Religion, what do you think?

[QuantumMindGames]

i'll necroquote because of the de-railing of this topic. :\

Funny how to the people so involved in their religions, that when someone of another faith or no faith tells them their beliefs, they are astonished, and look at them as poor pathetic souls. and if an argument heats up, its always "you are wrong, i am right" on both sides.


When will people realize that it's how you look at life? its your perspective on the world, how things work and the explanation behind things otherwise unexplainable. There is no right or wrong, its what you believe. Why is no religion considered the right religion? Maybe because it's impossible to do so - since it's nothing but a belief structure.


"A building without a solid structure will fall when something comes along and gives it the right push."
This is the reason for religion, or for some people no religion. There is no right religion, period. There is no wrong religion, either. Some are considered immoral, yes. But to the people who actively pursue these faiths, it's real, and it's how the world works.


I kinda make it a personal goal to help let people realize this that are too blinded by their own perspective. It's what you believe in and how you see the world.


Oh, and I'm buddhist, and technically it's not even a religion - it's a way of life. peace and whatnot.

ironically, that's just your perspective.

also the buddhist belief is that there IS that one true nature of the universe, and that when it is truly understood, you reach nirvana and all that. but you're saying there isn't, it's all how you look at things, and that the universe is unexplainable. I'm wondering how you can be a buddhist and believe the other things you said in that post?

let me restate that... my thoughts on the way things work are closest to buddhist. i prefer not to call myself atheist / agnostic merely because i do have thoughts and beliefs that are spiritual more than purely scientific.
Many people call themselves christian, but don't fully believe there is a god. they don't go to church, don't study the bible, but yet they are still considered christian. Why is this? Do you have to follow a religion to the core - be devout, in order to be considered that religion? if so... the population that counts as members of Christianity - or of any major religion - should be far less than what actually are. So, i call myself buddhist to have something to relate to, since i don't believe in a supernatural celestial being such as god.

and as for the universe being unexplainable? explain where you got that. "explain the unexplainable"? well yeah... there was no theories or explanations for the universe when all these religions started. but i never said that specifically there's no explanation to the universe.

and yes, it is my perspective. and to sum up that last part of my post: i try to make others realize that when they immediately dismiss somebody as being wrong due to having a different faith or belief as you, it's perspective. That was in no way saying that everyone is blinded by their perspective. or that this applies to everyone.

And the person a couple post above me made a good point to what i was saying.

how do you expect to explain religion without facts? you can't. because to the person who believes these things are facts - they are, to the person who doesn't - they aren't.

but i'll stay out of this conversation. I see no way of explaining myself without being the target for bashing a view because we don't meet eye-to-eye, and showing the very thing that i was saying - if you don't believe in something that other people believe in, depending on what they think you should believe in, you are outcast and ridiculed, or they try to find flaws in your every word, etc. yet they will deny it and continue it, never truly accepting others for who they are and how they see the world.

 

[Cruelty]

it doesn't really matter how closely your world-view and philosophies are to those of a buddhist - if you're not striving to attain enlightenment/nirvana, you're not a buddhist. all this 'buddhism as philosophy' or 'philosophical buddhism' (as I've seen it called) is just a modern western bastardization of buddhism, ignoring the most important aspects and practices - but still calling it the same thing. it's condensed - watered down.

also, sorry if you actually are a follower of the eightfold path, but i'm getting the feeling that that may not necessarily be the case.

i dont care who believe what and calls themselves what. i can call myself whatever i want but it doesn't make it true, the same way it doesn't make it true for anyone else who erroneously claims they are of a religious faith that they are not. also you dont have to go to church and study the bible to be a christian. there is one single all-important rule to being a christian - accept christ. everything else is up to the individual.

 

[jacob]

there is one single all-important rule to being a christian - accept christ. everything else is up to the individual.

Interestingly enough, after criticizing someone for "watering down" buddhist practices, you too have generalized and minimized what it means to be a Christian.

I only know of a few mainstream Christian sects that think you just need to "accept" Christ to be Christian. Disciples of Christ should not only accept Him, but follow Him. Anyone can say they believe in God and Jesus...

