| Author |
Topic:
Are you religious or spiritual?
|
Obi-Zahn Kenobi
Registered:
Aug '99
|
Date Posted:
7/15 5:14pm
Subject:
RE: Are you religious or spiritual?
- Date Edited:
7/15 5:19pm (2 edits total)
Edited By:
Obi-Zahn Kenobi
|
Okay, thank you for the clarification.
I mean, typically, I would think of branches like this:
Protestants
Catholics
Restorationists
Eastern Orthodox
Oriental Orthodox
Assyrian Church
But anyway, I see now what you mean and I was incorrect.
Also, J-w, I see you were using an appeal to the people. Well, I'll have you know that the vast majority of Christian denominations, branches, and people are trinitarians. However, according to you, this does not necessarily make them right.
-----signature-----
Even God has a Mommy.
Are we all to you lost causes?
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Jabba-wocky
Registered:
May '03
|
Date Posted:
7/15 5:42pm
Subject:
RE: Are you religious or spiritual?
- Date Edited:
7/15 5:57pm (2 edits total)
Edited By:
Jabba-wocky
|
Darth_Guy posted:
Jabba-wocky posted:
EDIT: Even, most branches of Christianity actually don't believe in the kind of Apostolic Succession outlined by whoever wanderguard was quoting in that post you quoted.
I know that. My point was that it's ridiculous to call one Christian denomination "dumb" when an outside observer could find quite a few "dumb" things in other denominations and Christianity in general.
Now that I 'm caught up with this thread, I wanted to say that this isn't much of a "point" to make at all. When Christian denominations call each other "dumb" they're referring to issue of internal consistency, since all sects/denominations of the same religion should share a core body of assumptions. Insofar as one of them subsequently embraces an idea that contradicts one (or several) of those, it is indeed "dumb." What you're referring to--the validity of the core assumptions themselves--is an entirely separate issue.
So, is your point "true?" Yes. But it's kind of like jumping into a discussion of whether Palpatine was Sidious and saying "You guys are both wrong because these are two fictional characters created as villains in a story written by George Lucas. They don't actually exist." It's entirely beside the point.
EDIT: OZK, it's still not faulty logic on my part. I never claimed that either side of the debate was "correct." I just disputed Even's apparent notion that this belief as near-universal in Christianity, by pointing out that on account of eh sizable segments that believe otherwise, it really isn't appropriate to generalize a criticism about that one specific belief to the religion as a whole.
That besides, if I was going to dispute Apostolic Succession, do you really think I would shy away from doing it head-on (Or, since it's come up, that I would do it on a big messageboard like this, unprovoked, where it stands as a virtual call out to every single Catholic that visits)?
-----signature-----
ays Darius the king: 8 of my family (there were) who were formerly kings; I am the ninth (9); long aforetime we are kings.
All Hail His Excellency, Barack Obama
Roma vincit
Tearing Up a Lane (TERRIN UP A LAAAANE!!!)
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
-RebelScum-
Registered:
Feb '04
|
Date Posted:
7/15 6:33pm
Subject:
RE: Are you religious or spiritual?
|
Palpateen posted:
all practical knowledge of physics and biology points to the impossibility of an afterlife 
That's the whole POINT of faith. That practical knowledge may be the truth of our material world, but knowledge of what's beyond is unknowable, not impossible. People who think in such literal, limited terms such as science can never access the spiritual infinite. By definition, it's outside the realm of what's measurable. It requires a different set of cognitive tools.
What is limited about only believing in things with evidence or reason to support them? Couldn't you use the brand of faith you are advocating to justify any beliefs, from God to unicorns? What makes your faith valid or true?
Scummy
-----signature-----
Fantasy Keeps Me Sane.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Lord_Vivec
Registered:
Apr '06
|
Date Posted:
7/15 6:39pm
Subject:
RE: Are you religious or spiritual?
|
|
Beliefs do not need to be justified. That's why their called beliefs. If they had to be justified, they'd be called "facts."
