How can one be so arrogant as to assume he knows who god is? What does he base this assumption on? A guy in a building with colored windows told him so. How can 90% of the population just accept this and not question it?
You can get people to go along with any stupid idea. Just tell them god said so.
Example:
“Don’t eat meat on Fridays from now 'till Easter!”
“Why?”
“God said so!”
“What does God care what I eat?”
“It’s about suffering, I think.”
“But I can still eat lobster and shrimp?”
“Yeah, that’s right.”
“Makes sense to me!”
Now I can see your random idiot buying into this stuff, but there are actually intelligent people who fall for this crap hook, line, and sinker! WHY?! Because that’s what your parents believed? Are there any Christians out there who honestly believe they’d be Christian right now if they were raised Buddhist?
What do people get out of religion? You go to this place once a week just to be bored out of your mind and told what you can’t do (even if a lot of it doesn’t make sense). Do you really believe that masturbation is wrong? If something isn’t hurting you and isn’t hurting anyone else, how can it be wrong? Oh, I’m sorry. You’re right. The guy in the building with colored windows told you so. Okay then. Carry on.
“Honey we’re recovering Christians.”
–Tori Amos - In the Springtime of his Voodoo
I am and I was. My brother still considers himself a Buddhist.
Personally I dont care if anyone masturbates.
[QUOTE]
Oh, I’m sorry. You’re right. The guy in the building with colored windows told you so. Okay then. Carry on.
**
[QUOTE]
I believe very little of what the guy in the building says so I just dont go. Why do I believe? I just do no one told me to but I had several experiences that brought me to this point. You dont believe? That is personally fine with me, I have to admit I dont go along with the witnessing part either.
Keep smiling it makes 'em wonder what you’ve been up to.
Perhaps there are people that use the above analytical model in determining Lenten abstinence.
But I am not one of them.
My reasons for observing the Lenten fast are:
I am convinced there is value every so often in enforcing upon oneself a measure of denial. Wholly apart from any religious observance, I simply think there’s some good to be had stepping back and denying yourself some favorite pleasure, as a useful reminder that things are not always rosy, the world does not owe you anything, and that the most important things are not material goods and don’t involve processed sugar.
The forty-day Lenten observances are meant to remind us of the forty days Jesus spent fasting in the wilderness. I am convinced that this occurred. You may not agree, but surely you can see that, if this Jesus thing did happen, the memorial observance we do today is reasonably sensible; we give up something we like and abstain from meat on Fridays, a far cry from wandering about fasting for forty days.
I feel a sense of community and belonging with my fellow Roman Catholics. Participation in the Lenten tradition is a shared experience that strengthens the sense of community. In the same way, so far as I know, there is specific Scriptural reason that the Amish wear somber colored clothes. But if an Amish person were to wear flourescent pink trousers every day, for example, he would be clearly distancing himself from the community. In other words, it’s not the word of God – it’s the sense of community.
In short, neutron star, it is quite possible to derive value from religion without relying on the strawman-foolish reasoning you describe above. Since I am sure that you are not nearly as dense as your moniker might otherwise lead one to believe, I hope you now grasp this.
I, for one, am no fan of the larger or more fanatical Chrisian denominations, so to a point I agree with you, Neutron.
However, although they are in the minority, there are thinking, Humanistic organized religions out there that encourage their congregations to think for themselves - Unitarian Universalists (of which I am one), Quakers, United Church of Christ, and others. Granted, not all are Christian, but they are religious communities.
And when I go to church on Sundays (which I haven’t since I gave up being choir director 3 years ago), I don’t get told what not to do, I get asked to think about what’s important to me, my community, and the world around me.
neutron star, when I’m feeling a bit venemous, I do enjoy concurring with your tirade about religion. The fundamentalist Christian attitude is quite unsettling to me. I don’t understand that mentality that allows people to blindly follow “the word of God” when god’s words were written by men. As for the rest of Christianity and non-fundamentalist sects of other religions, they really don’t bother me. Sure, the stances against controversial issues such as homosexuality and abortion backed only by a religiously instilled moral imperative is ridiculous in my perspective, but I think Esprix has the right idea. When a religious community focuses on improving the community and the world as a whole without stipulations of eradicating things morally dubious in their perspective, does it really matter that they believe in a supreme entity without empirical evidence? I think the only time it could be of concern would be if I were to run for president. I might win the small portion of atheist and agnostic nonbelievers (to borrow David B’s phrase) votes, but I really think it would be the anarchist platform that would keep me from the win. In the interest of avoiding getting totally sidetracked I’ll return to the point: I don’t understand why people believe in a god. I can’t believe in god on faith, but is believing in god more idiotic than berating those who do? I for one am content to smugly sit back and enjoy knowing that I am right (Hee hee hee).
What do you guys think religion is? GENERALLY speaking, it boils down to a morality, headed up by some figure, usually God (or Buddaha, etc), as the reference for the morality.
If you don’t do or not do what the religion dictates, in other words, go to a “church” that says you can do anything, and feel good about it, what have you got but a social club?
