PDA

View Full Version : The Anti-Bidlack


Yahzi
4th June 2003, 11:48 AM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/2963648.stm

If Hal can be a skeptic who believes in God, then why can't Thorkild be a priest who doesn't?

Note that Thor has been suspended, and Hal retains his job.

Ian Osborne
4th June 2003, 12:00 PM
Because 'Priest' is a job, not a belief. If his employer makes belief in God a prerequisite for doing the job, they've every right to suspend him if he doesn't. Scepticism, however, is not a job, nor even a belief system. Rather, it's a methodology.

And what, exactly, could Hal be suspended from? His position at JREF is voluntary, and the Foundation is here to promote critical thinking, not atheism.

Crossbow
4th June 2003, 12:11 PM
Why do you ask?

Well, to put bluntly, I expect that it is because you do not understand your own point.

Being a preist is a job and as such has specific requirements that must be fullfilled.

However, serving as a JREF Moderator is a gift of personal resources to an entirely different organization, and as such these requirements are not applicable.

c4ts
4th June 2003, 12:39 PM
They shouldn't fire him because he's an atheist. That's like firing your dealers becasue they don't snort the crack they sell.

Dancing David
4th June 2003, 12:40 PM
Is it a Hal of opposing charge and spin?

c4ts
4th June 2003, 01:01 PM
He'll go to the Abyss for disobeying TLOP!

EdwardG
4th June 2003, 01:48 PM
The variety of views held by Christian folk is astounding.

On the one hand we have the self-parodying Jack Chick and Pastor Fred Phelps (http://www.godhatesfags.com/main/), the latter proudly declaring that God Hates Fags.

And on the other hand we have this surprising (to me at least) quote from the Reverend John Shelby Spong:

The best way to lose all is to cling with desperation to that which cannot possibly be sustained literally. Literalistic Christians will learn that a God or a faith system that has to be defended daily is finally no God or faith system at all. They will learn that any god who can be killed ought to be killed. Ultimately they will discover that all their claims to represent the historical, traditional, or biblical truth of Christianity cannot stop the advance of knowledge that will render every historic claim for a literal religious system questionable at best, null and void at worst. [Bishop John Shelby Spong, Episcopal (Anglican) Bishop of Newark, NY, in Resurrection: Myth or Reality? pg. 22

Darwin
4th June 2003, 02:06 PM
All too unfortunate that this article offers nothing more specific about how this priest came to accept his present world views and related things.He looks like a die-hard skeptic though. ;)

Acrimonious
5th June 2003, 11:12 AM
Anyone else find it humorous that the person who suspended the priest for going against the grain was named Lise-Lotte Rebel?

Yahzi
5th June 2003, 12:14 PM
Originally posted by Crossbow
Well, to put bluntly, I expect that it is because you do not understand your own point.

Er... I forgot to add a smiley to the post.

I just thought it was a funny contrast.


:D

Lord Emsworth
5th June 2003, 12:16 PM
I find it rather amusing that Lise-Lotte Rebel says:"He will have to consider making significant concessions, clarifying that he did not want to sow doubt about the Church's confession, but rather trigger a debate.

"There should be no doubt that priests have committed themselves to act within the Church's confession of faith."

This comes very near to "instigate" someone to break a certain commandment, doesn't it?

DanishDynamite
5th June 2003, 04:53 PM
I absolutely love this! It's hilarious!

And people wonder why church attendance is almost imeasurable.