-
Religion, or the lack thereof
I've had a busy weekend. First we headed up to Leicester for the renewal of wedding vows of some family friends, then by a return journey back home to see my niece's first communion. Two different but important events, and at both of them, I very much felt out of place. I know exactly why as well - religion.
I'm a Christian. Church of England, to be prisice. But the thing is, I'm not a very GOOD Christian. I believe in God, I believe in Jesus and I believe in science. This leads to a few conflicts which I've been thinking about over the past few weeks - what happens when we die, etc. To be honest, I want to believe I'll go to Heaven, but I know that there's nothing. No life after death, no eternal paradise, nothing. That's it. End game.
So I'm having a very minor crisis of faith here, and we go to some very moving renewal of vows. Very touching - we've know the family ever since we were young and we do still visit back and forth a couple of times a year - but there was a fair mention of God. And I felt totally out of place singing hyms about His/Her love for us, and how the third person in a relationship is God. It feels wrong, because I don't know if I believe that.
The next day we're at the first communion of my niece. Very sweet, very touching, la de da. Same problem though - we're singing songs about how the Lord God loves us all, praying for His/Her forgiveness, giving thanks to Him/Her. And I feel horrible singing along to this because I don't believe this at all. A part of me accepts that there could well be a great being watching over us, but that for the most part, what people do in the name of their faith is way too much.
Then the kicker. The Act of Faith. It reads, and I quote from the booklets they gave us - 'We believe God made us. We believe Jesus died and rose to save us. We believe the Spirit gives us life. This is our faith. This is the faith of the church. We are proud to profess it, in Christ Jesus our lord. Amen.'
And I don't believe this at all. God made us? We were made by a sperm and an egg. Our very existence at all is due to evolution, not because some cosmic being rolled up his sleeves and said 'Right, I want someone to worship me. Let's call them... Human Beings.' It's rubbish.
I accept that other people may believe this. I'm not denying them that - it's their right to believe whatever they want to. But hearing things like this constantly for over an hour makes you wonder who came up with stuff like this. Why did they do it? What was the point?
...so don't mind me. Just a little worried that I won't go to Heaven - if indeed it exists - because I don't pray to Jesus every night before bed, or want to be blessed in Church. Eep.
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
Quote:
To be honest, I want to believe I'll go to Heaven, but I know that there's nothing. No life after death, no eternal paradise, nothing. That's it. End game.
(Key Word bolded and underlined.) Do we? How do we know? I don't really want to get all religious-zealot here, nor do I want to assume, or really get in deep down with the topic of faith. It's just that we don't know if God exists or not. We don't even know if God will ever be within our technological capabilities to be unearthed. Whereas the ancient people of the past thought that the stars were fixed in their positions in the sky, these days we know better. Much, much better, and about much, much more. Maybe we'll happen to find God one day. Or, maybe God is just a made up story to keep people in line that descended from the cavemans' beliefs in the world based on having nothing else. (Read Clan of the Cave Bear by Jean M. Auel for an example.)
Then there's the theory that God is just testing us all, and won't come out to any given person even if they want proof that he exists so people can actually worship him rather than wonder if he exists. Even with such a virtuous act in their hearts, it's still not worthy of being shown to. I'm in that boat, really.
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
Actually the conflict and its resolution are much more simplified than your post implies.
Quote:
I believe in God, I believe in Jesus and I believe in science. [...]
This paragraph is fine and in my opinion normal; I think many Christians today struggle between science and faith and, without derailing into a ridiculously detailed discussion of my beliefs I further believe the only accurate resolution is to rely on Biblical principles for matters of ethics and morality and leave science to creation, origin of man, etc. where it has solid evidence.
Now here is where your conflict really lies:
Quote:
I felt totally out of place singing hyms about His/Her love for us, and how the third person in a relationship is God. It feels wrong, because I don't know if I believe that.
A part of me accepts that there could well be a great being watching over us, but that for the most part, what people do in the name of their faith is way too much.
These two statements contradict the first. Fundamental to being a Christian (even a BAD Christian) is the basic belief in God and Jesus. God's position and purpose in life to the believer is well defined in Biblical texts, and failure to accept this notion means your system of belief is something that is not technically Christian.
It's not bad that you struggle with your faith; in my opinion the only way to know you believe the right thing is to struggle with it and attack your own beliefs to see if you can come up with a valid defense. It seems to me, though, that the source of your discomfort is revealed in this statement:
Quote:
Just a little worried that I won't go to Heaven - if indeed it exists - because I don't pray to Jesus every night before bed, or want to be blessed in Church. Eep.
Which, at least by my doctrine, shows a failure to understand Jesus' message. Belief that He atoned for your sins and the desires to live a sinless life and have repentance for the sins you do commit are all that are required. Prayer is good, church attendance promotes spiritual growth, but Jesus warned against placing more emphasis on the ritual than the worship.
