Thought I would start a fun new thread where atheists can freely ask what and why I believe what I believe. And although I can not promise my answers will satisfy everybody, I will give an honest answer to an honest question. I don't know how limited the scope of discussion will be, but I ask that the questions be as specific as possible, and there may be many questions that I simply don't know the answer to, sorry. ;)
Also, I am aware of the different "brands" of Christianity which can become a loaded term, but it will be much more constructive to focus on the more fundamental and universally understood beliefs.
Don't be shy to ask! :)
What church do you belong to?
Do you believe all (morals) that you are taught by your church?
This thread ought to be interesting. I already see an issue answering the first question... "all"
Quote from: Stevil on August 05, 2011, 09:22:15 PM
What church do you belong to?
Do you believe all (morals) that you are taught by your church?
I go to a southern baptist church, as well as a nondenominational church in atlanta. But would not box my beliefs in a denomination's tradition.
And as far answering your second question, I simply don't know "all" morals taught within my church, or all of their theological stances. However, I will say that I am not a big fan on how baptists choose to "dodge the question", when it comes to issues of speaking in tongues or prophesy in today's times. And I am still doing personal research to draw my own conclusions on those issues. However, I believe in their overall emphasis on global missions and enjoy the pastor's style of preaching.
Quote from: Cforcerunner on August 05, 2011, 10:11:36 PM
I go to a southern baptist church, as well as a nondenominational church in atlanta. But would not box my beliefs in a denomination's tradition.
And as far answering your second question, I simply don't know "all" morals taught within my church, or all of their theological stances. However, I will say that I am not a big fan on how baptists choose to "dodge the question", when it comes to issues of speaking in tongues or prophesy in today's times. And I am still doing personal research to draw my own conclusions on those issues. However, I believe in their overall emphasis on global missions and enjoy the pastor's style of preaching.
That is a great answer.
Do you think the bible is for personal interpretation and hence accept that others interpretations is neither wrong nor right but personal?
Would you consider the bible more as a guide book rather than a rule book?
I have a question!
What's your first recollection of "believing"
Quote from: Stevil on August 05, 2011, 10:16:34 PM
That is a great answer.
Do you think the bible is for personal interpretation and hence accept that others interpretations is neither wrong nor right but personal?
Would you consider the bible more as a guide book rather than a rule book?
No, I believe the bible to be inspired by "God" and objectively teaches why men and women are placed here in the external world, as well as their purpose in life. And although it can be interpreted in many different ways, I believe there is a core, consistent, metaphysical illustration of God's love for mankind, as well as salvation through His son.
As far as the bible being considered a "guide" or a "rulebook". I would lean toward "rulebook" in the sense of objective authority, however, I don't believe Jesus would condone morality as a strict set of do's and dont's. He has called man not his servants, but friends.
Quote from: Cforcerunner on August 05, 2011, 10:51:08 PM
As far as the bible being considered a "guide" or a "rulebook". I would lean toward "rulebook" in the sense of objective authority
Are all Christian churches aligned with this "rulebook" or some or one or none?
Why aren't you a Muslim?
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on August 05, 2011, 10:18:52 PM
I have a question!
What's your first recollection of "believing"
Haha, that is a long story! I will post on how I came to believe when I have more time. Thanks for asking :)
Quote from: Stevil on August 05, 2011, 11:01:55 PM
Quote from: Cforcerunner on August 05, 2011, 10:51:08 PM
As far as the bible being considered a "guide" or a "rulebook". I would lean toward "rulebook" in the sense of objective authority
Are all Christian churches aligned with this "rulebook" or some or one or none?
Once again, I can't speak for all Christian churches/denominations. I am sure there are a diverse number of churches that have very sound theology according the scriptures, as well as many who claim to be Christian and yet deliberately follow nothing in Christian doctrine. All I can say is some follow scriptures more closely than others. But I am a big fan of nondenomination as Jesus did not acknowledge denomination among disciples.
Quote from: Tank on August 05, 2011, 11:08:40 PM
Why aren't you a Muslim?
The same reason I am not mormon. I believe joseph smith/muhammad claim to be subsequent prophets following Jesus' revelation, as they highly condoned the person of Jesus. I found Islam to be confusing in this sense. They revere muhammad as the last and greatest prophet, yet Jesus is still found during the end of days? They created mandatory rituals when Jesus said days of the law were already fulfilled?
If someone here could represent an islamic belief system to me in a persuasive manner, I am all ears. My research of Muhummad simply did not compel me as the revelation of the divine as Jesus did.
Since you mention speaking in tongues I have a question. If speaking in tongues is the least of all gifts, why does this gift get so much emphasis in the more southern denominations? Why, as a gift, is it something that people attempt to attain? Doesn't make sense.
It is obvious that you believe in an afterlife where you will sing praises unto the Almighty for ever and ever, amen.
My question is...what did you do before you were born?
Quote from: fester30 on August 06, 2011, 12:09:35 AM
Since you mention speaking in tongues I have a question. If speaking in tongues is the least of all gifts, why does this gift get so much emphasis in the more southern denominations? Why, as a gift, is it something that people attempt to attain? Doesn't make sense.
That's a good question. According to what Paul assumes in 1 Corinthians it was routine in the early church for someone to speak in tongues and to have someone interpret it. Some kind of apparent praises toward God in an unknown language. And as you said, he also mentions that this gift is not a significant one.
I don't believe tongues are popular in "southern" denominations that I am familiar with at least. Being part of a southern baptist church, they simply don't acknowledge speaking in tongues and try their best to ignore it when they can. The denomination which tongues is most prevalent today is certainly the pentecostal. I have even observed someone speaking in tongues in the middle of the service in a manner not consistent with Pauline account. Paul insists speaking in tongues should be performed in orderly conduct, not in a dramatized fashion that it is so often depicted nowadays.
Okay, now to answer the other question directly. I don't know why many would attempt to speak in tongues. As scripture would interpret the event as some sort of involuntary praise to God in an unspoken language, that's all I can tell. However, I plan on reading on current views of contemporary theologians, and see if I can come up with a better answer after that. :)
Quote from: Cforcerunner on August 05, 2011, 11:32:58 PM
Once again, I can't speak for all Christian churches/denominations. I am sure there are a diverse number of churches that have very sound theology according the scriptures, as well as many who claim to be Christian and yet deliberately follow nothing in Christian doctrine. All I can say is some follow scriptures more closely than others. But I am a big fan of nondenomination as Jesus did not acknowledge denomination among disciples.
For the record I am interested in your thoughts, not so much the various churches. I am trying to establish your stance with regards to following scripture and how you became Baptist or non denominational.
Would a non denominational church focus on teaching what is common amongst the various denominations and avoid the differences?
I would gues that the various non denominationals are not aligned with each other, hence your church is unique, with a unique interpretation.
Would you say that you go along with your church or that you follow your own interpretation of the book?
Welcome to the forum, Cforcerunner. Thanks for volunteering for what could be difficult questions.
Do you understand and accept Darwinian evolution, the processes of natural selection and random mutation, and do you accept that this is the explanation of how life on earth arrived at its current state following abiogenesis?
I ask this because, while some Christians to not, many Christians wholeheartedly accept the scientific theory of evolution. I find this fascinating because of the implication. If you believe that humans can be traced back through thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands of species going all the way back to single-celled organisms living billions of years ago, where does that leave the story of Adam and Eve? In the book of Genesis, Adam and Eve live in the Garden of Eden and introduce sin into the world by eating from the Tree of Knowledge. If humans evolved from lower primates, which evolved from a type of marsupial, which evolved inevitably from single-celled organisms, the Garden of Eden incident never occurred and humans thus are not responsible for bringing sin into the world. This undermines a fundamental part of the Christian belief system, that humans are somehow born wrong and can only be fixed through the sacrifice of their demigod. If humans did not sin and break their covenant with the god of the Bible, the sacrifice of that god's son/self is rendered meaningless.
Quote from: Stevil on August 06, 2011, 05:45:03 AM
Quote from: Cforcerunner on August 05, 2011, 11:32:58 PM
Once again, I can't speak for all Christian churches/denominations. I am sure there are a diverse number of churches that have very sound theology according the scriptures, as well as many who claim to be Christian and yet deliberately follow nothing in Christian doctrine. All I can say is some follow scriptures more closely than others. But I am a big fan of nondenomination as Jesus did not acknowledge denomination among disciples.
For the record I am interested in your thoughts, not so much the various churches. I am trying to establish your stance with regards to following scripture and how you became Baptist or non denominational.
Would a non denominational church focus on teaching what is common amongst the various denominations and avoid the differences?
According to Jesus and early church teaching, meaningless and speculative quarreling was highly condemnable, and over the many centuries, has lead us to the many various forms of Christianity that has become a far cry from it's roots.
I believe Jesus was very intentional in what he chose to teach, and most other speculations are of no other point then to cause division. And overindulging in theological theorizing just takes away too much time away from much more fundamental ideals of Christianity, such as the Great Commission.
So to answer your question more bluntly... Absolutely! I don't believe many debates among Christians pertain the precepts Jesus would find relevant to mankind.
QuoteI would guess that the various non denominationals are not aligned with each other, hence your church is unique, with a unique interpretation.
Would you say that you go along with your church or that you follow your own interpretation of the book?
Yes, I really enjoy how my church interprets the bible, and gives options. For example, he didn't condemn a literal nor symbolic interpretation of the story of Jonah, but puts aside such speculation and ties the story in how Jesus used it and why he taught it in his sermons. This is the exact attitude I believe a Christian should have when interpreting stories of the Old Testament.
So to more specifically answer your question, yes, I highly agree with not only with a good portion of my church's beliefs, but overall attitude and sense of spiritual awareness that is actually relevant to a Christian in today's world. And yes, I may hold my own personal opinion on certain matters as the church holds their own, but I believe we both are heading in the same direction as far as our "spiritual mission" goes.
Quote from: Will on August 06, 2011, 05:46:33 AM
Welcome to the forum, Cforcerunner. Thanks for volunteering for what could be difficult questions.
Why thank you sir, it is my pleasure!
And please, call me Chris! :)
QuoteDo you understand and accept Darwinian evolution, the processes of natural selection and random mutation, and do you accept that this is the explanation of how life on earth arrived at its current state following abiogenesis?
I am familiar with many of the tenants of Darwinian evolution, but am certainly no expert on the matter. As far as my stance goes, I would consider myself agnostic on the matter, or simply "it may of happened, it may not of". I believe Alvin Plantiga made some sort of argument in favor of Christian evolution, I will try to take the time to read his essay and perhaps other views on the matter when I have time.
QuoteI ask this because, while some Christians to not, many Christians wholeheartedly accept the scientific theory of evolution. I find this fascinating because of the implication. If you believe that humans can be traced back through thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands of species going all the way back to single-celled organisms living billions of years ago, where does that leave the story of Adam and Eve? In the book of Genesis, Adam and Eve live in the Garden of Eden and introduce sin into the world by eating from the Tree of Knowledge. If humans evolved from lower primates, which evolved from a type of marsupial, which evolved inevitably from single-celled organisms, the Garden of Eden incident never occurred and humans thus are not responsible for bringing sin into the world. This undermines a fundamental part of the Christian belief system, that humans are somehow born wrong and can only be fixed through the sacrifice of their demigod. If humans did not sin and break their covenant with the god of the Bible, the sacrifice of that god's son/self is rendered meaningless.
I'll address my stance on the origin of life. Did life spontaneously appear out of outrageously absurd chance, or did God supernaturally poof life into existence? Or just maybe, did God use outrageously absurd chance to create life? I simply don't know. But believe we were created by God in one fashion or the other, and don't see a need for speculating how.
And now to address your concern about the Fall of Man. According to Judeo-Christian belief, the story of Genesis is NOT an eye witness historical account of how life and man came into existence, but was entirely based on a prophetic vision Moses had. I believe it's important to understand what the nature of the story is, and that it offers us a descriptive metaphysical narrative of how human nature is introduced to immorality and disobedience to God's sovereign will.
Quote from: Cforcerunner on August 05, 2011, 11:53:46 PM
Quote from: Tank on August 05, 2011, 11:08:40 PM
Why aren't you a Muslim?
The same reason I am not mormon. I believe joseph smith/muhammad claim to be subsequent prophets following Jesus' revelation, as they highly condoned the person of Jesus. I found Islam to be confusing in this sense. They revere muhammad as the last and greatest prophet, yet Jesus is still found during the end of days? They created mandatory rituals when Jesus said days of the law were already fulfilled?
If someone here could represent an islamic belief system to me in a persuasive manner, I am all ears. My research of Muhummad simply did not compel me as the revelation of the divine as Jesus did.
An interesting reply, thank you.
Hypothetically if you were not allowed to discuss your religion here would you remain an active member?
Which version of the bible do you find to be the real version?
Quote from: Gawen on August 06, 2011, 02:49:26 AM
It is obvious that you believe in an afterlife where you will sing praises unto the Almighty for ever and ever, amen.
My question is...what did you do before you were born?
Well?
Do you believe animals have an afterlife or is that just reserved for humans?
Do believe the rapture is just around the corner? Like in 50 years
I know you are not the judge but athiests who commit no crimes love their brothers and basically are good people will be bannished to hell if they do not accept what you believe.
Sorry for three but this is something I hate to bring up at work...they say all this stuff and I have to bite my tongue...lately I am feeling smoothered...thanks so much for taking the time for clear answers....But do you know how it is as hard for us to accept this as it is for you to believ anyone does not?
Ok. That was four sorry!
Quote from: Cforcerunner on August 06, 2011, 07:57:45 AM
Quote from: Will on August 06, 2011, 05:46:33 AM
Welcome to the forum, Cforcerunner. Thanks for volunteering for what could be difficult questions.
Why thank you sir, it is my pleasure!
And please, call me Chris! :)
QuoteDo you understand and accept Darwinian evolution, the processes of natural selection and random mutation, and do you accept that this is the explanation of how life on earth arrived at its current state following abiogenesis?
I am familiar with many of the tenants of Darwinian evolution, but am certainly no expert on the matter. As far as my stance goes, I would consider myself agnostic on the matter, or simply "it may of happened, it may not of". I believe Alvin Plantiga made some sort of argument in favor of Christian evolution, I will try to take the time to read his essay and perhaps other views on the matter when I have time.
QuoteI ask this because, while some Christians to not, many Christians wholeheartedly accept the scientific theory of evolution. I find this fascinating because of the implication. If you believe that humans can be traced back through thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands of species going all the way back to single-celled organisms living billions of years ago, where does that leave the story of Adam and Eve? In the book of Genesis, Adam and Eve live in the Garden of Eden and introduce sin into the world by eating from the Tree of Knowledge. If humans evolved from lower primates, which evolved from a type of marsupial, which evolved inevitably from single-celled organisms, the Garden of Eden incident never occurred and humans thus are not responsible for bringing sin into the world. This undermines a fundamental part of the Christian belief system, that humans are somehow born wrong and can only be fixed through the sacrifice of their demigod. If humans did not sin and break their covenant with the god of the Bible, the sacrifice of that god's son/self is rendered meaningless.
I'll address my stance on the origin of life. Did life spontaneously appear out of outrageously absurd chance, or did God supernaturally poof life into existence? Or just maybe, did God use outrageously absurd chance to create life? I simply don't know. But believe we were created by God in one fashion or the other, and don't see a need for speculating how.
And now to address your concern about the Fall of Man. According to Judeo-Christian belief, the story of Genesis is NOT an eye witness historical account of how life and man came into existence, but was entirely based on a prophetic vision Moses had. I believe it's important to understand what the nature of the story is, and that it offers us a descriptive metaphysical narrative of how human nature is introduced to immorality and disobedience to God's sovereign will.
Is it rasonable to assume an 'I' got missed out in the highlighted sentence, as in '
But I believe...'?
Quote from: Tank on August 06, 2011, 08:18:41 AM
Quote from: Cforcerunner on August 05, 2011, 11:53:46 PM
Quote from: Tank on August 05, 2011, 11:08:40 PM
Why aren't you a Muslim?
The same reason I am not mormon. I believe joseph smith/muhammad claim to be subsequent prophets following Jesus' revelation, as they highly condoned the person of Jesus. I found Islam to be confusing in this sense. They revere muhammad as the last and greatest prophet, yet Jesus is still found during the end of days? They created mandatory rituals when Jesus said days of the law were already fulfilled?
If someone here could represent an islamic belief system to me in a persuasive manner, I am all ears. My research of Muhummad simply did not compel me as the revelation of the divine as Jesus did.
An interesting reply, thank you.
Hypothetically if you were not allowed to discuss your religion here would you remain an active member?
I don't believe there would be much of a point to be member on any forum of discussion where your opinion wouldn't matter, so probably not.
QuoteIs it rasonable to assume an 'I' got missed out in the highlighted sentence, as in 'But I believe...'?
Indeed, there really should of been a comma after "I simply don't know, but believe....", which would of worked as well.
Quote from: Cforcerunner on August 06, 2011, 02:56:52 PM
Quote from: Tank on August 06, 2011, 08:18:41 AM
Quote from: Cforcerunner on August 05, 2011, 11:53:46 PM
Quote from: Tank on August 05, 2011, 11:08:40 PM
Why aren't you a Muslim?
The same reason I am not mormon. I believe joseph smith/muhammad claim to be subsequent prophets following Jesus' revelation, as they highly condoned the person of Jesus. I found Islam to be confusing in this sense. They revere muhammad as the last and greatest prophet, yet Jesus is still found during the end of days? They created mandatory rituals when Jesus said days of the law were already fulfilled?
If someone here could represent an islamic belief system to me in a persuasive manner, I am all ears. My research of Muhummad simply did not compel me as the revelation of the divine as Jesus did.
