The church has not been a beacon of what I might consider christian values over the centuries. When a senior member starts actually talking about them, he should be encouraged to do so as well as putting his own house in order. The view a lot of people seem to have is that he should shut up! My point that if the church has to not comment on what it sees as unfair treatment of the poor - what is the point of it?
The double standard here is absolutely appalling. If you are going to use your faith and quotes from its holy text as your justification, then stand by it. Don't just pick and choose whatever bits you want.
Religious person in 'being a f***ing hypocrite' shocker.
This is par for the course for all religious types.
In the time of Jesus there wasn't much room for left or right - his people were oppressed by the Romans which would have been the overiding consideration at the time I would imagine. Through time, people seem to have adapted the teachings of Jesus to meet their needs or have found things in his teachings that resonate. Tony Benn who was a non believer saw Jesus as a prophet and he was a massive influence in his beliefs. We often hear of the Christian right who clearly see christianity as a ultra conservative influence.
I think one aspect of these teachings that is hard to argue with was his preaching of social justice. Is this a left wing concept? We may label it as such, but that is probably wrong. There are conservatives who are deeply passionate about social justice, just they have their views which differ from the left on how best to achieve it. There are people on the extremes of both sides who don't care about people so much.
If Justin Welby feels strongly about social justice, he should be entitled, even encouraged to speak out and not be criticised for doing so. He isn't the Queen and I'm sure whilst there may be parallels with current Labour party policy, I am sure it is just a coincidence and he meant for his comments to address what he sees as an injustice. I am agnostic, but I think there is absolutely no point of the church if they are not supposed to make comment on our society based of their beliefs, whether we agree with them or not.
By criticising Welby's comments, there is a danger that those doing so are saying social justice belongs to the left. That says more about them than him in my opinion. The fact that it has been found that the Church has investments in Amazon probably says more about the complexities of modern finance than their duplicity. I don't think people should be looking for sticks to beat a decent person with, whether they agree with him or not.
Welby has outdone himself with his Amazon shares comments. I wonder what his stance on the taxation of the church would be.
With regards to Agnostics, I have no time for them. Wishy-washy fence sitters:
Being an agnostic means to me that you respect other people's beliefs and appreciate that there are things you don't know. That is not fence sitting. I don't believe in a god, but would be open to evidence there was. In whatever form that god took.
The double standard here is absolutely appalling. If you are going to use your faith and quotes from its holy text as your justification, then stand by it. Don't just pick and choose whatever bits you want.
Jeremy Vine is soft as shit and has let him get away with it there.
Being an agnostic means to me that you respect other people's beliefs and appreciate that there are things you don't know. That is not fence sitting. I don't believe in a god, but would be open to evidence there was. In whatever form that god took.
Bear in mind that there are roughly 3000 gods to choose from, none of which have ever been proved to exist.
Being agnostic has noting to do with being respectful and everything to do with fence sitting. If something has never been proved and will never be proved then there is absolutely no reason to give credence to those that believe.
Being an agnostic means to me that you respect other people's beliefs and appreciate that there are things you don't know. That is not fence sitting. I don't believe in a god, but would be open to evidence there was. In whatever form that god took.
Does that not make you a "weak/negative atheist". Not a great title, and sounds like an insult, but basically means a person does not believe in the existence of any deities but does not explicitly assert that there are none.
I suspect none of the many gods will ever be proven to exist to my satisfaction, but am open to the existence of a god being proven to me. I accept they have proven themselves to exist to believers for a number of reasons relevant to them.
In terms of god - the big question should be, if there is a god, who created that god? How can that god or god's creator have come from nothing? But in terms of the creation of the universe, how did it come from nothing? How can something come from nothing? And if it came from nothing, it couldn't really be nothing, so where did it come from?
I can't answer any of these questions. I could look to religion to explain or science, but neither can at this time. I believe if we ever get close to an answer, science will lead us there.
