Religion poll

[roguetoaster]

I really haven't had much exposure to typical religion. I recently went to a Catholic funeral, and I have to admit I found some aspects of it very strange. Creepy to be honest. Towards the end, they started handing out some kind of cracker. People would get up, and get in line. The cracker represented the body of Christ. Some of them took it themselves and ate it, whereas others had it fed to them which seemed really childlike, despite them being adults. The whole thing just felt very cult-like to me, and generally pretty submissive. Not a lot of individual thinking, just following the others. That's my outsider's perspective, and that experience pretty much sums why I don't do religion. My experience with Quakerism however was pretty mild, and never had anything weird like that. Probably why it's one of few religions I actually respect.

I get it, the rituals can be strange. If you want a bit of insight in to the Catholic/Protestant split look in to transubstantiation.

It seems to me that a lot of people get great comfort from attending church, participating in the rituals, and that feeling of God being more present (never something I went in for) as a part of regular attendance. Do I really understand that thought process, no, but if it makes them feel at peace it's all good. It should also be remembered that church/rituals are not religion, just the very public, small part of it.

[cale]

So now "Laws of physics don't exist"?

When discussing the universe as a singularity in the big bang theory, no they don't. This isn't anything new.

Physics that that the universe always was and always will be, now because we call it the big bang, it's not creation?

Creation implies a creator, so no. These appear to be two separate thoughts though.

The big bang wasn't even thought of a century ago, and some of us have living relatives that were alive about the time it became widely accepted. Perhaps saying "in my lifetime" wasn't proper. Einstein himself rejected Hubble's law up until his latest memoirs.

And? Science advances, we learn new things and methods to discover. This isn't a testament to the indecisiveness and inaccuracy of science, it shows that we are refining what it is we know. You describe it similarly to how a creationist would deny evolution on the false claim that science once thought the world was flat. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but you're quacking faintly like a duck....

Am I considered religious because I don't think we are an accident, but also don't think there's a magic man in the sky? Just kind of odd that we are a one in a decillion decillion decillion chance.

This goes back to the creation argument, by ascribing it as an accident and giving baseless odds you assume the end goal (us) was predetermined. We are the result of events, the events were not aligned for us.

[mrsleeve]

And? Science advances, we learn new things and methods to discover. This isn't a testament to the indecisiveness and inaccuracy of science, it shows that we are refining what it is we know. You describe it similarly to how a creationist would deny evolution on the false claim that science once thought the world was flat. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but you're quacking faintly like a duck....

Unless of course we are discussing anthropogenic global warming....errrrr Um I mean climate change, that "science" is settled with nothing else to revise or learn about it right??????

[roguetoaster]

When discussing the universe as a singularity in the big bang theory, no they don't. This isn't anything new.

Creation implies a creator, so no. These appear to be two separate thoughts though.

And? Science advances, we learn new things and methods to discover. This isn't a testament to the indecisiveness and inaccuracy of science, it shows that we are refining what it is we know. You describe it similarly to how a creationist would deny evolution on the false claim that science once thought the world was flat. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but you're quacking faintly like a duck....

This goes back to the creation argument, by ascribing it as an accident and giving baseless odds you assume the end goal (us) was predetermined. We are the result of events, the events were not aligned for us.

I'm fairly with you until the last statement. We cannot prove what spurred the existence of the universe in which we live, so why would you insist after what you said above that events were not aligned by some type of consciousness that we do not understand. To keep an open mind (of the scientific sense) it's allowable that any scenario for creation of the universe is possible, and at this time all are pretty equally probable as we both cannot yet observe the cause, nor likely conceptualize its origin with any certainty.

So, there's really no reason to argue this point, as it's totally a matter of opinion at this juncture.

[cale]

Unless of course we are discussing anthropogenic global warming....errrrr Um I mean climate change, that "science" is settled with nothing else to revise or learn about it right??????

Are we really going here? It's not settled no, but the Koch brothers are not leading us into a new era of knowledge in that field. Lets stick to the topic at hand, don't go all gwb on me.

[rturbo 930]

I get it, the rituals can be strange. If you want a bit of insight in to the Catholic/Protestant split look in to transubstantiation.

It seems to me that a lot of people get great comfort from attending church, participating in the rituals, and that feeling of God being more present (never something I went in for) as a part of regular attendance. Do I really understand that thought process, no, but if it makes them feel at peace it's all good. It should also be remembered that church/rituals are not religion, just the very public, small part of it.

Yeah, don't get me wrong, I get it to some extent. People like comfort. The idea that there is something after death, and you get to see all the people who died before you is comforting. So I get it. But it isn't really honest. And I get that people might like church because they have found a community of people who share their beliefs and traditions, etc. People like other people who are like them. It's human nature, nothing wrong with it. And I also get that a church can be a great place to meet people, can be the anchor of a strong community, and can be a good place to find support for those who need it. Like I said, I was at a funeral. A friend had died in a dirtbike accident at just 27 years old. I'm sure his parents are much better off with the support of their fellow church members, than without.