Matthew 7:21 - Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
24 - Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:
25 - And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.
26 - And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand:
27 - And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.

Simply believing in God or in Christ is not enough. Are devils Christians?

Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.

Being a Christian has always meant emulating his lifestyle and doing good works. It is impossible to have true faith in Him otherwise.

20 - But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
21 - Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
22 - Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?
23 - And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.
24 - Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.
26 - For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

 

[mawk]

jacob, I gotta say, I'm with you on a lot of this. in the practice of your religion, following jesus' example is pretty much the one essential tidbit (dont mind me im just doin my spring oversimplifying) that people seem to forget a lot. that sort of thing is the cornerstone of most large religion nowadays (basically BE NICE TO PEOPLE SEE WHAT THIS GOOD PERSON DID HERE? BE LIKE THAT (AS IN NICE) (you could call it personal improvement if you're better at explanations than I am)) and I'm p. ashamed actually that so many people lose sight of that and instead see their religion of choice as just basically a way of getting god to owe you favours.

I actually wasn't familiar with that as the accepted christian assumption regarding the nature of suffering. it's just such a common question "why do bad things happen to good people" that I had just assumed the majority of thinkers (religious or otherwise) thought whatever hypothetical god there was existed just to pop out of the machine every half-hour and directly and immediately benefit mankind and keep anything bad from happening. the assumption that a god who allows bad things to happen is either
a) not god
b) malicious
has annoyed me for a while.

honestly, for all my big talk I really don't give a shit about religious theory. the actual practice is most of the reason for religion in the first place, and it's the one area that seems so utterly neglected on the level of the institutions themselves. really, it's the only thing that really matters. I'll still call you ridiculous for creating your own religion just because your normal life is boring, but if you use that religion as an excuse to be generally a good person I really won't begrudge you anything except your ridiculousness.

 

[Ellie]

But then couldn't that practise exist with or without religion? If you're talking about a set of morals to follow, a guide to set your life by, do you need religion to give you that?

I myself would rather keep the two seperate. I mean, I'll follow someone's example if it's a good example, ok. But religious theory and those practises are entirely seperate and the "religious practices" should lose the word religious entirely.

 

[mawk]

ideally speaking, you shouldn't. the idea that there is no "perfect crime" and one's just desserts will be delivered to them by divine means, though, might have been intended as insurance against people who just thought it'd be easier to be bad.

honestly your way sounds a lot better but I'm not 100% on how it would work in practice. keeping the example alive in people's minds and making it seem worth following would over the generations come to resemble a religion in most ways, anyway.

buddhism might be a good example here. a lot of people consider it a philosphy of life before a religion, an example of "here is what gautama buddha taught and here is what he did, please follow his example because he was a great guy," and no one ever specifically afforded the Buddha a divine standing (not blatantly, at least,) but in the end there are still giant golden statues of the Buddha made.

 

[Holk]

Religion topics are unproductive and only lead to flames and childishness. Knowing this, and going against my better judgment, I am posting here. I'm not going to argue about beliefs, because it is a fruitless battle, and it doesn't really matter to me if your beliefs are different from mine. I'm just posting here because the topic is "Religion: What do you think?" I'm going to tell you that.

I am a spiritual person, not a religious person. I don't think that what a person truly believes in should have to fit into a prerequisite mold to be deemed "true". I feel that religions are the cause of many horrors on this planet, and if people worried about themselves more than they worried about what someone else believed, then this world would be a better place. I realize that this is not realistic, because human instinct is to conquer and engorge itself on pride. This is not to say that I don't have my beliefs, though. I believe in something more than myself. I see it every day. I see trees growing. I breathe air from the atmosphere. I feel rain pouring down on me, and hear the thunder roaring across the sky. I didn't put those things there. I don't know any living being that did. This means that some sort of order came out of some sort of chaos. I don't care how it got there, or why it is there. All that I know is that it is. I just try to do what I need to do, and not be an asshole. It's working for me right now, so why should I have to try and force what works for me down your throat? If you want it, then take it. If people are happy fighting and being angry at the world, then great. I'm not going to let it ruin my good time, though.