An interesting reply, thank you.
Hypothetically if you were not allowed to discuss your religion here would you remain an active member?
I don't believe there would be much of a point to be member on any forum of discussion where your opinion wouldn't matter, so probably not.
Not sure I phrased myself very well there, but I think your response covers the point.
Quote from: Medusa on August 06, 2011, 10:45:02 AM
Which version of the bible do you find to be the real version?
By version, do you mean translation? Can you clarify the question. By "real" do you mean authoritative?
Quote from: Gawen on August 06, 2011, 02:07:01 PM
Quote from: Gawen on August 06, 2011, 02:49:26 AM
It is obvious that you believe in an afterlife where you will sing praises unto the Almighty for ever and ever, amen.
My question is...what did you do before you were born?
Well?
I suppose I was an embryo wiggling around and about! :)
But no, I don't know how an afterlife precludes to the existence of some sort of pre-life. I believe the after life in it's strictest sense, infers a continued state of sapience apart from the material body.
Quote from: Hidelight on August 06, 2011, 02:11:33 PM
Do you believe animals have an afterlife or is that just reserved for humans?
No, I don't believe so. It would be neat, but I don't see how the Christian worldview would support that position.
QuoteDo believe the rapture is just around the corner? Like in 50 years
If the Son was not told the day, I surely have no idea. That being said, Jesus did endorse the idea of being of "sober mind" in preparation for that coming day.
QuoteI know you are not the judge but athiests who commit no crimes love their brothers and basically are good people will be bannished to hell if they do not accept what you believe.
Yes, I thankfully don't bear that responsibility. And from what I can gather from scripture, we will be judged according to the knowledge we are granted and how we have chosen to respond to it. It is also in Christian theme to be deeply humbled in moral pride and become completely reliant on the grace of God.
QuoteSorry for three but this is something I hate to bring up at work...they say all this stuff and I have to bite my tongue...lately I am feeling smoothered...thanks so much for taking the time for clear answers....But do you know how it is as hard for us to accept this as it is for you to believe anyone does not?
Ok. That was four sorry!
I am not too sure what exactly your asking here, lol. But from what I gather, I will tell you that I completely understand the view of religious being overly saturated in hocus pocus and the supernatural being based off of some sort of fairy tale. But such presumptions really distracts from the deeper metaphysical implications which surround many of the stories found in the religious scripture.
First of all I'd like to say that it's cool that you're willing to be questioned about your beliefs here. That's rare ;D
My question would be: to you, what does it mean to say that the bible is divinely inspired? That god talked directly to the people that wrote it? Or that those people were philosophizing about existence and the meaning of existence and came up with those answers? Or something else?
Quote from: Cforcerunner on August 06, 2011, 09:27:10 PM
Quote from: Medusa on August 06, 2011, 10:45:02 AM
Which version of the bible do you find to be the real version?
By version, do you mean translation? Can you clarify the question. By "real" do you mean authoritative?
Sorry.
Catholic bible.
Protestant bible
KJV
etc etc. Seems there are way too many versions depending upon how you want to spin God in your own image.
It makes me a little iffy when trying to justify the validity of THE word of God when first you have to ask 'well...which word exactly?'
*I'm a former Catholic. I'm almost certain our bible was different than yours. Know what I mean? We have extra OT books.
Quote from: Cforcerunner on August 05, 2011, 11:53:46 PM
Quote from: Tank on August 05, 2011, 11:08:40 PM
Why aren't you a Muslim?
The same reason I am not mormon. I believe joseph smith/muhammad claim to be subsequent prophets following Jesus' revelation, as they highly condoned the person of Jesus. I found Islam to be confusing in this sense. They revere muhammad as the last and greatest prophet, yet Jesus is still found during the end of days? They created mandatory rituals when Jesus said days of the law were already fulfilled?
If someone here could represent an islamic belief system to me in a persuasive manner, I am all ears. My research of Muhummad simply did not compel me as the revelation of the divine as Jesus did.
Hello Cforcerunner,
Just to explain the Islamic belief system as you've asked.
According to the Qur'an the goal of humanity is the path to God and each nation has it's own set of rules (religion) to walk that path.
Muslims believe that religion is progressive and Islam is the seal of all the religions that have gone by in the past.
We don't believe in God as an old man with a grey beard, but God is a Reality, the only Reality and we are just shadows compared to God.
And this can be explained in depth, but I will further refrain from that.
About Christ coming back in the last days.
The reason for this is because it will be the nation of Christ (secular Europe) that will give birth to the anti-Christ, which we call Masih-Dajjal (The false Messiah).
Islamic scholars still do not agree whether the Hadith literature talk of a methapor or a living being or both.
The anti-Christ is described as a technological advanced (he can control the weather and do great things) one eyed being with kafir (non-believer) written on his frontal lobe and the illiterate can also read that he is a non-believer. The one eye points out to the obsession with rationality, while it's one of the domains of the human intellect it will be
seen as THE intellect and forgetting a faculty like the imagination (the other eye).
People would forget God. The anti-Christ would then spread over the world with his teachings and put misery in the hearts of man till Christ returns.
(If you are comfortable being a Christian, then stay a Christian)
I hope it's a bit more clear now.
If (and/or when) life is found to exist elsewhere in the universe, and possibly life forms with clearly different origins than terrestrial life are discovered... How will that affect your belief in what your bible has to say?
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on August 07, 2011, 12:52:24 AM
First of all I'd like to say that it's cool that you're willing to be questioned about your beliefs here. That's rare ;D
My question would be: to you, what does it mean to say that the bible is divinely inspired? That god talked directly to the people that wrote it? Or that those people were philosophizing about existence and the meaning of existence and came up with those answers? Or something else?
"Divine Inspiration" indicates that the scriptures are "God-breathed and useful for teaching".
I believe God chose to express His presence to the authors and they wrote they recorded their unique experience. The genre of books found in the bible vary greatly, some poetic, some historical, and some philosophical. But incorporate the same Judeo-Christian ideals.
Quote from: Medusa on August 07, 2011, 10:03:48 AM
Quote from: Cforcerunner on August 06, 2011, 09:27:10 PM
Quote from: Medusa on August 06, 2011, 10:45:02 AM
Which version of the bible do you find to be the real version?
By version, do you mean translation? Can you clarify the question. By "real" do you mean authoritative?
Sorry.
Catholic bible.
Protestant bible
KJV
etc etc. Seems there are way too many versions depending upon how you want to spin God in your own image.
It makes me a little iffy when trying to justify the validity of THE word of God when first you have to ask 'well...which word exactly?'
*I'm a former Catholic. I'm almost certain our bible was different than yours. Know what I mean? We have extra OT books.
Yes, there are many translations, but that shouldn't cause too much confusion as to which is the "real" version. My preference is the New American Standard Bible, which is generally considered the best word-for-word translation, however I am saving up to attend seminary within the next few year, so I am hoping to read the original greek text for myself :P
As far as you being catholic....I'm sorry :D
Unfortunately, the catholic church as had a LONG historical tradition, many tenants which has certainly gone astray from the beliefs of the early church. That being said, I don't have a problem with books like Maccabees being considered canon, as they have strong historic roots. I suppose I'll have to do some homework and see why Martin Luther had such a fuss over the book.
Quote from: iSok on August 08, 2011, 04:32:08 AM
Hello Cforcerunner,
Hello sir! ;D
QuoteJust to explain the Islamic belief system as you've asked.
According to the Qur'an the goal of humanity is the path to God and each nation has it's own set of rules (religion) to walk that path.
This sounds like it has the same problem as culture relativism. So it's a path for me to believe in Christianity being part of America, It's a path for a muslim growing up in saudi arabia to be a muslim. So was it a path for a young boy growing up in Nazi Germany to join the führer?
QuoteMuslims believe that religion is progressive and Islam is the seal of all the religions that have gone by in the past.
We don't believe in God as an old man with a grey beard, but God is a Reality, the only Reality and we are just shadows compared to God.
And this can be explained in depth, but I will further refrain from that.
First, I don't believe Christians generally believe God to be an old man with a grey beard, mainly because the bible describes him as clean shaven. ;)
(But seriously, God the Father is not seen as some sort actual of father, but is described to be as one in metaphoric sense as being the creator the external world. I believe this is the consensus among most judeo, christian, and muslim worldview)
The way you describe God is Reality seems quite abstract and sounds similar to a form of pantheism, so a little more clarity would be great.
QuoteAbout Christ coming back in the last days.
The reason for this is because it will be the nation of Christ (secular Europe) that will give birth to the anti-Christ, which we call Masih-Dajjal (The false Messiah).
Islamic scholars still do not agree whether the Hadith literature talk of a methapor or a living being or both.
The anti-Christ is described as a technological advanced (he can control the weather and do great things) one eyed being with kafir (non-believer) written on his frontal lobe and the illiterate can also read that he is a non-believer. The one eye points out to the obsession with rationality, while it's one of the domains of the human intellect it will be
seen as THE intellect and forgetting a faculty like the imagination (the other eye).
People would forget God. The anti-Christ would then spread over the world with his teachings and put misery in the hearts of man till Christ returns.
Interesting, I'd like to some excerpts regarding the last days according to the qur'an if you get a chance! Anyways, I think the core belief is similar to that of Christianity, that Jesus saves humanity from the antichrist. Why then, do muslims not regard Jesus as divine as he says he was or at least consider him among the greatest of prophets?
Quote from: Ihateyoumike on August 09, 2011, 07:28:30 AM
If (and/or when) life is found to exist elsewhere in the universe, and possibly life forms with clearly different origins than terrestrial life are discovered... How will that affect your belief in what your bible has to say?
I don't think it would have much to do with what I believe in.
If aliens in the most scientifically fictional sense actually existed somewhere, I don't think their existence would have much to do with the moral imperatives or purpose of mankind.
But I suppose it would be pretty cool!
Quote from: Cforcerunner on August 10, 2011, 11:52:35 PM
This sounds like it has the same problem as culture relativism. So it's a path for me to believe in Christianity being part of America, It's a path for a muslim growing up in saudi arabia to be a muslim. So was it a path for a young boy growing up in Nazi Germany to join the führer?
I think it's save to say that Hitler wasn't really a prophet of God.
According to the Qur'an each nation had their messengers, and each nation was told in their own way to believe in The One God.
(35:24) We have sent you with the Truth to proclaim good news and to warn. Never has there been a nation but a warner came to it. (29:18) And if you give the lie (to the Messenger), then many nations before you also gave the lie (to their Messengers). The Messenger is charged with no other duty than to deliver the Message in clear terms."
So you have a whole range of different revelations, from Taoism (The Tao is seen as the Cosmic Unity, everything comes from the Tao, everything returns to the Tao) to Hinduism who believe in one God but worship multiple attributes of God in different forms.
Quote
The way you describe God is Reality seems quite abstract and sounds similar to a form of pantheism, so a little more clarity would be great.
You should read
post 104 and then post
113 (Of this thread http://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/index.php?topic=7699.90)to for a short introduction into Islam and how Islam sees religions like Christianity. If you are done reading, I'll add a third part.
QuoteInteresting, I'd like to some excerpts regarding the last days according to the qur'an if you get a chance! Anyways, I think the core belief is similar to that of Christianity, that Jesus saves humanity from the antichrist. Why then, do muslims not regard Jesus as divine as he says he was or at least consider him among the greatest of prophets?
The Qur'an talks of signs but there is a very important Hadith. The Hadith is like the Christian Bible, written down by the companions of the Prophet.
The most reliable sources are Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim. This Hadith sums up Islam very well by the angel Gabriel also known as the Hadith of Gabriel.
'Umar ibn al-Khattab (the second Rightly Guided Caliph) reported: One day when we were with God's messenger, a man with very white clothing and very black hair came to us. No mark of travel was visible on him, and none of us recognized him. Sitting down before the Prophet, leaning his knees against his, and placing his hands on his thighs, the stranger said, "Tell me, Muhammad, about submission [islam ]."
The Prophet replied, "Submission means that you should bear witness that there is no god but God and that Muhammad is God's messenger, that you should perform the ritual prayer, pay the alms tax, fast during Ramadan, and make the pilgrimage to the Ka'aba if you are able to go there."
The man said, "You have spoken the truth." (We were amazed at this man's questioning the Prophet and then declaring that he had spoken the truth).
The stranger spoke a second time, saying, "Now tell me about faith [iman ]."
The Prophet replied, "Faith means that you have faith in God, His angels, His books, His messengers and the Last Day, and that you have faith in the measuring out, both its good and its evil."
Remarking that the Prophet again had spoken the truth, the stranger then said, "Now tell me about virtue [ihsan ] (that is, about doing what is beautiful)."
The Prophet replied, "Virtue—doing what is beautiful—means that you should worship God as if you see Him, for even if you do not see Him, He sees you."
Yet again the man said, "Tell me about the Hour (that is, the coming of the Day of Judgment)."
The Prophet replied, "About that he who is questioned knows no more than the questioner."
The stranger said, "Then tell me about its marks."
The Prophet replied, "The slave girl will give birth to her mistress, and you will see the barefoot, the naked, the destitute, and the shepherds vying with each other in building."
At that, the stranger went away.
After I had waited for a long time, the Prophet spoke to me: "Do you know who the questioner was, 'Umar?" I replied, "God and His messenger know best." The Prophet said, "He was Gabriel. He came to teach you your religion."So the two most important signs are according to this Hadith.
- People will compete in constructing high buildings and not neccesary physical buildings but it's also a methapor
for man-made ideologies which are eventually doomed to fall down. It also points out to the current trend
in countries like Dubai, people forgetting the poor and needy and only boosting their ego.
- The slave girl giving birth is a methapor for the disturbed relation between parents and their children, children will no longer
have respect for their parents and will see their parents as a burden. Within Islamic tradition this is
a terrible situation, as the Qur'an demands respect for one's parent.
Qur'an:
(46:15) We have enjoined man to be kind to his parents. In pain did his mother bear him and in pain did she give birth to him.According to a Hadith.
A man came to the Prophet and said, 'O Messenger of God! Who among the people is the most worthy of my good companionship? The Prophet said: Your mother. The man said, 'Then who?' The Prophet said: Then your mother. The man further asked, 'Then who?' The Prophet said: Then your mother. The man asked again, 'Then who?' The Prophet said: Then your father. (Bukhari, Muslim). There some other signs, I copied those that are happening now.
Books/writing will be widespread and (religious) knowledge will be low.
Adultery and fornication will be performed in the open.
Rain will be acidic or burning. (Ecological disaster)
Children of fornication will become widespread or prevalent.
Great distances will be traversed in short spans of time.
The people of Iraq will receive no food and no money due to oppression by the Romans.
People will hop between the clouds and the earth.
Smog will appear over cities because of the evil that they are doing. (Ecological diaster, betraying God's vicegerency)
A man will leave his home and his thigh or hip will tell him what is happening back at his home. (Technological advancement)
and so on...
About Jesus; he's seen as one of the greatest of all prophets sent by God, but not divine within Islam.
Islam is very critical of the trinity since it disturbs God's unity, it shares it's view with the unitarian church.
If you have any other questions, feel free to ask.
Do you believe in the trinity?
@isok
Thanks for the reply, it sounds like a great discussion and I'm sure I have more questions to ask and will look into those threads you've referred to when I have a good hour to sit down and read through. But I think it would be better to take this discussion on another thread or through private messaging
Quote from: Medusa on August 11, 2011, 07:20:34 AM
Do you believe in the trinity?
Yes, I believe in the Father and ultimate creator, Jesus who is the messiah or God in the form of flesh, and the Holy Spirit which is the divine bridge that connects humans to God.
Quote from: Cforcerunner on August 11, 2011, 07:42:03 PM
@isok
Thanks for the reply, it sounds like a great discussion and I'm sure I have more questions to ask and will look into those threads you've referred to when I have a good hour to sit down and read through. But I think it would be better to take this discussion on another thread or through private messaging
I think that using the forum PM messaging system to carry out a private discussion that would be perfectly acceptable on the forum, and highly interesting to watch, would be inappropriate. If you wish to have a private discussion exchange email addresses and do it that way please. Personally I would be delighted to watch a Christian and a Muslim having a discussion here.
Quote from: Tank on August 11, 2011, 08:01:06 PM
I think that using the forum PM messaging system to carry out a private discussion that would be perfectly acceptable on the forum, and highly interesting to watch, would be inappropriate. If you wish to have a private discussion exchange email addresses and do it that way please. Personally I would be delighted to watch a Christian and a Muslim having a discussion here.
That would be interesting indeed Tank. But the problem here is that I know very little of Christianity and Cforcerunner doesn't know much about Islam.
It would end up in exchanging information.
Quote from: Tank on August 11, 2011, 08:01:06 PM
Quote from: Cforcerunner on August 11, 2011, 07:42:03 PM
@isok
Thanks for the reply, it sounds like a great discussion and I'm sure I have more questions to ask and will look into those threads you've referred to when I have a good hour to sit down and read through. But I think it would be better to take this discussion on another thread or through private messaging
I think that using the forum PM messaging system to carry out a private discussion that would be perfectly acceptable on the forum, and highly interesting to watch, would be inappropriate. If you wish to have a private discussion exchange email addresses and do it that way please. Personally I would be delighted to watch a Christian and a Muslim having a discussion here.
Agreed tank, but I really intended this particular "Ask a Christian" thread to have fairly clean cut FAQ structure with intentional avoidance on tangents. I know Whitney did a great job splitting one of my other threads. So if the same thing could be done here, I'd be more than happy to continue the discussion on another public thread.
Were you always a Christian or did you convert to Christianity? if the first, then you consider the teaching of religion to children as indoctrination? If the last, what caused you to convert?
