Moderator note: Some off-topic discussion has been moved to a separate thread, here: Modern Christianity, the bible and God's laws
Softball It's worth pointing out, in questions of relgion, state, and the new Christian spirit, that a presidential candidate and de facto boss of a major political party is now selling branded Bibles whlle trying to raise money for his political campaign, criminal defense, and judgments owed.
Just noticed. "God bless the USA" bibles. Donald J Trump. How cynical... I bet it becomes a best seller, no one will read it and the USA will become a little less "blessed".
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Nope: The video below is not the song in question. Actually, the background, which I hadn't yet picked up when I wrote the softball post, is that it's an extant brand in tribute to the Lee Greenwood song, and the seller has a poor reputation for not delivering. But part of the new pitch is that Trump intends to make America pray, again. † Look, Mike Johnson might be a hypocrite, &c., but think it through: This is Sciforums, and compared to pretenses of concern about religion and theism, this revitalized Christian-supremacist authoritarianism is a clarion example of why any atheist gives a damn what someone's religion is, and between the seventy-seven splintered posts↗ and what remains in this thread, sure, I might be puzzled (not really) or discouraged (over that) by the idea that they are missing their hour. And when it comes to supporting sin, that's the thing; one need not be from overseas, or simply trying to "ignore the news and politics as much as possible", i.e., there's always a reason they're uninformed or unaware, but, sure, in their way, there is always a reason why the looming danger, the problem at hand, seems absent from their discussion. And there is irony, here, when both atheist and Christian would have us turn away from sin in order talk about something else. (Think about how complicated it gets if I tell you to compare someone's particular inquiry of Christianity to how he thinks conservative Christians are mmistreated; it's an interesting contrast, but inasmuch as he worries that people are too hard on these folks, well, right, it's just that one of the reasons faithless usurpers continue to bear such influence is that enough people let them.) Spoiler
As Tiassa indicated by "extant", Lee Greenwood was already selling these bibles back in September 2022. No mention of Trump back then. If the current stock is actually non-modified or the bibles have always been the KJV (last quote at bottom), then these latest ones are perhaps the very same as those in 2022. And Trump has simply been engaged to promote them. They're produced in limited quantities, thus a sometimes significant delay in receiving them. (There has been a history of publishers backing out, and being shy or reticent when one of them does agree to print the bibles.) (Sep 7, 2022) Lee Greenwood's "God Bless the USA" Bible is available now https://www.jubileecast.com/article...-god-bless-the-usa-bible-is-available-now.htm According to Liam Adams: "The resurgent 'God Bless The USA' Bible featured in Trump’s recent ad is an altered version of the original concept, a modification that likely followed the publishing shake-up. Greenwood’s Bible is now printed in the King James Version, a different translation from the original pitch to HarperCollins. Perhaps the biggest mystery is the new publisher. That manufacturer is producing a limited quantity of copies, leading to a delayed four-to-six weeks for a copy to ship." But according to publicist Jeremy Westby: "Several years ago, the Bible was going to be printed with the NIV translation, but something happened with the then licensor and the then potential publisher. As a result, this "God Bless The USA Bible" has always been printed with the King James Version translation." _
Trump has a tendency to say just the right things for the Christian voters, and maybe even inspire them. He says he's read the bible, and I think he said it's his favortie book. I wonder how sincere he is, maybe I'm the cynical one. The video you posted is unavailable in my country, I don't use a VPN. But is it "God bless the USA"? I do have a vested interest in the USA, my daughter lives there and is half American. I love the place when I go, I like the people, in the Orlando region in anyway. I remember sitting in my car, and I watched this family walk past, they all, out of the blue, starting singing a Jesus song. That would never happen in England, it made me smile. † Sorry Tiassa, I'm ignorant with British politics so no chance with American ones, apart from Trump, he is the only politician that interests me for better or worse, so can't comment on Mike Johnson. I think atheists should be more concerned with Islamism, personally. Am I right in saying school shootings, or shootouts full stop are America's biggest killer? The Christian message taught properly is a one of peace and sense of community, no other religion can come close to it. Obviously you get the odd pervert Pastor or Priest but for everyone of them there are 100k none perverts. It doesn't cost anything to be civil, friendly. I take people as they come, I don't care about their beliefs, but if they piss me off I lose interest. It is a fault of mine. Back to Matthew 7:3-5... England is an atheist country now, and I live in one of the better areas, sense of community in other areas is none existent. Not saying Christianity is the answer,....when people all band together and help each other out, COVID did that. In other words we don't need religion but atheism doesn't work, we just need a mass outbreak of a killer virus or a World War to get our dysfunctional country back on track. There was a quote in the general philosophy sub forum, in the quotes thread about politics, it just about nailed it.
I wonder why publishers hesitate when printing bibles? I have a KJV, it's the same version I read on my little cassiopeia(can anyone remember them?). Great version, but I would now recommend the NIV, it might be an easier one to read and understand. I think a society built on the basic Christian premise, love thy neighbour sort of thing would be a good society, but it's the bible thumpers with their head in the old testament who seemingly are the core problem in the bible belt in the USA. I see many of them falling in this category: Matthew 7:21-23 I think it's a mistake producing KJV only bibles for mass production. The message is the same in the NIV, and it's a lot easier to read/understand like I've already said. The KJV fundies are wrong, God's message is the same in all the canonical bibles.
England is not an atheist country. It is one of the few that has an official state religion (Church of England / Anglican), and over half the population are still religious/believers. Atheism (and/or "no religion") may account for c.30-40% but this may also include those who believe but don't see themselves as belonging to a formalised religion. So I think it is wrong to say England is atheist. We are, perhaps, one of the more atheistic countries, and are trending towards an atheistic - or at least apathetic - majority, and we're certainly tolerant of atheism, and have a reasonably good separation of church from state, but those alone don't make us an atheist country.