Was baptised, took communion and for some unknown reason, never actually got confirmed. I respect people’s religious beliefs because it’s equally as plausible as aliens imo. I get that some people can’t stand religion, especially those that force their religious beliefs upon others with a degree of sanctimonious piousness etc etc
I will always put Catholic down on forms etc.
I’m completely open to whether God exists, but being a massive astronomy and physics geek, the two don’t go hand in hand. Agree with Muttley re: science finding the answers to the here and now. Think Gods and religion maybe has a bigger part to play in the afterlife, of which we will never know
I suspect none of the many gods will ever be proven to exist to my satisfaction, but am open to the existence of a god being proven to me. I accept they have proven themselves to exist to believers for a number of reasons relevant to them.
In terms of god - the big question should be, if there is a god, who created that god? How can that god have come from nothing? But in terms of the creation of the universe, how did it come from nothing? How can something come from nothing? And if it came from nothing, it couldn't really be nothing, so where did it come from?
I can't answer any of these questions. I could look to religion to explain or science, but neither can at this time. I believe if we ever get close to an answer, science will lead us there.
You'd need to define and prove what this 'nothing' is that you speak of.
Seeing as a 'nothing' can't be defined then it's not a realistic proposal.
No proof has ever been presented as to the existence of a god. Personal accounts are not proof in any shape, form or fashion.
I'd suggest watching a channel on YouTube called 'The Atheist Experience'. I think you'd find it interesting.
All that said, I'm not sure what the Tories can do about it
Being an agnostic means to me that you respect other people's beliefs and appreciate that there are things you don't know. That is not fence sitting. I don't believe in a god, but would be open to evidence there was. In whatever form that god took.
Does that not make you a "weak/negative atheist". Not a great title, and sounds like an insult, but basically means a person does not believe in the existence of any deities but does not explicitly assert that there are none.
We could get bogged down with titles. I could be classed a weak atheist I suppose. It boils down to the fundamental question - where did it all start? Is the religious explanation impossible? It seems as ridiculous or unridiculous as any other explanation we have at this time. It is the same trying to pin Jesus down as teaching left wing ideals or right wing ones. I'm sure people have spent a lot of time justifying both. If what he says resonates with you, take it how you understand it.
Social justice is something Corbyn believes in passionately but he doesn't own it, nor does the Labour party. There are conservatives who care about the poor, and members of the church. Are any of us against social justice? We may just have different ideas on how best to acheive it. It boils down to, if people see something they think is wrong, should they shut up about it. What Welby said was nothing to do with Labour - he was expressing his views.
I suspect none of the many gods will ever be proven to exist to my satisfaction, but am open to the existence of a god being proven to me. I accept they have proven themselves to exist to believers for a number of reasons relevant to them.
In terms of god - the big question should be, if there is a god, who created that god? How can that god have come from nothing? But in terms of the creation of the universe, how did it come from nothing? How can something come from nothing? And if it came from nothing, it couldn't really be nothing, so where did it come from?
I can't answer any of these questions. I could look to religion to explain or science, but neither can at this time. I believe if we ever get close to an answer, science will lead us there.
You'd need to define and prove what this 'nothing' is that you speak of.
Seeing as a 'nothing' can't be defined then it's not a realistic proposal.
No proof has ever been presented as to the existence of a god. Personal accounts are not proof in any shape, form or fashion.
I'd suggest watching a channel on YouTube called 'The Atheist Experience'. I think you'd find it interesting.
All that said, I'm not sure what the Tories can do about it
I suspect none of the many gods will ever be proven to exist to my satisfaction, but am open to the existence of a god being proven to me. I accept they have proven themselves to exist to believers for a number of reasons relevant to them.
In terms of god - the big question should be, if there is a god, who created that god? How can that god have come from nothing? But in terms of the creation of the universe, how did it come from nothing? How can something come from nothing? And if it came from nothing, it couldn't really be nothing, so where did it come from?
I can't answer any of these questions. I could look to religion to explain or science, but neither can at this time. I believe if we ever get close to an answer, science will lead us there.
