Religious Sanctuary Thread

PENA:

I don't buy that dead theory no matter how you put it. I have seen that happen alot, and after spending all my childhood in a hospital with my father, who's a doctor by the way, there are many things that can explain your "shutting off", but dead? i don't think so, unless you were buried and resurrected days later.

But you buy the Bible's story of Jesus' resurrection? How peculiar... but not unlike you. After all, you're the one who never accepts any evidence right in front of your face, but you seem to be eager to believe things you read that are impossible to prove.

Also, i though it was back in 1976, like your profile says, or are you just making all this up?

Don't chastise me for typos... I've rarely if ever criticized you for your command of the english language, have I?


Darth_Brooks:

So, it is because of the 'wrong' actions of theists you would join the atheists.

I wouldn't be "joining" the atheists any more than you would be "joining" the human race... I wouldn't be seen at atheist meetings or wherever they like to congregate, I wouldn't be frequenting atheist websites exclusively. See, this is the problem I have with religious zealotry... everything is so particularly black and white to you, that when it's so blindingly obvious that even Stevie Wonder could see it, you still don't realize that some people just do not subscribe to absolutes.

I say I'm agnostic and you think I'm Satan. It's always either you're with Jesus or you're with Satan... you're with Dubya or you're with the enemy... you're with Christianity or you're going to hell. Where else except in the minds of humans do absolutes exist? Anywhere in the universe? No... at least not for those of us who actually take time to look at the universe instead of cowering away from it and burying our noses in 2000 year old books out of which we're supposed to divine all knowledge and experience.

In my opinion, religious zealotry and born-againism is for the lazy... who refuse to acknowledge that their actions have a deliberate effect on their lot in life. Religion is the opiate of the masses... religion is the matrix... it is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to hide the truth from you.

This is a moral judgement and determination on your part.

You're absolutely right. So what the hell is your point?

Therefore, if you consider all the religious wrong for zealotry(which is a wide spectrum), then your morally based decision conludes that the atheistic must be 'right', or a morally 'better'(a degree of 'good')choice than the religious as a whole.

I don't consider atheism "right" or "morally better"... Here we go again with the absolutes.

Your generalization was "atheism."

So?

What I was pointing out, is the implicit history of atheistically based governments and regimes, which is all generally considered morally reprehensible( genocide occuring is part of the historical track record of the 20th century: Laos, Cambodia, Viet Nam, China, USSR, etc.).


Therefore, the Communist factions, themselves zealots in their ideology, with a worse human rights track record, have been to be concluded by you a better choice than "religious zealots."

And you conclude that identifying with cannibals, murderers, rapists, pedophiles, warmongers, racists, cultural annihilators, greedy rulers and despots is a better choice than all the various alternatives?

Wow, you're a better man than I. I obviously choose agnosticism, or might choose atheism, simply because I want to identify with others who hold those beliefs and who clearly participate in all the malevolence of some of the bad apples within their "group's" history.

Every person who chooses to follow Christ must obviously believe in mass murder, torture and cruel and unusual punishment (Therefore Christians must all be un-American since they support something that violates the Constitution, and therefore they must all be Communists, Fascists or Nazis... it's implied and logical f

...born-againism is for the lazy... who refuse to acknowledge that their actions have a deliberate effect on their lot in life

Bah! Being born again has nothing to do with knowing that one's actions would have a resulting effect. If you really know someone like that then he/she is nutty. "Born-againism" is more like a lifting of a spiritual burden than an excuse to be a dope in day-to-day living.

If you believe that, and if there are people like that who are born again... then sure, maybe I stand corrected, there may be a few exceptions... but my personal opinion is that people are driven towards being "born again", as someone said before, when they cannot reconcile life tragedies and want some easy way to lift the burden off themselves.

People come to religion often in their darkest of times... why is that? They want hope... which isn't a bad thing. But, in my personal opinion, using religion to "lift the burden" of your problems is no different than a clinically depressed individual taking a sugar pill.

It doesn't fix the actual cause of the problem, and it precludes any need for responsibility in one's life... especially when everything bad that happens can be pawned off as "Oh, Satan did it.." or can be easily forgiven and forgotten.

