Dangerous personal question

Postby Viper7 » Thu Feb 11, 2010 2:36 pm

Now this question is very dangerous to ask I realize. Oftentimes it results in people starting huge flame wars but it's an insightful discussion if people are mature about it.

What are your religious views if you have any?

I myself am Christian but differ from some quote-on-quote "old fashioned" Christians on some issues, such as evolution, big bang and so forth.

Re: Dangerous personal question

Postby Jack Roper » Thu Feb 11, 2010 2:42 pm

Hey Viper,

Yes, religion is a mine field, as is politics. The question of labeling one's self is, perhaps, an even more interesting question. Why do we label our selves Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, Atheist, Agnostic? Is it for some form of security? Is it laziness? Labels continue into capitalist, socialist, communist, American, Russian, Chinese, Arizonan, Hawaiian, South Carolinian, etc. It is almost as if we have a wish to seem different or to join certain tribes, and exclude others.

Try starting with "I Am" and see if you can stay with just that.

What say you?

Jack

Re: Dangerous personal question

Postby Viper7 » Thu Feb 11, 2010 2:49 pm

Intersting answer. I guess in the case the label describes what you believe to be true and how those views influence how you choose to live your life. In the case of religion or politics we label ourselves to show what our opinions are. I think most people have an opinion on this particular subject, with the possible exception of agnostics.

I figure since this is the "Jump into the Fire" section, posting minefields of topics should be okay. :P

Re: Dangerous personal question

Postby Nuclearo » Thu Feb 11, 2010 5:10 pm

Well, that's the fun of this section, isn't it? ^^

I'm Jewish. (OMG sound the alarms! Information alert!!!)
I believe god exists, I fast in yom kippur and I don't eat bread in passover. On the other hand, I don't follow most of the religion's other rules. Basically I put the religious rules into 2 categories: ones with practical reasons and ones with symbolic reasons. Symbolic would be the passover thing (in memory of the biblical story) and practical would be though shalt not kill. I tend to follow more the symbolic ones as part of the religion, because they represent the heritage I come from and believe in, one which I want to keep alive. The practical I take on a more case by case basis. Why? Because in my view rules aren't meant to be blindly followed. I want to know the reason behind it before I change my way of life to abide by it.

Let's take oysters for example. I think most of you know they aren't kosher, so jews can't eat them (by religion, of course). But why is that? Well, oysters, like most sea fruits (does that term even exist in english?) tend to rot pretty easily, and when you eat a rotten oyster it's na-sty! I can certainly see why 3000 years ago, when refrigeration meant putting something in the shade, it was pretty logical to forbid eating them. On the other hand, in present day it makes less sense because of the health standards. I believe the main problem of any religion is it is unable to adapt fast enough. If it can take years to change a law written by man, think how long it would take to slowly shape a law of the lord to better fit the new world.

Who knows. Maybe in 2012 god will send to us his fourth version of the bible :roll:
Join our irc channel!! http://chat.mibbit.com/#tugsnet It's fun!!

Re: Dangerous personal question

Postby Viper7 » Thu Feb 11, 2010 5:15 pm

Lol nice, I find your idea of practical vs. symbolic really interesting since I kinda think on a similar wavelength regarding my own beliefs.

Interesting idea about reasons behind kosher vs non-kosher too. :P

Re: Dangerous personal question

Postby Jack Roper » Fri Feb 12, 2010 11:58 am

Oysters, religion, beliefs, opinions....why are any of these necessary (well maybe the oysters). As President Obama quoted Sentaor Moynihan the other day, "you are entitled to your opinions but not your facts". So why do we deviate from facts, or the what is? Why are we so heavily conditioned from childhood? Is it possible to be free of all of this psychological conditioning, all of these beliefs, opinions and other--I hate to use the term here, but--straitjacketed thought processes?

