Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Victorgra]

• ???????? ?????????? ???? by Victorgra
  [Yesterday at 11:29:30 PM]
• ? ??????? 2 by Juliyge
  [Yesterday at 10:16:52 PM]
• ??????????? ????? ???????... by Juliget
  [Yesterday at 08:28:55 AM]
• 2012 Concert Thread by Carmelasew
  [April 25, 2024, 11:19:23 PM]
• ????????? ??????????? seo... by Victorumj
  [April 25, 2024, 09:59:00 PM]
• ???????? ?????????? tk by Victorcqt
  [April 25, 2024, 06:35:49 PM]

Members

• Total Members: 4939
• Latest: BrianCus

Stats

• Total Posts: 129551
• Total Topics: 7148
• Online Today: 179
• Online Ever: 1013
• (January 12, 2023, 01:18:11 AM)

[TheJudge]

I have no more right to impose my faith on others than others have the right to impose their faith - or lack thereof - on me.  I understand the whole "I'm tired of hearing about it" thing.  Because I'm also there - just on the other side.

Absolutely true.

Obviously, if someone is tired of hearing about it, they can simply skip the thread. And if others want to discuss the topic, without calling everyone else who disagress and idiot, that is fine too. I did use this word myself earlier, and I didn't really mean that. I understand and accept that anyone can choose their own beleifs, I just get very excited when I talk about it because to me, it makes no sense.


Trust me, I have tried and tried to understand. I've done my years of soul searching. I just don't get it at this point in my life. I remember a time when I was younger where I was a firm beleiver. But something changed over time. It's almost like I "woke up" on day and when I look back, I see how naive I was back then. And I'm  not calling anyone who beleives in God naive. Not at all. I see myself as naive because I took in the information I was given and accepted it without questions, because I wasn't wise enough to consider that the information could be wrong.

The day I woke up, I became angry with myself for letting others manipulate me. I felt violated in some way. Back then, I just accepted what I was taught as the truth. I view the whole experience equivalent to brian washing quite frankly. Today, I just can't take all the information in without questioning it, and when ever I question it, I realise that I won't find answers and I won't get anywhere. It's a never ending cyclce, and quite frankly, life is too short to spend it pondering about questions that no man will ever be able to answer. It's like spending your existence driving around in a traffic circle and never running out of gas.

While I accept that others can choose to beleive what they want, I always maintain that in neither party should impose their beleifs on others. I've had my share of religious people telling me I couldn't this or that however. "You can't do that because God ... fill in the blank". The people who do that truely beleive they are doing the right thing, because they beleive what they say to be true. That's the fundamental problem. Have you been to the other side and back? Then how the fuck do you know ANYTHING? It pisses me off.

My whole take on God is actually quite simple. Because I can't prove or disprove his existence, I chose not to beleive what religion tells me, and I chose to conduct myself in a maner which I deem to be good and just. I recognise that I may be wrong about God's existence. Should that be the case, I hope that God will judge me on my actions and not my beleifs when I die. Because if he does, I don't think he'll be upset with me. And if he comdems me for not beleiving in him, regardless living my life in a positive manner, then that is not the kind of God I would worship anyway.

Simply put, I'm pagan.

SHE'S A WITCH! BURN HER!!!!!

[dcrog]

She turned me into a newt.  But I got better.

[Joe Sixpack]

I don't think people who disagree with me on this subject are lacking in intelligence in any way.  If you are familiar with the concept of Occam's Razor, you get down to this:  is it "simpler" that a) a magical force in the sky created everything, or b) all the atoms in the universe cooled and congealed in just such a way to form a star at our distance from the galactic center, with our planet at just such a distance from our star in order to support our form of life?  An intelligent person could decide either way just on that point, and there are many different ways to think about it.

I also don't care if you're offended.  However, if what I say about some cocksucking old man in a stupid hat has a tangible effect on your emotional well-being, I would say you have some self esteem issues to work through.

