h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

This is odd, you see, because last night I happened to attend a Christian Union event at my University, and if one pays attention only to them, one might think that Christianity is thriving and growing rapidly. Probably because they make so much noise about it. Oh, and their presentation claimed 1 billion followers of Jesus. American billions, that is, there aren't a British billion people on the entire planet.

Mary can't have been an adultress - Christ was conceived immaculately, i.e. without sex, hence no adultery committed. The angel came to her, informed her she would bear the Son of God, and God made it so that she was pregnant. Besides, she didn't really have much choice - if you want to look at it from that angle, she was raped, 'cos from what I remember, nobody asked her if she'd be willing to accept. Although of course it's entirely possible (and probable) she was chosen because God knew she would be pleased to do it.

Bodhisattva, thats on another thread though if you read through the 500 + posts I'm sure we've touched on it a few times.


Alji (Member of The Guild of Wizards @ U197895)

Bodhisattva, have a look @ A293267


Alji (Member of The Guild of Wizards @ U197895)

"Mary can't have been an adultress - Christ was conceived immaculately, i.e. without sex, hence no adultery committed. The angel came to her, informed her she would bear the Son of God, and God made it so that she was pregnant. "

Hmm...the fact is that a mistranslation from the Ancient Greek for 'young woman' into 'virgin' resulted in this whole myth around the Virgin Mary. And that's what it is: just a myth, which resulted in a whole religion being built around it.

(1) Why does it matter whether Mary was a virgin or not?

(2) It's really stretching to claim that the entire religion of Christianity was built around the notion of the immaculate conception. It was the radical nature of Jesus' teaching, the clarity with which important moral and spiritual guidance was imparted and the wisdom and compassion he demonstrated which were the solid foundations of the religion. True, some people fixate on the opening and closing moments of his mission on Earth - his conception and resurrection - but they are not really so important.

Thanx Alji

Hi Bod,
I'm sure, if you have read all the posts, that the concern over Mary's adultery was based on some debate over whether we should follow the Bible literally and thus stone all adulteresses.

If, as has been suggested, the term 'virgin' and 'young woman' have been confused then she was very definitely an adulteress and God should have had her stoned (there again shouldn't he have been stoned also ).

The real point I have made time and again is that by tying a spirituality to an ancient dogma, that is increasingly irrelevant to the modern world, you are dooming it to stagnation.

Blessings,
Matholwch /|\.

I think were probably both stoned. Well, that's been my excuse in the past

Hi Alji!
The problem with such figures is their sources. I have seen similar listings and done a little background research into their methodologies. Amongst these sources are:

1. The religious organisations themselves. For instance the Vatican relies on a ten year census cycle which is gathered by the Priests in the field. Note that it is not in the Priest's interest to give accurate figures for if they fall too low he may well lose his parish as it will be integrated with another. Thus most RC priests count their congregation at Easter or Christmas and submit that as their normal attendance. The religious authorities at Mecca count the entire population of any country whose Government declares it as an Islamic state. However, the figures from non-Islamic western states are often very accurate.

2. UN/WHO/UNESCO figures. Unfortunately these rely entirely on National Government figures (see below).

3. National Government figures. These are normally based upon census returns. Unfortunately only about 30% of the worlds 200+ nations even carry out a regular or effective census. Of those that do only about half ask about religious practice, and of those just the Scandinavian countries and now Britain allow any choice but the major two or three religions in that country. In this country the last census was the very first to allow people to register a 'pagan' and it has been an uphill battle since the census to get the Government to even count them! (Not helped of course by the very vocal supporters of the Jedi faction).

Even where people are asked of course many tick a box saying they are, for instance, CofE, when in fact they only go into the Church for weddings and funerals.

From this I propose that the only real evidence for the decline and growth of various religions is by observing their physical infrastructure. Attendances at Christian Churches and indeed Jewish Synagogues are falling. Both types of establishments are closing by the day. Mosques are on the increase but this is more to do with the increase in the Moslem element of the British population, and the maturing of it such that they are more able to afford a communal location for prayer and teaching, than some Islamic revival.

The Abrahamic religions are in retreat and into this moral and ethical vacuum very few are stepping forward to pick up the banner they have held for so long. Humanism and paganism are tiny in comparison and far too fragmented to fight the forces of instant self-gratification, consumerism and amoral globalisation. It's all a bit frightening really.

Whether a divine creator actually exists is less important than the effect the loss of belief in a central system of morals, ethics and order will and is having on our society. I wish more people could see that.

Blessings,
Matholwch the Prophet /|\.

They go into that on the link I posted. I did say aprox.