So really the solution is to do some inner searching. Granted, how you go about it can influence the outcome as if you consult evangelical atheists they will be sure to help weaken your Christian position but an evangelical Christian would be more likely to help strengthen your Christian position.
Decide for yourself if you truly believe there is nothing after death. If so, then ask yourself if the conflict between this belief and Christian principles is so great that you cannot continue to call yourself a believer. If so, then you must make yourself comfortable with becoming more of a secular person. I could provide several personal opinions on this struggle, but my personal advice would be quite biased so I feel it would be more appropriate to give it if specifically asked rather than starting this thread down the path we all know it will tread.
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
You are correct in your doubt. There is absolutely no scientific evidence to support the notion that a magical being controls everything. It is impossible to know what happens after death, but the most plausible scenario is that we simply cease to exist.
People who believe in god are no different than tribal mystics who believe in voodoo, or medieval serfs who believe in wizards and witches, or the Greeks who believed in Apollo or Zues. It's just different flavors of the same delusional fantasy.
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
Well, I've been rambling on this subject quite a bit lately, but what the hay.
My parents are, of course, Christian, and right up until the age of 12 I believed everything they told me. But then, of course, I experienced some changes, and realized some things about who I am and who I want to be, that came into direct conflict with it. Christianity != Transsexuality being okay (although to get technical the bible says nothing about it). At first, I just hoped that maybe if I was good and kind, God would love me for who I was- although that already contradicted what my parents had been telling me (they don't think good acts and behavior are enough, see).
But the more I saw of the world, the less I was satisfied with that compromise. It culminated in the death of someone I loved, which reminded me all too bluntly how unsure I was (and am) about not only those beliefs, but whether any afterlife exists.
I've come to the conclusion that, to be perfectly honest: I don't know. I don't know if god exists, I don't know if some other religion is correct, I don't know if the afterlife exists, I don't even know if "magic" exists. I don't know if ghosts exist, I don't know if souls exist. I don't know what consciousness really is or what makes me me. Technically I don't know if anyone else has a sense of perspective like I do, though I feel fairly confident that at least that's the case.
So I just try to go with what's in my heart and mind to live life. I try to look at everything hypothetically, because if you want to get really elaborate, I don't know that anything I perceive is being seen correctly. But to function rationally I just have to guess based on what I think I see. I use logic as well as I can and go with what my feelings say, except for one "moral" I try to hold myself to. I could try to word it myself, but it was worded ingeniously for me many centuries ago: "And ye harm none, do what ye will". If I think anything I do or see might hurt somebody, I'm very, very careful about it, and try to find the least hurtful way, or at least the best compromise. Going on this same reasoning I try not to let my anger lose on anybody TOO strongly unless I think it will accomplish something, so typically I just wind up venting and ranting to myself or an empty/mostly empty chatroom or somesuch.
However, if I think I can help someone in some way, without screwing things up, and that such help is wanted or needed, I try to do my best with that, also.
I am an agnostic. I do not know anything for absolute certain one way or another, so I just try to live my life as myself in the most harmless way I can. I try to enjoy life, experience what it has to offer; I love certain people and enjoy certain things, and I have an identity which is very important to me. I also try to add something to it for other people, when I can. I hope that there is an afterlife, because I think it would be pretty awful for everyone to ultimately lose their lives and everything they ever did and were to just be gone forever eventually, but I don't really know if there is one or not. I hope so.
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
Why Belderan, you speak as if those things aren't real. You know, I've always wondered why you hate religion so much. I mean, granted, it can be twisted to cause horrible things, but it can also help people get through life. I just don't see why it matters whether what people believe in is real. I mean, if it's real to you, does it matter?
I mean, I used to believe in UFOs, and now I don't. However, I don't see what the harm was in my believing. I mean, in the end, it really didn't make a difference. It's not like I would've been a better person or anything for never having believed in UFOs. I just figure, as long as you're not using your beliefs to justify actions, then there isn't a problem, right? And I'm sorry, this whole darn post is off-topic.
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beldaran
You are correct in your doubt. There is absolutely no scientific evidence to support the notion that a magical being controls everything. It is impossible to know what happens after death, but the most plausible scenario is that we simply cease to exist.
People who believe in god are no different than tribal mystics who believe in voodoo, or medieval serfs who believe in wizards and witches, or the Greeks who believed in Apollo or Zues. It's just different flavors of the same delusional fantasy.
This is what I had in mind when I mentioned "don't ask an evangelical athiest". I was waiting on this cutie pie to post and what do you know his troll was clockwork.
You can be open-minded and decide for yourself what you think is right in this universe or you can be "open-minded" and "rational" and continuously attack points of view that challenge your own by dismissing them because they have no proof, when one of the first things I learned in logic classes was that issues of faith are not debatable as faith is placed on things in situations where logic provides no explanation. Those pesky Christians are always bothering the open-minded and forcing their beliefs upon people who weren't really interested in hearing them in the first place, Beldaran is a good example of one of those evangelical Christ-- oh wait.