Re: Dangerous personal question

Postby Plueschbabycd » Fri Feb 12, 2010 1:28 pm

Hallo Nuclearo, what wrote was great. But know I book about Jewish for Christian where most explain out history and in end because it is so written in the Torah but no explanation why it put in this form in Torah. I can be came that form orthodox.
Form the paper I´m Lutheran Christians, but the form belive more open.
Andrew
"Don´t dream it, be it." Dr. Frank N. Furter in Rocky Horror Picture Show

Re: Dangerous personal question

Postby Nuclearo » Fri Feb 12, 2010 3:16 pm

I agree that most of the reasons for the rules weren't explained in the Torah. After all, they had a lot of ground to cover and the book turned out pretty long anyway ;) Everything beyond the book itself, including pretty much all religions, are interpretations of people who studied it over the times. I heard some religious lectures, and almost everything is references to what great rabbis said in the past. It sounded like a list of legal precedents XD Almost every religious rule is an interpretation of what is written in the Torah. One of the classic examples I learned at school is the don't mix milk and meat rule. The sentence in the bible says "You shall not boil a young goat in its mother’s milk.", so one could understand that it only applies to goats and goat's milk. There were ancient debates over this and apparently the "goat is any meat" guys won (or the others were killed by some random local empire).
Join our irc channel!! http://chat.mibbit.com/#tugsnet It's fun!!

Re: Dangerous personal question

Postby Viper7 » Fri Feb 12, 2010 4:26 pm

Jack Roper wrote:Oysters, religion, beliefs, opinions....why are any of these necessary (well maybe the oysters). As President Obama quoted Sentaor Moynihan the other day, "you are entitled to your opinions but not your facts". So why do we deviate from facts, or the what is? Why are we so heavily conditioned from childhood? Is it possible to be free of all of this psychological conditioning, all of these beliefs, opinions and other--I hate to use the term here, but--straitjacketed thought processes?


So your're saying we should only look at observed facts and not form any opinons beyond that? That doesn't sound very free to me but rather sounds like a person who doesn't think abstractly. Your seeing it from a lens that religion is a thought "prison" while most probably would disagree. Others (like myself) would say that you're simply plugging your minds ears as well as missing out on something. You also seem to be implying that religion isn't "what is". Having a religion doesn't mean forcing yourself to believe something that isn't true like you seem to be implying. As for why we're conditioned from childhood, I myself started identifying as Christian independently from my parents having to "condition" me.

Re: Dangerous personal question

Postby Jack Roper » Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:14 pm

Living in a dreamworld may be very comforting and pleasant but it has little to do with truth and reality. What is the value of opinion about facts? If you're getting at imagination, creation, and insight that is something else. The realm of the known is limited and probably only represents a small part of Totality.

Organized religion can be very comforting and is at times a form of prison, if you look at it objectively. The literalist reading of sacred books often divides one group of people from another, which causes conflict and ultimately war--which is contrary to most organized religion's core beliefs. "Do unto others as you would do unto yourself," but proceed with the Crusades or Inquistion of Jihad as soon as possible against the unbelievers or infidels.

I guess it all depends on how you define the word "religion." My understanding is that word has no entymological known origin. What do you mean by religion? Carrying the conditioned burden of the past, whether from your parents, society or your friends, into the present is hardly freedom. And frredom from the known may truly be the path to a truly religious mind, and heart.
Last edited by Jack Roper on Sat Nov 19, 2011 5:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Re: Dangerous personal question

Postby Viper7 » Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:55 pm

You're not looking at it objectivly, you're looking at it from your own perspective/opinion (which I'm guessing based on what you've said is that no religion is true) and calling it the objective truth. However, that is your "religion" of your own. It may very well be the objective truth that God exists. I for one think that there is plenty of observable evidence that God exists and that one can soundly believe it to be so. To believe in a fairy tale for no other reason other than it being comfortable is foolish, I agree.

Yes, I know that certain religions have done atrocious things in the past. However like you said, the actual philosophies of the religions themselves don't condone such behaviors. People can have religion without doing stupid stuff.

By "religion" I guess I'm asking about your opinion on what lies beyond the observable.