Religions, particularly in the western world, are less like philosophies and more like prescriptions... promising "If you do this... this will happen", but they fail to deliver actual solutions and this is when people get frustrated. Not because the religions are flatly wrong, but because they are often sugarcoated with promises that shouldn't be made... by Jesus or anyone else.

Ultimately, you are responsible for your own actions.... Paths such as Zen Buddhism and Hinduism don't make any promises... they only put forth ideas which may help clear the way for you... not only for the desire to better one's own circumstances, but to also make one's self useful to the rest of the world.

I do believe that bettering one's self is important in the grand scheme of things... but the question is why one pursues such a course, is it:

1. Because you wish your circumstances were better?

2. Because you want to be a better person, physically, mentally and socially?

Western religions focus so heavily on promising a better life... which is really a selfish end. Eastern religions and philosophies, with which I more closely identify, but to which I do not ever wholly subscribe, most often focus on the work itself... the path of bettering one's self... with no regard whatsoever for the reward.

In the former case, the ends justify the means... but in the latter, the end is the means. Both are centered on the individual, which isn't a bad thing in and of itself... But rather than telling everyone else how they ought to live, the key to "making things right" with the world requires everyone to focus on themselves and not worry about the next guy. If we all did that, everything would fall into place.

That belief of mine, nowhere in it, around it, beneath it or over it, is there a god nor is one required to accept such a philosophy. I'm not required to refute the construct of god, either... even though I don't believe in it as it is presented by religions of the world.

Dark times would be a strong motivator, I'm sure. For others it may be just that they feel that there has to be a greater meaning in life. In other instances it may be a person who is merely experimenting or researching and reaches a particular conclusion.
For myself, I was raised in the church. Yes, I'm also one of those dolts (as I've mentioned to you before) that hasn't gone on some journey of discovery to see if some other belief suits me better. Oh, I've learned a thing or two of different religions and beliefs from different sources. I guess I'm just happy with who I am. My own personal experience then was not one of deep emotional distress causing me to run to the nearest church or temple.

Those who do so (become born again for that 'sugar pill') often find so much more. Spiritual burden lifted? Sure, but much more. Hope, yes; but also joy, and peace.

These things shouldn't be used as a poor excuse to remove one's responsibilities. I'd like to respond to this point further, but I hope you can provide an example so that I fully understand what you mean. (Are you referring to those who will not take medicine for an illness, as an example)?

What then does believing in god provide one that cannot be achieved through other means?

Hope?

Salvation?

Feelings of self-worth? of being loved?

These are all subjective constructs.

If I believe I have hope, salvation and love... it's the same as believing in God... because I cannot prove that God loves me, is the source of my hope, or will save me when I am toast.

The love and hope you achieve through other means are there (I believe) because of the whole "made in His image" concept, which I interpret as a reference to our spiritual side. They are qualities we share.

Subjective they are, and of course God is unproveable. We've even seen posts that describe that miracles would be a poor evidence of God's existence (save for those involved in said miracle). In comes that nutty faith thing. What else can there be? Since a person's faith and relationship with God is a very personal thing, the only 'proof' one would have is one's own experience, which is generally a spiritial one.

So, basically, if there is a god, all our actions are guided by him anyway... because he's omnipotent, and all the love, self-worth and hope we experience is because of this god.

So, in other words, whether or not I believe god exists... his influence is always there, and therefore belief in him is irrelevant... because, according to what you said, even those among the godless who have hope, love and self-worth have it because of him.

I can agree with that. In fact, it's funny... Hindu philosophy says precisely that.

Right so if those this=ngs are there because of god anyway, why waste my time worshipping and praying, god's influence is with me whther i acknowledge it or not. Seems reasonable enough to me. Not that i neccesarilly agree with that statement.



And Emperor's Foot I am in complete agreement with the last post on page five where you discuss the needs for religion.

Belief in him is irrelevant if all you care about is possessing the qualities of love, hope, etc; and yes, the 'godless' have them too. So what's the difference? It's the relationship, that thing Cydonia said to watch out for! I know it runs against your beliefs, SnowDog, but I personally believe that God wants a relationship with us. That's where the prayers and worship come in, Sleazo. We have God's qualities, but we aren't very good at using them in an ideal fashion. These things are what help; it gives us the personal connection.