[reimero]

However, if what I say about some cocksucking old man in a stupid hat has a tangible effect on your emotional well-being, I would say you have some self esteem issues to work through.

Heh.  I'd argue you're the one who has to get past this papal blowjob fetish you have.  I recommend you buy your wife a mitre and some red shoes and fantasize about it while she's going to town.  That should take the edge off.

[Joe Sixpack]

I don't think she would know what to do with one of these....


OR WOULD SHE???

[reimero]

Gotta love a woman who knows how to handle her hardware.

[TheJudge]

Anyway... Power tools and divine blowjobs aside, I actually think this is a good thread. Let's keep it productive folks!

[Wunderkind]

Part of the freedom of religion is the responsibility to accept that there are other people out there who do not recognize freedom of religion and do not recognize the beneficial nature of a pluralistic society. 

Okay, everybody, mark it down in your books. Prepare to file it for a national holiday. Light firecrackers. The pagan and the Catholic agree on something. |>

Actually, I pretty much agree with everything you said. This morning when I got home I was about to go off on full on tar-n-feather campaign about how much Catholicism has butchered other's religious freedoms in the past and have at times even abolished them completely. That the very nature of a montheistic religion is "Our way or burn, bitch" and that, in its very concept, destroys the fabric of what is relgious freedom. Needless to say, I'm glad I slept on it.

I have no more right to impose my faith on others than others have the right to impose their faith - or lack thereof - on me.

Neither do I and I think now is a good time to point out that this was not intended to put down any particular religion or belief (or lack thereof as the case may be). This thread was intended to point out that a man of some considerable influence has spoken against religious freedom, period. End of statement.

...I'm also there - just on the other side.

Apparently, now I am too. According to this man's words my mere existence near you is a threat to your faith. I now pose a new question:

Is it possible that by merely associating with those of another religion that your religioun is trampled upon? Is my mere existence in this forum, conversing with you, watering down your faith?

I understand and accept that anyone can choose their own beleifs, I just get very excited when I talk about it because to me, it makes no sense.

Ditto, but from the other side. People who don't believe in some form of a deity stupify me. We could have some very intriguing conversations.

And if he comdems me for not beleiving in him, regardless living my life in a positive manner, then that is not the kind of God I would worship anyway.

Actually this behaviour is very human in nature so I would say, if this occurs, that creature is not god, and you have nothing to worry about.

She turned me into a newt.  But I got better.

How in Pangea's womb....?
I thought that was fool proof!

I don't think people who disagree with me on this subject are lacking in intelligence in any way.  If you are familiar with the concept of Occam's Razor, you get down to this:  is it "simpler" that a) a magical force in the sky created everything, or b) all the atoms in the universe cooled and congealed in just such a way to form a star at our distance from the galactic center, with our planet at just such a distance from our star in order to support our form of life?  An intelligent person could decide either way just on that point, and there are many different ways to think about it.

I'm glad you added that last sentence, because I find option a) the simpler answer. Probably not completely correct, but simpler anyway.

[Joe Sixpack]

Well, I can personally observe stars, the effects of gravity, etc... so for me that goes a long way towards choosing b).  But the point is, nowhere did I ever insinuate that religious people are stupid. 

Some are, of course.

[Wunderkind]

Some non-religious people are stupid too. I don't think faith is anyway tied to stupidity or vice versa.
Some people are just stupid, religious or not is beside the point.

[12AX7]

I don't see why the concept of God and science aren't compatible.

 Where did all this come from? - Study God. (the idea of God; not some religion**... or maybe study ALL religions.)
 Weird Tingly Feeling? How? - Study science.

The whole idea that the two aren't compatible is a prime example of how 'religions' skew things. Not to mention that most mainstream religions all believe the same things; but somehow call it different so they can be at odds.
 Allah. God. Jesus. Mohammed. Heaven. Be faithful. Believe.

