I don’t even know if I have a religion, in the sense that the word is used today. If someone asks “What’s your religion?” I say I’m a neo-Pagan, or specifically a Wiccan. But to me, it’s so integrated into my total world-view that I wonder if it’s not more of a philosophy or a metaphor. Structurally, it just seems so different to me from (for example) the Christianity in which I was brought up. I keep hearing atheists talk about why they’re atheists, and I keep saying to myself, “I’m a Wiccan for the same reasons.” Essentially, I don’t worship a god who created what is; I worship gods who are what is. Sometimes I even worry about whether it’s misleading to use the word “gods” in this context; whether another word, akin to the Gaelic sidhe or Japanese kami might not be a closer fit.
I’m an athiest, as is my husband. We’ve decided to raise our son as an athiest, too, but I have taught him about the basics of Christianity, because so much of Western Civilisation is based on that. I haven’t gone into other religions so much, but I plan on doing it as he gets older.
I was raised Independent Baptist, my Mother is very born again, and my Father sort of goes along with it. I hated that church, and if I had to go to church again (if, TinyTot wanted to go, for example) I would choose something like Unitarians or maybe Methodist.
Sorry, your analogy is invalid. “2+2=4” is a fact that can be independently tested and verified via objective, scientific means. In other words, it can be proven to be true. On the other hand, the validity of your religious beliefs – or anyone else’s – are impossible to verify by any means other than subjective experience, and therefore must be taken on faith. We’re dealing with apples and oranges here.
No offence, but every so often some of your fellow church members come a-knocking at my front door. As soon as I see their ID badges, the door closes again without comment. I find door-to-door “witnessing” to be a particularly heinous and offensive practice because of its intrusiveness.
Pardon me, but 2+2=4 is not an “objective scientific fact”; it’s a mathematical truth that’s true by definition.
That is to say, nobody performed an experiment in which they got a great deal of pairs and added them together and found they always got four. In other words, 2+2=4 is not a product of the scientific method; there is no possibility, as there is with scientific facts, that one of these days we could add 2+2 and get five. That’s because 2+2=4 is true by definition; 4 has no independent existence other than as the sum of 2+2 (and as the product of 2*2, and as the square root of 16, etc.)
To put it another way, we know that 2+2 always equals 4 in the same way that we know that a square is a four-sided right-angled equilateral polygon, not in the same way we know that there is a gravitational force between objects. The latter has been experimentally verified; the former is a matter of definition.
Science is the process of applying reason to observed facts about the natural world; mathematics is pure logic applied to perfect entities that do not have physical existence. That’s why 2+2=4 is not subject to doubt: it is sheer definition.
“Logic does not by any means treat the totality of things; it does not treat objects at all but only our way of speaking about objects…The certainty…of a proposition of logic derives just from the fact that it says nothing about objects of any kind.”
- Hans Hahn
…I’m a Christian, a historically unpopular thing to be around here. Denomination (not that I think it matters all that much) is Methodist.
yojimbo’s sig is exactly why I don’t like to advertise my faith. Christians have very bad PR, and can be very ignorant and arrogant about their faith. Typically, the more ignorant they are, the more arrogant, in fact. I could never be completely like Christ; I see it as as near-hopeless goal. A worthy one, certainly, but one very few of us reach–and thousands tend to think they have. I have developed an unfortunate resentment toward “generic” Christians; unfortunate that it would have reason to develop, and unfortunate that I am wasting my energy developing it.
I don’t witness. I find it an insulting practice.
I love my church because it does not dictate our political beliefs, or even cultural mores. Homosexuals are welcome at our church (and not under the guise of, “come here and we’ll fix you”), as are different places of faith and growth and lifestyle.
Now that I’ve lost credibility with some, I’ll tip-toe away now.
(quote edited for brevity)
Your response has got to be the Mother Of All Nitpicks.
Five paragraphs to argue semantics??? Sheesh.
To some it’s a question of semantics, to other it’s fighting ignorance… How you choose to view this is of course entirely up to you.
Athiest
Thoughts on other people? Long as they don’t force their beliefs on me, or judge me, they can believe in the Almighty Wallowing Pig for all I care.
Thanks, Quick.
cough Can we just end this before you guys get rowdy?
Anyway, I think that Christians should aim to be as Christ-like as possible. That is an immpossible goal, as Christians know, he was/is perfect. But we can aim, and at least follow the things he said to.
BTW, before someone comments, I know my sig is strange for a Christian, but I just think of how sadly true that seems to be, a lot of the time.
I’ve been brought up Christian my entire life; nothing and no one has changed my mind about wanting to be anything else.
I’m Presbyterian. Yes, I’ve gone to the same Presbyterian church my entire life, but I’ve also gone to other denominations’ churches to “try them out”. I could easily switch over to Methodist, since they seem to have the same ideals, but I could be wrong.