We're like teens, driving around lost in the big city and trying to get Home. Salvation/Forgiveness is the roadmap that leads us there. The prayers and worship are the family game nights and Bar-B-Q's that strengthen the ties.

Certainly, if God was an emotionless being, or without likes/dislikes there would be no sin, because He wouldn't care. I've read posts where people mocked the notion that God would have 'petty' emotions like jealousy and anger. I tend to prefer to think that a God that created humans that possess these qualities also have them Himself. How could an emotionless Creator endow mortals with these traits? That makes no sense.

Lastly, I don't follow how possessing these qualities equates to having one's actions influenced. We are given the tools to be like Him; but how we use them is entirely up to us.

Snowdog is in top form, as usual.

What? No kudos for me?

uhm no phelps, no kudos,
"Certainly, if God was an emotionless being, or without likes/dislikes there would be no sin, because He wouldn't care. I've read posts where people mocked the notion that God would have 'petty' emotions like jealousy and anger. I tend to prefer to think that a God that created humans that possess these qualities also have them Himself. How could an emotionless Creator endow mortals with these traits? That makes no sense"


As for this you are certainly good at anthropomorphizing what the suppossed supreme creator is. These emotions are the result of evolution, as you can see forms of them in many other mammals as well as many birds. These traits that you think god has serve a biological purpose, that is why we have them. To assume god has these traits simply because humans do not only puts humans on too high of a pedestal but insults the concept of a supreme being.
Edit- Also calling god a he is also attributing traits to god that shouldn't be. Why would god be a he? Wouldn't god be above the hormonal differences between male and female?

Ah. So emotions are an inferior trait. You imagine that a Creator would be above such things.

I did single out humans, but if you wish to include other animals that suits me fine. I believe God created all of it, evolution or no...and I still think a God devoid of emotion wouldn't bother, but I'm an idiot.

My two cents.

'He' is for simplicity. The Lord is often referred to as our Heavenly Father, a moniker I enjoy.

Did i say emotions are an inferior trait? no, what i said is that these emotions are a result of neccessity. To think god has them simply because you have them is arrogant.

It is not an inferior/ superior thing, its why are you giving god human characteristics?

Why human characteristics?

1. Well, as a Christian, I confess to using the Bible as a source of my religious knowledge. As such, God is described as having those characteristics. I am uncertain how Jews, Muslims, Hindus, etc feel about the characteristics or lack thereof in a diety. I'm speaking purely from my perspective.

2. As I said, to me it makes sense that God would have those characteristics, and I feel that God has given them to us, rather than the reverse. Neither do I feel then, that it's arrogant to believe such, although I would feel silly assuming God rather had the emotional qualities of an inchworm.

And yet wouldn't a silly inchworm's idea of god have the emotional qualities of an inchworm?

Do you see what i am getting at?
Your idea of God is a human construct, that is why it has human characteristics.


I find it very interesting that humans can invent something, then go off and worship it as if their creation created them.

Your idea of God is a human construct...

That is what I would think if I didn't believe. Unfortunately, my notion only works if one believes a God exists.

I said YOUR IDEA of god. Not God.
Your idea of god is a human construct.

Yes, I know. I copied and pasted what you said in fact. Also, it isn't my idea. I read it in a Book.

So, can you give me an idea of a god that is not a human construct?

I'm loggin' out btw. Been fun. God bless.
He He.

The idea of god that is not a human construct is what god is and is probably beyond the ken of the human imagination

This part of the debate reminds me of that AC/DC song Who Made Who.

Darth_snowdog:
But you buy the Bible's story of Jesus' resurrection? How peculiar... but not unlike you. After all, you're the one who never accepts any evidence right in front of your face, but you seem to be eager to believe things you read that are impossible to prove.

You are almost on the right track, thanks for putting yourself in my position, you are somehow understanding a few things, rather late in the game, but none the less are almost there, but a few things come to mind. First off,you are the one who tries to reason everything before trying to even acknowledge the fact that it could/did happen, myself?, no, i just have faith. I don't doubt that it could have happened to you, although i would reject the fact that it did until you accept the fact that Jesus did exist and did die and resurrect, because you keep claiming that it didn't happen. It has to be fair, and the fact that you claim it happened to you should be reason enough to acknowledge Jesus, otherwise, like Darth_Brooks said, you are just against Christianity and Christians for the sake of being. Impossible to prove? wait a second, someone here is biased, and it is not me ,to me it seems like you have a comfort zone where everything seems to fit into your utopian life, and whenever someone comes and shakes the bed telling you that you are possibly wrong, you take offense and tell us to "screw ourselves, or go to hell", remember?