  .  .  .  ok, so what's to fight about? Except one case I can think of in Jerusalem; where the same spot of ground means different things to different people. Although as a rational person, I would think that that could be worked out. Maybe that's the problem. Rationality.


**edit

[Joe Sixpack]

If you are saying that God is the creator of everything, then it means that you are using it to explain things that you don't understand.  That's why the God concept is at odds with empirical science.  This doesn't make them wholly incompatible, necessarily.  But as far as science should be concerned, the God question is irrelevant.

By the way, there is a big difference between believing in some kind of creator and calling it God, and believing in the Judeo-Christian Biblical God.

If you believe the the earth was literally created in 7 24  hour days and that humans were put right there with the lions and the sheeps and the dirt-eating snakes, that is a long way from believing that the universe didn't begin in a spontaneous combustion, and there must be some form of powerful sentient creator (and I daresay you do have a bit of an intelligence issue).

[12AX7]

If you are saying that God is the creator of everything, then it means that you are using it to explain things that you don't understand.  That's why the God concept is at odds with empirical science.

No;  but God -the idea of God- has a LOT to do with what exists now; since it seems to be an innate tendency of humans to have a God in some form; and we as humans have had a huge effect on what exists now. Thats why I edited to say study ALL religions.

By the way, there is a big difference between believing in some kind of creator and calling it God, and believing in the Judeo-Christian Biblical God.
If you believe the the earth was literally created in 7 24  hour days and that humans were put right there with the lions and the sheeps and the dirt-eating snakes, that is a long way from believing that the universe didn't begin in a spontaneous combustion, and there must be some form of powerful sentient creator (and I daresay you do have a bit of an intelligence issue).

This is precisely why I say 'religions' skew things.

[Wunderkind]

But as far as science should be concerned, the God question is irrelevant.

On this we agree.
I do not understand why my belief in a deity suddenly makes my perception of science skewed. I believe the two exist independent of each other. Whether or not there is a god and it created the universe, is beside the fact. The facts are that we have proof of these events occuring in this order, if it fucks up your belief in your god that's a matter between you and your god, not you and science. Science is the matter of what is known and knowing more. I do not see how it relates to the god issue in any way. (This is, of course, eliminating those few who deem science as their god. That is a discussion for later.)

No;  but God -the idea of God- has a LOT to do with what exists now; since it seems to be an innate tendency of humans to have a God in some form;

Actually, it seems more that humans have an innate tendency to take the blue pill and pretend none of it exists. It is the nature of religions to provide that blue pill, so that we can continue taking the easy way out instead of testing theory until we find truth. Therefor, it seems the innate tendency of humans to have a religion of some form.

[12AX7]

Therefor, it seems the innate tendency of humans to have a religion of some form.

Ok, yep; thats a better way to put it. Nonetheless; the end result is the same.

[Joe Sixpack]

No;  but God -the idea of God- has a LOT to do with what exists now

Indirectly at best, by how humans have reacted to it. You could say the same about any number of imaginary things.  It doesn't mean we should sacrifice children to the kobolds (although maybe, just to be safe...).

Knowing a lot about religions is the best toolbox against Bible-thumping nutjobs, so I'm all for studying them all.

[12AX7]

I do not understand why my belief in a deity suddenly makes my perception of science skewed.

Belief in a deity and religion are not neccessarily one and the same.

[12AX7]

Indirectly at best, by how humans have reacted to it. You could say the same about any number of imaginary things.

Yeh, but that doesn't negate effect Im talking about.

  It doesn't mean we should sacrifice children to the kobolds (although maybe, just to be safe...).

    

Knowing a lot about religions is the best toolbox against Bible-thumping nutjobs, so I'm all for studying them all.

Yep. Anything-thumping.

[Joe Sixpack]

If your deity consciously makes no demands on your time I don't see the distinction.

So rather than be just another mindless religious robot, mindlessly and aimlessly and blindly believing that all of this is in the hands of some spooky incompetent father figure who doesn't give a shit, I decided to look around for something else to worship. Something I could really count on.