Also a point of curiosity Beldaran: you made sure to not capitalize the word "god" but took great care to capitalize other mystical beings such as "Apollo" and "Zues" [sic] though you couldn't be bothered enough to spell Zeus properly. One should take care when expressing one's angst towards all things not athiest to provide equal disrespect to all belief systems, or possibly face unfair lack of discrimination lawsuits in courts eternal. Also I might suggest the cute substitute "g-d" that people seem fond of using that really sticks it to the big man up in the clouds! He gets so mad when people leave that letter out he has something like 12 more hurricane Katrinas planed over the next decade.
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
I don't hate people who believe in god, just like I don't hate people who have AIDS. However, I do dislike AIDS and believe it is destructive and terrifying, just like I think irrational beliefs are destructive and terrifying (terryfing that people could be so stupid).
I purposely don't capitalize "god" to show my utter disdain for the concept of god. I don't have any disdain for the fictional character of Zeus because his followers are not currently destroying the world I live in.
If you want to be irrational and mentally backwards, that's your perogative. It's my perogative to speak out against things that are unsupported by scientific evidence that cause real harm to societies.
I hope people that believe in magic will come to see that humans can move past the need for that mental crutch and move on to bigger and better ways of seeing the universe.
As an example of the utter mental depravity of belief, consider that it took the Church until 1832 to remove Galileo's work from its list of books which Catholics were forbidden to read at the risk of dire punishment of their immortal souls.
"You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe. " - Carl Sagan
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
Too many rhetorical questions alert!!
Religion is just... difficult to interpret and understand, IMO. No one will ever be able to comprehend it 100%, not even myself. But I particularly detest how people mandate the belief in God. For instance, the Boy Scout Law is...
Quote:
A scout is trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean, and reverent.
Reverent? What if I don't believe in God? I, too, am agnostic, for the record. What makes me a worse Scout if I don't believe in God than the other guy that does? Sometimes, religion is much more troublesome than it is worth. The Crusades? The Nazis? The Israeli-Pakistani conflict? All due to the hatred of another's religion. Additionally, the Church rejected the idea of a heliocentric solar system because it somehow defied Him. And who was right?
Which brings me to the point. If religion did not exist, would the world be in better shape?
[EDIT: Agh, Beldaran beat me to the church thing. A lousy two minutes.]
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
>_> Questioning and finding answers is pretty standard, actually. I consider myself a Christian (I can say the apostle's creed without any second thoughts/doubts) but...I don't really go by the book. In fact, some of the beliefs I have are a bit odd.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Darth Marsden
I know that there's nothing. No life after death, no eternal paradise, nothing. That's it. End game.
As ST so boldly pointed out (no pun intended), we DON'T know. We probably never will, because those who DO know are in no condition to tell us.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Darth Marsden
Our very existence at all is due to evolution, not because some cosmic being rolled up his sleeves and said 'Right, I want someone to worship me. Let's call them... Human Beings.' It's rubbish.
>_> I think you're taking it a little too literally. I don't think the Adam and Eve interpretation "works". Two humans CANNOT create an entire species. Plus, we'd all be related to each other and having kids with each...(actually...that explains a lot of stuf...)
*AHEM* In any case, Yeah, evolution is the only really good explanation. so how does God come in? A few little nudges here and there along the evolutionary process and voila. Here we are. Why? to create an intelligent race to...to do what, I have no idea. :shrug:
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Darth Marsden
Just a little worried that I won't go to Heaven
>_> Name me a contemporary (rational) Christian who ISN'T worried about that. Worries me too (for other reasons). It sccres us because we have no bloddy idea aobut the next life. how do we know it's there? how do we know what it's like? how do we know we won't just end up in the underworld?
WE DON'T. Hence why we must find our own answers.
And plus, I don't think that you have to be a Catholic, or even religious at all to move on. I velieve it just depends on how you live your life. I think that anyone (even, let's say...people who believe the aliens made us) can find the next life, as long as they lived their lives well.
@ beldaran: Cease to exist? Meh, I don't think that. When a person dies, all the energy leaves their body.
Energy cannot be created nor destroyed.
Ergo, we continue to exist, but in a different state altogether.
*shurg* that's my take on it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jennifer
So I just try to go with what's in my heart and mind to live life....
If I think anything I do or see might hurt somebody, I'm very, very careful about it, and try to find the least hurtful way, or at least the best compromise.
I am an agnostic. I do not know anything for absolute certain one way or another, so I just try to live my life as myself in the most harmless way I can. I try to enjoy life, experience what it has to offer; I love certain people and enjoy certain things, and I have an identity which is very important to me. I also try to add something to it for other people, when I can.
...
>_> Uhh...does that make me an agnostican christian, or what? A lot of what you just said reminds me of how I function.
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
Beldaran the only appropriate response to your bandwagon is to ignore it because your beliefs themselves are somewhat irrational and the evidence you use is, ignoring tact, stupid.