Alji (Member of The Guild of Wizards @ U197895)

Matholwch the Apostate: <>

I like them tiny. No one Pagan group, for instance, will ever become vastly dominant, because Pagan religions generally teach that you find your own path - hence the various different traditions even within, say, Wicca (of which there are innumerable variations, some quite strikingly different to each other although sharing largely the same basic principles). However, in this kind of world, where people think 'me, me, me' most of the time, a religion which encourages you to work out what you think about the world has gotta be one which some people are going to take to very fast indeed.

Whether that's immoral or not is a matter of opinion of course. I do seem to recall the Pope denouncing 'design-your-own religions' on the Internet at one point. Subsequently he declared that the Internet was a great tool for Christianity, or something like that. As far as I'm concerned, it's highly useful for all religions to find others of their kind, and to spread their message, if that's what they like doing.

Although I really, really hate being preached to. It's insulting.

Part of the problem of tying your system of morals to a religious dogma is that when people see that the dogma is nonsense they'll think that ethics is nonsensical too.

Noggin

(chapels are super, tho, I'd rather see them used profitably as studios and such rather than demolished.)
I wouldn't worry that much about ethical leadership, Matholwch; we are out of the stage where religion and morality are combined- if they ever were- and able to think out such things for ourselves. Notice the high level of ethical concern amongst the atheist contingent here.

re. Mary- she was married to Joseph but 'visited' by an angel. (Anyone familiar with William Blake's angle on angelic visits?) It was a facetious remark, tho. However there is the argument that Mary was not actually a virgin but a young girl (the words being interchangeable, I'm told) and they couldn't keep menstruants in the temple she grew up in, so they shipped her off to Carpenter Joe. I can't see how it makes much difference 'cept to Catholics.

Chauncey, to get on in the thread (or else there might be threats, but only in the form of a helpful prod with a blunt stick ) you have to address points that are raised. (Like Mary, and the other saintly adulterers. And the post before last. And 'make them in OUR own image'.)

Besides, anyone who looks hard enough will find that the basic morals behind a lot of religions are pretty much the same anyway. Don't kill, don't be cruel to people, etc. etc. These, I think, are things more people should listen to.

More, perhaps, would be an improvement, but I don't think it is a moral disaster at the moment. I think this is a good time to be around, all things considered.

(sssss... missed a whole page of posts.)

Hi MaW .
My apologies if I came over as preaching, it twas not my intent.

In my experience I think that you will find that Druids in particular do use the internet extensively, but more for scholarly debate and to swap/test research. We welcome anyone who drops in with an open mind but make no attempts to recruit people. To become Druid you must come of your own accord and walk your own path.

I cannot, of course, speak for the other pagan paths, but I have met those I would describe as 'vengeful ex-Christians' who simply replace JC with 'the Goddess' and attack their former religion at any opportunity. Disappointment can be a terrible thing.

However, some things that you will find as a constant amongst most pagan paths are a reverence of the earth and a deep belief in the sacredness of life and free will. Something you will not find so often in the practice of the Abrahamic religions. Even the pagan warriors of the Loyal Arthurian Warband would rather throw themselves in front of a gun than pick one up.

Blessings,
Matholwch the Apostate /|\.

Borodar Noggin!
You are absolutely correct, as always !

To me dogma-based religions like Christianity = Soma.

Blessings,
Matholwch the Apostate /|\.

Hi Mandragora .

Nice point, however the 'atheist contingent' here are not the societal mean by any means. The level and intelligence of debate here has been of an order far higher than that of much of that available on the net (despite me desperately trying to drag the average down).

In my forty odds years travelling this planet I have observed a distinct downturn in the application of ethics and morals, from our glorious leaders to the common man. And this cannot just be put down to more extensive and sensationalist reporting. The population's belief systems are changing faster now than I believe they ever have from my studies of social history.

We are at one of the fulcrum points of history, where small events and movements can have disproportionate effects on the future. If I were a demagogue I would be crying out "Now is the time for all people and spirits of good intent to come to the aid of the planet!"

Similar fulcrum points I have observed were the execution of JC, the Council of Nicea, the triumph of the first Chinese Emperor, the landing of Cortez and Britain's refusal to support its traditional ally Germany in 1914. In each of these the actions of under a hundred people changed the course of world history irrevocably.

Perhaps the actions of a few good people may tip the balance here. Let's hope so, for the alternative don't look so pretty.

Blessings,
Matholwch the Apostate /|\.

Matholwch the Apostate - thanks for that observation. It's really encouraging, just what I needed.

Matholwch, I wasn't meaning to accuse you of preaching. Sorry about that. I was pointing out that I don't like it when people start doing it to me.