 

[Incognitus]

Former fundamentalist debunks Bible:

http://www.cnn.com/2009/LIVING/05/15/bi ... pstoryview

Seems to be very little new stuff, as his detractors say, but apparently it is very accessible.

 

[mawk]

what I find hilarious is people who think they can invalidate an entire set of beliefs by bringing up factual inaccuracies and shit like that in books centuries old

this guy seems to have the right idea, though. most religious texts have been around long enough so as to undergo heavy restructuring, which is one of the reasons it's so important not to take the words literally (especially if you're reading a translation) and make conclusions in context with the life and decisions of that religion's prophet of choice.

 

[jacob]

I believe the bible to be poorly translated and incomplete.

 

[Incognitus]

I believe the bible to be poorly translated and incomplete.

Okay, two groups of questions then:

What books, and whose translations of them do you consider to be authoritive, and why? How familiar are you with the nuances of the original Hebrew/Aramaic?

A small set of questions:
Thou shalt not suffer a *what* to live?
What is the nature of the relationship between Jonathan and David?
Dissect the quotations used as the foundation for the Catholic Church. If you do not believe them to be applicable, state why.
What is your opinion on the adulterous woman in John 7:53 onwards?
How should the word "Elohim" be understood, and how has it been understood across the ages?
What, in your opinion, is the most poorly translated or incompletely understood passage in the Bible, what consquences has this had, and justify.


I've got more. This type of stuff is fun!

 

[jacob]

I believe that the bible was written by prophets of God, and that its original content is inspired scripture. I also believe that the bible we have today, when translated correctly, is the word of God. Unfortunately, lots can happen to an ancient text (especially controversial in nature) when it is passed down for thousands of years (lets assume that Moses began to write Genesis around 1600 B.C.) and has been translated into hundreds of languages time and time again.

Even if the translators had good intentions, you simply cannot translate an ancient text dozens of times and not have it lose some meaning. I happen to know this to be true because I myself speak English, Spanish, and Italian. I have read the bible in those three languages, and know that there are certain ideas and other things that cannot be translated 100% into a different language.

I believe that the King James Version of the Bible is the most credible, although it, like any other translation, is missing dozens of books and has been censored almost beyond recognition in many parts.

As for your questions, the only one I really feel contributes to this conversation is the last one. I believe that one of the most misunderstood principles is that people erroneously believe that God and Jesus Christ are the same person, basing their entire testimony on a couple scriptures taken out of context, while simultaneously ignoring the more plentiful scriptures that contradict this false doctrine.

Other fallacies include:
Baptizing little children
Preaching without the authority
Ignoring the necessity of apostles and prophets
Thinking God/Christ is a spirit without a body
and the list goes on...

 

[Velocir_X]

Well, personally my thought's on religion are as follows:

In essence religion is an alright object (and that coming from a total atheist). It simply is (in my opinion) human kinds attempt to distance themselves from the animals we our. However it can improve the lives of people by giving them a sense of belonging and a community to count on (sorta like RMXP.org) along with values.

The problem is that there are always people who take things too seriously, and those who wish to take advantage of others. See if there's an almighty being that the population believes in then theres something to fight over, to protect. And the clever person uses this to advance his own political gains. Good example of this is Charlemagne, who was crowned by the pope himself, and supposedly led by "God". This escalates with many sides claiming dominion under god, like Richard and Saladin and in the end you get wars fought over such a trivial thing as "God". And it repeats over and over again. You have early christianity's fight in Rome, you have the crusades, the Roman Catholic - Protestant cnflict (both sides are christian for goodness sake) in Ireland, in fact our current war is a war of religion - itsthe Islamist's Jihaad.

And in order to fight a war you need people. So in the end you have the preachers, the Jehova's Witnesses. This is the most annoying part for me personally. See I have no problem with people killing themselves over nonsense, but when they attempt to make me fight for them, threatening me with hell and unending punishment - well it gets personal. They have no right to try and decide my my life, at all!!

So in the end religion is a theoretically good thing, that in practice is corrupted.