-----signature-----
EUS Vice Chancellor
"I believe the proper analogy involves a river of excrement and a Native American vessel without any means of propulsion." -Sheldon
Gavin Newsom for CA Gov '10!
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Jabba-wocky
Registered:
May '03
|
Date Posted:
7/15 6:40pm
Subject:
RE: Are you religious or spiritual?
|
Though it's obviously no answer to you, I've always thought Mahmoud Ahmadinejad hit a very nice note during his speech at Columbia. As he explained, "Just as the physical world was only one element of the Creation, so should the physical sciences represent only one area of human inquiry."
I'm working from memory, so that's obviously not verbatim, but that was pretty much the construction he used, and it was a rather elegant one in my opinion. That's probably my favorite thing this fellow has ever done.
-----signature-----
ays Darius the king: 8 of my family (there were) who were formerly kings; I am the ninth (9); long aforetime we are kings.
All Hail His Excellency, Barack Obama
Roma vincit
Tearing Up a Lane (TERRIN UP A LAAAANE!!!)
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Quixotic-Sith
Title: Manager Emeritus
Registered:
Jun '01
|
Date Posted:
7/15 6:42pm
Subject:
RE: Are you religious or spiritual?
|
|
smh at "faith" being used equivocally. It's like assuming everyone has the same definition for "love", "justice", "beauty", "truth", "patriotism", "[insert every other complex concept made simplistic by casual conversational terms here]", etc.
-----signature-----
A Pennsylvania Yankee in Queen Ida's Court
Ostrich_Stapler = Bling-Bling Thunder
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
-RebelScum-
Registered:
Feb '04
|
Date Posted:
7/15 7:08pm
Subject:
RE: Are you religious or spiritual?
- Date Edited:
7/15 7:09pm (2 edits total)
Edited By:
-RebelScum-
|
Obviously different people will view faith/beauty/love and things of that nature differently, however the person I was quoting implied that he had knowledge through faith and his "different set of cognitive tools" and said that science was a narrow viewpoint. I think I'm perfectly justified asking him what separates his faith from others.
Also, Vivec. Yes, they are beliefs and as such don't require evidence or proof and I certainly won't try to convince you you're wrong, but I still have a sort of expectation for justification when you put the beliefs out there and I at the very least will ask.
Scummy
-----signature-----
Fantasy Keeps Me Sane.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Quixotic-Sith
Title: Manager Emeritus
Registered:
Jun '01
|
Date Posted:
7/15 7:16pm
Subject:
RE: Are you religious or spiritual?
|
-RebelScum- posted:
Obviously different people will view faith/beauty/love and things of that nature differently, however the person I was quoting implied that he had knowledge through faith and his "different set of cognitive tools" and said that science was a narrow viewpoint. I think I'm perfectly justified asking him what separates his faith from others.
Also, Vivec. Yes, they are beliefs and as such don't require evidence or proof and I certainly won't try to convince you you're wrong, but I still have a sort of expectation for justification when you put the beliefs out there and I at the very least will ask.
Scummy
That wasn't the point of my post. People have been insisting that "faith" is precisely what they mean it to be, and have functionally ignored the rather obvious point that several different definitions are in use with the same type of justification employed. When "faith" and "belief" are thrown around so interchangably, the terms become empty. It's like insisting that one "loves the movies" the same way one "loves one's parents" or the same way one "loves one's wife". A lot of important nuance is being lost in the discussion.
-----signature-----
A Pennsylvania Yankee in Queen Ida's Court
Ostrich_Stapler = Bling-Bling Thunder
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
-RebelScum-
Registered:
Feb '04
|
Date Posted:
7/15 7:17pm
Subject:
RE: Are you religious or spiritual?
|
Ah, I agree with you then. I generally tend to assume a sort of blind-faith in religious matters as the default but it's just an assumption on my part.