Re: Dangerous personal question

Postby Kyle » Fri Feb 12, 2010 7:44 pm

I'm a Christian. I base my beliefs off the Bible rather than a label, and have disagreed with my own church on a few issues (albeit minor ones, otherwise I wouldn't be going to that church any more). My own preacher would rather hear that than to hear I've blindly accepted what he says though, as he always tells us to go to the Bible. Churches aren't always indoctrinating people and beating them over the head with "the Truth."

Re: Dangerous personal question

Postby wadeb444 » Sat Feb 13, 2010 8:06 pm

kyle sounds a lot like me an my church.
WADE

Re: Dangerous personal question

Postby Scottstud94 » Mon Feb 15, 2010 11:02 pm

I believe in the religion of science. I believe what I see, religions just too far out there to me.

Re: Dangerous personal question

Postby nalk » Thu Feb 18, 2010 5:13 pm

Birds, fish, flowers, insects and animals do it. Mix and spread their DNA.

Thus to me it seems that, procreation is the main meaning of life. The entire DNA of a planet cant be wrong.

That is my religion.
Is a person with multiple personality disorder always beside himself?

Are the paranoid always 2 steps ahead?

TUG, you´re it.

Re: Dangerous personal question

Postby Soul_Rebel » Thu Feb 25, 2010 8:43 am

Like anything that can be given abstract thought, it is what you make of it. I personally was raised in the liberal Catholic format, there was a generation between me and the more radical natured one of the 60's and 70's that drove many counter culture movements. So I attended a few years of Catholic school, but it was not mandatory.

With my freely inspired beliefs about the world comes also a longing to interpret ideas, weather religious or purely philosophical in nature, in my own manner. I draw my own conclusions about what is being said, because having my own subjectivity is far more helpful than adapting another's subjective conclusions.
Whips and chains may break my bones, but ropes and gags excite me!

The image in my avatar is the work of Vonnart

"Duct tape makes you smart." - Michael Weston

Re: Dangerous personal question

Postby Viper7 » Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:58 am

Interesting, though there are many reasons why I am unable to buy into the idea that reality is subjective and what we make of it. For example, the Earth is round and orbits the sun. It does this whether we believe it does or not, it is concrete and absolute. If you poke your hand with a white hot iron poker, it's going to burn whether you subject it to or not. The same could be said for the existence of God and other claims in religions. If for example, God exists and Christ was God incarnated into human form as Christianity claims, it would be the case whether you believed it or not. On the flip side, if Naturalistic Atheism is true and neither God nor anything of that metaphysical nature exists, believing in God won't make him/her/it exist, the truth would simply be that there is no God.

Most religions claim that they know that God exists because they claim that someone came into contact with him/her/it at some point early on and passed on accound of their experience. While they could be just a hoax, they seem much more likely to be true than something one conjectures up on their own, which is really just making up a new religion.

I personally came to very different conclusions than what I was raised with. I was born into a conservative baptist family, but by coming to my own conclusions based on what I learned, I've become much more liberal in my thinking, embracing a lot of ideas my grandparents would not at all approve of. However, this didn't cause me to reject the religion altogether.

Re: Dangerous personal question

Postby FelixSH » Mon Mar 01, 2010 1:48 pm

born as christian but left church some years ago. I don´t need an institution to be religious, it depends only on what you do and think. It doesn´t matter which god you choose to believe into, as long as you do the right things...be nice, don´t hurt other people, be respectful to everyone...

I also don´t believe in a real god, everything happened without some entity doing anything...that we live here depends only on chance...like nearly everything...

Re: Dangerous personal question

Postby dreadnaught3200 » Sun Mar 07, 2010 9:28 pm

I was born and raised a Christian. Though I like to think of myself as a free thinking Christian, I definitely don't agree with everything that the current Christian church teaches. Though to be fair, most of their teachings are good.