And my policy on it is the same one I have with gays:
Let them live as they let me live...
But when they try to convert, or hit on me - I pull out my shotgun
(metophorically speaking of course, I've never killed anyone and do not own a shotgun)

 

[Ellie]

In theory yeah, in an ideal world religion poses the greatest solution: community, morality, everyone following the same path, no conflict. But in reality it is completely unlike that. Hell, even religions themselves split (look at Christianity, for example) and not everyone will follow the moralic part of religion, choosing to only follow some aspects that apply to them.

And even then, morality is subjective and still everyone won't follow the same path.

 

[Velocir_X]

In theory yeah, in an ideal world religion poses the greatest solution: community, morality, everyone following the same path, no conflict. But in reality it is completely unlike that. Hell, even religions themselves split (look at Christianity, for example) and not everyone will follow the moralic part of religion, choosing to only follow some aspects that apply to them.

And even then, morality is subjective and still everyone won't follow the same path.

uh-huh, we're human for godsake,
so most of the time religion just ends up causing problems...

But hey like I said if it doesn't effect the majority who cares?

 

[Incognitus]

if it doesn't effect the majority who cares?

But it does. All the time.





The only plausible and justifiable course of action is to open up Global Re-Education Centres for the Religious. They can be frogmarched in two by two! :haha:

 

[Velocir_X]

if it doesn't effect the majority who cares?

But it does. All the time.





The only plausible and justifiable course of action is to open up Global Re-Education Centres for the Religious. They can be frogmarched in two by two! :haha:

That's a valid point - probably why I'm so pissed off at religious people all the time,
hat to bring my story in, but whenever tell people I'm atheist
They start blabbing about how its "offensive" and try to convert me
oh well...

As for re-education,
they should do that first for driving - make the school German too...

 

[jerome_denis]

I am a Christian, and I belive In God (IHWH), and In his Son Jesus Christ the (and the only) Savior.

I DO belive, that one day, we all will raise from the dead, and will have to go through Judgement - Good thing, when you can call Jesus your lawyer then, because if you can`t You'll must NOT go to heaven, but Must go the other place ... ("I am the Way, the truth, and the live - NO man cometh to the father, BUT BY ME" -Jesus-)

Yes I DO take the Bible as truth, but NO I am not a (Short-Time-)Creationist ...
[The Radiocarbon dating proofes that the world HAS to be billions of years old - And the 6 days, in which God created the earth? => The hebrew word "IOM" could be also translated as "Periode of Time" not only as "Day"]

 

[Velocir_X]

I am a Christian, and I belive In God (IHWH), and In his Son Jesus Christ the (and the only) Savior.

I DO belive, that one day, we all will raise from the dead, and will have to go through Judgement - Good thing, when you can call Jesus your lawyer then, because if you can`t You'll must NOT go to heaven, but Must go the other place ... ("I am the Way, the truth, and the live - NO man cometh to the father, BUT BY ME" -Jesus-)

Yes I DO take the Bible as truth, but NO I am not a (Short-Time-)Creationist ...
[The Radiocarbon dating proofes that the world HAS to be billions of years old - And the 6 days, in which God created the earth? => The hebrew word "IOM" could be also translated as "Periode of Time" not only as "Day"]

Cool, but if I tell you I'm atheist will you go and try to convert,
and then throw in the that's "offensive" excuse, well...
If not I'm alright believe what you wish to belive...
Live and let others live....

 

[QuantumMindGames]

What would the world be like without religion? Laws and consequences the same, just with the religion part taken out.

would it be chaos, anarchy, or would we get along better?

The fighting in iraq stemmed from the muslim religion and how killing "infidels" earns you a harem of virgins. how many people died in the twin towers incident over some religious kook thinking that they get to have 72 virgins - which only lasts so long, if you think about it.

In all honesty, when you get to the roots of human nature, i think religion has stemmed a major amount of conflicts. Even in ancient times with gods like Zeus and Posiedon (sp?), religion played a major role in human-to-human conflicts.
Religion answers questions, but maybe these questions weren't meant to be answered.

In my ideal world, no religion would be present.

just my 2 cents.