What I don't like is the submission to God, and that you must obey his rules, or you burn in hell. I don't like being told what to do in general, so it's no surprise that I wouldn't like this, but I really just don't get it. It's like they don't even live their own lives, they live their lives the way someone else (God) wants them to. And if something bad happens? God's will. Something good happens? God's will. You didn't earn it, God gave it to you. I flat out do not understand the mentality. And I don't understand having someone preach to me. Feels too much like having someone else think for me vs. thinking for myself. That's why I prefer the Quaker method of worship. We did meeting for worship every Wednesday for 45 minutes. You sit in silence, no one is preaching. If you've got a thought to share, you can stand up and say it. Anyone can. More diversity of thought that way, and IMO encourages one to think for oneself. The actual Quaker meeting on Sundays might be a bit more God oriented, but I've never attended.

[ForcedFirebird]

When discussing the universe as a singularity in the big bang theory, no they don't. This isn't anything new.



Creation implies a creator, so no. These appear to be two separate thoughts though.



And? Science advances, we learn new things and methods to discover. This isn't a testament to the indecisiveness and inaccuracy of science, it shows that we are refining what it is we know. You describe it similarly to how a creationist would deny evolution on the false claim that science once thought the world was flat. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but you're quacking faintly like a duck....



This goes back to the creation argument, by ascribing it as an accident and giving baseless odds you assume the end goal (us) was predetermined. We are the result of events, the events were not aligned for us.

Not quacking. Perhaps this isn't the best place for this discussion as it has nothing to do with "religion".

Explain to me if time didn't exist in the singularity, how could it end to become the universe? If it has and end, then there would be a time marker - an end. If time truly did not exist before, would there be no end or no beginning?

So, because I feel there was something that kick started this whole Universe, and perhaps we aren't just lucky, I am religious? Sorry if you read more than that.

I do find it interesting that the Jewish faith talk about in Genesis what scientists now regard as truth. (disclaimer: I am not Jewish, either)

You can't possibly say "it didn't happen like that" simply based on what others' theorize.

If you are to be scientific about it, it has to be subjective. To say that there wasn't outside intervention is just as bad as saying there was. It's always going to be a chicken and egg. We have no idea WTF happened, so if one wants to believe or theorize, there is no right or wrong until, like any theorem, it's proven.

And as far as baseless odds, sure I made up a number, but have you heard scientists talk about the effect on the whole process just a few moments would make? According to more theories and models, AFTER the bang, the universe should have collapsed back on itself immediately - or may just do so at any time, even.

Again, this is a chicken and egg discussion. There is no right or wrong answer, and it can go on for days. LOL @ Sleeve for bringing up GW thread....

[roguetoaster]

^^
It's good that you see the reason for some people's reliance on church/rituals.

Ultimately, we all submit to someone, something, or face the consequences, so in many ways it's easier to accept God as some sort of ultimate authority. But the way in which I learned my faith it's not so cut and dry as whatever happens on earth is the will of God. For me it's very much a hands off management, if you screw up, it's on you, but you can come back from it, if you something good happens you should acknowledge that it happened and be thankful for it (as it may be the grace of God), if something awful happens you should reflect on the cause/impact.

What I think you're talking about is predestination, wherein good, bad or indifferent (or as some put it, reasons unknown) you're damned or not. That, along with several other traditional Calvinist points are in my opinion misguided in more than one way, but I'd encourage you to read up on Calvinism specifically.

Preaching, specifically sermons are to me more like a class lecture, and I try to take away a new way of looking at a teaching, thought or issue afterwards. If a pastor were to just stand up there and quote scripture without presenting a meaningful thought I wouldn't attend.

Although I have not attended a Quaker meeting it does sound interesting, and I do hope you don't think all Christians, Muslims and Jews (which I believe generally attempt to worship the same God [some polytheists seems to worship an ultimate God in various forms/traits] - shocking, I know!) are as dogmatic as you made it sound.

[rturbo 930]

^^
It's good that you see the reason for some people's reliance on church/rituals.

Ultimately, we all submit to someone, something, or face the consequences, so in many ways it's easier to accept God as some sort of ultimate authority. But the way in which I learned my faith it's not so cut and dry as whatever happens on earth is the will of God. For me it's very much a hands off management, if you screw up, it's on you, but you can come back from it, if you something good happens you should acknowledge that it happened and be thankful for it (as it may be the grace of God), if something awful happens you should reflect on the cause/impact.

What I think you're talking about is predestination, wherein good, bad or indifferent (or as some put it, reasons unknown) you're damned or not. That, along with several other traditional Calvinist points are in my opinion misguided in more than one way, but I'd encourage you to read up on Calvinism specifically.