My entire family is Presbyterian. I thought that Dad’s cancer would make him turn from God, but on the contrary, he’s even more God-loving than ever. I find it cool that he can have so much faith.
I’m not really into witnessing either. People know that I’m a Christian by how I treat people, how I act, how I’m kind and have a wide capacity of love for people. My boyfriend now wants to go to church with me. He doesn’t consider himself a Christian, but he believes in God. I’ve never witnessed to him. But we do talk about religion. I asked him why he never went to church when his own best friend asked him to go. He said, “Because when you asked me to go, you were more like, ‘Ray, I’d love you to come to church, but it’s up to you. You don’t have to go if you don’t want to. I’m not making you’ when his friend was along the lines of ‘Ray, if you don’t go to church you’re going to Hell! Come to church with me!’” You win the flies over with honey, not vinegar.
As for other religions, I’m fine with them as long as they’re happy with their religion, and they don’t try to force things upon others. In Costa Rica, my fellow missionaries were convinced that I wouldn’t go to Heaven because I wasn’t “baptized in the Holy Spirit” (actually, I am, but they were convinced something was wrong with me since I don’t speak in tongues and never plan to). They tried to force it upon me, and it frightened and offended me.
I just want to say I love all you guys. group hug
Ack! I keep hitting the wrong ‘quote’ button. This is the one I meant to quote, so just kindof mentally transfer the other message to this one.
I’m a philosophical Daoist with no particular religious belief, although I just performed my first Christian wedding ceremony today. Two, actually.
The power went out twice during the rehersal. Message?
–sublight.
<Sarcasm>
Yes. Silly me, I was under the mistaken impression that Mathematics was a science. I stand corrected.
</Sarcasm>
Mathematics is a science. “2+2=4” is a fact. Therefore, my earlier usage, while perhaps a bit sloppy and colloquial, is not completely inaccurate. On the other hand, spending FIVE FREAKING PARAGRAPHS lambasting me on that usage, while still arriving at the EXACT SAME CONCLUSION that I had intended, is being anal-retentive in the extreme. Lighten up, for crying out loud!
And since mathematics is a science, it is thus a scientific fact. You want to play word games, go somewhere else.
Strange… I’ve seen that experiment done myself. On Sesame Street. Granted, the experiment was demonstrative rather than inquisitive, but there it is. Perhaps you missed it.
Whis not the same thing as saying that it is not “a scientific fact”. The fact that water is liquid at room temperature under normal atomospheric pressure is likewise something that is obvious by direct observation. I would call it a “scientific fact” as well, because it falls into the realms of both chemistry and (to a lesser extent) physics, which can explain why water is liquid at room temperature.
In other words, you’re saying that some of the scientific facts we do have based on experimentation just might someday turn out to be wrong? A chemical reaction that mixes Chemical A and Chemical B to produce Chemical C might someday produce Chemical D instead? Give me a break.
Scientific experiments also serve to explain, which your definition appears to leave little room for.
I find that to be a rather narrow definition of “science”. For starters, some disciplines that are generally regarded as Sciences fail that definition. Astronomy, for one. Mathematics, for another.
Which was basically my original point, which you appear to have missed completely – the poster of the message to which I originally applied used “2+2=5” as a (wrong) fact in his analogy. My point was that “2+2=4” is and always will be a fact that can be independently verified by emperical means, while the existence of God can not, thus pointing out the error in his analogy.
I simply chose 2+2=5 because it is obviously false and could possibly be believed by confused people. If you like, you can replace it by something like “x^n + y^n = z^n , for all integers n>2.” Even though this has been proven false, it took hundreds of pages. So, many simply take it on faith that those mathematicians wouldn’t deceive them rather than going through each step.
I’m just saying that it doesn’t matter, in this particular analogy, how easily it can be proven false. The point is that people will believe false things and if you knew the truth, you would try to help them. Enough with the nitpicking, and please be kind to the “door-knockers”. They give up two years of their lives just to get others to see the truth.
As far as I am concerned, my beliefs represent the truth as I am capable of understanding it. But I don’t go around knocking on other people’s doors to convince them of it. As I said before, my view is that other people can believe whatever they want to believe as long as they extend me the same courtesy. Coming around and knocking on my door to tell me about what they perceive as the truth is a violation of that courtesy. I find such behavior to be intrusive and offensive. My response is to shut the door without comment, mostly because it’s less hostile than some of the alternatives (eg, yelling and/or swearing at them THEN closing the door, as I’ve heard my next-door neighbour do). 
I’m hoping you don’t think that these traits are exclusive to Christians.
I’m posting to this although I have a feeling that the math hijack may be driving people away (get your own thread if you want to discuss such things).
I am Wiccan. I have been Wiccan for approximatley 11 years, even though my mother still has this odd thoery that I must be going through some type of rebellious phase.
Forgive my ignorance, but isn’t Wiccan like witchcraft? Or is that just a rumour?