You wave the Galileo flag at every opportunity but are we to believe that religion has not changed in the past two centuries? Dare you commit the fallacy of division and infer that since the Catholic church took a stance that it is indicative of the beliefs of every follower of every religion? Furthermore, your facts do not check out and since you cite no sources I can't cross-check to see if perhaps mine are wrong. After hearing you bring this up several times you motivated me to do some cursory research and I was pretty satisfied with what I found. Allow me to provide enlightenment:
Quote:
Originally Posted by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo#Church_controversy
Galileo was reburied on sacred ground at Santa Croce in 1737. He was formally rehabilitated in 1741, when Pope Benedict XIV authorized the publication of Galileo's complete scientific works (a censored edition had been published in 1718), and in 1758 the general prohibition against heliocentrism was removed from the Index Librorum Prohibitorum. On 31 October 1992, Pope John Paul II expressed regret for how the Galileo affair was handled, as the result of a study conducted by the Pontifical Council for Culture.
Oops you got your dates wrong by a century but a clever rebuttal would incidate that the mistake doesn't weaken your point because the church's decision still came a century after Galileo's death. But wait!
Quote:
Modern science considers Galileo's views on heliocentricity to be no fundamental advance; most of his discoveries were only further advances of Copernicus' views. The heliocentric model that Galileo presented was no better at predicting planetary positions than the Tychonic system model, the main competing theory at the time. Stellar parallax, the first evidence from outside the solar system that the Earth does indeed move, would not be observed until 1838 (Consolmagno 150–152).
So, at the time, there was no compelling scientific evidence to show that Galileo was more right than any of the current accepted models. In fact, the first proof that Galileo was correct came nearly a century after the Catholic church accepted Galileo's teachings.
Unless you can cite a more scholarly source than Wikipedia (which honestly doesn't take much) that disagrees with these statements, I do believe you just lost your favorite example.
In short, the Galileo example you use is wrong on two counts:- The dates and facts you use do not agree with the facts I have found.
- The actions of the Catholic church centuries ago do not provide reasonable insight into the actions of religious people as a whole today.
I hope that in the future when you are seeking evidence to indicate the total backwards behavior of religion you are careful to make sure you are correct and not just seeing what you want to see. I understand you think blind faith in religion is irrational but realize you are exhibiting characteristics of blind faith yourself: you read a fact in a book somewhere and took it as truth without seeking evidence yourself. I am reminded of something Carl Sagan said once:
Quote:
You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe.
The wrong kind of belief in science's ability to explain the unknown can be just as dangerous as the wrong kind of belief in religion.
I cannot understand why you have never acknowledged the crucial argument I make. The basis of my conclusion is this:- Belief in science can become a religion itself.
- Science provides no answers for some questions.
- The best scientific thought is sometimes wrong and this is only discovered much later.
My first conclusion is that blind faith in science is foolish. This conclusion leads me to the ultimate conclusion: unquestioning faith in anything is the most dangerous form of fanaticism.
I strongly believe you believe in atheism a little bit too much to be as rational as you believe you are.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pineconn I believe if you thought a bit about the word "reverent" the Scout Laws would make a bit more sense to you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=reverent&x=0&y=0
feeling, exhibiting, or characterized by reverence; deeply respectful
That particular portion of the Scout Law does not necessarily indicate respect towards a diety but that at all times a Scout should be respectful to all beings.
The Boy Scouts in general are actually a very fine example of a religion-neutral organization in my opinion. I did a little bit of research to cover myself and I find that the BSA is disturbingly against how I have always interpreted the spirit of scouting. The requirements for a scout are actually trivial for an athiest or agnostic to accomplish; in most cases you can replace "God" with "your ethical beliefs" and it fits perfectly well. I have a particular problem with the First Class requirement "lead your patrol in saying grace at the meals" but honestly I had never heard of it. In my troop we ignored that requirement even though the bulk of the members were devout Mormons.
The "duty to God" part of the Scout Law is also being misinterpreted in the cases of those who oppose them. The portion as I remember (Tenderfoot requirement, right?) goes (with emphasis added):
On my honor,
I will do my best
To do my duty
To my god and my country
...
For the athiest/agnostic, god may simply be a code of ethics, but there is no one that truly believes in nothing.
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
If disagreeing with scientific thought helps you sleep better at night, then have at it.
I am correct. You believe in magic. End of story.
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
Well, I missed a lot because I was gone for a few hours, but the third agnostic is here to post. I almost always disagree with anyone who sees anything as black and white, or holds only one view, because everything has a deeper level. I believe that religion is good because it gives many people morals and guidelines to follow, and I believe that science is good because it helps us understand the world around us and make our lives better. Do I wholheartedly believe in one or the other? No. Do I see good and bad in both? Yes. Both sides are capable of being incredibly close minded. Beldaran, you say that religion causes harm to society. How? Do the majority of people who follow it behave differently in a negative way. By negative, I don't mean your whole "belief in faries idea", but in an actual, "harming the world around them" way.