I'll admit that I'm actually pretty ignorant to the inner workings of religion. I don't think I've ever been to a church aside from a wedding or funeral, so most of what I'm going off of is what I see people say and do, TV shows, etc. And part of what I said there was inspired by something I saw someone say that has stuck in my mind because of how ridiculous it was. Referring to someone who had basically started going downhill, and then got their shit back together having been inspired by some book, this person said (paraphrasing) "I hope he realizes that it was because of God's grace that he got his life together, not because he read a book."

It's this sort of thing that just drives me mad with regards to religion. I know it's one person, but I know she's not the only person who thinks this. Takes all credit away from the person who deserves it, and hands it to God.

The views that you described sound much more reasonable. I've got no problem with that.

Preaching, specifically sermons are to me more like a class lecture, and I try to take away a new way of looking at a teaching, thought or issue afterwards. If a pastor were to just stand up there and quote scripture without presenting a meaningful thought I wouldn't attend.

Although I have not attended a Quaker meeting it does sound interesting, and I do hope you don't think all Christians, Muslims and Jews (which I believe generally attempt to worship the same God [some polytheists seems to worship an ultimate God in various forms/traits] - shocking, I know!) are as dogmatic as you made it sound.

Never been to church, so I don't know how sermons go. I guess I hear too much about the wacky parts of religion. Not surprising, that's what people are interested in, so that's what sells. I guess it's not the bible-based echo chamber I thought it was lol. Or maybe it is. Depends on the church probably, and the guy preaching.

Yeah, I know that everyone sort of does their own brand of religion with regards to how far they go with it and whatnot, at least in the western world. Easier to generalize. I don't really care if someone is religious or not if they keep it to themselves. Regardless of how it's taught, human beings have free will, so they can accept or reject any idea that is presented to them. Regarding Islam though? I will say that I believe there is too much acceptance and not enough rejection of ideas by too many of its followers. Based on what I see, what I hear, and don't hear, I don't have a favorable view of Islam. I'll leave it at that.

[Das Delfin]

holy shit is this thread actually a thing? Have we digressed as a forum to this??? This is the epitome of the politics section. lmao I love it!


if I were to answer I would say I am spiritual but not religious. So you need to edit your poll to accommodate for my beliefs. Merry Christmas.

[2mAn]

Science is a liar.....






sometimes.






Im not going to be some stupid science bitch

[E30 Wagen]

holy shit is this thread actually a thing? Have we digressed as a forum to this??? This is the epitome of the politics section. lmao I love it!


if I were to answer I would say I am spiritual but not religious. So you need to edit your poll to accommodate for my beliefs. Merry Christmas.

What's wrong with this thread, and how would you edit the poll? I figured I'd get a response like yours and decided it would be more interesting to see how people cross the line one way or the other instead of a basic poll listing all the major religions.

[BECKSTER]

I don't see my faith as a religion because I'm not following a set of traditions and rules, so I'd consider my self spiritual.

I'm simply living the way Jesus did because I believe he died for me so I can have eternal salvation.

Christianity has been watered down and distorted in so many different ways that I don't really like being called a Christian anymore.

[dereliiict]

Please explain what you find disrespectful about my post. I don't see it. At all. Most of that was simply repeating my Dad and Step-Mom's reasoning for not retiring down there, how could that ever possibly be deemed disrespectful?




This was before my Dad was retired, so he wanted to meet on a Sunday because that was the only day convenient for us to meet


The guy was shitty from the start about the idea to meet on a Sunday because of church, but he relented.

And yes, my general distrust of Christians probably does slant my feelings on the matter.

Okay, so I will try to not reiterate what has already been stated after this post, but I have outlined the disrespectful selfishness of your logic.

But:

The "shitty" guy told you beforehand that he didn't want to meet on a Sunday due to important to him reasons, but your family had to push it until he broke because it was convenient for them, ignoring his beliefs and generally being inconsiderate of any other.

Then had the audacity to be upset when he wasn't bowing to their beck and call.

Sorry not sorry, I would tell you to promptly go fuck yourself. Being a seller has its limitations and customers are fired every day. You sound like the product of some very fireable customers.


Allow me to phrase it this way: his mother died and the funeral was on Sunday, but your family could only buy his car on that Sunday because your dad may have to take off work on Monday if the seller couldn't meet Sunday, at his mothers funeral. So is the guy supposed to cancel anything that matters, for you? Why? You aren't working with him, at all.

Maybe I should have said your post was selfish, but the disrespect really comes in when you second generationally display a lack of knowledge publicly and as fact about an entire region based upon one interaction, that you never had, in BFE Arkansas. Take a look in the mirror man.


Also, very non religious here, though I agree with the "we come to earth until we learn what we need" energy school.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[z31maniac]

Could you argue that Josef Mengele personally was more evil than Hitler or vice versa?

I'm sure you could make an argument either way, however, that was not the point of the post.

The point of the post was that I disagree that are no inherently evil people, or that NO ONE regardless of what they have done would deserve to rot in hell (If such a fictitious place existed).