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on August 12, 2011, 06:07:13 AM
Were you always a Christian or did you convert to Christianity? if the first, then you consider the teaching of religion to children as indoctrination? If the last, what caused you to convert?
I don't think I was always Christian, my parents were always on and off again service attenders. But I would consider myself agnostic, but always intrigued by religion.
My, "turning point" occurred during a random youth retreat, a speaker spoke and described the Gospel and the passion of Jesus in way that I never thought about. So I continued hearing more of his sermons and Christianity began making a lot more sense to me. I also had more of a "spiritual experience" during a mission trip in Mexico.
To answer more directly to your question as to the "cause" of my conversion: I am a big believer that argumentation is a poor mean to convert to any religion (the same could be said about highly driven emotions). But the first step for me was to assert that I had some sort of reason to be bothered into existence, and that the way I choose to live out my life in one manner or another will ultimately matter, so the concept of divinity and spirituality was certainly worth investigating.
But why Christianity? why must I be Christian? My only answer is Jesus. I certainly am all for the bible, but I LOVE the gospels. His intuition, his leadership, his sense of morality and understanding of God. I believe he is who claims to be and he did what he said he would. Rationality (as nice as it is, and I would by no means call my faith irrational) isn't the cornerstone of my conversion, but more the impulsion to follow in his wake.
Quote from: iSok on August 11, 2011, 10:26:48 PM
Quote from: Tank on August 11, 2011, 08:01:06 PM
I think that using the forum PM messaging system to carry out a private discussion that would be perfectly acceptable on the forum, and highly interesting to watch, would be inappropriate. If you wish to have a private discussion exchange email addresses and do it that way please. Personally I would be delighted to watch a Christian and a Muslim having a discussion here.
That would be interesting indeed Tank. But the problem here is that I know very little of Christianity and Cforcerunner doesn't know much about Islam.
It would end up in exchanging information.
And what could possibly be wrong with that?!
Quote from: Cforcerunner on August 12, 2011, 05:59:01 AM
Quote from: Tank on August 11, 2011, 08:01:06 PM
Quote from: Cforcerunner on August 11, 2011, 07:42:03 PM
@isok
Thanks for the reply, it sounds like a great discussion and I'm sure I have more questions to ask and will look into those threads you've referred to when I have a good hour to sit down and read through. But I think it would be better to take this discussion on another thread or through private messaging
I think that using the forum PM messaging system to carry out a private discussion that would be perfectly acceptable on the forum, and highly interesting to watch, would be inappropriate. If you wish to have a private discussion exchange email addresses and do it that way please. Personally I would be delighted to watch a Christian and a Muslim having a discussion here.
Agreed tank, but I really intended this particular "Ask a Christian" thread to have fairly clean cut FAQ structure with intentional avoidance on tangents. I know Whitney did a great job splitting one of my other threads. So if the same thing could be done here, I'd be more than happy to continue the discussion on another public thread.
Totally agree, start another thread!
Ok, I've held off from approaching this, and I want to try to be fair about my questions to those Christians who I am impressed with, despite myself, for putting their necks out here in a place that rejects God.
I've read some of the back and forth stuff on this thread, but both sides of the argument really lose me when they get into finely tuning the details of their evidence. Pretend I'm a little bit dumb, or highly distractible. Brevity and clarity is good.
What I am struggling with is the version of God as he is depicted in the Bible in general, and how he comes across through Christian interpretation, explanation, ect. When I throw away those preconceived notions, I can let go of my expectations of God, and consequently my loathing of him.
The promise of a personal relationship concerns and troubles me. I've been in a human-to-human relationships, and have been called out on some things that are personally difficult for me (because of my personality type and/or certain problems). A couple of things are trust and consistency, off the top of my head, as I'm typing this out.
Trust: We give out a certain amount of trust, in the hope that it will be affirmed as wisely-placed trust. I had trust withdrawn from me because I didn't measure up to that trust, and in some ways I didn't fully understand that trust that was invested in me. An active, personally committed God should have an understanding of each individual human's ability to trust (since he knows everything about us, as established Christian perspective). My trust has been withdrawn, because he hasn't measured up to my trust. Let me just state before I go further, I've heard in the past the concept that "Sometime God answers by not answering."
This is also part of why trust has been withdrawn, I'm not good with relationships because I sometimes don't answer, and it's been made clear to me that it's not ok! This leads into another question: if it's not ok for me, why is it ok for God? Creating the universe and making it "good" is not an acceptable answer; any reasonable human with a conscience would feel responsible for something they created and probably feel guilt for when there are problems with that creation that causes harm to others. If we feel guilt, and God doesn't because he is confident in his own perfect, what does that say about his ability to reflect on his behavior, and the work that he does (or fails to do)? And what does that say about his ability to really appreciate a situation, if we experience guilt but he doesn't (keeping in mind that he is capable of everything, according to the paradigm I'm using to understand him).
I was going to go into consistency, but I'm running out of steam at this point, I will keep it simple and just say that he comes across as nothing less than supremely inconsistent. Genocide is okay for him to order, sanction, and implement; but we're monsters if we engage in such behavior. I'm not allowed to be shy in this world he's allowed to develop, which demands that you must be outgoing to be successful; but he never talks to us, or shows up to have his picture taken, and that's ok because he's God!
Why is he better than us, when we can accept and love people who are guilty of "sin" (and some of the sins such as homosexuality do not seem harmful to others, and he does not clarify for us).
Why isn't he clear? He can do anything, and he sacrificed his son/himself to himself, for the sake of our souls. That's supposed to be important, so why didn't he choose a better time to do all that stuff? The whole planet is wired for surveillance right now, why be subtle when clarity is so important (remember, it's our immortal souls!).
Why did he create Hell, and the the god damned Devil? Let me make this clear: I would not create hell and the Devil. All the stuff before this is confusing enough, before you add Hell and the Devil. I hate to say it, but I believe there are plenty of other humans, including myself, who can think of a better form of justice than him; that is more fair, merciful, reasonable, and able to be understood and clear and consistent. Given that, wouldn't he be doing himself a huge favor by streamlining and reorganizing a lot of stuff?!
I'm really angry, in case you can't tell. I've been trying to swallow my anger, and communicate with him, asking him for reciprocation in communication. Well, now I want a damned burning piece of shrubbery talking to me while I'm sober, and say to me, "Ok, I get why you're confused, let me show you some pieces of the puzzle to help you sort through it, let me know if that helps make things more clear," because that is what a kindly, friendly human being would do for someone they cared about!! >:(
Post script: Eh, sorry about the length of my post, BTW, I know I asked for brevity and simplicity, then I went ahead and did this. There are a lot of things I'm steamed about, though.
Was there a question in there?
Quote from: Medusa on August 18, 2011, 02:13:21 AM
Was there a question in there?
Ah! Excellent, I thought I had lost my way. I appreciate the prompt. :)
I guess one of my questions is, if God is supposed to only test us within the limits of what we are able to handle, then why did he test me to the point that I hate him? Shouldn't he have realized that I've been tapping out? Who would like a jerk that keeps someone in a painful headlock after you've been tapping out for ages! Not very sporting.
Why is there a double standard between him and us? I'll go with an example of lying. He tells us do not lie. We hold ourselves to a standard that goes as far as saying withholding the truth is also lying. Yet it sure seems like he is withholding stuff from us. And what about all the other stuff I mentioned, when asking why is it ok for him, but not for us. What's up with the double standard? I mean, are we actually beating him at his own stupid game, doing a better job than he is? The Bible seems to present a lot of evidence.
Another question is, why can't he clarify himself? As I alluded to earlier at one point, why couldn't he have picked a better time to more blatantly have himself documented. Wouldn't that have helped with a lot of questions that should be obvious, but are not? And wouldn't that be worth the effort, to save more people on behalf of his son's/himself's sacrifice to himself? Shouldn't he be doing everything in his power to maximize the effectiveness of that sacrifice, to make sure that every last possible person can be save (he is supposed to be capable of everything)?
My final question for now is: why won't he answer my questions? I mean, at this point I think he consistently acts like a jerk and I hate him, but I would be comforted by him answering. If he continues to fail to answer (and I feel reasonably open minded if he chooses to answer very effectively through the medium of a follower, which has not happened so far) then it will reinforce my distaste for the way he acts.
I have to step in here for a second. I think it's unfair to ask any other person (Christian or not) to explain why you have an issue with what you believe to be God. I think not only will you not find answers. I think you are asking the wrong questions. I could hypothesize to some of your answers. Because boy oh boy have I been there. But I am not a Christian so I can't answer it here. Though privately I may be able to. The point? These aren't questions for a Christian. They are questions for you. And even more so, probably not the real questions that would help to be answered. I can only give you two pieces of info I have learned the very hard way.
1) Christians do not own God
2) Trying to understand what you believe to be an infinite being with our finite reasoning will get you no where.
You can pm me if you'd like to and we can discuss it free of prying eyes. :)
I appreciate your response Medusa, I feel like I've moved closer to turning a corner toward something better than where I am at right now. I totally agree with you that it's not really fair questioning, especially for very well meaning people who have put themselves in a vulnerable place on here (a very cordial and courteous environment. My question really is not necessarily directed at them, the only reason I posted in here is because I thought I would place my feelings and deep concerns out in the open, for the consideration of multiple perspectives; and I am interested and curious about their thoughts and reactions. I can get carried away, I admit, mainly I'm just interested in different, personal introspections; and I don't want anyone to feel like they have to perform for or be accountable on the behalf of something or someone else that is not themselves.
Quote from: Tristan Jay on August 18, 2011, 06:23:21 AM
I appreciate your response Medusa, I feel like I've moved closer to turning a corner toward something better than where I am at right now. I totally agree with you that it's not really fair questioning, especially for very well meaning people who have put themselves in a vulnerable place on here (a very cordial and courteous environment. My question really is not necessarily directed at them, the only reason I posted in here is because I thought I would place my feelings and deep concerns out in the open, for the consideration of multiple perspectives; and I am interested and curious about their thoughts and reactions. I can get carried away, I admit, mainly I'm just interested in different, personal introspections; and I don't want anyone to feel like they have to perform for or be accountable on the behalf of something or someone else that is not themselves.
Yeah. I totally get it. But no one can tell you why God does what it does. My opinion is that if you are a believer and in that world...well it's a place that will never be able to question or truly understand the motives of an infinite being. And it may not necessarily be anything that can be placed in their part of the blame. At some point we must realize our own finite limits of understanding. We can't blame God for our lack of 'getting it'.
Of course as a non believer I don't really live in that world. But when I did briefly this was my understanding of why I always didn't understand everything about God. And once again it wasn't a Christian God I was looking towards. That's a very big problem for most poeple, especially Westerners. We just all assume God is an American I guess...and Christian. :D
Hello Tristan Jay
I think that Christians derive all their knowledge from a few simple assertions
1. god exists
2. god created everything
3. god is all powerful
4. god is good
5. god is perfect
6. you are special, made in god's image.
7. god loves you
8. god wants you to love him
9. god is your personal friend and guide
10. you must believe or else you will be punished for all eternity
So if you run any event in your life, or story from the bible through these assertions you can then interprete correctly.
e.g. God set a couple of She bears to maul 42 children for teasing a man about his bald head.
Q: How can this god be good, when Super Nanny would have suggested a warning and then if offense is repeated would have put the child into naughty corner (1 minute for each year of its life), She would have explained why they were put in naughty corner, got them to say sorry, give them a big bear hug and then forgive them and show much love.
A: Those children were evil and deserved death, god could see this and dished out a just punishment, or after killing them god took them to heaven, apologised for killing them, explaining that it would make an interesting talking point about his book, the Bible. They would be immortalised when millions of people got to read about their plight and they would become famous in heaven and hence it would make it easy for them to get laid.
Quote from: Stevil on August 18, 2011, 08:18:36 AM
e.g. God set a couple of She bears to maul 42 children for teasing a man about his bald head.
Like most of the Bible, I'd read that story allegorically. There are two she-bears in the night sky (Ursa Major and Ursa Minor). They were two of the most important constellations in ancient cosmology / religion as they're very distinctive and bright constellations and they're also circumpolar. It's pure speculation on my part, but they might be the basis for that part of the myth. Given that the story is about Elijah's ascent to heaven, it might just be that the two she-bears were supposed to represent the two celestial she-bears. If I had to speculate further, maybe the 42 children might have been the 42 Greek constellations as listed by Aratos in 270 BCE? Pure speculation mind!
Tristan Jay, why don't you start a thread on the topic of misotheism? Maybe a mod can merge these last few posts? I think it's an interesting topic, and at least since I've been posting here, there hasn't been such an outspoken misotheist such as yourself.
Well...for me the answer is simple. God doesn't exist, or at least if he does, then it's not of the type that interferes with the workings of the world and the living things capable of asking the question (is/are there a god or gods?) in it. To me it looks like you're trying to look for meaning in an indifferent universe, which will always be inconsistent with the gods as put forth by theistic religions, which have their fair share of expectations projected onto the universe such as god has to be good, protective, etc and etc.
About the part where you mentioned that sometimes god answers by not answering...in what context did you mean that? As in god always answers either yes or no as well? I ask because that looks like a psychological trap. That way, something called god will always answer and so reinforce your beliefs about the thing that you think is answering you. Looks a lot like the same way that Pascal's Wager works, that is, they're mechanisms that reinforce your already held beliefs, and people who already believe rarely question what they believe in.
Quote from: Tristan Jay on August 18, 2011, 03:31:25 AM
I guess one of my questions is, if God is supposed to only test us within the limits of what we are able to handle, then why did he test me to the point that I hate him? Shouldn't he have realized that I've been tapping out? Who would like a jerk that keeps someone in a painful headlock after you've been tapping out for ages! Not very sporting.
An answer from a Christian that will no doubt be a non-answer for you.
If life was a test, we all have failed as from the God/Christian perspective all have sinned and are thus destined for hell from the time of Adam and Eve taking of something they were told not to take up to now...and beyond.
The point we all, Atheist and Christian, agree on is that we all will die. No one person is immortal. The Christian (and other religions) simply hopes for something more and trusts in something that has shown a certain degree of foreknowledge. The "myth" is that God has done all that is necessary for life after death and all one needs to do is believe. That's it. One doesn't HAVE TO DO anything. The whole point is that if one loves something/someone, nothing is done from the standpoint of "must" but rather from love for...
You are still alive and so are not necessarily "done". You're "done" the moment you take your last breath. So technically, you've not tapped out yet...and so are simply at a point that many biblical characters have been at some point in their life and yet turned to God in the end or didn't. Not that you will, but simply to say you're not "out" yet.
I know this is futile telling you, though. There is enough reason to believe and just enough reason to disbelieve. It gives everyone full choice and every person is 100% in charge of their own stance. Do you stand on your own or do you stand in need of a savior? That is the question and the answer you give simply etches your place in the universe at death.
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on August 23, 2011, 10:42:17 PMThe "myth" is that God has done all that is necessary for life after death and all one needs to do is believe. That's it. One doesn't HAVE TO DO anything. The whole point is that if one loves something/someone, nothing is done from the standpoint of "must" but rather from love for...
This looks very contradictory: One must believe to be saved along with not having to do anything. Only one can be true: either we don't have to do anything or we have to believe (believing being at least one thing). Would you mind clearing this up? As it stands: the god wants us to do something from the standpoint of "must" (one must believe), rather from love.
Quote from: AnimatedDirtThere is enough reason to believe and just enough reason to disbelieve.
I don't think this is true at all, if there were enough reason to believe in a god, I would. There is enough reason to accept many things, but I see no reason to believe in something that is supposed to be doing so many things that has so little evidence for it. Also, these two problems present more than enough reason to not believe in your flavor of god.
-Edit: Bad spelling.
I've been keeping tabs on this in silence, because I got to the point where I said what I felt I needed to say up to that point. Medusa said some things that helped prompt me to take a step back and take stock of my internal processing. I have also been wanting to see if a Christian would venture to respond to my questions.
Animated Dirt, I appreciate you taking the time to respond to what I've thrown out on the table. I wish you all the best in your life and endeavors (as I often wish well of Christians in general, but with perspective in their minds to go with it). If you wouldn't mind, though, please don't make the assumption that an answer from yourself and a fellow Christian is going to be a non-answer, or sharing your perspective with me is a futile effort. I'm still in flux, you see. I'm trying to explore what the universe around me is going to offer as a response to my concerns, and I am refining my beliefs as I go.
Like all humans, I am full of contradictions. One minute I make a frustrated declaration in my own mind that all works of humanity as a guide toward the divine are crippled by each individual human's flaws; and the next moment I'm turning around and getting a text on Buddhism. Over the course of the last couple of days, despite my frustration with human constructs and organizations to bring spirituality to humanity, I still at one point I still looked toward the Bible for an answer (and was dismayed at what I read) and similarly approached Buddhist literature for answers (and found something partially compelling). While I bought the Buddhist text, and found what I had read there to be of interest, I still recognized a moment where I questioned some of those teachings as well, and my mind reflected that maybe there's still a lot that can be gleaned from this and other spiritual viewpoints, but I'm attuned to being wary of potential human error and personal prejudices riding alongside the genuinely constructive suggested mentality and approaches to life and spirituality.
