Theists: Why do you believe in your religion?

[smiling_bandit]

@Strinka

Why do you think Catholicism is the closest thing to being “right” that we have? Why is it closer to being “right” than Protestantism, Islam or any other religion?

Oh, that’s simple. Looking at most religions which are strongly defined religions*, we really have only the Abrahamic faiths.

Now, with regards to Christianity, I believe its claim is by far the strongest. It includes everything of consequence in Judaism. Its miracles were seen and attested to by hundreds, and have continued to be (false ones, and general idiots notwithstanding). We have a clear record carried down to the present day about a Man who was not just a Man.

I did consider Islam closely. I eventually had to reject it, however, because Islam, even the relatively kindly version we have here, was itself the rejection of human reason in favor of, well, blind fanaticism. Secondly, I have extreme doubts about the validity of the Koran/Qur’an. Not only are certain passages highly suspect (it’s fascinating to see how Muhammed’s opinion of the Jews changed with whether or not he could borrow cash from them), but the whole text has been pretty definitely pinned down to a corruption of a Gnostic or Nestorian bible. (I think).

It is possible that the religion had a truly holy foundation, but it was twisted by someone very early on, possibly Muhammed himself.

Continuing on, we have Buddhism. Let’s seee… original form of Buddhism. I disagree with some of ist priciples slightly, but more or less it’s a philosophical concept and does not in the least contradict Christianity. I would contest its modern Chinese-religious form.

*Now for that little star. There are many religions, such as Shinto, were are highly sectional and really dont’ even claim to be valid outside of their “home-turf” and which are more ritual and myth than belief or faith. Likewise the Norse or Greco-Roman Pantheism. Hindu has a special place in my heart, although it is really not much different.

Not back to Christianity. I looked at Protestantism. I think it is sectionalism, and frankly that breaking the Church any way at all is morally wrong. more to the point, none of the Protestant Particular Churches can stand for all Christianity, everywhere:ironically, they make too strong a claim for understandding things (or once did, anyway). I could go for Orthodox, but I do accept Papal Succession.

[Jodi]

@cosmosdan

Can I get an Amen! Thanks for expressing this Jodi. May I ask if this is a common attitude you find among your Christian friends and/or whatever church you attend?

It is, because I am a moderate Christian attending a fairly liberal church. Like most people who have a “spiritual home,” mine is among like-minded people. We may all be wrong, but at least we’re all wrong together.

[cosmosdan]

@Jodi

It is, because I am a moderate Christian attending a fairly liberal church. Like most people who have a “spiritual home,” mine is among like-minded people. We may all be wrong, but at least we’re all wrong together.

indeed. I keep thinking we are all partly wrong and trying to figure things out. I appreciate other religions and in the last two years have come to know more about the Baha’i and like them. Having a Christian background I focus on certain aspects of what I learned.

Anywho, I appreciate what ya posted.

[Atomicflea]

@Locrian

Religion, like any club or contract has requirements. If all aren’t followed, that contract, club or faith membership is null and void.

Speaking strictly from the Catholic-ish side (I also have my native beliefs), once you’re baptized, you’re a Catholic. Nothing nixes that, even if you decide to become an Atheist or are excommunicated, you’ll always be one of the fold as far as the Church is concerned.

[gonzomax]

When I was in high school 3 of us wrote to the Pope asking to get officially excommunicated. He never sent a response.

[smiling_bandit]

@gonzomax

When I was in high school 3 of us wrote to the Pope asking to get officially excommunicated. He never sent a response.

That’s possibly the most chilish thing I can imagine, on several levels.

[WhyNot]

@gonzomax

When I was in high school 3 of us wrote to the Pope asking to get officially excommunicated. He never sent a response.

I believe the proper response is that the Pope doesn’t excommunicate anyone - you excommunicate yourself by your actions, and he (or another priest) informs you of that fact if he becomes aware of it. So don’t worry, your excommunication is still valid, even if he doesn’t know about it.