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beldaran
If disagreeing with scientific thought helps you sleep better at night, then have at it.
I am correct. You believe in magic. End of story.
If failing to use logic or even acknowledge my questions helps you sleep better at night, have at it.
I am enlightened. You refuse to question yourself and therefore cannot understand yourself or the world around you. };
Actually seriously, provide evidence that I believe in magic. I realize this is a situation where you have to guess the proper question to ask but seriously try me I think you will be surprised that I don't like very many supernatural concepts.
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beldaran
If disagreeing with scientific thought helps you sleep better at night, then have at it.
I am correct. You believe in magic. End of story.
Okay, how does believing in magic contradict science? Maybe it's not scientific, but it's not against science. If I say you go to heaven when you die, it's not scientific because it can't be tested, but it's not anti-science. That in itself seems irrational, saying we can't speculate about what we can never know. Why not? It doesn't hurt anything. The business with Galileo was wrong because his work was verifiable. My problem is just that you treat science like it's a religion itself. If it can't be proven scientifically, it must necessarily not exist. From a pragmatic viewpoint, there's no point in worrying about things that can't be tested, but on the other hand, because it doesn't contradict science, it's harmless speculation.
I just feel it's only when religion blatantly contracts science that it's a problem, whereas you keep saying that even when it doesn't, it's still a problem. I just want to know how it's hurting anything. I'm very much a firm believer that so long as nobody is hurt, anyone should be allowed to do whatever the heck they want. And yes, I know religion has the potential to cause harm, but it's not a given.
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aegix Drakan
>_> Uhh...does that make me an agnostican christian, or what? A lot of what you just said reminds me of how I function.
Well, you say you're not sure about the existence of the afterlife and follow a theoretical interpretation of the creation of humanity (rather than just saying "the book of genesis is 100% right and not metaphoric at all!"), so in that sense, you seem to be somewhat agnostic. On the other hand you believe in God and have certain tentative beliefs about things.
So "agnostican Christian" might be right. Another way of putting it, though, if my terminology correct, is that you might be more "spirtualistic" than "religious". The way I understand the two terms, religious means you stick to a certain set of rules and laws and stories and say they are 100% right and that you need to have faith in them, which typically (though not necessarily) goes hand in hand with what a lot of people don't like in Christianity today.
Spiritualism, on the other hand, is a bit more open and general. It means you believe there IS something, be it a/some god/ess/e/s, the tao, just something in general, or what have you. But it also tends to mean you don't assume you know much about it for certain, or that you MUST follow overly complicated, especially strict rules and views, and it almost never goes hand in hand with forcing your views on others. Basically, it is a relaxed sort of belief where you do believe or at least practice something, and try to respect what you think is right and follow a few morals or ideals, but are generally pretty open. As I understand it, wicca is almost always practiced this way. I have also seen certain christians who practice their belief in a similar manner (PrrKitty and Glenn being two pretty good examples of what I mean by this- I think).
I've yet to see any nasty behavior connected to spiritualism; none based on it and none justified using it. It's a very passive kind of belief system, and I rather like what I know of it. In fact, I kind of envy it ^^
Also, I try not to be evangelical or absolute about anything. I just tend to state my opinions and views a lot. Sorry if that comes off the wrong way at times >.>
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
Your link saddens me. For a moment, I thought it was about agnosticism.
Apparently it's propeganda trying to claim atheism makes less sense than christianity/requires some kind of "blind faith" to believe in, in an attempt to convert/retrieve atheists. Glorified reverse psychology. Ugh.
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
Wow, I kicked off a sensitive issue. Good thing?
The reason my initial post had a few contradictions is because I believe I'm at an awkward point at my life where I'm in between two points of view - the scientist and the believer. When I was young, I was taught to believe that God was good, He/She was the divine being and that we should never question His/Her love for us. I suspect a fair number of you were taught the same.
As I got older, I stopped being taught - we never really went to church, and so on, and I guess my parents wanted me to make my own mind up as to whether or not I wanted to take religion more seriously. In some ways they're to blame for how I feel, and in others I should thank them for not forcing a way of life on to me that I probably wouldn't have wanted, had I known what was going on.
Nowadays I sit and think about things like the bible and wonder 'Who wrote this?'. Because that's pretty much what the bible is, if you think about it. One guy, or girl, writing down their beliefs in a book which has become the foundation of an entire collective of faiths. But just because people believe it doesn't make it cold, hard fact. It could well be completely made up.
Science these days has come an awful long way and has disproved a number of ideas mentioned in the bible. And not only does science sound much more logical, it can offer proof. Religion can't. It can only offer stories about how a mystical being created us all, how we're all related if we go back to the very first man and woman, how a man died on the cross and was resurrected three days later, and so on.