You'd need to define and prove what this 'nothing' is that you speak of.
Seeing as a 'nothing' can't be defined then it's not a realistic proposal.
No proof has ever been presented as to the existence of a god. Personal accounts are not proof in any shape, form or fashion.
I'd suggest watching a channel on YouTube called 'The Atheist Experience'. I think you'd find it interesting.
All that said, I'm not sure what the Tories can do about it
They can't do much about it but it is an interesting subject.
No proof has been presented as to the existence of a god - that is certainly true. But God can be put forward as a totally valid explanation. In many ways, that is how science works - people have theories that they can't prove and in time they are either proven or disproven. The issue with the Church is that when a theory contradicts their beliefs, they tend to surpress it, although in some religions, including christianity they increasingly embrace science into the religion. Not all of course - I recall being told with total conviction by a Seventh Day Adventist work colleague that the dinosaurs did not exist and the bones were those of big people put together to look like them!
Totally outside of religion, radical new theories that have proven to be correct have been resisted from within science. Imagine you are a scientist who has spent all his life telling people about something that is wrong! It can't be easy admitting it.
I see there being a god as a theory. A pretty old theory, but one that hasn't yet been disproved. I don't see a big difference in saying a God doesn't exist without evidence as saying he does without evidence.
It will be interesting to see what the Church does now that these inconsistencies have been highlighted to them.
First, I will declare an interest, in that I know the First Church Estates Commissioner, who will be running the whole shebang at the Church Commissioners. She is an intelligent, astute, hard-working individual with many skills.
To an extent, this is evidenced by the fact that the Commissioners' "investable assets" are worth £8.9bn and that they have achieved a 9.1% annual return over 30 years. In the past, the Church's finances have been less robust.
But to answer your question: it will do nothing. They will know this story will be tomorrow's chip wrappers.
Welby as Chair and Sentamu sit on the board of Governors and they will have been well aware that Amazon sits at number three in its list of most valuable equity assets. They will also know that Alphabet Inc is number two. (Known as Google to most of us.) That AstraZeneca (albeit misspelt as AstraZenica), who used 131,615 animals for research last year, is at number four and Baidu Inc at five. Acuity Brands Inc, a lighting manufacturer, sits at the top of the tree. It is easy to see that the Church of England actually is not all that keen on the idea of investing in England very much at all. With a heavy bias towards the USA and a soupçon of Chinese investing thrown in. I suspect therefore that they have done quite well out of Cable's recent woes, with their overseas investments becoming more valuable when expressed in Sterling.
I suspect none of the many gods will ever be proven to exist to my satisfaction, but am open to the existence of a god being proven to me. I accept they have proven themselves to exist to believers for a number of reasons relevant to them.
In terms of god - the big question should be, if there is a god, who created that god? How can that god have come from nothing? But in terms of the creation of the universe, how did it come from nothing? How can something come from nothing? And if it came from nothing, it couldn't really be nothing, so where did it come from?
I can't answer any of these questions. I could look to religion to explain or science, but neither can at this time. I believe if we ever get close to an answer, science will lead us there.
You'd need to define and prove what this 'nothing' is that you speak of.
Seeing as a 'nothing' can't be defined then it's not a realistic proposal.
No proof has ever been presented as to the existence of a god. Personal accounts are not proof in any shape, form or fashion.
I'd suggest watching a channel on YouTube called 'The Atheist Experience'. I think you'd find it interesting.
All that said, I'm not sure what the Tories can do about it
They can't do much about it but it is an interesting subject.
No proof has been presented as to the existence of a god - that is certainly true. But God can be put forward as a totally valid explanation. In many ways, that is how science works - people have theories that they can't prove and in time they are either proven or disproven. The issue with the Church is that when a theory contradicts their beliefs, they tend to surpress it, although in some religions, including christianity they increasingly embrace science into the religion. Not all of course - I recall being told with total conviction by a Seventh Day Adventist work colleague that the dinosaurs did not exist and the bones were those of big people put together to look like them!