[ToeJam]

@Strinka

Why do you think your religion is the right one? Why do you think your holy book is correct, but all the other ones aren’t? Why do you think your prophet spoke to God, but other prophets didn’t?

My religion is the right one for me, because it’s the one that helps me sleep at night… sometimes. Sometimes I still lie awake, but it’s the one that’s worked the most for me.
My holy book may or may not be correct. I don’t make any presumptions on others holy books. They could all be correct (sans the whole no one else’s is correct thing). My beliefs don’t really say that mine is the only way, so I don’t judge others on that sort of thing. I just pray with my limited knowledge and that which i’ve learned and feel is the right thing.
I don’t think I have a prophet that spoke to God, but I do feel that if there is a God, he’s not really bugging out on that sort of thing. So maybe someone did speak to God, maybe someone didn’t- doesn’t really help me or hurt me in anyway, so I just focus on that which I’ve learned and what’s best for ME, not others.

Oh, I’m a Hindu.

[Lobohan]

@smiling_bandit

That’s possibly the most chilish thing I can imagine, on several levels.

Yeah. Why the fuck didn’t that baby respond?

[smiling_bandit]

@WhyNot

I believe the proper response is that the Pope doesn’t excommunicate anyone - you excommunicate yourself by your actions, and he (or another priest) informs you of that fact if he becomes aware of it. So don’t worry, your excommunication is still valid, even if he doesn’t know about it.

No, not unless he’s guilty of outright heresy, rather than purely moral error.

[gonzomax]

@smiling_bandit

That’s possibly the most chilish thing I can imagine, on several levels.

Do those include hypocricy and honesty? It was time to make a split.

[gonzomax]

@smiling_bandit

That’s possibly the most chilish thing I can imagine, on several levels.

Do those include hypocricy and honesty? It was time to make a split. By the way he does excommunicate. Throughout history he has.

[cosmosdan]

@gonzomax

When I was in high school 3 of us wrote to the Pope asking to get officially excommunicated. He never sent a response.

Actually he probably just forwarded your letter and the response will come later.

[Locrian]

@Atomicflea

Speaking strictly from the Catholic-ish side (I also have my native beliefs), once you’re baptized, you’re a Catholic. Nothing nixes that, even if you decide to become an Atheist or are excommunicated, you’ll always be one of the fold as far as the Church is concerned.

To the church, sure. To a god? I disagree. I think that’s more of a strictly human concept. I believe we all want to do good unto others… at least when needed.

To other posters who disagreed with my “all or nothing” theory,
I think we are taught there’s a ratings system.

If you follow all the written biblical rules to a tee, and your same-faith neighbor
does too, except for stealing, coveting, what have you, isn’t that person less likely/ less deserving to receive a type of salvation?

Or is that just more a human style, in a way?

Kanicbird, thank you. You answered my questions
and the OP honestly.

[Strinka]

@cosmosdan

**
Strinka
** yes there are facts involved that may or may not be true. All people operate that way in their day to day life to various degrees. It’s not necessary to know if all the details of one’s religion is true in order to go forward and use it as a vehicle for personal growth or social interaction. It’s perfectly normal to operate on what we believe to be true and to accept traditions and rituals of a religion that just “feels” right. It’s often more about what we get emotionally than whether everything can be proven factually.
IMO that’s what “it works for me” means. Each person decides what is comforting, or encouraging, or meaningful, for them, and chooses a path. Sometimes people grow to a point where it’s time to change vehicles. Sometimes not.

So, would you agree that your faith is irrational?

@smiling_bandit

Oh, that’s simple. Looking at most religions which are strongly defined religions*, we really have only the Abrahamic faiths.

Now, with regards to Christianity, I believe its claim is by far the strongest. It includes everything of consequence in Judaism. Its miracles were seen and attested to by hundreds, and have continued to be (false ones, and general idiots notwithstanding). We have a clear record carried down to the present day about a Man who was not just a Man.