Scummy
-----signature-----
Fantasy Keeps Me Sane.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
AaylaSecurOWNED
Registered:
May '05
|
Date Posted:
7/15 7:29pm
Subject:
RE: Are you religious or spiritual?
|
Darth_Guy posted:
I dislike the perversion of quantum physics by pretending that it is anything like, say, belief in God. I won't pretend to be a physicist nor will I pretend to grasp all the concepts, but I do know that scientific theories and mathematical formulas have little-to-no relation to religious faith.
Eh. I think that's a matter of opinion, actually. I think that quantum mechanics is quite similar to religious faith.
OZK, pretty much just what Carmen said, which is that parts of other religions and other religious practices that don't interfere or directly contradict Catholicism are fine.
-----signature-----
Is it Star Wars?
YES --> Post in Star Wars
NO --> Post in Not Star Wars
IDK? --> GTHOTB
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
-RebelScum-
Registered:
Feb '04
|
Date Posted:
7/15 7:31pm
Subject:
RE: Are you religious or spiritual?
- Date Edited:
7/15 7:31pm (1 edits total)
Edited By:
-RebelScum-
|
How is it similar to religious faith?
Scummy
-----signature-----
Fantasy Keeps Me Sane.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Onoto
Title: Host
Risk
Arena Top 100
Registered:
Oct '04
|
Date Posted:
7/15 7:39pm
Subject:
RE: Are you religious or spiritual?
|
|
I think the likening has to do with the idea that one must accept the very foundation before a greater understanding can be reached. For physics, one must believe that there is a set of natural laws that govern the universe before one can see that they are there. Similarly, one must believe that there are a set of what C.S. Lewis referred to as natural laws of moral order before one can believe in religion. The comparison is also useful to the faithful in that it implies that a lack of faith in religion does not dismiss the religion, just as a lack of faith in gravity does not free one from its hold.
-----signature-----
A mathematician is a device for turning coffee into theorems. ~Paul Erdos
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
ophelia
Registered:
Jun '02
|
Date Posted:
7/15 7:41pm
Subject:
RE: Are you religious or spiritual?
- Date Edited:
7/15 7:44pm (1 edits total)
Edited By:
ophelia
|
I think ASO means theories of quantum mechanics and not the math that most scientists prefer to focus on.
Basically, we have a set of data that can be explained in various ways--most of which violate the basic laws of the universe as we regularly experience them. Which interpretation of the math you pick is up to you, but whatever you pick has profound implications for your understanding of what the universe is. Any path you take is also likely to lead you to a "logical" conclusion that makes you give up on all conventional ideas of logic.
Edit: Or not. 
Epistemology does tend to shatter like glass around the quantum universe, though.
Which would be why most scientists prefer to focus on the math.
-----signature-----
"Once upon a time, again."
--Onoto, NaNoWriMo entry
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
AaylaSecurOWNED
Registered:
May '05
|
Date Posted:
7/15 7:41pm
Subject:
RE: Are you religious or spiritual?
- Date Edited:
7/15 7:43pm (1 edits total)
Edited By:
AaylaSecurOWNED
|
The fact that there are physical particles that exist but cannot be observed seems immensely similar to the idea of a God that is real but cannot be seen. Maybe it's not similar to the paternalistic, conscious "God" that most major religions believe in, but the two concepts to me are notions in very similar spirits. I'll be the first to admit that I don't hold very conventional views about "God," though.
EDIT: Also kinda what Ophelia said. Not really what Onoto said, though.
-----signature-----
Is it Star Wars?
YES --> Post in Star Wars
NO --> Post in Not Star Wars
IDK? --> GTHOTB
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Onoto
Title: Host
Risk
Arena Top 100
Registered:
Oct '04
|
Date Posted:
7/15 7:46pm
Subject:
RE: Are you religious or spiritual?
|
|
Oh. I thought we were using quantum physics as a generic example of a science that has a foundation that requires a basic level of acceptance.
-----signature-----
A mathematician is a device for turning coffee into theorems. ~Paul Erdos
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