The only reason it is the official state church(Church og England) is because of the king. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think I am. The majority of folks in this country do not believe in God. Of course we can use different studies, but with empty churches, closed down churches, churches used for Circus practice, Christianity is dwindling in England, atheism is on the rise, and the studies I see declare that the majority of England are atheist. Whatever study you use it's a close call. And think seriously, do the people who declare themself Christian really believe? Or were they just born with the label(like my brother)?
Just to correct myself from earlier, and to be more precise, the official religion of the UK is Christianity, of which CoE is the largest denomination within England, and with the monarch as the head of that church. But if you want to refer to the CoE as the state church, okay, because it is "established" - i.e. embedded in customs and laws. As to the why, well, there is the mere 500 years of history that you could look back on, beginning with when Henry VIII renounced papal authority so that he could divorce etc. There's also the matter of the Act of Settlement of 1701 that restricted the succession of the crown to only Protestants (which includes CoE), and then all the laws that helped "establish" the church. But, sure, we can ignore all of that and say that it's "because of the king". Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! As at the last census date (21/22) "Atheism" only accounted for just over a 1/3. Yes, it is on the rise, but it is not the majority. Facts, Davewhite04. Facts. Yes, you could argue that there is a chunk of those 46.7% who said Christian in the Census that don't actually believe in God, or among the 11% who declared another religion (or just "other religion"). But you'd have to argue that, if you so wish, not just state it. If you want to cite a source that says the majority are atheist, cite it. I'll cite the latest census (via Wiki): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_United_Kingdom that declares otherwise. Church-going is also a different matter, even if obviously related. The CoE has no requirement for it, even relatively recently relaxing their requirement for a church to even hold a service on Sundays. And this is as much to do with lack of clergy as it is the dwindling attendance (those two also being related, sure). And while the Census asked for one's religion, it is quite possible to believe in God without being religious at all. But if your point was that atheism was on the rise in the UK, and that a significant proportion (just over 30-40%) declare as atheist, then sure. But that does not make the UK atheist. Yet. And even when over 50% of the population declare as atheist, that still won't make England an atheist country, not when there is still the "established" church. A country is more than just its people. But, again, if your point was only with regard population, then it is certainly heading toward being majority atheist, possibly before the next Census in 2031/2.
Seems I stand corrected. It is hurtling towards atheism, so maybe I was thinking ahead and not 2021/22. The numbers are debatable, many will tick Christian simply because they were given the label at birth because of their parents, but in reality they don't believe any of it. So I still say unofficially it is an atheist country(as far as numbers of people go). They're already talking about getting rid of "Songs of Praise" the only Christian show in the UK(on standard TV).
Lee Greenwood's "God Bless the USA" Bible endeavor apparently conveyed overtones of Christian nationalism (or at least that's what MSM critics projected upon it). It was also expensive, and the original potential publisher (that backed out) might have had doubts about its selling potential. Lee Greenwood arguably wanted it in NIV. That's what was, supposedly, originally planned with the publisher that ran off for the hills. Why the new printer regressed to KJV might have been due to difficulties or extra expenses in securing copyrights. There may be problems like that swirling around some contemporary translations, in which the rules vary in different locations. (For all we know, the current mysterious publisher might not even be based in North America.) It's not an aspect of the Bible industry I have any familiarity with, or ever had a motivation to ponder. What major translations of the Bible are in the Public Domain? https://christianity.stackexchange....lations-of-the-bible-are-in-the-public-domain _
Should the number of CoE bishops allowed to sit in the Lords be reduced as the census shows the percentage of CoE 'members' fall? 25 bishops now. "As senior members of the Church of England, which is the established church, some bishops are entitled to sit in the House of Lords. The Archbishop of Canterbury, the Archbishop of York, the Bishops of London, Durham and Winchester and 21 other bishops in order of seniority together form the Lords Spiritual. " https://www.parliament.uk/site-information/glossary/bishops/
Is it democratic to allow more unelected faith leaders from all religions into the Lords? " Government’s faith minister calls for more religious leaders in the Lords 14 September, 2018 Lord Bourne of Aberystwyth, the Minister for Faith, has called for more religious leaders to be appointed to the House of Lords. The suggestion, which was made to The Times, was in response to a question about the ongoing place of Church of England bishops in the second chamber. Humanists UK has called for the bishops to be removed instead… …..But The Times now reports Lord Bourne as saying that ‘“I’d be more [for] adding other faiths.” He said that there was a “great value” in having bishops in the Lords but that “broader representation” would be beneficial. “There obviously are other religions represented there, but certainly not at the same level. A [former] chief rabbi is there [Lord Sacks] and there are Sikh representatives. We do have a lot of bishops, which I think is fine — they do contribute massively." https://humanists.uk/2018/09/14/gov...alls-for-more-religious-leaders-in-the-lords/
The House of Lords is not a democratic chamber. By that I mean that the members of the chamber are not elected democratically but rather simply chosen, or a matter of hereditary. For example, each outgoing PM can send any of their cronies, BoJo even appointing his brother Jo. On the whole, though, I'd support a greater diversity within the Lords than just filling it with cronies.
And the Christians in these discussions, well, there's always a reason they're uninformed or unaware, but it just isn't surprising, anymore, when they somehow end up supporting sin. (#36↑) Look, kids! Big Ben! Parliament!
"Cronies" Wouldn’t that also apply to faith leaders (any faith)? A faith organisation using its allotted lords 'seat or seats' as a 'reward' for going along with shenanigans within a faith’s own organisation?
