyway. I'm curious.

Funnily enough I was challenged as to whether I was a Christian at the weekend, by some one using "facts" you could say, against me.
You could argue too, the basic tenets of the Christian faith I might wish to consider "open to interpretation", (like the virgin birth), are, as you would probably agree, matters of faith, not necessarily fact, (a former bishop of Durham famously being equivocal about his belief in that tenet thirty odd years ago too).
My interpretation of the pastors message is the man might not have meant, "All facts don't matter", just, "Sometimes faith matters more than facts", (or what is taken as a fact in this sceptical world).

 

[grahamg]

Some research related to the thread topic:
https://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/23/world/europe/23italy.html

"Mother Teresa recited the simple prayer of St. Francis every day. Margaret Thatcher cited it upon becoming prime minister of Britain, and Alcoholics Anonymous included it in its “12 steps” book. But something else is notable about the prayer that begins: “Lord, make me an instrument of thy peace; where there is hatred, let me sow love; where there is injury, pardon; where there is doubt, faith.”

St. Francis of Assisi, who was born in the 12th century, probably had nothing to do with it.

An article published this week in L’Osservatore Romano, the Vatican newspaper, said the prayer in its current form dates only from 1912, when it appeared in a French Catholic periodical. And it became wildly popular only after it was reprinted in L’Osservatore Romano in 1916 at the behest of Pope Benedict XV, who wanted a prayer for peace in the throes of World War I.

Although news to many, the truth about the prayer had apparently been hiding in plain sight.

“No one among the Franciscans ever thought it really was by St. Francis,” said Giovanni Maria Vian, the editor of L’Osservatore Romano. Mr. Vian said the point of the article was to show the importance of prayers for peace in times of war

Although the prayer’s origins “remain mysterious,” Mr. Vian said, the prayer had at some point been printed on the back of cards bearing images of St. Francis, hence the confusion.

Would fans of St. Francis be disappointed to know the truth?

“Catholics are used to this sort of thing, that you have a tradition but you don’t know when it started or its whole history,” said the Rev. Thomas G. Weinandy, a Franciscan and the executive director of the Secretariat for Doctrine at the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.

He pointed to St. Christopher. “The church says he more than likely did not historically exist,” Father Weinandy said. “But people still pray to him, figuring someone up in heaven is in charge of watching over travelers."

 

[grahamg]

And more research info vaguely on thread topic:
https://www.americamagazine.org/fai...cient-insights-are-transforming-todays-church

"Our ideas of saints are always easier to handle than the reality; they do what we expect of them. The Francis we picture is a man we can easily imagine inviting to tea. The saint might tuck a napkin in his lap and mention the lovely songs the birds were singing outside. Perhaps he would even interpret them for us, since he seems to understand their language. But if you invited the real Francis to tea, he might prefer to work in the kitchen or maybe even beg his bread from passers-by before joining you inside. His clothes might be ragged and dirty, since he had little concern for presentation. The neighbors would stare."

"Francis often was uncertain; he frequently questioned his own motives; those are reasons why we like him so much. And those quixotic, “saintly” things he did were simply, in his time, experiments in Gospel living. Francis’ life demonstrates that Christianity is much more than institutions, catechisms and sacraments—it is also techniques and practices."

“How?” We must look to the past, not simply to learn what happened, but to understand ourselves in the present. Let us continue to look to St. Francis of Assisi. And let us see that, ........, (Break),..., perhaps the transformation that happened 800 years ago is still happening today."

 

[Sunny]

"Sometimes faith matters more than facts", (or what is taken as a fact in this sceptical world).

Graham, that means absolutely nothing to a modern, rational mind. In fact, it sounds like the opposite of sanity. When dealing with a lethal virus, we can have all the faith in the world that there's an evil demon out there spewing it out, because he wants to do away with humankind. And if we turn around three times and utter a magic incantation we have faith that we won't get sick, or will get cured.

Or we can believe in the facts demonstrated by medical science, and get the damn vaccine already. It works.

 

[jerry old]

Graham, that means absolutely nothing to a modern, rational mind. In fact, it sounds like the opposite of sanity. When dealing with a lethal virus, we can have all the faith in the world that there's an evil demon out there spewing it out, because he wants to do away with humankind. And if we turn around three times and utter a magic incantation we have faith that we won't get sick, or will get cured.

Or we can believe in the facts demonstrated by medical science, and get the damn vacci

I quit posting on religious questions sometime ago; however, there is always room for humor when we get all sweaty with our opinions.

You think i should tell Sunny: their are a lot of folks lacking rational minds. Yep, afraid it's true: these are the folks you see raising hell
at dept stores, burger joints, blaming a minimum wage worker for doing as their told.
When we go out in public we must realize that most of the people we encounter are lunatics.

You can purchase Anti-lunatic pills at War-Marts, if you don't take them you become one (that's what it says on the package).

I meant to post this earlier, but it would have interrupted my turning around three time and spitting.
I'm giving serious consideration to going to Turkey and studying the "Whirling Dervishes;" these folks seem to have this whirling down pat.

 

[Jennina]

Funnily enough I was challenged as to whether I was a Christian at the weekend, by some one using "facts" you could say, against me.
You could argue too, the basic tenets of the Christian faith I might wish to consider "open to interpretation", (like the virgin birth), are, as you would probably agree, matters of faith, not necessarily fact, (a former bishop of Durham famously being equivocal about his belief in that tenet thirty odd years ago too).
My interpretation of the pastors message is the man might not have meant, "All facts don't matter", just, "Sometimes faith matters more than facts", (or what is taken as a fact in this sceptical world).

So, do you believe that? What are the instances when faith matters more than facts? I'm trying to understand the thought process behind it.

I think healthy skepticism is good btw.