I don't doubt that many things could happen to you, even die and resurrect, to me it's normal, i have seen it happen many times, as well as seen many things that maybe you haven't seen, but it is offensive to myself and others for you to come here and insult and demean whatever we believe because it doesn't fit into your logical state of mind, you are right and we are wrong, just like your claims about how we hold exclusivity to God, for you it's ok and for us it's wrong, how stupid, step out of your little box and see the world, i have a pair of scissors here for you, in case you need them.

And in relation to my English, i want to see you learn, speak, write, a language from a country you don't live in and be fluent in it, learn my language and then you can make claims about my english. And typos? i made typos, you make typos, we are even, now learn spanish, and maybe we will be even, capisce?

BTW, this is a sanctuary thread, for us who have similar beliefs and/or want to share our thoughts and feelings on certain subjects, if you want to come here and argue, fight, insult, etc. etc. go somewhere else where people care what you think. We let you have your sanctuary, let us have ours. Or should we start another one?

PENA: I have no problem discussing religions in a "sanctuary", do you?

It seems to me this thread may have to be relabeled "Christian Sanctuary and Misinformation-About-Other-Beliefs Thread"... because that's what it really is. I come in and talk about my religious views and how I don't view Christianity as anything special or unique... and watch what happens. All the Christian fundies in the channel start swarming around me like vultures waiting to pick away.

I thought this was a religious sanctuary... and not just a Christian one.


As for languages, my point was... whatever command of the english language you have or don't have has never been an issue for me. I'd appreciate it if you'd recognize a typo for what it is and not throw darts at other people's mistakes when you yourself are in no better a position to speak. Instead of acknowledging the respect I've shown you, in that regard, you chose to make this a peeing contest to see who speaks the most languages.

DarthPhelps: I tend to prefer to think that a God that created humans that possess these qualities also have them Himself. How could an emotionless Creator endow mortals with these traits? That makes no sense.

Just because you "tend to prefer to think" it doesn't make it true. Of course I'm not meaning to steer you away from believing in things that don't exist. Believe in whatever you want.. believe in the blue fairy, for all I care. Just don't judge me on things you yourself cannot prove to me. If you come asking me to denounce my faith and accept yours simply on the basis of a story that I cannot accept as the basis for a prescriptive belief... especially when I don't accept any kind of prescriptive belief systems whatsoever.

If someone tells me they know the truth about all things, either they're god or they're lying. Likewise, I don't know the truth about all things... nor do I subscribe to any belief, philosophy or doctrine that claims to have such absolute truth all worked out. The whole point of life for me is not to be saved, but to discover the truths one by one for myself... if I can't do that, life for me is pointless.

The problem with taking the "right path" is in the assumption that there is one and one alone. There's no basis upon which we can assume that which is passed down to us from other humans is fact until we see it for ourselves. I might tell you that Martians live in France... you probably won't believe me. So why would you prefer to believe it as it is if it was told for a hundred generations before you?

Is it because you think that the older the story, the more truthful it must be? Well, then in that case... animism is the most correct belief of them all... and, funny thing, the knowledge base gained from life sciences wouldn't disagree with that.

Or... is it more likely that... as the old adage goes... If you tell a lie enough times, eventually people will believe it's the truth?

History knows the answer to that one.

How could an emotionless Creator endow mortals with these traits? That makes no sense.

So, why don't Moraxella catharralis or Pseudomonas aeruginosa have emotions?

BTW, this is a sanctuary thread, for us who have similar beliefs and/or want to share our thoughts and feelings on certain subjects, if you want to come here and argue, fight, insult, etc. etc. go somewhere else where people care what you think.

Oh, it's oh so very clear from the opening post by Darth_Brooks the direction he intended for this thread... which was to chastise atheism as a morally reprehensible belief, as opposed to simply discussing religion.

We let you have your sanctuary, let us have ours. Or should we start another one?

This is "my" sanctuary... I came here to talk about religion... not atheism.