And immediately, I thought of the sun. Happened like that. Overnight I became a sun-worshipper. Well, not overnight, you can't see the sun at night. But first thing the next morning, I became a sun-worshipper. Several reasons. First of all, I can see the sun, okay? Unlike some other gods I could mention, I can actually see the sun. I'm big on that. If I can see something, I don't know, it kind of helps the credibility along, you know? So everyday I can see the sun, as it gives me everything I need; heat, light, food, flowers in the park, reflections on the lake, an occasional skin cancer, but hey. At least there are no crucifixions, and we're not setting people on fire simply because they don't agree with us.

Sun worship is fairly simple. There's no mystery, no miracles, no pageantry, no one asks for money, there are no songs to learn, and we don't have a special building where we all gather once a week to compare clothing. And the best thing about the sun, it never tells me I'm unworthy. Doesn't tell me I'm a bad person who needs to be saved. Hasn't said an unkind word. Treats me fine. So, I worship the sun. But, I don't pray to the sun. Know why? I wouldn't presume on our friendship. It's not polite.

[12AX7]

Fuckin a.  Call me a convert. 

[Wunderkind]

Ok, yep; thats a better way to put it. Nonetheless; the end result is the same.

Only if you use "god" as your blue pill, which I think is a cop-out and makes the rest of us look bad. Some people use chocolate. Religions require you to use "god" as your blue pill, hence their built-in flaw.

Belief in a deity and religion are not neccessarily one and the same.

I was hoping that would be clear, but thank you for pointing it out. I will still be told that my belief in a deity is somehow un-scientific.

It doesn't mean we should sacrifice children to the kobolds (although maybe, just to be safe...).

I nominate we sacrifice the parents of the most annoying brats first. |>

Fuckin a.  Call me a convert. 

The moon is better than the sun. 
It doesn't matter why dammit! IT JUST IS!

[12AX7]

I will still be told that my belief in a deity is somehow un-scientific.

Have them study human psychology. It's actually very scientific.

[reimero]

Is it possible that by merely associating with those of another religion that your religioun is trampled upon? Is my mere existence in this forum, conversing with you, watering down your faith?

Now you've opened the can of worms...

Seriously, I'm firmly of the opinion that faith and reason not only have to coexist, but that they have to help each other.  I believe God created the world, and I believe that the Big Bang was the mechanism used.  I believe in intelligent design, because evolution isn't just intelligent, it's freakin' brilliant.  Put another way, God set up the dominoes and gave the first one a nudge, then let things happen.

But I digress.

Is the mere fact that I converse with pagans and atheists about faith an affront to my faith?  Absolutely not.
(WARNING: I'M ABOUT TO GET RELIGIOUS HERE)
Per Christianity, and per what I believe, God made humanity in God's own image and likeness, and that entails everything about humanity.  Including reason, intellect, natural curiosity and free will.  These are God's gifts to humanity.  For humanity to reject these gifts in favour of blind obedience is, I believe, a misuse of these gifts.  If you're at all familiar with the Bible, you might remember the story about the landowner who gave 3 servants stewardship over some money.  2 invested that money and were profitable, one buried it in the dirt and had only the original money to show for it.  While that's not the original intent of the story, I think it applies to human reason.  We are given an intellect, curiosity and free will not to bury in the sand, but to better ourselves and those around us.

If reason is a gift from God, then even the nature of faith itself must be subject to that reason.  True faith demands absolute belief that something is true.  This means that if a tenet of faith cannot withstand rational scrutiny, it must not be true.  Similarly, if what I believe is true, it MUST stand up to rational scrutiny.  By testing my faith, by subjecting it to scrutiny and legitimate questioning, I can strip away those aspects which are not actually of divine mandate and strengthen what I do know to be true.

