Anyone here actually religious?

I'm not religious, but I'm not atheist either. I'm a headging my bets, don't know, agnostic.

I do respect people that have faith and believe in God and religion though. I don't feel the need to pull them down and tear into their beliefs.

Ultimately, live and let live is my moto (or I suppose on the context of this thread, turn the other cheek ) though of course that should apply to the ridiculous extremist element of all religions, also.

If we all just went about our business believing what we want to believe and not inflicting it on others the world would be a much happier place, IMO.

 

[image=http://img718.imageshack.us/img718/7852/2001dave.jpg]

 

I now worship in the House of Andrew.

 

All of you are heathens for not believing in His Noodliness, the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

 

I'm not religious, but my boyfriend is.

 

Interesting article in today's Guardian about UK secularism and why it should not be a threat to religion.

 

Is there room for me? I hear the cooking is fantastic.

 

Pastafarianism ftw.

 

First off, to say that Christianity, or how Christ was, is similar to other religions is a big "Duh." It doesn't make it not true. People have pointed out that other religions have singular figures that do good things, perform miracles, and heal the sick. That just sounds like something anyone, if they were in fact sent from God, or in any way divine, would do. Many of these similiarities, to me it seems, just seem to be holy, sacred events that such a person would do, or would befall such a person, it seems natural and holy would happen if such a person were divine.

Andrew, I actually think that post shows you have some similar mindsets with religion, but also a vast misinterpretation of what it means. The world as we see it is not as different as you may think from how YOU perceive it.

Everything you said in this paragraph describes why I am a relgious person. It's the idea of this whole universe being put together in all these impossible ways. The difference is that I see that as evidence of some sort of conciousness behind it, some sort of intent. I find that the sheer impossibility of all this happening this way, of all the incredible millions of moving parts and apparatuses inside our own body, from the cartilege between our bones to the lubricants in our eyes is contained in the DNA of a single cell, is a clear showcase that there is something behind it all. I can't understand thinking that's all just a coincidence, let alone taking pleasure in that meaninglessness.

So far off the mark I'm not even sure what to say. Life is not a "grand experiment." We are created out of love, we are children. Certainly not rats in a maze. God did not create us to judge us, any more than our parents conceived us so that they could scold us. God created us out of love and wants us to be happy. That's why Christians believe He loved us so much he sent Himself down to be one of us, to die so that we WOULDN'T have to pay for our transgressions. Just like a parent would protect us, even from mistakes we mad eoutselves.

First off, I would argue an omnipotent God does anything but limit the impossibility of existence. It's the thing that's behind existnace, and behind your soul.
I really don't follow this logic. You're seeing God as some sort of external guy who loves to judge. God doesn't really work any differently from the way the universe in your perspective does. To say you "don't need God's forgiveness," only your own, sounds so strange because you're not seeing Him as simply a person watching out for you. You're seeing Him as someone you have to prove yourself to, work extra hard for some kind of special forgiveness, and that thus sounds unappealing to you. What you're talking about is actually more in line to what we think. He's just a guy watching over us. If you err, and repent, you say you need to forgive yourself. But this guy who's been watching it all forgave you before even you could forgive yourself. He's not out to make you jump through hoops for Him.

All this wonderful, strange universe, and life in it, I take as a beautiful, wonderful miracle, created as a gift

 

Hey man. That's your interpretation of things. I just listed mine. I recognize the fact that much of what I said can be viewed exactly the same way, but through a religious filter. I have no problem with that. In fact, I love it. We should all dig on those things, regardless of our feelings about a deity. I don't care enough to discuss or debate your refutations of what I said though.

Religious debates are always an exercise in masturbatory politics. I believe what I believe. You believe what you believe. I respect that and will leave you to it. It's not my place to argue that what you believe is wrong or any less valid. It's just that in my view, there's no room for a god in all of this. It just doesn't add up. If it does for you, that's fantastic. Keep at it. Stay strong and keep yo faith. But the things I've experienced in my life lead me to a different conclusion. That's all there is.

 

I think it's really funny that the thread that inspired this one was a Monty Python thread.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fINh4SsOyBw

 

How silly.

You have religion to thank for hospitals, food banks, homeless shelters, universities, schools, and a whole host of other benefits. St. James said this: "Religion clean and undefiled before God and the Father, is this: to visit the fatherless and widows in their tribulation: and to keep one's self unspotted from this world."

Before the development of religious systems, the behavior of humans was very different. Consider the brutal culture that the Bible portrays, which the Israelites participated in. The other Semites and Mediterrean peoples, the central Asians, the northern Europeans - they were no better.

Do you know what the most common cause of death in hunter-gatherer bands is? It's murder.

Human beings never needed excuses to enslave, rape, exploit, humiliate, punish, wage war, or do any other evil action. Might is right was the rule of the world - religion has been a crucial part of changing that. The whole idea of human rights comes from religion. Human beings ought to be treated a certain way because of an innate dignity?

No, a world full of pagans is hopeless and brutal. Even our post-Christian society is far superior in its treatment of human beings than a world without religion.