If you don’t understand the reasoning behind a directive, such as not eating meat on Fridays, and so on, perhaps further investigation on your part is warranted before summarily dismissing is as useless.
And let me remind you, some of the things that the religious folks believe in starts with a predication on faith. That’s why they call it “faith”!
Patrick Ashley
‘The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.’ -Edmund Burke
IMHO, that, and also because it fills an emotional need, which it can do independently of whether it is actually true. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that, in and of itself. Many people do seem to really get something from it. It is only a problem in my eyes when it is used either to persecute others for not believing in the “right” religion, to force one particular religion’s morals on people who don’t want them, or to push valid science out of schools because it is seen as contradicting what some religion says.
Responding to the now-soured ESPRIX due to the passing of Prop. 22…
[QUOTE]
“It is possible to attend a spiritual community that encourages individual expression in a religious context - my faith is proof of that.”[/QUOUTE]
Can you explain this? Sounds like Humanism to me (don’t get me started).
Patrick Ashley
‘The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.’ -Edmund Burke
Sure - check out Unitarian Universalism, which has Judeo-Christian roots but still manages to explore and respect theological differences within its own denomination. There is certainly an element of Humanism in our teachings and beliefs, but ours is defined by faith, spirituality and religion just as much as any other denomination.
So, I took the bait, and clicked thru on Esprick’s “church”.
The Unitarian Universalist Association, which includes both Christians and non-Christians, is among the most open and tolerant of Protestant religious traditions. They reject the doctrines of the Trinity, seeing Christ as a great teacher, not a divine incarnation. They tend to avoid dogma as restrictive and even presumptuous, choosing to emphasize inclusiveness and understanding rather than a specific religious creed.
I don’t see the value of this church, at least on the surface; if you have very few (if any) rules to live by, what’s the point of the church? Seems like a anything-goes-don’t-worry-God-loves-you-anyways gathering, which i would expect the liberal and gay Expricks to be gravitating toward.
Patrick Ashley
‘The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.’ -Edmund Burke
I would ask that you refrain from besmirching my religious beliefs by referring to it in quotations. I may not agree with Christianity, but I have never stooped so low as not to recognize it as a valid belief system, and I would hope you would do the same. (From you, however, it is probably a hope in vain.)
I am assuming this is your own summation, as you gave no cite and it is a distortion of the truth.
Yes, we are made up of Christians and non-Christians alike. Yes, we are unabashedly open-minded and liberal. No, we do not reject the Trinity nor Christ’s divinity out of hand; we leave that bit of faith up to each individual member. And we reject traditional dogma because that usually means a strict list of oppressive rules that stifle the individual spiritual path, but we do have a very specific religious creed - it’s just a little less restrictive than, say, the Catholic’s, and if you’d looked a little harder you’d have found our list of Purposes and Principles (http://www.uua.org/principles.html).
Well, I don’t much see the value of Christianity, either, but only for myself - you’re free to worship as you choose, and I hope it gives you much depth and insight. (Personally, I think there are a lot of people who would do well with a good dose of spirituality, and I don’t care much which religion they get it from.) Spiritual enlightenment is not solely dependent on rules (at least, the rules you feel are important), and I much prefer being in a religious community of tolerance, understanding and education - it suits me. Are we rule-less? No - ours is a strict understanding of personal responsibility to ourselves and our fellow man. I find it much harder to be personally moral and answer to my own conscience than to mindlessly follow a list of someone else’s rules.
To get back to the OT, my point is that not all religions, Christian or otherwise, have to relegate its members to being a flock of mindless sheep. And, not every member of that flock is the same - I know plenty of intelligent, self-analyzing, rational Christians who I would hold up as shining examples of the best of what that faith has to offer.
Evolution is a scientific theory, and about as close to a fact as it gets. Creationism is religion, not science, and as such doesn’t belong in public schools, save perhaps in a course about the history of religion that also mentions the origion theories of other past and present religions.
Because it has an enourmous amount of evidence from several independent disciplines supporing it, and none contradicting it. It has passed enough tests and research and attempts to falsify it that we can say we think it’s “true”, even if it’s possible that something new could come along and falsify it.
Creationism is not science at all. It is religion, and is not based upon scientific princples. In fact young earth creationism is contradicted by a wide body of evidence. Such things do not belong in public schools any more than astrology does.
This isn’t about freedom of expression, it’s about teaching objective reality to the best current level of human knowledge, even if that contradicts what one or more religions say. If some nut comes along and says the moon is made of green cheese, that doesn’t mean it should be taught in schools just because it would be “fair” to give it as much airtime as other theories.
This debate has been done about 4 zillion times before. I don’t imagine anything would change by doing it again…
pashley
Being Christian doesn’t mean one stops listening to science. This whole creationism vs evolution has been hashed out before.
As fo the OP, religion help us discover who we are and how we should live. There are Christian denominations that are not as reactionary as the mainstream, such as the Reformed branch, which includes Presbyterianism and its lesser known Dutch cousins, Christian Reformed, Reformed Church of America.