I was very gravely disappointed when I referenced a psalm mentioned in a sticky of this part of the forum; I had read it and subsequently my eyes were drawn to a psalm above it (The Bible I have helpfully gives titles, or clarifies the subject of each psalm). I eagerly locked in on it as something that I hoped would help. Yet, at some point, the psalm starting talking about "enemies" and I shut down. My jaded and disappointed mind wandered along a path, which brought a reminder that David was a king; and I wondered about his position as a religious but also
political leader. I was probably overreacting, but my mind seemed convinced that I had come across plenty of references to "enemies" as a general thing, and mentality and approach to "enemies" in the Bible. I was not happy with my ponderings; in my own personal life, I reached a significant turning point in maturing when I set aside the word "enemies" as something to apply to people in actual life and thoughts. As much as I loved (and still like to a certain extent) stories with clear black and white divisions in a conflict, at some point I realized that these stories presented a view of conflict that was too polarized, too simplified, and detrimental as a guide for dealing with humans in the real world. I was revolted at the thought of flipping through the Bible any further, and coming across anything like "the enemies of God" and "the enemies of Jesus" and so forth. Just to clarify, I'm mainly referring "enemies" on a personal, person-to-person level, warfare is a different animal that I'm hesitant to expand on, as this post is already getting to be a bit larger than I intended.
QuoteThere is enough reason to believe and just enough reason to disbelieve.
I can't impress upon you enough how relieved I am that you are trying to recognize that here we have one very serious problem (with still others waiting in the wings) that myself and (it seems to me) Atheists are stopping and saying "wait a minute, this isn't working." Although Davin's response drew my attention to the fact that you've worded this very carefully. Still, I feel generous and charitable (genuinely, without any derision or condescension), and receptive to carrying this further. My concern is akin to what Davin said, and despite much of the hostility I feel directed toward God as he is characterized in Christianity and the Bible, I don't want to feel that; and I would want to see more from God that makes sense. There is this notion that he knows what is in the hearts and minds of all of us, and it seems like there is a lot more that he could do (in subtle ways...if he must) that speaks to each individual in the way that they absolutely need, to dispel each individual's doubt. Anything less doesn't reflect effectively on how important Jesus efforts and sacrifice are supposed to be, if you follow my line of reasoning (feel free to offer an alternative perspective, that's why I'm asking in the "Ask a Christian" topic, I am not taking this lightly).
Regarding the Tapping Out thing, I wasn't necessarily approaching it from a view of being released at the end of our lives, I'm more thinking of a non-terminal situation in life where someone can still be begging and praying to God desperately, "Please, make it stop, make it stop, it's unbearable, make it stop!" You can use your imagination to fill in the blank for what they're praying to be saved from. From the perspective I was approaching this example, if a Sensei didn't follow his own rules and release a person who is tapping out, then the Sensei might find his students are starting to leave the Dojo. Life isn't over, and an enthusiasm for martial arts isn't necessarily at an end either.
Viewing the Tapping Out scenario in the direction of a more terminal situation just directs my thoughts toward people who commit suicide. Another very serious problem. We never know what is in the heart and mind of a person who has reached the point of suicide. But I have to wonder if there are some who genuinely feel like they cannot go on in this world; it really is too much, and they really have been tested beyond what they are capable of handling. I've been very dismayed to hear how Christians have responded to the issue a few times in the past; and have longed for more careful, thoughtful, honest, and introspective reflection than I've seen in the past. Very troubling.
As a housekeeping matter, right now I loath God as defined by the infrastructure, constructs and conventions of Christianity (and the other Abrahamic approaches as well). I don't want to waste my time, energy and mental wellbeing channeling hatred, though. As for the God I don't know, as not defined or limited by any religion, I don't want to be preoccupied with him in equal measure to how he doesn't seem to want to be to preoccupied with human affairs. I don't know if I could ever really like him, because my personality is hard wired to be extremely wary of authority figures as a general thing. So, ostensibly I suppose I am sort of still a misotheist, to a certain extent. I latched onto that label when I tried searching for others online who have felt the same way as I have in the distant past and most recent present (I knew I didn't fit the bill of Atheist), and a book called Hating God had some interesting perspectives on offer to help me sift through my feelings. Another member on this forum said something that gave me the impression that misotheism has tended to be (or is commonly regarded as) a kind of pupal-stage for people who eventually transition into something else. I think that's become true for me, but I'm still exploring, trying to find my way. I imagine someone could pin a label on me, but just like Abrahamic religions do to God, trying to pin a person down by definition, it only provides a simplified explanation for people trying to understand a phenomenon (but within the phenomenon itself, things are much more complicated).
Wow, that's a lot! But I don't think anything less will do the trick.
Quote from: Davin on August 24, 2011, 05:13:25 PM
This looks very contradictory: One must believe to be saved along with not having to do anything. Only one can be true: either we don't have to do anything or we have to believe (believing being at least one thing). Would you mind clearing this up? As it stands: the god wants us to do something from the standpoint of "must" (one must believe), rather from love.
Certainly. The answer is the difference between a physical action (good works) and a passive action (belief). In that sense is what I mean to say there is nothing that needs be done. It is often referred to as a gift. One (in a sense) must accept a gift to therefore use it...reach out and take it. There's nothing that one does to gain or deserve the gift...as it is a gift. But you do have to actively
take it. Slightly contradictory as an analogy, but I think it conveys the point.
Quote from: DavinI don't think this is true at all, if there were enough reason to believe in a god, I would. There is enough reason to accept many things, but I see no reason to believe in something that is supposed to be doing so many things that has so little evidence for it. Also, these two problems present more than enough reason to not believe in your flavor of god
Apparently there is enough reason to believe, otherwise there would be NO believers. You may require more evidence or better evidence or even proof, but that doesn't make the available evidence unsatisfactory as there are plenty of believers. It's just not enough for "you".
Quote from: Tristan Jay on August 24, 2011, 08:10:05 PM
Animated Dirt, I appreciate you taking the time to respond to what I've thrown out on the table.
Getting to this...maybe later tonight or tomorrow. :)
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on August 23, 2011, 10:42:17 PM
The point we all, Atheist and Christian, agree on is that we all will die. No one person is immortal. The Christian (and other religions) simply hopes for something more and trusts in something that has shown a certain degree of foreknowledge. The "myth" is that God has done all that is necessary for life after death and all one needs to do is believe. That's it. One doesn't HAVE TO DO anything. The whole point is that if one loves something/someone, nothing is done from the standpoint of "must" but rather from love for...
I know this is futile telling you, though. There is enough reason to believe and just enough reason to disbelieve. It gives everyone full choice and every person is 100% in charge of their own stance. Do you stand on your own or do you stand in need of a savior? That is the question and the answer you give simply etches your place in the universe at death.
I don't really see why you need to bring death into the equation, although I guess Christians have always been obsessed with death and their afterlife, and playing on the fear of death (and the fear of eternal punishment for non-believers) has always swelled church congregations. As an atheist I couldn't disagree more strongly with the assumption that whether or not to believe in the Christian god or saviour 'simply etches our place in the universe at death' (although I can see how it might seem so very important to a believer). I think the choice of which god or saviour to believe in (or not) affects one's life far more than one's death. Death seems pretty irrelevant to me, I like to concentrate on living and enjoying life. As Epicurus succinctly noted;
'Death does not concern us, because as long as we exist, death is not here. And when it does come, we no longer exist'
Death is the one thing that no human or beast has control over, but even watching horror films or the news, I could care less.
I think most people only think of death as it is happening to them. But, meh.. I'm almost 30. I lived a good life. I don't know how i'll go, but i'll continue to get up in the morning and drink coffee, and go about my day.
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on August 24, 2011, 10:42:06 PM
Quote from: Davin on August 24, 2011, 05:13:25 PM
This looks very contradictory: One must believe to be saved along with not having to do anything. Only one can be true: either we don't have to do anything or we have to believe (believing being at least one thing). Would you mind clearing this up? As it stands: the god wants us to do something from the standpoint of "must" (one must believe), rather from love.
Certainly. The answer is the difference between a physical action (good works) and a passive action (belief). In that sense is what I mean to say there is nothing that needs be done. It is often referred to as a gift. One (in a sense) must accept a gift to therefore use it...reach out and take it. There's nothing that one does to gain or deserve the gift...as it is a gift. But you do have to actively take it. Slightly contradictory as an analogy, but I think it conveys the point.
This doesn't help very much. So a person could believe, kill millions of people and then jump off a building to kill him/her self, and be welcomed lovingly into heaven? Because you say that belief is the only thing that matters and not physical actions. Which means that one can't do anything to get into heaven and equally there is nothing that can be done to not get into heaven. If this is the case, then why the ten commandments and teachings of Jesus? Why even worry about morals at all when they don't even matter?
Quote from: AnimatedDirtQuote from: DavinI don't think this is true at all, if there were enough reason to believe in a god, I would. There is enough reason to accept many things, but I see no reason to believe in something that is supposed to be doing so many things that has so little evidence for it. Also, these two problems present more than enough reason to not believe in your flavor of god
Apparently there is enough reason to believe, otherwise there would be NO believers. You may require more evidence or better evidence or even proof, but that doesn't make the available evidence unsatisfactory as there are plenty of believers. It's just not enough for "you".
Right, because all people always do rational things. I'm sorry, but the argument from majority is not a very effective point to make. We can see from humans bumbling through the Earth being the center of the universe, the Earth being flat, maggots growing from meat, there being no such things as germs, thinking slavery is OK'd by god... etc. that people will believe things without sufficient evidence. The entire human population could believe in unicorn riding, cyborg, pirate leprechauns, that doesn't mean there is enough reason for them to believe it nor does it justify the belief. Irrational is irrational no matter how many other people are also irrational.
Hey, Davin...
I want a unicorn. Or even a cyborg unicorn like vampire hunter D. :D
Orz..yeah, science can make that xD
Who doesn't want a cyborg unicorn? I doubt anyone would deny the awesomeness of a cyborg unicorn. Attach some wings on it and have a cyborg unipegacorn.
That would be freaking awesome~
Quote from: Tristan Jay on August 24, 2011, 08:10:05 PM
If you wouldn't mind, though, please don't make the assumption that an answer from yourself and a fellow Christian is going to be a non-answer, or sharing your perspective with me is a futile effort. I'm still in flux, you see. I'm trying to explore what the universe around me is going to offer as a response to my concerns, and I am refining my beliefs as I go.
A look at the posts in reply to my post/answer suffices to prove it is a non-answer, but I assumed wrongly it would be for "you". It's the kind of replies I'm more expecting as it has been almost the norm. However if I don't give my (Christian) perspective at all, the HAF community may always think it has the right take on what Christians believe/promote. HAF on the whole disagrees, I have no allusions of recruiting any to the Christian side, but simply to enlighten some from a different perspective.
Quote from: Tristan JayThere is this notion that he knows what is in the hearts and minds of all of us, and it seems like there is a lot more that he could do (in subtle ways...if he must) that speaks to each individual in the way that they absolutely need, to dispel each individual's doubt. Anything less doesn't reflect effectively on how important Jesus efforts and sacrifice are supposed to be, if you follow my line of reasoning (feel free to offer an alternative perspective, that's why I'm asking in the "Ask a Christian" topic, I am not taking this lightly).
God does know each heart and does know what each person requires to know Him. The problem (I see humanly) is that there are many Atheists even here at HAF that have been asked the question, "What would it take to believe in God?" Whatever the answer is, it varies, the end of the matter is, "It doesn't matter to me if God does exist and wants me...I would never love/follow a god like that..." So in those cases, there is no reason for God to reveal Himself to them in a special manner. But what about the people (like you maybe) that are searching for answers? The questions and issues that someone in the position of searching for answers is usually asking the same questions another has asked and is satisfied with the answer. In all probability, there is an answer to questions and an answer that someone has found satisfactory for their needs. I'm almost positive that one can do a search on today's internet to find most answers or explanations to questions raised by the skeptics. Whether or not they satisfy is left to each individual. It's a choice each one makes.
Quote from: Tristan JayRegarding the Tapping Out thing, I wasn't necessarily approaching it from a view of being released at the end of our lives, I'm more thinking of a non-terminal situation in life where someone can still be begging and praying to God desperately, "Please, make it stop, make it stop, it's unbearable, make it stop!" You can use your imagination to fill in the blank for what they're praying to be saved from. From the perspective I was approaching this example, if a Sensei didn't follow his own rules and release a person who is tapping out, then the Sensei might find his students are starting to leave the Dojo. Life isn't over, and an enthusiasm for martial arts isn't necessarily at an end either.
I am an inadequate vessel to convey these deep thoughts, but I'll try my best as I always do. The first analogy that comes to mind to TRY and convey this is that of drag racing where the car(s) represent humanity and the owners/mechanics/drivers/enthusiasts represent God. It's not a perfect analogy and probably fails on many points, but it is what popped into my mind first. I'll go with it. Dragsters/Funny Cars and the like are custom built (for the most part). They are built for a purpose. To travel 1,320 ft as fast as possible. Sometimes the cars make it and win, sometimes they lose. Sometimes the engine blows and sometimes the car crashes. To personify the car is to say that the wins are good lives that while their wheels spin at some point, maybe the steering wavers the car a bit, but the life of that car is on the whole good. Another car's engine couldn't stand the strain and so explodes or a car is not driven correctly or a tire blows, whatever the case, and the car ends up exploding and hitting the guardrails, flipping and simply just coming apart. This represents the person(s) whose lives are not going so well, to say the least or whose lives have ended, death, even suicide. Now, other than the pain the owner of the car and those that have put long hours of time, sweat and tears into that car, as long as the team is able, they are able to reconstruct that car to race another day. You follow me? It hurts to see the "pain" the car is going through and sometimes it simply cannot be changed as life on a track can be dangerous. The danger represents life with sin present. One side of the point then says, "What does it matter if the owner of the car or the mechanics/driver decide to run the car into a wall? What possibly can be learned or gained from that? Well, we have a company that does that A LOT and out of that we learn about how to build safer cars. What about the "car" that is scared of speed and doesn't want to race, but is raced anyway? The car is "owned" by the one that put it together/made it. Who's to tell the owner how to use that which he's created? It's his car, right? If the owner/mechanic can recreated it, fix it, or make it better the second time, what is the real problem? Therein lies the difference in thinking by human standards and by God's. The Sensei is just another vehicle. The Sensei cannot recreate, rebuild, restore someone he's chocking out. The Sensei rules his own house, but within his house, life and the creation of it, is not something he rules over. So in the big scheme of things, the track (life) is dangerous (has sin in it). The cars (we) are not on that track by choice. The track exists by default (fault of another) and is the only place for cars to race (humans live). Therefore if God is able to rebuild, what does it matter if one should die or suffer? (that's not to say God enjoys suffering as an enthusiast of car racing loves the cars and the race, but doesn't like the pain or death his/her passion can cause) This is why Christians are (as some express it) obsessed with death. On the contrary though. Christians are obsessed with life, death is simply a hurdle between this life and a better life.
Quote from: Tristan JayViewing the Tapping Out scenario in the direction of a more terminal situation just directs my thoughts toward people who commit suicide. Another very serious problem. We never know what is in the heart and mind of a person who has reached the point of suicide. But I have to wonder if there are some who genuinely feel like they cannot go on in this world; it really is too much, and they really have been tested beyond what they are capable of handling. I've been very dismayed to hear how Christians have responded to the issue a few times in the past; and have longed for more careful, thoughtful, honest, and introspective reflection than I've seen in the past. Very troubling.
I'm not positive on the suicide side of the situation. Some Christians equate human suicide with spiritual suicide. That being that if a person takes their own life, then that is a sin that cannot be reversed and therefore cannot be saved. This is not taught in the bible, in fact, the bible teaches that there is only one Unpardonable Sin. That is the sin of grieving the Spirit or basically ignoring God's still-small-voice constantly and so much so that there comes a point at which the person no longer hears God. That is the only sin that cannot ever be forgiven. How can God save a person that doesn't want saving? God is not in the business of forcing Himself on anyone. He respects each persons choice. Basically, I don't know exactly how/where suicide plays into being saved or not. I trust that God will judge each one fairly. I don't promote suicide as spiritual suicide. There's no evidence that it is.
Quote from: Tristan JayAs a housekeeping matter, right now I loath God as defined by the infrastructure, constructs and conventions of Christianity (and the other Abrahamic approaches as well). I don't want to waste my time, energy and mental wellbeing channeling hatred, though. As for the God I don't know, as not defined or limited by any religion, I don't want to be preoccupied with him in equal measure to how he doesn't seem to want to be to preoccupied with human affairs. I don't know if I could ever really like him, because my personality is hard wired to be extremely wary of authority figures as a general thing. So, ostensibly I suppose I am sort of still a misotheist, to a certain extent. I latched onto that label when I tried searching for others online who have felt the same way as I have in the distant past and most recent present (I knew I didn't fit the bill of Atheist), and a book called Hating God had some interesting perspectives on offer to help me sift through my feelings. Another member on this forum said something that gave me the impression that misotheism has tended to be (or is commonly regarded as) a kind of pupal-stage for people who eventually transition into something else. I think that's become true for me, but I'm still exploring, trying to find my way. I imagine someone could pin a label on me, but just like Abrahamic religions do to God, trying to pin a person down by definition, it only provides a simplified explanation for people trying to understand a phenomenon (but within the phenomenon itself, things are much more complicated).
Whatever label you pin on yourself or others on you, it seems clear to me you have a need for answers.
Quote from: Sweetdeath on August 25, 2011, 12:29:41 PM
I lived a good life. I don't know how i'll go, but i'll continue to get up in the morning and drink coffee, and go about my day.
that's better philosophy than has been written in 100 holy books!
Quote from: Too Few Lions on August 25, 2011, 09:21:38 PM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on August 25, 2011, 12:29:41 PM
I lived a good life. I don't know how i'll go, but i'll continue to get up in the morning and drink coffee, and go about my day.
that's better philosophy than has been written in 100 holy books!
Aww, shucks. Thank you~ and plus, my Sundays are always free xP
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on August 25, 2011, 09:42:54 PM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on August 25, 2011, 09:29:13 PM
and plus, my Sundays are always free xP
Mine too!
What about your Saturday?
(My grandparents are 7th day Adventists...)
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on August 25, 2011, 10:32:59 PM
What about your Saturday?