But the thing is, science doesn't disprove everything. It can't tell us there is no immortal being watching over us. It can't tell us there is no afterlife. And so forth. Whether you believe in something or not is a matter of choice. And while I respect other people's choices, I don't know what to make of my own.
The point I was trying to make (I think) is that when I went to the wedding renewal and the communion, I personally disagreed with a lot of what was going on. It's like my mind is split in two on the issue. On the one hand, I almost felt revolted at some of the things they were saying - 'We believe God made us', 'His gentle hand he stretches over me', 'Lord you are the Saviour of the world', etc - because, to me, it's rubbish and I cannot believe that people would give their lives to believing it.
But on the other hand, I'm thinking 'Did I ever believe things like that?' And the truth is, I probably did, though not to such an appallingly heavy degree. Now of course I don't, and I'm really not sure where I am, but a part of me used to. And now the two parts are conflicting and I'm not really sure of where I am or what I really believe.
As I said, I really want to believe that there is an afterlife of some sort. That when I die, I'll go to a mystical place where all my loved ones are waiting for me and I can finally meet the grandfather who died before I ever knew him. I really want to believe that. But I don't think I can.
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beldaran
I am correct. You believe in magic. End of story.
I saw this on The Simpsons, only it went a little differently:
Scientist 1 - "Why did you think a giant bubble would stop him?"
Scientist 2 - "Shut up, that's why!"
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beldaran
You are correct in your doubt. There is absolutely no scientific evidence to support the notion that a magical being controls everything. It is impossible to know what happens after death, but the most plausible scenario is that we simply cease to exist.
Bel is the only person who is allowed to know anything. He is correct in everything, we are worthless scum.:rolleyes:
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
So what, instead of God I'm supposed to believe in Beldaran? Great! I'm probably gonna become an atheist now. You've killed religion for me. I hope you're proud, you heathenistic bastard. ;)
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
Why spend your life trying to appease some mystical being?
You should wake up every morning having faith in yourself, not some god that you fear under the false pretense of a so called heaven.
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
Sometimes having something to believe in makes life a little easier.
You don't have to believe in any religion, Beld. No one is making you. But it's unfair to tell people that they're wrong for doing so. You're really being no better than those pushy Christians who badger you to believe in what they believe.
I'm a woman of faith. I don't attend any church services, I don't read the Bible (but I do own one) and I very rarely pray. I believe in a higher power, what or who that is, I don't know. But I have reason to believe in such, and that's proof enough for me.
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
I'm not asking anyone to believe in me or anything else. I'm saying they shouldn't believe in anything for which there is no evidence.
As magic believers, you are the ones who think you know the answers to these questions. I am pointing out that these answers are not known.
I am sorry you are all so intellectually small that you must believe in magical invisible friends to feel good about yourselves, but don't accuse me of the intellectual sins you yourselves are commiting.
I am completely correct on this issue because I am arguing that you cannot prove your position scientifically. Unless you can prove your assertion of a god scientifically, you must accept that you are wrong and that I am absolutely correct.
Also, you should all read "The Demon Haunted World" by Carl Sagan. The books that support my position are written by renowned physicists. The books that support your position are written by ancient tribal nomads who believed the sun was controlled by magic, the earth was flat, and that the universe was a dome.
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
Darth, if you really want to know something, or if your worried, why not talk to someone who has more experience in that field? I don't think a forum with active members composed mostly of athiests or agnostics will help stengthen your faith in Christ, if that is indeed what you want. If I were you, talk to your pastor, youth pastor, or a friend that goes to your church. They could possibly help answer your questions better than someone on this forum.
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
I'm not an atheist, I'm a Beldarist. Anyway, honestly, I'm not trying to prove that anything exists. My question was simply, if it can't be proven, and it can't be disproven, what does it matter? The scientists are no more correct than the theologans. Besides, come on, there is no absolute reality, only our perceptions. You, Beldaran, have too much faith that the world even exists. No one's proven it yet, and no one ever will.
Just saying, you contradict yourself by saying "I'm right because your position can't be proven scientifically." Yours can't, either. You can confirm the existence of gravity, or dinosaurs, or evolution, the Big Bang, etc., but what you can't do is show that there were no divine forces at work. Hell, it's all a matter of interpretation anyway, because I could turn around and say that the Big Bang was a divine force, as is gravity, and evolution, etc. Your concept of religion is FAR too narrow. Would it be wrong of me to start a religion devoted to things that can be scientifically proven?
lol Never mind. I just noticed your signature, you already do have a religious system based on science. I mean, that's all a religion is, is a system that shapes your perception of the world. I myself prefer to be open minded, so I try to avoid confining myself to any one belief system. For example, I recognize the value of science, but at the same time, science can't help me to be happy, or decide what I want to do with my life, or anything like that, and so I look to other more creative sources for guidance in those areas.