Totally outside of religion, radical new theories that have proven to be correct have been resisted from within science. Imagine you are a scientist who has spent all his life telling people about something that is wrong! It can't be easy admitting it.
I see there being a god as a theory. A pretty old theory, but one that hasn't yet been disproved. I don't see a big difference in saying a God doesn't exist without evidence as saying he does without evidence.
Destroy every book in the world and ban the creation of books for 1000 years.
I'll have a wager with you that every science book would reappear due to tests being constant and provable. No religious book, as they are today, would reappear.
Well if he wasn't aware, he certainly is now. So what he does about it will be interesting like I said - even if it is nothing. Maybe he will be told off - which in itself may say a lot about the church. Like I said, if the church doesn't stick up for the poor, what is the point of it. Is it just there to make money?
I suspect none of the many gods will ever be proven to exist to my satisfaction, but am open to the existence of a god being proven to me. I accept they have proven themselves to exist to believers for a number of reasons relevant to them.
In terms of god - the big question should be, if there is a god, who created that god? How can that god have come from nothing? But in terms of the creation of the universe, how did it come from nothing? How can something come from nothing? And if it came from nothing, it couldn't really be nothing, so where did it come from?
I can't answer any of these questions. I could look to religion to explain or science, but neither can at this time. I believe if we ever get close to an answer, science will lead us there.
You'd need to define and prove what this 'nothing' is that you speak of.
Seeing as a 'nothing' can't be defined then it's not a realistic proposal.
No proof has ever been presented as to the existence of a god. Personal accounts are not proof in any shape, form or fashion.
I'd suggest watching a channel on YouTube called 'The Atheist Experience'. I think you'd find it interesting.
All that said, I'm not sure what the Tories can do about it
They can't do much about it but it is an interesting subject.
No proof has been presented as to the existence of a god - that is certainly true. But God can be put forward as a totally valid explanation. In many ways, that is how science works - people have theories that they can't prove and in time they are either proven or disproven. The issue with the Church is that when a theory contradicts their beliefs, they tend to surpress it, although in some religions, including christianity they increasingly embrace science into the religion. Not all of course - I recall being told with total conviction by a Seventh Day Adventist work colleague that the dinosaurs did not exist and the bones were those of big people put together to look like them!
Totally outside of religion, radical new theories that have proven to be correct have been resisted from within science. Imagine you are a scientist who has spent all his life telling people about something that is wrong! It can't be easy admitting it.
I see there being a god as a theory. A pretty old theory, but one that hasn't yet been disproved. I don't see a big difference in saying a God doesn't exist without evidence as saying he does without evidence.
Destroy every book in the world and ban the creation of books for 1000 years.
I'll have a wager with you that every science book would reappear due to tests being constant and provable. No religious book, as they are today, would reappear.
I agree with that. I think there are many vicars that don't believe everything in the bible. If there is a god, whose god is it? Probably nobody's unless he is speaking to certain people but not most of us!:) Scientific fact is scientific fact. It is just that science has not answered every question so where there is a gap we have to be open to all the possibilities.
Was baptised, took communion and for some unknown reason, never actually got confirmed. I respect people’s religious beliefs because it’s equally as plausible as aliens imo. I get that some people can’t stand religion, especially those that force their religious beliefs upon others with a degree of sanctimonious piousness etc etc
I will always put Catholic down on forms etc.
I’m completely open to whether God exists, but being a massive astronomy and physics geek, the two don’t go hand in hand. Agree with Muttley re: science finding the answers to the here and now. Think Gods and religion maybe has a bigger part to play in the afterlife, of which we will never know
I'm also a lapsed Catholic but I've lapsed into atheism.
I suspect none of the many gods will ever be proven to exist to my satisfaction, but am open to the existence of a god being proven to me. I accept they have proven themselves to exist to believers for a number of reasons relevant to them.
In terms of god - the big question should be, if there is a god, who created that god? How can that god have come from nothing? But in terms of the creation of the universe, how did it come from nothing? How can something come from nothing? And if it came from nothing, it couldn't really be nothing, so where did it come from?