(My grandparents are 7th day Adventists...)
Imagine that. Me too. I know many SDA's that dread Saturdays simply because they are doing the "Sabbath" thing out of a 'must do' rather than a 'I get to...'. I have a few responsibilities in the morning at church which isn't the greatest at the moment of waking up, but after I'm up, it's all gravy. My Saturday's are filled with lots of time with friends and family. I can't claim to keep the Sabbath perfectly, but it is a time I look forward to all week. (I don't necessarily look forward to getting up early, but it's part of the day) I get to sleep in on Sundays. :)
I don't function before 10am. X_x
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on August 25, 2011, 10:58:32 PM
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on August 25, 2011, 10:32:59 PM
What about your Saturday?
(My grandparents are 7th day Adventists...)
Imagine that. Me too. I know many SDA's that dread Saturdays simply because they are doing the "Sabbath" thing out of a 'must do' rather than a 'I get to...'. I have a few responsibilities in the morning at church which isn't the greatest at the moment of waking up, but after I'm up, it's all gravy. My Saturday's are filled with lots of time with friends and family. I can't claim to keep the Sabbath perfectly, but it is a time I look forward to all week. (I don't necessarily look forward to getting up early, but it's part of the day) I get to sleep in on Sundays. :)
I don't really know what other SDAs are doing on Saturdays, but I'd risk saying that my grandparents take on Saturdays are on the slightly extreme side. No TV :o and no (sorta) house chores.
Quote from: Sweetdeath on August 25, 2011, 11:08:23 PM
I don't function before 10am. X_x
Just like my son and wife! I tend to rapidly lose functionality after 10pm!
Quote from: Sweetdeath on August 25, 2011, 11:08:23 PM
I don't function before 10am. X_x
I don't function before midday! Still, I drink plenty of coffe and hope no-one notices at work...
I think that any hour before 12 pm can rightfully be called an 'ungodly hour', in fact, I've never seen a better usage for the word. ;D
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on August 26, 2011, 04:46:07 PM
I think that any hour before 12 pm can rightfully be called an 'ungodly hour', in fact, I've never seen a better usage for the word. ;D
hehe in that case I really should like mornings more. Every hour should be an ungodly hour!
Yes, seriously. I don't know how people who have to be at work by 9am do it.
I used to have to work 10-4 (great file clerk job) but I lived an hour and a half away. T_T
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on August 25, 2011, 11:41:06 PM
I don't really know what other SDAs are doing on Saturdays, but I'd risk saying that my grandparents take on Saturdays are on the slightly extreme side. No TV :o and no (sorta) house chores.
That's pretty typical. That in and of itself is not extreme. The thinking is to use Friday (the preparation day) to do the house chores etc. I'd say the "extreme" SDA's prepare their food on Friday to not cook on the Sabbath. To try and keep from secular things...T.V., computers,... but that isn't to say those things cannot be used for a better purpose on a Sabbath. I think that's a bit much (the not cooking thing) but each person is certainly able to make their on decision on what is lawful to do on the Sabbath. It may be that cooking stresses them out too much and so it seems as too much "work" to be doing. Having the food ready to go is actually pretty cool. We have basically the example of what JC did on the Sabbath. He healed people, usually first the physical healing (lame walk, blind see...and even feeding) then the spiritual healing. That and the, "It is lawful to do good on the Sabbath" from JC too. Couple that quote with his actions and I think it makes a pretty clear picture of how to best keep the Sabbath.
Quote from: Sweetdeath on August 26, 2011, 05:43:45 PM
Yes, seriously. I don't know how people who have to be at work by 9am do it.
I used to have to work 10-4 (great file clerk job) but I lived an hour and a half away. T_T
I live an 8 minute walk away from my office and a 4 minute cycle (I've timed them!) It's the only way I can do 9-5, I roll out of bed around 8.40, have a quick wash and bite to eat, then walk into work.
That and it rains here most days (today it's seriously been like a monsoon), and I really don't like getting wet, so having a job near my home suits me perfectly. Although I guess I'd still rather not have to work, there are so many more interesting things to do.
Lucky monkey!
Quote from: Too Few Lions on August 26, 2011, 05:39:52 PM
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on August 26, 2011, 04:46:07 PM
I think that any hour before 12 pm can rightfully be called an 'ungodly hour', in fact, I've never seen a better usage for the word. ;D
hehe in that case I really should like mornings more. Every hour should be an ungodly hour!
Think of it this way: at least there are fewer and fewer godly church bells ringing at a certain times to signal godly times of the day, including the appropriate and godly hour to get out of bed.
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on August 26, 2011, 06:19:08 PM
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on August 25, 2011, 11:41:06 PM
I don't really know what other SDAs are doing on Saturdays, but I'd risk saying that my grandparents take on Saturdays are on the slightly extreme side. No TV :o and no (sorta) house chores.
That's pretty typical. That in and of itself is not extreme. The thinking is to use Friday (the preparation day) to do the house chores etc. I'd say the "extreme" SDA's prepare their food on Friday to not cook on the Sabbath. To try and keep from secular things...T.V., computers,... but that isn't to say those things cannot be used for a better purpose on a Sabbath. I think that's a bit much (the not cooking thing) but each person is certainly able to make their on decision on what is lawful to do on the Sabbath. It may be that cooking stresses them out too much and so it seems as too much "work" to be doing. Having the food ready to go is actually pretty cool. We have basically the example of what JC did on the Sabbath. He healed people, usually first the physical healing (lame walk, blind see...and even feeding) then the spiritual healing. That and the, "It is lawful to do good on the Sabbath" from JC too. Couple that quote with his actions and I think it makes a pretty clear picture of how to best keep the Sabbath.
I have no problem whatsoever with the idea that there's a day in which you shouldn't do any house chores. I would readily incorporate that into my way of life and thinking ;D
But as for the secular things such as TV and computers (which they don't have anyways) would make Saturdays noticeably different for me. :-\
No computers? Yeah, no fucking thanks.
What do you do; sit in candlelight and count the tiles on the floor?
Quote from: Sweetdeath on August 26, 2011, 10:54:06 PM
No computers? Yeah, no fucking thanks.
What do you do; sit in candlelight and count the tiles on the floor?
Well...there was this old typewriter from ancient times past just lying around...
:P
They were allowed to go out (and usually did) to get a coffee or something. Otherwise it's a good time to catch up on one's reading.
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on August 26, 2011, 10:48:59 PM
I have no problem whatsoever with the idea that there's a day in which you shouldn't do any house chores. I would readily incorporate that into my way of life and thinking ;D
But as for the secular things such as TV and computers (which they don't have anyways) would make Saturdays noticeably different for me. :-\
I'd like you to ponder your choice of words above. "shouldn't do house chores" and then "I would readily incorporate".
Therein lies the complete difference of the true Gospel and the false gospel which so many Christians (and those that criticize them) fail to understand as did the Jews and their extra laws. The false is done out of obligation and the true is done out of love.
More on the TV and Computers later.
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on August 26, 2011, 11:06:00 PM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on August 26, 2011, 10:54:06 PM
No computers? Yeah, no fucking thanks.
What do you do; sit in candlelight and count the tiles on the floor?
Well...there was this old typewriter from ancient times past just lying around...
:P
They were allowed to go out (and usually did) to get a coffee or something. Otherwise it's a good time to catch up on one's reading.
Pfff, I read a lot to, but I watch Jimmy fallon and Simpsons every night, so yeah.
I guess some people will believe what they are doing is right/holy. o_o
Oh wow.....Sorry for being away everyone ;D
I've been busy taking care of life for the last couple of weeks and for whatever reason, my email forward for thread responses suddenly stopped, so this forum has completely slipped my mind! But I am glad to see this thread has taken a life of it's own and I'll review any questions I've missed lately.
Quote from: Tristan Jay on August 17, 2011, 09:58:30 PM
Ok, I've held off from approaching this, and I want to try to be fair about my questions to those Christians who I am impressed with, despite myself, for putting their necks out here in a place that rejects God.
I've read some of the back and forth stuff on this thread, but both sides of the argument really lose me when they get into finely tuning the details of their evidence. Pretend I'm a little bit dumb, or highly distractible. Brevity and clarity is good.
What I am struggling with is the version of God as he is depicted in the Bible in general, and how he comes across through Christian interpretation, explanation, ect. When I throw away those preconceived notions, I can let go of my expectations of God, and consequently my loathing of him.
The promise of a personal relationship concerns and troubles me. I've been in a human-to-human relationships, and have been called out on some things that are personally difficult for me (because of my personality type and/or certain problems). A couple of things are trust and consistency, off the top of my head, as I'm typing this out.
Trust: We give out a certain amount of trust, in the hope that it will be affirmed as wisely-placed trust. I had trust withdrawn from me because I didn't measure up to that trust, and in some ways I didn't fully understand that trust that was invested in me. An active, personally committed God should have an understanding of each individual human's ability to trust (since he knows everything about us, as established Christian perspective). My trust has been withdrawn, because he hasn't measured up to my trust. Let me just state before I go further, I've heard in the past the concept that "Sometime God answers by not answering."
This is also part of why trust has been withdrawn, I'm not good with relationships because I sometimes don't answer, and it's been made clear to me that it's not ok! This leads into another question: if it's not ok for me, why is it ok for God? Creating the universe and making it "good" is not an acceptable answer; any reasonable human with a conscience would feel responsible for something they created and probably feel guilt for when there are problems with that creation that causes harm to others. If we feel guilt, and God doesn't because he is confident in his own perfect, what does that say about his ability to reflect on his behavior, and the work that he does (or fails to do)? And what does that say about his ability to really appreciate a situation, if we experience guilt but he doesn't (keeping in mind that he is capable of everything, according to the paradigm I'm using to understand him).
I was going to go into consistency, but I'm running out of steam at this point, I will keep it simple and just say that he comes across as nothing less than supremely inconsistent. Genocide is okay for him to order, sanction, and implement; but we're monsters if we engage in such behavior. I'm not allowed to be shy in this world he's allowed to develop, which demands that you must be outgoing to be successful; but he never talks to us, or shows up to have his picture taken, and that's ok because he's God!
Why is he better than us, when we can accept and love people who are guilty of "sin" (and some of the sins such as homosexuality do not seem harmful to others, and he does not clarify for us).
Why isn't he clear? He can do anything, and he sacrificed his son/himself to himself, for the sake of our souls. That's supposed to be important, so why didn't he choose a better time to do all that stuff? The whole planet is wired for surveillance right now, why be subtle when clarity is so important (remember, it's our immortal souls!).
Why did he create Hell, and the the god damned Devil? Let me make this clear: I would not create hell and the Devil. All the stuff before this is confusing enough, before you add Hell and the Devil. I hate to say it, but I believe there are plenty of other humans, including myself, who can think of a better form of justice than him; that is more fair, merciful, reasonable, and able to be understood and clear and consistent. Given that, wouldn't he be doing himself a huge favor by streamlining and reorganizing a lot of stuff?!
I'm really angry, in case you can't tell. I've been trying to swallow my anger, and communicate with him, asking him for reciprocation in communication. Well, now I want a damned burning piece of shrubbery talking to me while I'm sober, and say to me, "Ok, I get why you're confused, let me show you some pieces of the puzzle to help you sort through it, let me know if that helps make things more clear," because that is what a kindly, friendly human being would do for someone they cared about!! >:(
Post script: Eh, sorry about the length of my post, BTW, I know I asked for brevity and simplicity, then I went ahead and did this. There are a lot of things I'm steamed about, though.
This is certainly a lot of questions, and honestly wouldn't be productive if I went down the list, answering one after the other. I have always enjoyed the saying that "facts are great, opinions are great....But nothing is greater than when both remain distinct from the other".
It's important to clarify that I'm not here to tell you what to believe in, but I answer questions of my belief, and if you have any constructive criticism of what I believe in as Christian, I am all ears. But the first step in that is to (1) know what I believe and being careful not to assume what I believe in, and then (2) tell me why you don't like/partake in that particular view and this or that is why....From there, I will be more than happy to listen/discuss our differences in opinion and find out what similarities in values each of our views have and where aspects can be agreed to be disagreed upon.
I understand your point of view. And from what I have experienced, one of the biggest problems skeptics have against Christianity and theism at large is that they see religious interpretation of the divine as not being mapped out to their liking or from what they hear about it, it's not all that great. For some, the idea of religion is similar to a movie review that they have heard so many talk about, and for them, it's a skip. This is why going about and telling skeptics all the great perks and benefit plans Christianity has to offer is usually not very productive, because such discussions have absolutely nothing to do with whether it's true or not.
I can illustrate my point like this: the common conversation between the apologist and the skeptic.
Skeptic: "Ehh....I don't believe the bible to be true. It's not even consistent."
Apologist: "We'll I disagree, did you know this and that fact, I bet you did not. ;)
Skeptic: "This is not true....And you're part of the discovery institute."
This is a conversation that is going to lack any intellectual substance, and here is why: If I was a New Age Neopaganist whose belief is loosely based upon the Lord of the Rings trilogy, it may very well have grand and intriguing consistency to my mystical story, but does that, therefore make it true. Or any more true? The skeptic does not believe the bible to be true, and although consistency might help the bible as a cohesive story, it is irrelevant to the question at hand. Regardless, it is clear that the skeptic is just not interested in the first place. Think of your friend who hates nothing more than scary movies, who has found him or herself in the unfortunate position of becoming dragged along with your group of buddies on the intent of picking out a scary movie for everyone to watch tonight. They pull a horror movie here and another there, and for some peculiar reason, this friend always seems to find something wrong with each and every movie selected. Your friend's sway has nothing to do with the specific movie and has everything to do with their innate presumptions regarding the horror movie genre.
And this comes full circle as to why I can't just go down a laundry list and tell you this or that and have the truth of Christianity spring upon you. Feel free to repost more specific questions regarding my personal beliefs, and we can discuss our difference in views instead of me speaking in terms of "why does God does this/that".
For example, your question about hell. Your first question could be, do you believe in hell?...What exactly is hell? Who goes and who doesn't? Do I think a hell is necessary for divine justice?, ect. All would be great questions to ask me. And after I tell you my specific views on the subject, you can (and encourage you to do so) tell me why you don't sit well with that particular stance. Such as pointing out something of common values. For example, you could say something like, "Well...I don't believe people should be punished just for believing in something different from myself, and from what Christians have told me, hell severely punishes those who aren't Christian, this is not at all right". This would leave us with a very fascinating topic to be discussed.
I have another question!
And this was something I could never reconcile when I was Christian myself, so here it is: How do you know your belief is "enough"? Religious folk often talk about belief as if it is an all or none game, but I have never been able to see how that is so. It always made more sense to me that belief was like trust, there were several shades and you could have "a lot" or "a little", but when you absolutely NEED a certain amount to be "saved" where is the "enough" line?
Even if you have convinced yourself 100% that you are the believiest believer that ever believed, how do you feel at ease about that? Because, obviously, it is YOU that is making that judgement and one of the tenants of christian faith is that we are all fallible in our judgement and ability to discern God's will on our own. And God will never really come down and say "okay, you pass, you're saved!", or even if he did, how could you be sure you will keep that status?
Take me, for example, I went from Christian to agnostic to (close-to) full atheist over the course of maybe ten years. Very gradually. When did I stop being saved? There was a period of time when I probably didn't believe very strongly, but I would pray "for stronger faith" and that kind of thing, was I saved then? Or would I be doomed once the slightest bit of doubt crept in?
I'm honestly wondering because this point used to drive me crazy when I was a believer and I never really talked about it with anyone else, so I'd be interested to see how current Christians feel about it. ;D
Quote from: Cforcerunner on August 28, 2011, 10:28:52 AM
This is certainly a lot of questions, and honestly wouldn't be productive if I went down the list, answering one after the other. I have always enjoyed the saying that "facts are great, opinions are great....But nothing is greater than when both remain distinct from the other".
It's important to clarify that I'm not here to tell you what to believe in, but I answer questions of my belief, and if you have any constructive criticism of what I believe in as Christian, I am all ears. But the first step in that is to (1) know what I believe and being careful not to assume what I believe in, and then (2) tell me why you don't like/partake in that particular view and this or that is why....From there, I will be more than happy to listen/discuss our differences in opinion and find out what similarities in values each of our views have and where aspects can be agreed to be disagreed upon.
I understand your point of view. And from what I have experienced, one of the biggest problems skeptics have against Christianity and theism at large is that they see religious interpretation of the divine as not being mapped out to their liking or from what they hear about it, it's not all that great. For some, the idea of religion is similar to a movie review that they have heard so many talk about, and for them, it's a skip. This is why going about and telling skeptics all the great perks and benefit plans Christianity has to offer is usually not very productive, because such discussions have absolutely nothing to do with whether it's true or not.
I can illustrate my point like this: the common conversation between the apologist and the skeptic.
Skeptic: "Ehh....I don't believe the bible to be true. It's not even consistent."
Apologist: "We'll I disagree, did you know this and that fact, I bet you did not. ;)
Skeptic: "This is not true....And you're part of the discovery institute."
This is a conversation that is going to lack any intellectual substance, and here is why: If I was a New Age Neopaganist whose belief is loosely based upon the Lord of the Rings trilogy, it may very well have grand and intriguing consistency to my mystical story, but does that, therefore make it true. Or any more true? The skeptic does not believe the bible to be true, and although consistency might help the bible as a cohesive story, it is irrelevant to the question at hand. Regardless, it is clear that the skeptic is just not interested in the first place. Think of your friend who hates nothing more than scary movies, who has found him or herself in the unfortunate position of becoming dragged along with your group of buddies on the intent of picking out a scary movie for everyone to watch tonight. They pull a horror movie here and another there, and for some peculiar reason, this friend always seems to find something wrong with each and every movie selected. Your friend's sway has nothing to do with the specific movie and has everything to do with their innate presumptions regarding the horror movie genre.