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
Isn't it stupid to point out the fact that no one really knows what happens to someone when they die other than the phsyical facts we know of? No one knows if anything special happens to people when they die like "going to heaven". People that believe it can't prove it to be true, people that don't can't prove it's not true. Simple as that. I do agree you shouldn't believe things blindly, though mainly if someone else tells you it's true. If someone tells you they spoke with God, you shouldn't believe them, but you knew that didn't you? Mainly I don't like "Holy Books" that dictate what is right and wrong, and have ridiculus stories in them.
But haven't we had these topics 8 million times before?
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Grasshopper
Darth, if you really want to know something, or if your worried, why not talk to someone who has more experience in that field? I don't think a forum with active members composed mostly of athiests or agnostics will help stengthen your faith in Christ, if that is indeed what you want. If I were you, talk to your pastor, youth pastor, or a friend that goes to your church. They could possibly help answer your questions better than someone on this forum.
To be perfectly honest, the only people with any meaningful experience in the field are dead, considering they even existed.
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
Darthy, having questions about religion/faith is how a person grows and develops and figures out what they believe and don’t believe. Having the questions and uncertainties that you are having is actually really very normal.
If you will stop and listen to those around you, during the singing of Hymns, I think you will find that not everyone does sing when others are. Same goes for reciting verses… etc. I’m sure there are many reasons why some don’t… sing… recite… etc. So if you don’t… I doubt anyone will think any less of you.
I believe that if you are uncomfortable doing something… don’t do it.
(hug)
If you can't be true to yourself how can you be expected to be true to anyone/anything else? <-- just a thought...
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beldaran
I'm not asking anyone to believe in me or anything else. I'm saying they shouldn't believe in anything for which there is no evidence.
As magic believers, you are the ones who think you know the answers to these questions. I am pointing out that these answers are not known.
I am sorry you are all so intellectually small that you must believe in magical invisible friends to feel good about yourselves, but don't accuse me of the intellectual sins you yourselves are commiting.
I am completely correct on this issue because I am arguing that you cannot prove your position scientifically. Unless you can prove your assertion of a god scientifically, you must accept that you are wrong and that I am absolutely correct.
Also, you should all read "The Demon Haunted World" by Carl Sagan. The books that support my position are written by renowned physicists. The books that support your position are written by ancient tribal nomads who believed the sun was controlled by magic, the earth was flat, and that the universe was a dome.
Bel is correct because everyone else is incorrect. That makes sense logically, right?
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beldaran
Unless you can prove your assertion of a god scientifically, you must accept that you are wrong and that I am absolutely correct.
uhh... ?_? And how does that make any logical sense?
Science can't DISPROVE God's existence any more than it CAN. Therefore, you are not absolutely correct.
Honestly Beldaran, you're beginning to sound like the very same closed-minded zealots you so despise...
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
Beldaran, unless you can prove your assertion of no god religiously, you must accept that you are wrong and that I am absolutely correct.
:)
Gotta love twisted logic.
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
Don't doubt Beldaran, for He is never wrong. As a matter of fact, I'm going to start worshiping him... but he has to do something for me, like part the Red Sea for me (or was that Moses? :p).
***
Y'know, when I was in a hotel in Orlando a few weekends ago for Disney, we had Bibles in our rooms. I checked it out, and I was seriously thinking, "Why couldn't some guy have just written this a thousand years ago as a work of fiction?"
For all we know, if we would have found some Dr. Seuss book before the Bible, we could be worshiping Ziggalydots and Diggalyzots. ;)
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beldaran
I'm not asking anyone to believe in me or anything else. I'm saying they shouldn't believe in anything for which there is no evidence.
As magic believers, you are the ones who think you know the answers to these questions. I am pointing out that these answers are not known.
I am sorry you are all so intellectually small that you must believe in magical invisible friends to feel good about yourselves, but don't accuse me of the intellectual sins you yourselves are commiting.
I am completely correct on this issue because I am arguing that you cannot prove your position scientifically. Unless you can prove your assertion of a god scientifically, you must accept that you are wrong and that I am absolutely correct.
Also, you should all read "The Demon Haunted World" by Carl Sagan. The books that support my position are written by renowned physicists. The books that support your position are written by ancient tribal nomads who believed the sun was controlled by magic, the earth was flat, and that the universe was a dome.
Unfortunately any points that you may have on this issue are undermined by your haughty demeanor and negative dialect.
Foo.
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
I don't really believe in this (but I don't not believe) but it kinda ties into Pineconn's post, my ever so favorite TV sitcom "Red Dwarf" featured a short gag whereupon "experts have found what could be a new and radical page to the bible, allegedly to be inserted before the first page. It says, translated 'All peoples and events contained in the following work are entirely fictitious. Any resemblance to other peoples or works, real or imagined is completely coincidental' Naturaly the church has denounced the page as an utter hoax and disgrace"
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
This is a bit off topic(and colour maybe), but it's the best place to post this.
What do you get if you cross a drug addict with a Christian?
A Crystal Methodist!
