I just gotta ask...

Why do we even have a religion forum? Whether you don't believe or do believe in a God or whatever, there is always going to be someone to challenge that belief or lack thereof.

My point is that, if you are set in not believing in God or you do believe, you're not going to change anyone's mind about it. If someone wants to ask me a question about what I believe I have no problem talking to them about it. However, i'm not going to sit here and argue back and forth with someone about how i'm right and they're wrong. It's sort of silly don't you all think?

God exists, no he doesn't, yes it does... that's what the whole thing seems to come down to from what i've seen.

If it makes you a better man or woman no matter what you believe... then just go with it and leave it at that.

 

If you don't want to discuss the existence - or otherwise -of (g)God(s) then don't go in there - it's not difficult to avoid areas you have no interest in discussing.

 

Ahh yes, but it usually just turns into some heated debate. It's no sense in it. The Karate or Kung fu thing isn't the same as both of them are MA's. Which would be more along the lines of a pentacostal and a baptist talking about their beliefs.

 

I typically avoid this area for just that reason actually. I was just trying to get an idea more of why people consistantly argue the existance of something for any other reason except out of fear.

 

It probably exists because people like to discuss their position on religion. Much as we are doing now. My mind was persuaded by talking to people and arguing with them. It took a few years, but yeah.

 

Because Odin demands it!

Osu!

Dan93

 

in many ways religion, human conflict and MA's are intrinsically linked,in origins,
their continued existence and in blindly held dogmatic beliefs

 

That's not true. It would be very easy for a religious person to convince most rationalist non-believers that God exists. They simply need to present some evidence that proves that He exists. At that point, the rationalists would say "Oh, OK, maybe you're right". Obviously, the evidence would be questioned, debated, challenged, as it's a big change in our conceptualisation of how the world works, but if the evidence is solid, then opinions would be changed.

 

Again, that's my point as providing proof isn't faith and therefore your belief would be flawed and faith based. Like I said... this is why I avoid this area. I do pray for all of you though, quite often. I just feel like that constantly debating and almost or actually arguing about it gets most people no where.

 

Surely faith isn't an alternative to proof. Faith is driven by proof. I have faith that cats exist. Even though I can't see a cat right now, I have seen them in the past and haven't heard of any reason they would have been wiped out. So, despite the lack of immediate evidence, I take in on faith that there are currently cats in the world.

If you have faith that God currently exists, doesn't that mean that either you have directly seen God or evidence of his intervention in the past or that you have a very low standard of evidence? It seems to me that the reason people have faith in God is that they accept that something written down 2000 years ago is, by nature, evidence of existence (although alternative mythologies written down in the past aren't - I don't quite get why).

As I've said in the past, I'd like to believe in God as the idea of a supernatural protector is very comforting, but I just can't get past the lack of credibility. Comparing cats and God, there's a lot more reason to believe in cats even though I can't see evidence of either right now.

 

And they have a bible, and do works in mysterious ways -

http://www.lolcatbible.com/index.php?title=Genesis_1

''Oh hai. In teh beginnin Ceiling Cat maded teh skiez An da Urfs, but he did not eated dem.''

 

That's equal parts sweet and patronizing.

As long as you're praying to the right one, I'm cool with that.

...And by "right one" of course I mean Kali, the dark godess. Don't go making her mad at me by mentioning me in the same breath as false gods now. You wouldn't like her when she's mad!

I'll pray for you to her idol tonight, that she may slaughter and feast upon your demons of ignorance, and allow your third eye to pierce Maya and see a universe beyond man's petty notions of gods.

"Om. Fierce of face, she is dark, with flowing hair and four-armed. Dakshina Kalika divine, adorned with a garland of heads. In Her lotus hands on the left, a severed head and a sword. She bestows sanctuary and blessings with her right hands.

The color of the monsoon clouds, and clothed by the sky, the garland of heads around her neck, tinges her with blood. Fear-inspiring, with a pair of unborns as her earrings. Her face is ferocious , her high breasts full in affection.

Girdled with a skirt of severed arms, she smiles. A stream of blood flows from the corner of her lips. Terrifying of voice, turbulent, dwelling in cremation grounds With fearsome teeth, her three eyes reddened like the early sun.

Her unbraided locks covering her left side, she is installed on the heart of corpse-like Siva. Jackals howl around her, filling the four directions. She is in reverse congress with Mahakaal(Time) . With a blissful face, she is always smiling. Meditate on kali, who grants all needs and desires. "

That make you feel better?

 

Disagree. I believe faith is driven by belief, not proof. Proof simply only acts to reinforce or to affirm a position of believe that is already in place, even if it is not our own. Whether or not something can be considered to be proof circulates largely on the assumption that it truthfully supports a theory or position of belief that can be justified within a reasonable state of existence.

As summarised by Plato, "Knowledge is belief true justifiable".

But what about us poor agnostics who are sitting on the middle fence? Why we get no love? :cry:

Seriously though, yeah, sometimes it can be pretty silly. But I'm one of those people that is a sucker for a good debate even though I try to steer clear of them for the most part. Sometimes it's just good to hear an alternative viewpoint, to explore what you yourself claim to believe and to look at viewpoints that perhaps I had not considered myself before.

Besides, if we all agreed on things then those things would not be quite so interesting.

 

"Any old soul is worth saving at least to a priest, but not every soul is worth buying" had to throw in a W Borroughs quote to the mix.

Thanks but no need to pray for me (exception made for Kali of course :evil, you praying for me is dependant on me being part of your belief paradym not mine (as a none believer I default at Hell no?), which are more than likely very different to yours.

Osu!

Dan93

 

I actually think Saved-in-Blood has a point. Not that I'm suggesting we shut down the Religion forum. But I agree that discussions of religion are unlike discussions between different styles. Some different styles, anyway. We're generally very entrenched going in, meaning that our discussion is heavily focused on advancing our own position and deconstructing the other guy's position.

I do feel like there's a distinct lack of actual listening in these discussions. And I'm as guilty as anyone. I'm not religious. I go to church periodically with my in-laws. (My wife and her family are religious.) And I sit there wondering what the point of it all is. But I do try, in an actual discussion, to see it from the perspective of a believer.

There's a strong temptation to see it through our own lense. Take this cat idea, for example. We don't have faith in cats. Not in the religious sense. Because we have sensory basis for believing in cats. We see, hear, feel, and (oh yes) smell them. Faith is (for better or worse) a call to believe in things that are not immediately or obviously apparent. To recognize the work of a higher power even when it's not out in the open.

Now, I personally don't find that very compelling. But I choose to respect people who do. Now, religion gets bent to the will of individuals with some seriously screwy agendas. (As do other things.) And I'm not obliged to buy into those agendas. I believe strongly in gay marriage, for instance. And some beliefs are harder for me to tolerate than others. In Virginia right now, we have prominent politicians openly talking about homosexuality as being deviant behaviour. I'm not obliged to accept that. But there are more fundamental aspects of belief that I'm not driven to take from someone who holds them.

I don't think the Religion forum needs to be closed. I do think it would benefit from an infusion of respect and empathy from both directions.

 

Thats is exactly how religions started, to explain natural things, now we have rational answers, Religion retreats into the non sensory realm.

 

Agreed. It seeks to address those questions and concerns that aren't adequately (for certain people) addressed by science. That being the case, the purview of religion has changed a lot over the millenia. But there still seems to be enough call for it in people's lives for religion to persist.

And I see no reason to stamp that out, when I could just opt to disagree civilly.