And this comes full circle as to why I can't just go down a laundry list and tell you this or that and have the truth of Christianity spring upon you. Feel free to repost more specific questions regarding my personal beliefs, and we can discuss our difference in views instead of me speaking in terms of "why does God does this/that".
For example, your question about hell. Your first question could be, do you believe in hell?...What exactly is hell? Who goes and who doesn't? Do I think a hell is necessary for divine justice?, ect. All would be great questions to ask me. And after I tell you my specific views on the subject, you can (and encourage you to do so) tell me why you don't sit well with that particular stance. Such as pointing out something of common values. For example, you could say something like, "Well...I don't believe people should be punished just for believing in something different from myself, and from what Christians have told me, hell severely punishes those who aren't Christian, this is not at all right". This would leave us with a very fascinating topic to be discussed.
I'm glad that your still here, I wondered about that. It's very sporting of you and Animated Dirt to be receptive towards responding to a wall of text that carries the weight of my resentment toward God, and disappointment with the religious organizations' in the realm of individual spirituality. My disappointment, frustration, and dispair are directed towards that, not individual Christians. Your suggestions for how to approach this are helpful, I'll keep them in mind as I narrow down the focus for each in turn. Give me some time, and I'll try and frame specific questions as appropriately as I can. Oh, and bonus points to you for name checking The Lord of the Rings, puts you in
my good book on that count. :) To be continued.
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on August 26, 2011, 10:48:59 PM
But as for the secular things such as TV and computers (which they don't have anyways) would make Saturdays noticeably different for me. :-\
There is nothing wrong with TV or computers in and of themselves. They are a tool or avenue to entertainment, information, etc. It's not that one CAN'T watch TV, it's that for the most part, there is nothing TV offers generally that is spiritually uplifting. One can "waste" lots of time on it. Think of it like this; You go to a family reunion and you spend your time watching a football game and then it's time to go. A family reunion is a gathering where family gets together to enjoy each other's company, catch up on each other, play games together and all this to simply become closer again. If one spent the whole time on a football game (I'm not discounting the "guys" enjoying that time) and ignored the family, then the TV is distraction and takes away rather than adds to the basic reason of gathering together as a family. Another is how society has changed in the past few years with smart phones. Going out to dinner with family, sometimes I have to mention, "Really! You all have to stare at your phones and cannot put them down for a short time to carry on in a real coversation?" It's that kind of distraction that TV and computers can be.
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on August 29, 2011, 07:24:26 PM
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on August 26, 2011, 10:48:59 PM
But as for the secular things such as TV and computers (which they don't have anyways) would make Saturdays noticeably different for me. :-\
There is nothing wrong with TV or computers in and of themselves. They are a tool or avenue to entertainment, information, etc. It's not that one CAN'T watch TV, it's that for the most part, there is nothing TV offers generally that is spiritually uplifting. One can "waste" lots of time on it. Think of it like this; You go to a family reunion and you spend your time watching a football game and then it's time to go. A family reunion is a gathering where family gets together to enjoy each other's company, catch up on each other, play games together and all this to simply become closer again. If one spent the whole time on a football game (I'm not discounting the "guys" enjoying that time) and ignored the family, then the TV is distraction and takes away rather than adds to the basic reason of gathering together as a family. Another is how society has changed in the past few years with smart phones. Going out to dinner with family, sometimes I have to mention, "Really! You all have to stare at your phones and cannot put them down for a short time to carry on in a real coversation?" It's that kind of distraction that TV and computers can be.
Makes sense I guess. :)
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on August 29, 2011, 12:54:55 AM
I have another question!
And this was something I could never reconcile when I was Christian myself, so here it is: How do you know your belief is "enough"? Religious folk often talk about belief as if it is an all or none game, but I have never been able to see how that is so. It always made more sense to me that belief was like trust, there were several shades and you could have "a lot" or "a little", but when you absolutely NEED a certain amount to be "saved" where is the "enough" line?
Haha, interesting question. I suppose us religious folks just have the feeling in our boot soles! xD
But seriously, theology and religion can be a very overwhelming topic to ponder about. And with so many denominations, mixed messages, variation of doctrine on salvation between different church groups. The important thing to do is to do your own spiritual guide do for youself and not because you'll feel accepted to a particular group of believers. When I read the gospels, I was amazed. When you strip away the VBS Jesus and look into who he actually was, that was what did it for me. Listening to testimonies and secular journals on what Jesus has done is truly remarkable. I can't use this to create an argument to logically conclude Christianity is true, but that would be missing the point.
My advice to you (or your former self) is to strip away all of you've heard/think you've heard about Jesus. And read the gospel for yourself. There is no amount of "belief" needed. Hear out the message Jesus has brought and decide for yourself if you can accept it or don't....It's really as simple as that.
QuoteEven if you have convinced yourself 100% that you are the believiest believer that ever believed, how do you feel at ease about that? Because, obviously, it is YOU that is making that judgement and one of the tenants of christian faith is that we are all fallible in our judgement and ability to discern God's will on our own. And God will never really come down and say "okay, you pass, you're saved!", or even if he did, how could you be sure you will keep that status?
Trust me, you'll know. Christianity is certainly a lifestyle. And more of a life complete thankfulness for the grace of God then a life of strict moral conduct. I know when I became an actual Christian, my view of the world and my purpose significantly changed.
QuoteTake me, for example, I went from Christian to agnostic to (close-to) full atheist over the course of maybe ten years. Very gradually. When did I stop being saved? There was a period of time when I probably didn't believe very strongly, but I would pray "for stronger faith" and that kind of thing, was I saved then? Or would I be doomed once the slightest bit of doubt crept in?
I'm honestly wondering because this point used to drive me crazy when I was a believer and I never really talked about it with anyone else, so I'd be interested to see how current Christians feel about it. ;D
I would consider myself once agnostic/deistic before. So I can relate to your view, but have moved in a different direction. I don't believe you ever "lost" faith. I don't believe followers of Jesus, once converting, was in a constant state of pondering their salvation. It could be you never truly experienced it in the first place. This is very common since many conversions are solely emotionally based. That's great that you were praying for stronger faith (assuming those prayers were very legitimate), but it sounds you were a state of seeking faith rather than actually having it. For me, it is difficult to describe the state of mind during my conversion, but it was a long and reflective process...."counting the cost" as Jesus would say. Again, read the gospels for yourself with fresh eyes, the way I grew up learning the gospel was very watered-downed. I also recommend reading Mere Christianity, not for proof of Christianity, but for a simple and intelligent explanation regarding many components of the Christian worldview.
Quote from: Tristan Jay on August 29, 2011, 06:52:02 PM
I'm glad that your still here, I wondered about that. It's very sporting of you and Animated Dirt to be receptive towards responding to a wall of text that carries the weight of my resentment toward God, and disappointment with the religious organizations' in the realm of individual spirituality. My disappointment, frustration, and dispair are directed towards that, not individual Christians. Your suggestions for how to approach this are helpful, I'll keep them in mind as I narrow down the focus for each in turn. Give me some time, and I'll try and frame specific questions as appropriately as I can. Oh, and bonus points to you for name checking The Lord of the Rings, puts you in my good book on that count. :) To be continued.
Sounds great Tristan! I will be looking forward to your next post. ;D
What are you searching for at the moment Tristan Jay?
Are you looking for a higher authority, a purpose, an objective morality, a group to belong to?
Are you searching for some answers/explainations with regards to your lost faith?
Do you feel something is missing in your life right now?
"Need input Stephanie, more input!" - (sorry, vague reference to a very old movie)
Johnny Five, is alive.
Number Five is alive!
Do you feel Mormons are Christians?
Quote from: Medusa on September 02, 2011, 05:58:08 AM
Do you feel Mormons are Christians?
No....Like gnosticism, their theology is just WAY too much of a stretch/contradicting from universally accepted Christian doctrine.
Mormons kinda really scare me. :(
Mormons worship Jesus Christ as their savior and the son of god, so I don't see how they aren't Christians. Though they believe that Jesus, the Holy Ghost and God are three different people instead of all the same person.
Quote from: Davin on September 02, 2011, 04:14:31 PM
Mormons worship Jesus Christ as their savior and the son of god, so I don't see how they aren't Christians. Though they believe that Jesus, the Holy Ghost and God are three different people instead of all the same person.
Seems more rational than thinking they are multiple personalities of the same entity.
Quote from: Sweetdeath on September 02, 2011, 06:42:53 AM
Mormons kinda really scare me. :(
One of my friends, Mason. He is a mormon. He is a very nice guy, but we certainly have our theological differences. ;)
Quote from: Davin on September 02, 2011, 04:14:31 PM
Mormons worship Jesus Christ as their savior and the son of god, so I don't see how they aren't Christians. Though they believe that Jesus, the Holy Ghost and God are three different people instead of all the same person.
I understand your point, and you are correct to say they share fundamental beliefs of Christianity, but their doctrine has become so tainted/deeply influenced by another belief(s) system, in which many of their tenants are very incompatible and often contradictory with their original beliefs. For example, they believe God the Father (not being one "God", but being among many "gods") being once human from another planet, residing near a star they call Kolob. This father is married to a "mother goddess" whom had bore many children. Jesus is one of the many "sons" of God (including his brother Satan). Jesus was conceived when God the Father literally stepped down to earth and had sexual relations with the virgin Mary. In addition, the sacrifice of Jesus (the first born) is not sufficient for some sins (i.e. murder, repeated adultery). According to their doctrine of salvation, very moral mormons are able to become "gods" themselves in a similar (if not synonymous) definition as the original father. Needless to say Mormonism tremendously differentiates itself from any branch of reasonably orthodox Christianity. It would appropriately fall in the same category as other Christian "spin offs" such as gnosticism and esoteric Christianity.
Quote from: Cforcerunner on September 02, 2011, 10:30:11 PMI understand your point, and you are correct to say they share fundamental beliefs of Christianity, but their doctrine has become so tainted/deeply influenced by another belief(s) system, in which many of their tenants are very incompatible and often contradictory with their original beliefs. For example, they believe God the Father (not being one "God", but being among many "gods") being once human from another planet, residing near a star they call Kolob. This father is married to a "mother goddess" whom had bore many children. Jesus is one of the many "sons" of God (including his brother Satan). Jesus was conceived when God the Father literally stepped down to earth and had sexual relations with the virgin Mary. In addition, the sacrifice of Jesus is not sufficient for some sins (i.e. murder, repeated adultery). Needless to say Mormonism tremendously differentiates itself from any branch of reasonably orthodox Christianity. It would appropriately fall in the same category as other Christian "spin offs" such as gnosticism and esoteric Christianity.
Or that weird Catholicism stuff. One problem in your description is that many of the odd things in it are based around misconceptions of the Mormon religion instead of what they actually teach. I know you're trying to make it appear more silly than your own particular flavor, but even with all that, it's no more or less ridiculous than any other version of Christianity (or any other religion for that matter).
But please, don't continue the misrepresentations of their religion just as you wouldn't want someone making things up about yours.
Quote from: Davin on September 02, 2011, 10:39:12 PM
Or that weird Catholicism stuff. One problem in your description is that many of the odd things in it are based around misconceptions of the Mormon religion instead of what they actually teach. I know you're trying to make it appear more silly than your own particular flavor, but even with all that, it's no more or less ridiculous than any other version of Christianity (or any other religion for that matter).
But please, don't continue the misrepresentations of their religion just as you wouldn't want someone making things up about yours.
Davin, I have no intention in misrepresenting any religion, nor am I on here with an agenda to misrepresent nor offend anyone's beliefs. If you find Mormonism, Christianity, Islam (theology at large) all "ridiculous", those are your words, not mine. Please, by all means, tell me what beliefs of Mormonism have I misrepresented? The Mormon president (past and present) has fully acknowledged their substantial differences from that of universal Christian doctrine. If you have done much more extended research into Mormonism, I will be more than happy to revise my understanding on their doctrine and what they teach. So please don't be judge me with an agenda that only exists in your presumptions.
Quote from: Davin on September 02, 2011, 10:39:12 PM
Quote from: Cforcerunner on September 02, 2011, 10:30:11 PMI understand your point, and you are correct to say they share fundamental beliefs of Christianity, but their doctrine has become so tainted/deeply influenced by another belief(s) system, in which many of their tenants are very incompatible and often contradictory with their original beliefs. For example, they believe God the Father (not being one "God", but being among many "gods") being once human from another planet, residing near a star they call Kolob. This father is married to a "mother goddess" whom had bore many children. Jesus is one of the many "sons" of God (including his brother Satan). Jesus was conceived when God the Father literally stepped down to earth and had sexual relations with the virgin Mary. In addition, the sacrifice of Jesus is not sufficient for some sins (i.e. murder, repeated adultery). Needless to say Mormonism tremendously differentiates itself from any branch of reasonably orthodox Christianity. It would appropriately fall in the same category as other Christian "spin offs" such as gnosticism and esoteric Christianity.
Or that weird Catholicism stuff. One problem in your description is that many of the odd things in it are based around misconceptions of the Mormon religion instead of what they actually teach. I know you're trying to make it appear more silly than your own particular flavor, but even with all that, it's no more or less ridiculous than any other version of Christianity (or any other religion for that matter).
But please, don't continue the misrepresentations of their religion just as you wouldn't want someone making things up about yours.
Actually he's quite accurate. On our Pagan forum we have a former Mormon (now Pagan but still tied in to the Mormon way of things for the time being). She's had an ongoing Ask a Mormon thread there. And it's quite kooky (she will attest to this) they do in fact believe that stuff. And so so so much more...enough to also agree with Sweets, the scare the bejeesus out of me.
Cforcerunner, which denomination do you follow and why? That is, if you identify with one.
And...just to add, which belief system do you think is weirder, Mormonism or Scientology?
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on September 03, 2011, 03:01:19 AM
Cforcerunner, which denomination do you follow and why? That is, if you identify with one.
And...just to add, which belief system do you think is weirder, Mormonism or Scientology?
The first question was pretty much answered at the beginning of the thread.
Quote from: Cforcerunner on August 05, 2011, 10:11:36 PM
Quote from: Stevil on August 05, 2011, 09:22:15 PM
What church do you belong to?
Do you believe all (morals) that you are taught by your church?
I go to a southern baptist church, as well as a nondenominational church in atlanta. But would not box my beliefs in a denomination's tradition.
And as far answering your second question, I simply don't know "all" morals taught within my church, or all of their theological stances. However, I will say that I am not a big fan on how baptists choose to "dodge the question", when it comes to issues of speaking in tongues or prophesy in today's times. And I am still doing personal research to draw my own conclusions on those issues. However, I believe in their overall emphasis on global missions and enjoy the pastor's style of preaching.
To the second one, I have no idea. I would at least consider Mormonism as a religion, and I have yet to see how Scientology became to be legally recognized as a religion. Apparently their truth is only for those who can afford to it.
QuoteThe first question was pretty much answered at the beginning of the thread.
Whoops, sorry! I must have the shortest attention span on Earth coupled with almost complete inawareness of that fact. ::)
Scientology is just as stupid as any religion. They just know how to scam celeberties and make a shit ton of money from it.
Do Tasmanian Devils suffer from transmissible cancer due to some auto smite mechanism triggered by their name?
Anyway can you send a prayer for them, they're just critters you know. If they fall foxes will rise and other unique things will pass away.
Quote from: Medusa on September 02, 2011, 11:46:18 PM
Actually he's quite accurate. On our Pagan forum we have a former Mormon (now Pagan but still tied in to the Mormon way of things for the time being). She's had an ongoing Ask a Mormon thread there. And it's quite kooky (she will attest to this) they do in fact believe that stuff. And so so so much more...enough to also agree with Sweets, the scare the bejeesus out of me.
I'm not sure how we judge one religion as being more kooky than the other. They all seem to be very kooky if you ask me.
Some people think if they mention aliens then that makes them odd, but I happen to think there most likely is life on other planets.
Some think that their god is eternal, never changes, just simply knows everything about everything, even before anything existed and by definition is not comprised of anything that could be considered to exist such as energy or matter.
They press their hands together wish for things, they clutch crucifixes, hang painting of a guy being killed on their wall. Eat bread wishing it were Jesus flesh, drink wine wishing it were Jesus blood. Kooky, kooky, kooky!
Quote from: Stevil on September 03, 2011, 08:52:54 PM
I'm not sure how we judge one religion as being more kooky than the other.
I'd agree that debating "kookiness" is not too productive.
QuoteSome think that their god is eternal, never changes, just simply knows everything about everything
I believe this, I would imagine a being capable of creating all matter and energy.... Would know a thing or two about all matter and energy.
Quoteeven before anything existed and by definition is not comprised of anything that could be considered to exist such as energy or matter.
Sure...Being transcendent would infer that the entity is made not of energy or matter. So if you, by definition assert God equates as being "not comprised of anything". I suppose mathematics, morality, thoughts/sapience are essentially "not comprised of anything", either.
QuoteThey press their hands together wish for things,
A poor definition of a traditional act of prayer, but you can also bow your head ;D
Quotethey clutch crucifixes
Don't believe I've done this before.
Quotehang painting of a guy being killed on their wall.
Don't believe I've done that either.
QuoteEat bread wishing it were Jesus flesh, drink wine wishing it were Jesus blood. Kooky, kooky, kooky!
Looks like I'm three for three! :)
Quote from: Cforcerunner on September 03, 2011, 09:31:09 PM
Sure...Being transcendent would infer that the entity is made not of energy or matter. So if you, by definition assert God equates as being "not comprised of anything". I suppose mathematics, morality, thoughts/sapience are essentially "not comprised of anything", either.