I did consider Islam closely. I eventually had to reject it, however, because Islam, even the relatively kindly version we have here, was itself the rejection of human reason in favor of, well, blind fanaticism. Secondly, I have extreme doubts about the validity of the Koran/Qur’an. Not only are certain passages highly suspect (it’s fascinating to see how Muhammed’s opinion of the Jews changed with whether or not he could borrow cash from them), but the whole text has been pretty definitely pinned down to a corruption of a Gnostic or Nestorian bible. (I think).

It is possible that the religion had a truly holy foundation, but it was twisted by someone very early on, possibly Muhammed himself.

Continuing on, we have Buddhism. Let’s seee… original form of Buddhism. I disagree with some of ist priciples slightly, but more or less it’s a philosophical concept and does not in the least contradict Christianity. I would contest its modern Chinese-religious form.

*Now for that little star. There are many religions, such as Shinto, were are highly sectional and really dont’ even claim to be valid outside of their “home-turf” and which are more ritual and myth than belief or faith. Likewise the Norse or Greco-Roman Pantheism. Hindu has a special place in my heart, although it is really not much different.

Not back to Christianity. I looked at Protestantism. I think it is sectionalism, and frankly that breaking the Church any way at all is morally wrong. more to the point, none of the Protestant Particular Churches can stand for all Christianity, everywhere:ironically, they make too strong a claim for understandding things (or once did, anyway). I could go for Orthodox, but I do accept Papal Succession.

That doesn’t address other forms of Christianity, such as Protestantism and Eastern Orthodoxy. You mentioned Catholicism specifically, or do you think they’re equally “right”?

[WhyNot]

@Locrian

If you follow all the written biblical rules to a tee, and your same-faith neighbor
does too, except for stealing, coveting, what have you, isn’t that person less likely/ less deserving to receive a type of salvation?

I don’t understand “salvation” that way. I think some people do, and create their own salvation (and/or hell, as mentioned earlier).

I don’t need to be saved or accepted by another being. I need to improve myself and my behavior so I can accept and love myself. And when I’m actively working on it, as I mentioned, my life works better for me. I suppose I could consider that a form of salvation, but I don’t think it’s what Christians mean by the term.

Thanks for the correction on the Excommunication issue, y’all. I brushed up at Catholic Encyclopedia and you’re right - excommunication is something done to you by the church. I was confused by a half remembered conversation with a priest about 15 years ago. I apologize.

[cosmosdan]

@Strinka

So, would you agree that your faith is irrational?

Because all humans operate on faith to varying degrees I would say no. faith is not necessarily irrational.

Here’s something I think might be interesting. We’ve discussed this sort of thing on the board many times. Perhaps the line of division would be whether believers hold their beliefs provisionally or not.

Meaning, If you believe things may or may not be true but prefer to operate under the assumption they are while being open to additional evidence and information, then your beliefs are rational. If, on the other hand, you insist that the beliefs you have no evidence for are absolute fact, or worse, you hold beliefs that are contradicted by plenty of evidence, then your beliefs are irrational.

[Strinka]

@cosmosdan

Because all humans operate on faith to varying degrees I would say no. faith is not necessarily irrational.

Here’s something I think might be interesting. We’ve discussed this sort of thing on the board many times. Perhaps the line of division would be whether believers hold their beliefs provisionally or not.

Meaning, If you believe things may or may not be true but prefer to operate under the assumption they are while being open to additional evidence and information, then your beliefs are rational. If, on the other hand, you insist that the beliefs you have no evidence for are absolute fact, or worse, you hold beliefs that are contradicted by plenty of evidence, then your beliefs are irrational.

That seems reasonable.

[The_Second_Stone]

I grew up a Christian, so I spent much time assuming that it was correct. But during all that time, I also found that Jesus’ message: love each other as you love yourselves, be forgiving, take care of the poor, etc. are good things and the very essence of what is best. If that isn’t divine, it certainly is the only thing that should be. These are things to strive for in myself.