I can't answer any of these questions. I could look to religion to explain or science, but neither can at this time. I believe if we ever get close to an answer, science will lead us there.
You'd need to define and prove what this 'nothing' is that you speak of.
Seeing as a 'nothing' can't be defined then it's not a realistic proposal.
No proof has ever been presented as to the existence of a god. Personal accounts are not proof in any shape, form or fashion.
I'd suggest watching a channel on YouTube called 'The Atheist Experience'. I think you'd find it interesting.
All that said, I'm not sure what the Tories can do about it
They can't do much about it but it is an interesting subject.
No proof has been presented as to the existence of a god - that is certainly true. But God can be put forward as a totally valid explanation. In many ways, that is how science works - people have theories that they can't prove and in time they are either proven or disproven. The issue with the Church is that when a theory contradicts their beliefs, they tend to surpress it, although in some religions, including christianity they increasingly embrace science into the religion. Not all of course - I recall being told with total conviction by a Seventh Day Adventist work colleague that the dinosaurs did not exist and the bones were those of big people put together to look like them!
Totally outside of religion, radical new theories that have proven to be correct have been resisted from within science. Imagine you are a scientist who has spent all his life telling people about something that is wrong! It can't be easy admitting it.
I see there being a god as a theory. A pretty old theory, but one that hasn't yet been disproved. I don't see a big difference in saying a God doesn't exist without evidence as saying he does without evidence.
Destroy every book in the world and ban the creation of books for 1000 years.
I'll have a wager with you that every science book would reappear due to tests being constant and provable. No religious book, as they are today, would reappear.
I agree with that. I think there are many vicars that don't believe everything in the bible. If there is a god, whose god is it? Probably nobody's unless he is speaking to certain people but not most of us!:) Scientific fact is scientific fact. It is just that science has not answered every question so where there is a gap we have to be open to all the possibilities.
That is known as' The God of the gaps', a variation of an argument from ignorance, which is exactly what religions try and claim due to science pushing their beliefs further to the margins.
The gaps are the thin ledges that religious finger tips cling to.
But religions try to fill the gaps when they are just gaps. It is the same saying that there isn't a god as saying there is. My money is on there probably not being one and if there was, he/she/it wouldn't match up the the god that humans worship, but until we know the answer to the fundamental questions, one guess is as good as another! We know a lot more than we did and our knowledge is growing at as fast a rate as ever.
But religions try to fill the gaps when they are just gaps. It is the same saying that there isn't a god as saying there is. My money is on there probably not being one and if there was, he/she/it wouldn't match up the the god that humans worship, but until we know the answer to the fundamental questions, one guess is as good as another! We know a lot more than we did and our knowledge is growing at as fast a rate as ever.
It absolutely isn't, and nobody is guessing. Religious people try and fill the gaps left by science and everyone then says 'prove it'. They can't so it's rightfully and logically left as unknown by everyone other than the God of the gaps fallacy.
Not sure we are disagreeing. I said it is basically the same saying something you can't prove as saying something else you can't prove. I am referring to the fundamental question as to whether there is a creator or not, not the detail religions will tell you around the notion. But If I am going to say there is no creator (god) how do I know that is the case? I am pretty certain the earth was created in 7 days, man was created in his image, Adam and Eve, the flood, Moses parting the red sea etc...is nonsense!
Being an agnostic means to me that you respect other people's beliefs and appreciate that there are things you don't know. That is not fence sitting. I don't believe in a god, but would be open to evidence there was. In whatever form that god took.
Bear in mind that there are roughly 3000 gods to choose from, none of which have ever been proved to exist.
Being agnostic has noting to do with being respectful and everything to do with fence sitting. If something has never been proved and will never be proved then there is absolutely no reason to give credence to those that believe.