Mathematics is conceptual, numbers are conceptual, mathematical functions are conceptual. We use these as tools to help us model and understand the real world, but they of themselves are not the real world.
As for thoughts (conceptual), they are interpretations (mediation) that the long running process (conceptual) we call our consciousness (conceptual) makes with regards to the firings of neurons (physical) that continuously goes on within our brains (physical).
Quote from: Cforcerunner on September 03, 2011, 09:31:09 PM
Looks like I'm three for three! :)
I did say "some people" certainly didn't mention all Christians, and certainly wasn't inferring that you in specific believed these things.
but, with all these traditions, beliefs, theories, if you are not a believer and are on the outside then they can easily appear kooky.
Many people think evolution is kooky.
Quote from: Stevil on September 03, 2011, 10:17:21 PM
Mathematics is conceptual, numbers are conceptual, mathematical functions are conceptual. We use these as tools to help us model and understand the real world, but they of themselves are not the real world.
As for thoughts (conceptual), they are interpretations (mediation) that the long running process (conceptual) we call our consciousness (conceptual) makes with regards to the firings of neurons (physical) that continuously goes on within our brains (physical).
You're definition of mathematics as being "...tools to help us model and understand the real world, but they are not real world", is a fair observation, but would not be the best definition. Similar to the theories of natural sciences, mathematical theorems are not so much human inventions, but are rather discovered. For example when Pythagoras discovered "the square of the hypotenuse of a right triangle is equal to the sum of the squares of the other two sides" (Pythagorean theorem), this fact has always existed regardless of Pythagoras' time and predates human experience. This would include time and quantum theory. Although we know these things to exist through conception and the ability to compute abstractions; does not indicate that they don't exist in the real world.
Quote from: Cforcerunner on September 05, 2011, 06:28:48 PM
Quote from: Stevil on September 03, 2011, 10:17:21 PM
Mathematics is conceptual, numbers are conceptual, mathematical functions are conceptual. We use these as tools to help us model and understand the real world, but they of themselves are not the real world.
As for thoughts (conceptual), they are interpretations (mediation) that the long running process (conceptual) we call our consciousness (conceptual) makes with regards to the firings of neurons (physical) that continuously goes on within our brains (physical).
You're definition of mathematics as being "...tools to help us model and understand the real world, but they are not real world", is a fair observation, but would not be the best definition. Similar to the theories of natural sciences, mathematical theorems are not so much human inventions, but are rather discovered. For example when Pythagoras discovered "the square of the hypotenuse of a right triangle is equal to the sum of the squares of the other two sides" (Pythagorean theorem), this fact has always existed regardless of Pythagoras' time and predates human experience. This would include time and quantum theory. Although we know these things to exist through conception and the ability to compute abstractions; does not indicate that they don't exist in the real world.
Trigonometry is conceptual. A triangle does not exist of itself. It is simply the way we model the world. If I draw these three lines in this way it looks like a triangle. It is not a triangle, it merely looks like our concept of a triangle. Based on the properties and constraints of this concept we can also introduce the concept of mathematics and work out some interesting mathematical correlations with regards to angles and side lengths. We can create some mathematical rules that apply to all triangle or simply only right angled triangles. But this is all conceptual. Physically we have some carbon particles dispersed on certain parts of paper.
Quote from: Stevil on September 05, 2011, 08:05:01 PM
Trigonometry is conceptual. A triangle does not exist of itself. It is simply the way we model the world. If I draw these three lines in this way it looks like a triangle. It is not a triangle, it merely looks like our concept of a triangle. Based on the properties and constraints of this concept we can also introduce the concept of mathematics and work out some interesting mathematical correlations with regards to angles and side lengths. We can create some mathematical rules that apply to all triangle or simply only right angled triangles. But this is all conceptual. Physically we have some carbon particles dispersed on certain parts of paper.
It seems the biggest presumption you have that I am disagreeing with is that because something is "conceptual" or "abstract" or "not physical", does not conclude it doesn't exist. If both you and I saw a circular clock in my kitchen, we both would agree the shape of the of the clock is that of a circle. It wouldn't be our consciousness creating the same consistent shape, it would be because such an object actually exists. If we both decided to measure the width of the clock (or any other measurement), chances are we would gather the same results (lets just say the clock is objectively 10 inches wide).
While you are concluding such measurement would not exist without the tools of human sapience, I am concluding the other way around. Quantity, space, structure, and shapes are a part of the natural world, independent of individual experience.
Quote from: Cforcerunner on September 01, 2011, 05:22:12 PM
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on August 29, 2011, 12:54:55 AM
I have another question!
And this was something I could never reconcile when I was Christian myself, so here it is: How do you know your belief is "enough"? Religious folk often talk about belief as if it is an all or none game, but I have never been able to see how that is so. It always made more sense to me that belief was like trust, there were several shades and you could have "a lot" or "a little", but when you absolutely NEED a certain amount to be "saved" where is the "enough" line?
Haha, interesting question. I suppose us religious folks just have the feeling in our boot soles! xD
But seriously, theology and religion can be a very overwhelming topic to ponder about. And with so many denominations, mixed messages, variation of doctrine on salvation between different church groups. The important thing to do is to do your own spiritual guide do for youself and not because you'll feel accepted to a particular group of believers. When I read the gospels, I was amazed. When you strip away the VBS Jesus and look into who he actually was, that was what did it for me. Listening to testimonies and secular journals on what Jesus has done is truly remarkable. I can't use this to create an argument to logically conclude Christianity is true, but that would be missing the point.
My advice to you (or your former self) is to strip away all of you've heard/think you've heard about Jesus. And read the gospel for yourself. There is no amount of "belief" needed. Hear out the message Jesus has brought and decide for yourself if you can accept it or don't....It's really as simple as that.
QuoteEven if you have convinced yourself 100% that you are the believiest believer that ever believed, how do you feel at ease about that? Because, obviously, it is YOU that is making that judgement and one of the tenants of christian faith is that we are all fallible in our judgement and ability to discern God's will on our own. And God will never really come down and say "okay, you pass, you're saved!", or even if he did, how could you be sure you will keep that status?
Trust me, you'll know. Christianity is certainly a lifestyle. And more of a life complete thankfulness for the grace of God then a life of strict moral conduct. I know when I became an actual Christian, my view of the world and my purpose significantly changed.
QuoteTake me, for example, I went from Christian to agnostic to (close-to) full atheist over the course of maybe ten years. Very gradually. When did I stop being saved? There was a period of time when I probably didn't believe very strongly, but I would pray "for stronger faith" and that kind of thing, was I saved then? Or would I be doomed once the slightest bit of doubt crept in?
I'm honestly wondering because this point used to drive me crazy when I was a believer and I never really talked about it with anyone else, so I'd be interested to see how current Christians feel about it. ;D
I would consider myself once agnostic/deistic before. So I can relate to your view, but have moved in a different direction. I don't believe you ever "lost" faith. I don't believe followers of Jesus, once converting, was in a constant state of pondering their salvation. It could be you never truly experienced it in the first place. This is very common since many conversions are solely emotionally based. That's great that you were praying for stronger faith (assuming those prayers were very legitimate), but it sounds you were a state of seeking faith rather than actually having it. For me, it is difficult to describe the state of mind during my conversion, but it was a long and reflective process...."counting the cost" as Jesus would say. Again, read the gospels for yourself with fresh eyes, the way I grew up learning the gospel was very watered-downed. I also recommend reading Mere Christianity, not for proof of Christianity, but for a simple and intelligent explanation regarding many components of the Christian worldview.
Interesting response, though I don't see how a prayer could not be "legitimate", could you explain what you mean by that? You also seem to be hinting that I was never really a true "believer" to begin with and I'm not sure why, because I did explain that I was. I understand that "belief" is a subjective thing, but for several years of my life I had, what I believed to be true, religious experiences, I went to church, I went to church camps, I read the bible cover to cover, I had the "personal relationship with God". I even got a cross tattoo. Or would you consider someone that comes to consider themselves an Atheist, by definition, someone who could have never "really" believed (because "real" grace of God would never allow it or something of that nature?) If that is the case, I'd be interested in hearing you elaborate on that (though I don't want to put words in your mouth, maybe that's not what you meant)
Also, what do you mean by a conversion being "emotionally based". What else would it be based on?
Thanks for your honest response :) I find this interesting ;D
Quote from: Cforcerunner on September 05, 2011, 08:33:56 PM
It seems the biggest presumption you have that I am disagreeing with is that because something is "conceptual" or "abstract" or "not physical", does not conclude it doesn't exist. If both you and I saw a circular clock in my kitchen, we both would agree the shape of the of the clock is that of a circle. It wouldn't be our consciousness creating the same consistent shape, it would be because such an object actually exists. If we both decided to measure the width of the clock (or any other measurement), chances are we would gather the same results (lets just say the clock is objectively 10 inches wide).
While you are concluding such measurement would not exist without the tools of human sapience, I am concluding the other way around. Quantity, space, structure, and shapes are a part of the natural world, independent of individual experience.
A circle is a concept, it does not exist of itself. It is a concept where each point is equal distance from the centre. The properties of this concept are that the diameter fits into the circumference exactly 3.14159265358979323...., its area is Pi X r squared. These are conceptual properties which accurately describe a physical system build to these dimensions. Conceptual modelling is very useful, but does have its limits.
e.g.
When building a computer system or building an architect creates a conceptual model. This highlights the key aspects of a potential system without requiring the time and effort needed to go into the detail of what something actually is and how it works.
A conceptual model takes advantage of people's common understandings and allows a few quick iterations to ensure the design meets the intended requirement, at least from a high level.
It is only once agreements of understandings have been made, assumptions have been clarified and high level designs have been completed that a physical model is then attempted to more accurately design and model the physical system which is to be built.
When thinking of a person, the mind and soul are merely conceptual. Of course you will disagree because your religion teaches you that these this are metaphysical and actually exist, in the same way that you are taught that your god is metaphysical.
In my world of understanding, the mind is a conceptual model of the physical system, the brain, the neurons and the long running process that is your consciousness. The soul is also conceptual, describing your personhood, your personality, your memories, your drive, your ambitions, your personal moralities. To me these are conceptual properties of the conceptual mind. In a very simplistic conceptual way they describe aspects of the underlying physical system, the brain, the neurons, the long running process...
To me the god concept is an extrapolation of that person understanding of the mind, the soul, the metaphysical. It is conceptual, you will never see god, you will never observe, measure or test god, you will never have a personal relationship with god (although no doubt, you think you do). Just like that clock, it is not a circle, it is shaped like a circle. Your relationship is not a relationship with god it is a relationship with the thoughts you have about your idea of god. (IMHO)
Quote from: Stevil on September 01, 2011, 08:17:04 PM
What are you searching for at the moment Tristan Jay?
Are you looking for a higher authority, a purpose, an objective morality, a group to belong to?
Are you searching for some answers/explainations with regards to your lost faith?
Do you feel something is missing in your life right now?
"Need input Stephanie, more input!" - (sorry, vague reference to a very old movie)
I found these questions to be very helpful for drawing my attention to what I am looking for. Thank you. :) I have delayed in posting back here, because I wanted to let it bubble about in my mind. I would say at this point, what I understand about myself is that I am looking for a way to understand/deal with/interact with the Universe in an effective, constructive way. My personality type predisposes me towards loathing authority and authority figures, or at the very least review their performance and activities highly critically. I feel that the world is spiritual, and I believe in God, but I've been coming to the conclusion that religions are going to fail someone like me. I'm too much of an iconoclast, and religious doctrine and practices designed for mass consumption, are homoginized in a way that diminishes the wonder of spirituality at an individual level. Each person, coming to their own understanding of how they're going to act and interact with the Universe, without being
told; this feels very important to me, for some reason. That really is a noble exercise of Free Will; and religious intrusion on that gift seems like the seems close to the complaint that sin is in the world when Free Will becomes to selfish and violates the space of other people's Free Will. It feels like religious infrastructure has fallen into a trap of selfishness.
I want to not hate God. God is defined for humans by religions. I hate him as he is defined by religions. At college I was exposed to the notion that defining something lessens the object that is being defined. Definitions are restrictive, simplified, they make their object smaller, lesser than all that they really are. So I guess I would say that right now it is important to strip away the way God is defined, because I would speculate that religions are diminishing something that could be so much greater. So I guess right now I'm trying to Un-Define Re-define God.
I am not looking for a group to belong to. The more I think about it, the more worthwhile an endeavor it seems to just go it alone, to take the hard, worthwhile road. It would kill the passion to sit in a church, and listen to a sermon that's been prepared for me, and worry about the politics or the potential flawed individual that conceived of it. If I find knowledge, it will be because I am personally motivated to seeking it out.
I'm afraid I've only got impressionistic answers to your questions, Stevil.
I now return you to your regularly scheduled "Ask a Christian" topic. I'm still thinking; I'll ask when I figure out what I'm trying to get my head around, so to speak.
Tristan, I think you could benefit from some structure to your thoughts. This might help you concieve a way forward.
I've had a go at structuring/disecting your last post. I hope you don't mind.
The Goal
* I am looking for a way to understand/deal with/interact with the Universe in an effective, constructive way.
* I want to not hate God.
The Strategic approach
* Un-Define Re-define God
* It's important to me to come to my own understanding of how I'm going to act and interact with the Universe (I reworded this phrase - Stevil)
* The more worthwhile an endeavor it seems to just go it alone, to take the hard, worthwhile road
The Tactical approach
* Noble exercise of Free Will
* ???
SWOT
Strengths
* Review performance and activities critically
Weaknessess
* My personality type predisposes me towards loathing authority and authority figures
* Religions are going to fail someone like me
Opportunites
* If I find knowledge, it will be because I am personally motivated to seeking it out
* The world is spiritual
* I believe in God
Threats
* Religious doctrine and practices designed for mass consumption, are homoginized in a way that diminishes the wonder of spirituality
* It would kill the passion to sit in a church
* Politics
* Religious Intrusion
* Selfishness
* Potential flawed individual that conceived of it
I would say, given the above it would benefit you to flesh out your tactical approach more.
Maybe explore your opportunities more. Seek knowledge, try to work out what it means to be spiritual for you and the world and how you interact with it. Maybe explore what you mean when you say that you believe in God. What does god mean to you? I understand you don't want to define god so this will be a challenge.
Possibly be conscious of your threats, don't let them hinder your progress but use them as a tool to validate your journey. When you gain some knowledge filter it through your threats. Has this understanding been tainted by selfishness, by religious intrusion etc?
Mitigate your weaknesses, don't waste too much time looking to others for answers, it seems you might be reluctant to take on board what they have to say.
On your search for spirituality or an understanding of god are you simply defining your own personal religion? Why would this not fail you?
Anyway, hopefully just some food for thought.
With regards to your statement
"God is defined for humans by religions. I hate him as he is defined by religions"
You need to change this.
"I hate the definition religions put on god"
I think this is more honest.
And with regards to
"The notion that defining something lessens the object that is being defined"
I actually find that sometimes a definition or a story about something or someone can actually put that person or thing into legendary status. It can build it up beyond what it was. I think if you look at the "27 club - Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, Jim Morrison, Kurt Cobain" you will find that idea of unfinished potential could potentially improve what reality may have brought about.
Quote from: Cforcerunner on September 02, 2011, 11:11:30 PM
Quote from: Davin on September 02, 2011, 10:39:12 PM
Or that weird Catholicism stuff. One problem in your description is that many of the odd things in it are based around misconceptions of the Mormon religion instead of what they actually teach. I know you're trying to make it appear more silly than your own particular flavor, but even with all that, it's no more or less ridiculous than any other version of Christianity (or any other religion for that matter).
But please, don't continue the misrepresentations of their religion just as you wouldn't want someone making things up about yours.
Davin, I have no intention in misrepresenting any religion, nor am I on here with an agenda to misrepresent nor offend anyone's beliefs. If you find Mormonism, Christianity, Islam (theology at large) all "ridiculous", those are your words, not mine. Please, by all means, tell me what beliefs of Mormonism have I misrepresented? The Mormon president (past and present) has fully acknowledged their substantial differences from that of universal Christian doctrine. If you have done much more extended research into Mormonism, I will be more than happy to revise my understanding on their doctrine and what they teach. So please don't be judge me with an agenda that only exists in your presumptions.
I can both find something ridiculous and not misrepresent it. My understanding of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Mormonism), comes from previously being a Mormon.
Quote from: Medusa on September 02, 2011, 11:46:18 PMActually he's quite accurate. On our Pagan forum we have a former Mormon (now Pagan but still tied in to the Mormon way of things for the time being). She's had an ongoing Ask a Mormon thread there. And it's quite kooky (she will attest to this) they do in fact believe that stuff. And so so so much more...enough to also agree with Sweets, the scare the bejeesus out of me.
I was a Mormon myself, and it's not very accurate. There is indeed many a kooky thing just like every other religion, so I don't see the need to bring in misrepresentations. I don't know who the woman you mentioned is or what she said, but if you think that what was said here is accurate based on what she said, then there is a problem with what she said. Not only am I an ex-Mormon who studied it extensively, but most of my family is still Mormon.
While I can't argue whether a Mormon actually believes that stuff or not, I can say that that stuff is not taught and is not doctrine. I.E.: I know a lot of Southern Baptists that believe in aliens abducting people, but that doesn't mean that it's taught in their church.
Tristan Jay, have you tried focusing more on the personal and individual growth aspect of spirituality and philosophies based more on introspection and knowing that you have the free will to deal with adverse situations in the way you see fit? I don't know how much you would have to distance yourself from mainstream religions however, and especially the bible, which contains one of the best examples of a leader (god) not living up to the standards he wants his creations to live up to. Take it back to basics, maybe. Christian theology has already been around for many years trying to make sense of the world in a way that doesn't make sense at all, and so either you compartmentalize and choose which parts you think are relevant and practically ignore the rest and inconsistent contradictions or you throw it all out.
hi Tristan Jay
You do sound like you need to believe in a deity, and feel that your life and the universe has some meaning, as well as feeling there is a spiritual dimension to existence. Personally I don't feel the need for those things, but I can understand how you or others might.