Sorry, that was horrible. You may now resume your intellectual conversation.
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Darth Marsden
So what, instead of God I'm supposed to believe in Beldaran? Great! I'm probably gonna become an atheist now. You've killed religion for me. I hope you're proud, you heathenistic bastard. ;)
You don't need Belderan to come to those conclusions. I went through a very similar questioning of my faith when I was about 15. Unfortuniatly, I made the mistake of raising my objections with my Youth Pastor, who then went ouf his way to distort my worldview and line of thinking, and for a time period after that I considered myself a religious person. Once I got to college, however, I was out of my church's youth program and began to see how I had been taken advantage of, and now I carry a bitter resentment of all things religious. Your divorce from religion doesn't have to be on such bad terms, but it's not as uncommon a decision as you might think.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dechipher
Unfortunately any points that you may have on this issue are undermined by your haughty demeanor and negative dialect.
Foo.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
phattonez
Bel is the only person who is allowed to know anything. He is correct in everything, we are worthless scum.:rolleyes:
He may be abrasive in what he says, and I personally don't really like how he states himself as absolutely correct, but he also makes many good points. As the saying goes, don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Where I think Bel makes his mistake is trying to absolutely assert his correctness. It's an easily attackable opening, as we've seen in this thread. I sidestep that problem by bringing forth Russell's teapot. I'd write on it, but I'll just paste the two quotes from the wiki article, as I think they speak for themselves. It's a nice way of demonstratining argument from ignorance without going so far as to claim being absolutely correct.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bertrand Russell
If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is an intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time.
Richard Dawkins, in his book The God Delusion, writes further
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Dawkins
The reason organized religion merits outright hostility is that, unlike belief in Russell's teapot, religion is powerful, influential, tax-exempt and systematically passed on to children too young to defend themselves. Children are not compelled to spend their formative years memorizing loony books about teapots. Government-subsidized schools don't exclude children whose parents prefer the wrong shape of teapot. Teapot-believers don't stone teapot-unbelievers, teapot-apostates, teapot-heretics and teapot-blasphemers to death. Mothers don't warn their sons off marrying teapot-shiksas whose parents believe in three teapots rather than one. People who put the milk in first don't kneecap those who put the tea in first.
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
Y'know what? I'm gonna tell you a little story I heard somewhere. And just to make it even more interesting, I'm gonna use people from here to illustrate certain characters. Are we all sitting comfortably? Then I'll begin.
Oncer upon a time, there was an entire race of people who fervently believed that God was standing right behind them, guiding them through life. No-one else could see this God except the person he was standing behind, but there was a snag. At the very heart of their religion, people believed that if they turned around and looked at this God, they would be denied entry into heaven and the eternal paradise that would come with it.
And so the people went for all of their days, believing that God was watching over their shoulder but being totally afraid to check. Until one day, when Beldaran, in one of his many arguments against the race's religion, could stand it no longer, and looked over his shoulder.
And found no-one.
Convinced that this proved his point, he began spreading the word - there was no God over your shoulder, there was no eternal afterlife. And, slowly but surely, people started to see if it was true. They started looking over their shoulders, and found that God wasn't there. Until eventually there was only one man left who believed that God truly was there. And, unable to face the sheer pressure of those who believed otherwise, he took his own life.
When he woke up, he found that he was in Heaven.
Now boys and girls, what have we learned?
-
Re: Religion, or the lack thereof
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Darth Marsden
Now boys and girls, what have we learned?
Suicide is divinely rewarded?
*edit*AlexMax I just saw your post, and it made me think of something I can maybe illustrate my point with.
There are some athiests, like you, that though I stand in disagreement with on the point of God's existence I can recognize your arguments are based on solid philosophical ground. You seem to have chosen atheism as the result of your life experiences, and though my religion tells me you are wrong my heart and mind tell me you've made the choice that seemed most rational to you at the time. You only really poke your head into religion threads when it seems like things are getting kind of crazy and it's always something intelligent you have to add.
There are others, like Beldaran, who seem to have chosen atheism because it gives them a chance to feel superior to others. So far the only supporting points he has provided rely on either "common knowledge" (that sometimes turns out to be wrong!), "books I read one time", or "you just aren't intelligent enough to understand". Some religions provide a sense of superiority, but I believe no other but atheism can allow and even support one's sense of self-worth so far that one feels like people should be honored that one even deigned to stroke one's e-cock in front of them.
What's fairly interesting to me is that religions display these characteristics too, and so far I believe no one has responded in negation to my belief that athiesm can display all of the negative characteristics of an organized religion and when it does it is every bit as evil as historical atrocities committed in the name of a religion. So far by the time I've attempted to support this point, Beldaran has advanced past his first post and only replies with "I'm right, you're wrong. Deal with it."
What's sad is I think the first kind of atheist can be the source of really stimulating philosophical discussion, while the second is too busy patting himself on the back to ponder life's mysteries.