People are working on it and it may well be proven or may not at some point. Science is going in mind blowing directions with quantum physics and M theory. But it is a theory that seeks to explain how the universe just existed when previously nothing existed. A creator is a theory. M Theory scientists may find that they are ultimately right but that aspects of previous explanations of the theory may be wrong. In the same way, there may be a creator but our undertsanding of who/what it is is almost certainly wrong. And who created the creator? All interesting but mind blowing stuff. it isn't sitting on the fence to know what you don't know though.
Being an agnostic means to me that you respect other people's beliefs and appreciate that there are things you don't know. That is not fence sitting. I don't believe in a god, but would be open to evidence there was. In whatever form that god took.
Bear in mind that there are roughly 3000 gods to choose from, none of which have ever been proved to exist.
Being agnostic has noting to do with being respectful and everything to do with fence sitting. If something has never been proved and will never be proved then there is absolutely no reason to give credence to those that believe.
The absence of God hasn’t been proven ?
Nor has the absence of fairies at the bottom of my garden.
Blimey, spend a day in meetings and the Tory thread has gone all religious! @Cordoban Addick is going to flip!
After spending my childhood in a CofE school and Sunday school I'm very much an atheist, to me the bibles a book no different to the Harry Potter series. Some of the ten commandments are OK, especially the one about the neighbours wife - but you should see her
You'll never prove God does or doesn't exist. Although maybe, just maybe, if we go to the Gavin Peacock do he may have the answers......
Back slightly on topic - so house prices could fall 35% on a no deal Brexit - I knew Brexit was a good idea! Go Tories!!
I suspect none of the many gods will ever be proven to exist to my satisfaction, but am open to the existence of a god being proven to me. I accept they have proven themselves to exist to believers for a number of reasons relevant to them.
In terms of god - the big question should be, if there is a god, who created that god? How can that god have come from nothing? But in terms of the creation of the universe, how did it come from nothing? How can something come from nothing? And if it came from nothing, it couldn't really be nothing, so where did it come from?
I can't answer any of these questions. I could look to religion to explain or science, but neither can at this time. I believe if we ever get close to an answer, science will lead us there.
You'd need to define and prove what this 'nothing' is that you speak of.
Seeing as a 'nothing' can't be defined then it's not a realistic proposal.
No proof has ever been presented as to the existence of a god. Personal accounts are not proof in any shape, form or fashion.
I'd suggest watching a channel on YouTube called 'The Atheist Experience'. I think you'd find it interesting.
All that said, I'm not sure what the Tories can do about it
Being an agnostic means to me that you respect other people's beliefs and appreciate that there are things you don't know. That is not fence sitting. I don't believe in a god, but would be open to evidence there was. In whatever form that god took.
Bear in mind that there are roughly 3000 gods to choose from, none of which have ever been proved to exist.
Being agnostic has noting to do with being respectful and everything to do with fence sitting. If something has never been proved and will never be proved then there is absolutely no reason to give credence to those that believe.
The absence of God hasn’t been proven ?
Isn't the burden of proof on believers to provide evidence of existence?
Blimey, spend a day in meetings and the Tory thread has gone all religious! @Cordoban Addick is going to flip!
After spending my childhood in a CofE school and Sunday school I'm very much an atheist, to me the bibles a book no different to the Harry Potter series. Some of the ten commandments are OK, especially the one about the neighbours wife - but you should see her
You'll never prove God does or doesn't exist. Although maybe, just maybe, if we go to the Gavin Peacock do he may have the answers......
Back slightly on topic - so house prices could fall 35% on a no deal Brexit - I knew Brexit was a good idea! Go Tories!!
But it is on topic really - how do the tories need to change. Well, they should tax the churches and (while QEII would go apeshit,) the 26 CoE bishops should be kicked out of the House of Lords as well.
Comments
With regards to Agnostics, I have no time for them. Wishy-washy fence sitters:
Being agnostic has noting to do with being respectful and everything to do with fence sitting. If something has never been proved and will never be proved then there is absolutely no reason to give credence to those that believe.