You really don't have to be a Christian though, or even assume that theirs is the only god, or the only way of defining a god. It does seem like you've been heavily indoctrinated into thinking that way (I'm assuming you were raised a Christian). Their god is one of thousands and is no truer or more valid than any other. To me your anger at the Christian god seems pointless, you're angrily shaking your fist at the clouds in the sky.
Why don't you just have your own personal spirituality / belief in god, and do without all the mythology, dogma and doctrine of organised religions like Christianity. You can take good philosophy on how to lead your life from both religious and non-religious sources, there's plenty out there. Plus pretty much all of us have a basic agreement of what's right and wrong in life. I'm an atheist but I've always quite liked the sentiments of the Desiderata, particularly the ending that one should strive to be happy.
You sound to me like you could be a deist of sorts;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism
xSilverPhinx, much of what you say gells with the frustrations that I feel, and the new approaches I'm angling for. Right now, I'm trying to focus on personal, introspective spirituality. Wisdom that can help with benevolent perspective, an attitude toward the world that is health and constructive while also being realistic about the stupid or undignified stuff so I don't take it too personally; these are the kinds of things I'm going for. Subject matter pertaining to punitive measures (on any scale), or talk of "enemies" and "allies", that stuff is poison to me.
Christianity has some stuff that I like; a great random example that I recall taking out of it is anonymous charity: by not taking credit for certain good works, I hope to move closer accomplishing "true" altruism. Non-judgementalism is something I got the impression is strongly encouraged in Christian circles, this, too feels helpful in peaceful living aspirations. What does offend me is the self-inflicted guilt that is encouraged as a mindset; I had enough self-confidence problems before getting into all that. I'm hard enough on myself as it is, and I've had to learn some important lessons about being realistic about when guilt and remorse is instructive for personal interaction with others, and when it can cripple me psychologically; it had to be done, and could only be accomplished outside of that Christian framework of "You are always sinning, all the time!"
At this point, I'm interesting in wisdom that helps me live a peaceful life and contribute to the world and help others; and I have come to the conclusion that religion does not offer peace for me, only confusion. Too many people obsessed with trying to persuade others about what is "right" and they end up arguing about the structural semantics that are nebulous and not as profound.
Too Few Lions, I sense the pointlessness of shaking my fist at the sky. I suppose in the end it is humans that I am disappointed with, and that's more honest. I think the promise of a God who is personal and active in the world has left me with a crushing, agonizing disillusionment. I don't think anyone can try and persuade me that God is like this anymore without making me very angry and resentful. I admit, it's my own fault for putting too much trust in what I've been told, a recurring problem for me is that I've been easily impressionable. As I peruse Buddhist text, I do so with a critical eye; the wisdom and mentality may help, but the miracles and the outlined structure of the Universe, Life, the Afterlife and all that other cosmic stuff is a distraction from usefully and peacefully living through the life we can clearly see in front of us.
Sorry for being off topic; but this is helping me on a personal level. If it's distracting, perhaps it might be desirable to take some of my own posts and those of people responding directly to me into a new topic? Whatever works best for the forum.
Sorry for the intrusion, Christian members. :-[ I return you to the "Ask a Christian" questions.
Quote from: Tristan Jay on September 07, 2011, 09:13:45 PM
xSilverPhinx, much of what you say gells with the frustrations that I feel, and the new approaches I'm angling for. Right now, I'm trying to focus on personal, introspective spirituality. Wisdom that can help with benevolent perspective, an attitude toward the world that is health and constructive while also being realistic about the stupid or undignified stuff so I don't take it too personally; these are the kinds of things I'm going for. Subject matter pertaining to punitive measures (on any scale), or talk of "enemies" and "allies", that stuff is poison to me.
Christianity has some stuff that I like; a great random example that I recall taking out of it is anonymous charity: by not taking credit for certain good works, I hope to move closer accomplishing "true" altruism. Non-judgementalism is something I got the impression is strongly encouraged in Christian circles, this, too feels helpful in peaceful living aspirations. What does offend me is the self-inflicted guilt that is encouraged as a mindset; I had enough self-confidence problems before getting into all that. I'm hard enough on myself as it is, and I've had to learn some important lessons about being realistic about when guilt and remorse is instructive for personal interaction with others, and when it can cripple me psychologically; it had to be done, and could only be accomplished outside of that Christian framework of "You are always sinning, all the time!"
At this point, I'm interesting in wisdom that helps me live a peaceful life and contribute to the world and help others; and I have come to the conclusion that religion does not offer peace for me, only confusion. Too many people obsessed with trying to persuade others about what is "right" and they end up arguing about the structural semantics that are nebulous and not as profound.
If I may make a few suggestions, when you have the time, look up
cult tactics and how cults operate and manipulate. Whether free will is real, partial or a pure illusion is irrelevant, religious authorities know that they can only persuade people up to a certain point. From my perspective, it explains a lot of the bad in religion, especially when it has to do with control. Making people feel worthless (sinners) without the cult is one of them. Punitive measures, and an "us versus them" mentality too. It keeps people in line and makes "spiritual property" out of them.
Of course it wouldn't be fair to compare modern Christianity and all its forms to what it was in the Middle Ages and earlier. The more liberal a religion gets, the further it distances itself from what cults do, especially since less and less people grow up already heavily indoctrinated environments and into that way of thinking. They see through the bullshit.
Maybe you can find some answers that you might find helpful.
One of the downsides of Christianity IMO is that it's not a religion that really empowers people, and it's too easy to twist it into a comfort blanket and false sense of security that will only disappoint you again in the future. Unless you cherry-pick the parts that you feel will be constructive and not worry about the rest of the philosophical package that comes with it that isn't. The good thing about being more independant is that ultimately you're responsible for your choices. One more rather negative aspect that can come from organised mainstream religions, where people base their opinions on whatever their book or Church/Temple/Mosque ect. tells them, and when things go wrong, there are other entities to blame such as the devil or evil spirits, the church, god or whatever.
Yeah...I'm also not a big fan of religions. ::)
Tristan Jay, I can understand your disappointment with humans, there are plenty of bad egotistical self-centred ones out there, but there are also plenty of lovely genuinely nice people. I always try and surround myself with those kind of people.
From my experience of religions, at their basest they're a mix of mythology (like virgin births, miracles, resurrections etc) and philosophy (don't be too materialistic, do your best by others etc). On top of that you have all other manner of dogma that builds up over the centuries. I think you can take the good philosophical bits from Christianity, Buddhism or any other religion and dump the bad stuff like all that crap about sin, or intolerance towards homosexuals or non-believers, heaven and hell, or blindly stating what's 'right' or 'wrong' and trying to enforce their beliefs on everyone else.
It sounds like you need to feel like you're doing good and making a difference in the world and that's a good thing. You sound quite a lot like me in that you seem to have a natural inclination towards humanism, but also experience tells you that people aren't always that nice and society / government / authority can be full of shit therefore there's also a level of alienation and misanthropy. I wonder if there's such a thing as a misanthropic humanist? I think it's a good idea to read all religious texts with a skeptical eye, but take any small pearls of wisdom out of them while discarding all the rubbish. I hope you find what you're after, and that it makes you happy and reasonably content with the world.
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on September 05, 2011, 08:38:59 PM
Interesting response, though I don't see how a prayer could not be "legitimate", could you explain what you mean by that?
It's the level of sincerity, the condition of your heart. That's truly the way of finding God. I'd say there's a vast amount of people claiming to be a Christian, but have nothing to show for it. Many pray when they are out to dinner with Christians or after finishing a bible study, but not so often after that. Finding people who are as much of a Christian behind close doors as they are in public is not very common.
QuoteYou also seem to be hinting that I was never really a true "believer" to begin with and I'm not sure why, because I did explain that I was. I understand that "belief" is a subjective thing, but for several years of my life I had, what I believed to be true, religious experiences, I went to church, I went to church camps, I read the bible cover to cover, I had the "personal relationship with God". I even got a cross tattoo.
You not being a "true believer" would be my first assumption off hand, but honestly I just don't have enough information regarding your spirituality. There are several students at our church who were heavily involved in the church, but when college came around or some event in their life came up, all of a sudden God/church became less of a priority. I'd assume if you felt you really believed, it was likely a very slow and thought out decision to dismiss your faith and I'd like to know more details as to what caused you to become an atheist.
QuoteOr would you consider someone that comes to consider themselves an Atheist, by definition, someone who could have never "really" believed (because "real" grace of God would never allow it or something of that nature?) If that is the case, I'd be interested in hearing you elaborate on that (though I don't want to put words in your mouth, maybe that's not what you meant)
No, I wouldn't consider myself a believer in a predetermined destination, especially on a micro-level of our personal lives and beliefs. I believe we all personal beliefs based on what we have experienced and the world around us, but it is ultimately up to us to decide how we choose to react (those who don't agree with me, please just feel free to disagree, this is just part of my worldview). I would of considered myself an agnostic/maybe deist during highschool, and became a Christian around my junior/senior year.
Jesus' parable of the sower would best explain how people have chosen to react to His gospel. For example, many committed atheists/secularist who are avidly against religion as a social intuition (or perhaps just Christianity) would represent the birds or the stony ground, those who simply shut the door when any evangelist comes their way and are not even willing to hear what they would of had to say. (important to note that this example is not in reference to all atheist, but to simply illustrate a point)
There were the seeds that fell and were scorched by the sun because they had no root and withered away, and those who had fallen into thorns and were choked away. The former would represent believers who really did not truly believe in the first place, the latter representing believers who have since fallen away from their faith.
Being from a evangelical church, I love missions and spreading the gospel and love using my own testimony. But I also understand this parable, and have never approved pushing my beliefs unto anybody, but rather letting the gospel speak for itself, let those who are considering believing do so like I did, and think it over and count the cost. I see success in genuine presentations, and not in the number count of conversions. It is up to the individual to react in the way they choose.
Quote
Also, what do you mean by a conversion being "emotionally based". What else would it be based on?
My conversion involved emotions, that's a very important aspect to a spiritual transformation, however, it was not "based" in emotions, or else it would likely not of lasted. I would say it took me a period of around 6 months to become an actual believer. It was after much thought, reading, research, and prayer to whatever maybe out there. And after all this, it wasn't just church attendance that changed for me, but a lifestyle, purpose, and a change in how I see people and the world around me.
QuoteThanks for your honest response :) I find this interesting ;D
Yes, I find this conversation very enjoyable! :D
Quote from: Cforcerunner on September 10, 2011, 01:18:45 AM
You not being a "true believer" would be my first assumption off hand, but honestly I just don't have enough information regarding your spirituality. There are several students at our church who were heavily involved in the church, but when college came around or some event in their life came up, all of a sudden God/church became less of a priority. I'd assume if you felt you really believed, it was likely a very slow and thought out decision to dismiss your faith and I'd like to know more details as to what caused you to become an atheist.
Actually, it was sort of the other way around. I attended religious groups, but I very rarely talked about it with other people. Ironically, the most I've actually discussed spirituality and religion has been here.
And I never really made a conscious decision to "lose the faith". For years, I just "had it" (like I assume most Christians do), and then, one day, for no particular reason, I just started doubting. That's when I went through the whole crisis of faith that I described, with the prayer and whatnot, which was a difficult time, but then I sort of came out "the other side" - what you would probably consider the wrong side, but what I would consider the right side.
I have to say that studying History in university and meeting my now husband, who is an atheist, most likely supported my transition.
I just feel as though some Christians think that Atheists are always people who just won't give the word of God a "chance". I gave it a whole-hearted chance, I was born and raised to give it a chance and consciously wanted to keep believing. I just, couldn't. I can understand your frustration in not being able to reach people the way you'd like to, so I have to commend you for how respectful you are here. Thanks for elaborating on the points I asked about :)
Quote from: Stevil on September 05, 2011, 10:36:54 PM
A circle is a concept, it does not exist of itself. It is a concept where each point is equal distance from the centre. The properties of this concept are that the diameter fits into the circumference exactly 3.14159265358979323...., its area is Pi X r squared. These are conceptual properties which accurately describe a physical system build to these dimensions. Conceptual modelling is very useful, but does have its limits.
e.g.
When building a computer system or building an architect creates a conceptual model. This highlights the key aspects of a potential system without requiring the time and effort needed to go into the detail of what something actually is and how it works.
A conceptual model takes advantage of people's common understandings and allows a few quick iterations to ensure the design meets the intended requirement, at least from a high level.
It is only once agreements of understandings have been made, assumptions have been clarified and high level designs have been completed that a physical model is then attempted to more accurately design and model the physical system which is to be built.
Sure, I don't see any problems agreeing with you on these points. But again, it lies with your conclusion. I understand your belief in human conceptual models as being nothing more than "handy tools" in understanding our world and nothing more, therefore they lack existence. I'd say you are strongly understating the significance of our cognitive faculties and our capability in understanding the abstract. Natural science is completely dependent on highly complex mathematical understanding and the ability to think abstractly. In fact, it has lead to the development of new physical elements which did not previously exist. Moreover, non-mathmatical conceptions such as culture, aesthetics, harmony/congruency, logical inference, fairness, moral values, human rights, social norms, politics, human economics/trade, human emotion, language, race, social liberty, as well as your entire personality, ect; are examples of conceptional models that go beyond being mere "tools used for understanding/painting a picture for the world around us". No functional human could reasonably deny the existence of these things in any pragmatic capacity. You have good reason to believe these very words you are reading as you review my post contains abstract, yet objective meaning beyond it's mere text formulation that does actually exist.
QuoteWhen thinking of a person, the mind and soul are merely conceptual. Of course you will disagree because your religion teaches you that these this are metaphysical and actually exist, in the same way that you are taught that your god is metaphysical.
In my world of understanding, the mind is a conceptual model of the physical system, the brain, the neurons and the long running process that is your consciousness. The soul is also conceptual, describing your personhood, your personality, your memories, your drive, your ambitions, your personal moralities. To me these are conceptual properties of the conceptual mind. In a very simplistic conceptual way they describe aspects of the underlying physical system, the brain, the neurons, the long running process...
Alright, I think this is a transitions of topics, but yes, I'd say the soul "runs" on neurologic functioning and capability. But that shouldn't define what the soul is purely comprised of. For example, my body "runs" on proper circulation of my cardiovascular arteries, and if I was to inject myself full of cholesterol, I would no longer be able to function. Am I, therefore, a circulation of cardiovascular arteries? Just because it is a needed component for a phenomena to sustain itself does not necessarily define the phenomena itself.
QuoteI think this. To me the god concept is an extrapolation of that person understanding of the mind, the soul, the metaphysical. It is conceptual, you will never see god, you will never observe, measure or test god, you will never have a personal relationship with god (although no doubt, you think you do). Just like that clock, it is not a circle, it is shaped like a circle. Your relationship is not a relationship with god it is a relationship with the thoughts you have about your idea of god. (IMHO)
Again, I disagree on your black/white view on what does and does not exist (if it's physical it's real, if not, it's a "mere concept"). So it's safe to say we will have differences in metaphysical standpoints as well. I, for example, believe something has bothered itself enough to drag me into the natural world, perhaps to bring some good to it, and become "more like Him" which (even outside of the Christian faith) would be seen as a fairly virtuous ambition.
I am not sure what your worldview is. But assuming it is naturalistic or somewhat closely related to naturalism, I don't see how there could be problem with my behavior/worldview (or anyone else's). As there is no inherit implications of meaning outside of human "conception", there is not too much of a difference between the day you are born and the day you have died. As you would simply be filling space and time for a short period, and any meaning beyond that is self-created.
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on September 10, 2011, 02:15:02 AM
Quote from: Cforcerunner on September 10, 2011, 01:18:45 AM
You not being a "true believer" would be my first assumption off hand, but honestly I just don't have enough information regarding your spirituality. There are several students at our church who were heavily involved in the church, but when college came around or some event in their life came up, all of a sudden God/church became less of a priority. I'd assume if you felt you really believed, it was likely a very slow and thought out decision to dismiss your faith and I'd like to know more details as to what caused you to become an atheist.
Actually, it was sort of the other way around. I attended religious groups, but I very rarely talked about it with other people. Ironically, the most I've actually discussed spirituality and religion has been here.
And I never really made a conscious decision to "lose the faith". For years, I just "had it" (like I assume most Christians do), and then, one day, for no particular reason, I just started doubting. That's when I went through the whole crisis of faith that I described, with the prayer and whatnot, which was a difficult time, but then I sort of came out "the other side" - what you would probably consider the wrong side, but what I would consider the right side.
I have to say that studying History in university and meeting my now husband, who is an atheist, most likely supported my transition.
I just feel as though some Christians think that Atheists are always people who just won't give the word of God a "chance". I gave it a whole-hearted chance, I was born and raised to give it a chance and consciously wanted to keep believing. I just, couldn't. I can understand your frustration in not being able to reach people the way you'd like to, so I have to commend you for how respectful you are here. Thanks for elaborating on the points I asked about :)
Ahh...We would of loved you to be on team Jesus :'(
:D
I am happy to know that you had a meditated decision on the matter, and I hope for the best in your spirituality/worldview. I am not sure what exactly your view is from now on, but I hope you have left Christianity on good terms and perhaps taken some positive aspects of Christian values in your family life. You can still look at Jesus from a completely secular standpoint and still find inspiration! ;D
Good luck at vet school!
Dogs are awesome! 8)