It's about truth. We don't raise our children to believe that whatever they want to do is right - they have to share, they have to be polite, they cannot physically assault other children, they cannot steal from others - we force these truths upon them. We also force such truths upon them as the structure of our language, science, and so forth - why not force upon them something we hold to be truer than all things, the True Faith?

If you think that religion is one of those areas where there are lots of varying but equally acceptable truths, like you're at a vending machine and there is no moral difference between having a Fanta and a Sprite, then sure, that attitude makes sense. Let your children choose which flavor they like, and don't force your own particular preference upon them - but if you believe it is truth, then you choose to raise your child in it because it is good to teach others to believe truth.

 

Are you saying that without religion there would be no morals and we'd descend to barbarism? Because that's absolute nonsense.

 

Blech, what an anachronistic borefest of a film that was.

No. Those things quite clearly predate Christianity (which I assume you mean by "religion" since apparently pagan religions don't count). Food assistance does as well-- Roman politicians were often celebrated if they fed the poor.

Er, I'm skeptical. Infant mortality was very high because there was virtually no medical care to speak of. Food security was very low. A minor cut could kill someone due to infection. Very skeptical. Murder rates were definitely much higher, but that can also be said of Christian societies up until a century or two ago.

I don't quite understand why people feel the need to make stuff up in order to defend their religious faith (besides the faith itself oh atheist burn). A few people earlier in this thread basically said, "If it can't be explained, God did it." But there were a lot of things 1,000 years ago that couldn't be explained then that can be explained now. And we will be able to explain more things. If you use that sort of argument, you will lose. And you will lose by trying to attribute... like, every positive societal development to religious faith.

 

But you must make sure that children are exposed to all forms of truth, not just the one that you believe to be true. Many who raise their kids to be strongly religious try to prevent them from seeing or hearing anything that could undermine their faith or encourage them to turn away from it. This is wrong, present all evidence and then decide what you believe.

 

Yes, Christians are not the only ones who have fed the poor. Feeding the poor is a great way to get votes, but religion teaches us to feed the poor because it is morally good and right to do so, not merely because it is expedient. Did the Roman government feed the poor in Syria or Palestine? I am curious - I don't know, but I would guess not. As for pagan religions - for the most part, no, they didn't teach morality. They were superstitious attempts to control nature for material benefits. A moral philosophy such as Buddhism or Confucianism or a theistic religion such as Christianity or Islam are actually quite different. No one obeyed Zeus because his commandments were just or righteous - the pagan Gods, Jupiter, Zeus, Ammon, whomever, they ruled because they were strong and served the peoples who worshiped them, but in their mythologies they were guilty of reprehensible behavior themselves.

As for the quote on murder, that is from Jared Diamond, Guns, Germs, and Steel, chapter 14. So no, I didn't make it up to defend the concept of faith in general. I was using it to point out that human beings possess immense innate savageness, especially towards each other. I'm not arguing the existence of God from the angle, "God obviously exists because human beings' behavior has improved under the influence of religion."

I'm simply saying that that quote from Kingdom of Heaven is stupid because religion does quite a bit of good - not every good, but quite a bit of it, and in novel and more whole ways than before, and it's idiotic to dismiss all religion as awful because the poor behavior of some religious people (especially whereas it concerns the Crusades).

No one would give their eleven year old a copy of Mein Kampf* and say, "Read it and think about it. If you choose to believe that, go ahead. We accept whatever you believe."

People recognize that they have a right to force their beliefs on their children, and everyone does. It just so happens that most people in our society don't believe they have the right to force religious beliefs on their children - moral beliefs, sure. I agree, they shouldn't be sheltered, and they should be exposed to all the evidence, and you can't control your children - they will have to make their own choice. But your child can choose to grow up to be a racist, a philanderer, a thief, a murderer, or worse - but it doesn't mean that you would pretend that you had to give your child all the evidence and let them

 

Yeah, you have to be able to distinguish between belief and truth. I think truth is something that can be absolutely proven to be true - hence truth. Believing something to be true does not make it true.

I agree with Andrew, though... arguing about religious beliefs is silly. If one believes their faith to be truth in its purest sense, and lives their life one hundred percent based on their belief, it really shouldn't matter what other people think.

 

Well, Jared Diamond's thesis is flawed and he's not even a trained historian, so I wouldn't be surprised if he got a (difficult to research since obviously there were no written records and little archaeological evidence) fact wrong. I don't have the book, but I'm curious as to what source he cites.

 

"All forms of truth..."? I wasn't aware that the truth came in different forms, just what's true and what isn't.

 

He's an anthropologist and I said "is", I didn't say "was". He cites studies of modern day hunter-gatherer bands.

 

what about the 9/11 hijackers?

 

The worst people are the heads of the religious organisations. The Pope & Ayatollahs being the worst, they spread the intolerance and preach the outdated views of their religious doctrines. The influence over so many that such men have means that they should be sending out messages of peace and love and tolerance, as religious leaders such as the Dalai Lama do.

The power given to a select few by organised religion is the problem, if they becoem corrupt or refuce to modernise their teachings to fit into today's world they will cause many global problems.