In terms of god - the big question should be, if there is a god, who created that god? How can that god or god's creator have come from nothing? But in terms of the creation of the universe, how did it come from nothing? How can something come from nothing? And if it came from nothing, it couldn't really be nothing, so where did it come from?
I can't answer any of these questions. I could look to religion to explain or science, but neither can at this time. I believe if we ever get close to an answer, science will lead us there.
Was baptised, took communion and for some unknown reason, never actually got confirmed. I respect people’s religious beliefs because it’s equally as plausible as aliens imo. I get that some people can’t stand religion, especially those that force their religious beliefs upon others with a degree of sanctimonious piousness etc etc
I will always put Catholic down on forms etc.
I’m completely open to whether God exists, but being a massive astronomy and physics geek, the two don’t go hand in hand. Agree with Muttley re: science finding the answers to the here and now. Think Gods and religion maybe has a bigger part to play in the afterlife, of which we will never know
Seeing as a 'nothing' can't be defined then it's not a realistic proposal.
No proof has ever been presented as to the existence of a god. Personal accounts are not proof in any shape, form or fashion.
I'd suggest watching a channel on YouTube called 'The Atheist Experience'. I think you'd find it interesting.
All that said, I'm not sure what the Tories can do about it
Social justice is something Corbyn believes in passionately but he doesn't own it, nor does the Labour party. There are conservatives who care about the poor, and members of the church. Are any of us against social justice? We may just have different ideas on how best to acheive it. It boils down to, if people see something they think is wrong, should they shut up about it. What Welby said was nothing to do with Labour - he was expressing his views.
No proof has been presented as to the existence of a god - that is certainly true. But God can be put forward as a totally valid explanation. In many ways, that is how science works - people have theories that they can't prove and in time they are either proven or disproven. The issue with the Church is that when a theory contradicts their beliefs, they tend to surpress it, although in some religions, including christianity they increasingly embrace science into the religion. Not all of course - I recall being told with total conviction by a Seventh Day Adventist work colleague that the dinosaurs did not exist and the bones were those of big people put together to look like them!
Totally outside of religion, radical new theories that have proven to be correct have been resisted from within science. Imagine you are a scientist who has spent all his life telling people about something that is wrong! It can't be easy admitting it.
I see there being a god as a theory. A pretty old theory, but one that hasn't yet been disproved. I don't see a big difference in saying a God doesn't exist without evidence as saying he does without evidence.
To an extent, this is evidenced by the fact that the Commissioners' "investable assets" are worth £8.9bn and that they have achieved a 9.1% annual return over 30 years. In the past, the Church's finances have been less robust.
But to answer your question: it will do nothing. They will know this story will be tomorrow's chip wrappers.
Welby as Chair and Sentamu sit on the board of Governors and they will have been well aware that Amazon sits at number three in its list of most valuable equity assets. They will also know that Alphabet Inc is number two. (Known as Google to most of us.) That AstraZeneca (albeit misspelt as AstraZenica), who used 131,615 animals for research last year, is at number four and Baidu Inc at five. Acuity Brands Inc, a lighting manufacturer, sits at the top of the tree. It is easy to see that the Church of England actually is not all that keen on the idea of investing in England very much at all. With a heavy bias towards the USA and a soupçon of Chinese investing thrown in. I suspect therefore that they have done quite well out of Cable's recent woes, with their overseas investments becoming more valuable when expressed in Sterling.
Tax The Churches.
I'll have a wager with you that every science book would reappear due to tests being constant and provable. No religious book, as they are today, would reappear.
The gaps are the thin ledges that religious finger tips cling to.
After spending my childhood in a CofE school and Sunday school I'm very much an atheist, to me the bibles a book no different to the Harry Potter series. Some of the ten commandments are OK, especially the one about the neighbours wife - but you should see her
You'll never prove God does or doesn't exist. Although maybe, just maybe, if we go to the Gavin Peacock do he may have the answers......
Back slightly on topic - so house prices could fall 35% on a no deal Brexit - I knew Brexit was a good idea! Go Tories!!