Association with others who believe differently in no way waters down my faith.  On the contrary, it strengthens it.  That said, I must be aware that my circumstances are uncommon.  I'm a rather intelligent person conversing rationally with other intelligent people.  There are lots of other places on the internet where discourse of this nature (i.e. on-topic and reasonably intelligent) is simply impossible because of the number of idiots who decide to make it into an ad hominem attack-fest.  In a forum like this, in which we actually generally respect one another, even when we disagree, I think the situation is ideal for rational questioning of what I believe.

[TheJudge]

I have this theory about religions. I think that an important part of what drives people to faith is the fear of death. Most religion speak of life after death in some form. They give hope that existence is not ended by death. Do you think that it is perhaps convenient for people to embrace such beliefs because it comforts them in some way? It helps them cope with the unknown by chosing to beleive, without actual proof, that certain things will occur once they pass on? To me, that is one of the greatest benefits religions offer to individuals. I beleive that those who choose to practice any faith do so because it brings them something in return, whether that benefit is real or not being irrelevent. As long as it is perceived as being real, then this is all that matters. And if I am correct with my theory, then this only supports another theory that I have which is that all humans are driven by personal greed. Now, I know, this sounds radical. I admit it. But I beleive that humans only act in one way or another when there is some kind of benefit to them in doing so. Even a random act of kindness is driven by personal gain. You do it because it makes you feel good. Yes, it is true that you also provide a benefit to someone else, but that's a secondary effect. The primary driver is personal gain, or preventing/minimizing personal loss, always.

I think that religions directly translates into that personal greed factor. To continue on with my "fear of death" theory, those embrace the delusion that they will somehow continue on, and that somehow the next life will be rewarding in many ways, are those who gain something from beleiving this. They end up embracing the concept to the point where they beleive it to be the absolute truth. And it's a convenient truth. Most religions use reward as an incentive to join. What better reward than eternal life? What better way to avoid facing the possibility that when I die, there is nothing?

I've intentionally used the word "delusion" realier because "eternal life" and "nothing after death" are equally viable outcomes of death. Clearly, one outcome is not as appealing as the other. So if you can choose to pick one or the other, which do you think people will "choose" to beleive? Religions provide a framwork to deal with the unknown, which is a way for people to cope with the unknown. That is why they choose to beleive something. Ultimately, this translates into personal gain. I'm not saying that's a bad thing. Perhaps it's not a bad thing to live a potential lie and be happy your whole life, than to live a potential reality and be miserable because of it. Because of the unverifiable nature of life after death (or the absence of it), people can just swing both ways. Well... if you're a catholic, it is frowned upon to swing both ways! hehe!

Anyway, these seem like viable theories to me, and they are both interlinked.

Now, I will ask a few personal question to those who practice a religion, should they feel like answering them.

1 - Have you considered the real possibility that you are completly wrong?
2 - And if so, what was your thought process, how did you reach a conclusion?
3 - And now, to entertain my personal greed theory: After you've conducted the analysis and reached your conclusions as per your response in #2, do you think that your choice in the end was the option that directly provided the greates personal benefit to you? In order words, did you really choose your faith because if either promises rewards, or it provides the threat of punishement should you choose any other option (or both)?

[reimero]

1. Yes.  All the time.
2. I'll just say a lot of it has to do with statistical anomalies.  They could be explained as statistical anomalies (i.e. a 99.999% probability of something not happening still leaves a 0.001% probability of something happening) or as divine will or whatnot.  There are some other very personal things involved I'm not completely comfortable discussing in an open forum such as this, but have to do with personal experiences.
3. I grew up in a family with faith, so it's something I've had to deal with on a daily basis.  And I've had to deal with serious abuse of faith as well.  So my subconscious has a healthy dose of "you'll go to hell if you..." in it.  Even though, by those same terms, some of the people who had the most influence on that are also the most likely to experience the most severe punishments in the afterlife (assuming there is such a thing.)  Frankly, it's almost a miracle I'm not atheist, given the crap I've had to deal with.

Lord, protect me from your followers, indeed!