I believe the main reason that I've stuck with it thus far, rather than defer to atheism is: I cannot fathom that the Universe we live in happened by accident. As far as I can tell, the most basic and most important difference between People of Science and People of Faith, is that religion answers the question "How did the Universe come from nothing" by saying that it was the work of something beyond human comprehension, while the atheist can't accept that. I mean both viewpoints are essentially trying to answer that question. But just saying that the enormity and infinite complexity of the Universe came from some scientific process that we just don't know about, doesn't hold any water in my opinion. It seems far more logical to me that there's something bigger than ourselves at work here. When it comes to the really big questions in life, it takes just as much faith to believe in Science as it does to believe in God.
There's a permanent tension in music isn't there? On one hand you have three chords, you know, four four and three chords. Then there's the people like me, who say "Well, why don't we add a fourth chord and put it in five four?" - Bill Bruford

Re: Dangerous personal question

Postby Jason Toddman » Fri Apr 30, 2010 7:24 am

For what it's worth, I think the teachings of Jesus have been grossly misunderstood by most Christians. What he taught would be, if preached afresh today, would be considered to be a God-centered form of Socialism. Look how often he talks about giving to the poor (something Republicans in general today have completely lost sight of). The parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man was about helping those in need; not a tutorial about what Hell is like (besides, Hades is the GREEK/ROMAN afterlife for the wicked; and that's the name he used because everyone knew Greek/Roman mythology in those days). His major emphasis was to teach justice and equity. He never said anything about dying for sins or any of that sort of thing; those were wordsd applied to him later. Paul the Apostle popularized Jesus's teachings in part by completely changing them; read the Gospels and then the Epistles carefully and without preconceptions and you'll see huge differences between them. In modern terms, Jesus would have been considereed a liberal and Paul a Bush-era Republican! Whether Jesus is the Son of God is a different matter. I used to believe so; I do not now. Miracles have been attributed to great teachers before (like Buddha), and still are with 'saints'. So what's left that makes Jesus special? His isn't even the only resurrection!
As for life and the Afterlife - life is like the greatest massive multi-player online video game ever; only we forget it IS a game until we die (Game Over). The Afterlife is eternal, we were always there, but its so peaceful it's dull and boring so we play 'Life on Earth' (among maybe millions of others) for a little spice just like some otherwise good kids play Grand Theft Auto so they can legally blow away cops and create mayhem in general without 'hurting' anyone. Reincarnation is when we start another game with no recall we ever lived anything else until its game over again. God is the game programmer. Animals are (maybe) NPCs.
Maybe I should start my own religion for profit like L Ron Hubbard did with Scientology and call it the Church of the Almighty Programmer. :wink:
No offense is intended to anyone's religious views. I respect everyone's religious views that do NOT include hatred and intolerance for those who do not believe as they do. After all, without certain knowledge, anyone's religion is just as valid as anyone else's. Whatever you sincerely believe is your right to believe; just don't insist that everyone else must believe the same way or that they'll go to Hell. If a human can be morally outraged at the idea of Hell, how much more so for a 'righteous' God?
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

Re: Dangerous personal question

Postby dreadnaught3200 » Fri May 07, 2010 4:22 pm

Ok Jason, I respect your views on religion in general, and I agree with you that everyone should have religious freedom as long as those views don't condone hatred and violence.

But, I hate it when people try to apply modern politics to Jesus and his teachings. Jesus never said anything about politics, he seems to have made a point to be non-political.

What Jesus taught through his actions and his parables was a morality, a higher standard of living that he wanted his followers to try and live up to. Included in this along with love, faith and respect was generosity and compassion. But he called everyone to this as a personal duty. He called people like Zacchaeus to take their own wealth and give it to those in need of their own free will. He said "Take care of the widows and the orphans" not "Thou shalt set up a Government that takes wealth and re-distributes it evenly". It doesn't take any self-sacrifice or personal devotion to take care of those less fortunate if the Government that forces you to do it. And that self-sacrifice is the whole point. I think it's both short-sighted and morally wrong to try and say "Jesus was a liberal" or "Jesus was a republican". He wasn't either. More to the point, if Jesus came back today, I'm sure he would find the hypocrites on both the left and right sides of the spectrum and knock some heads around!

One more thing, I think you need to read the gospels again. Yes, Jesus taught morality, but he claimed over and over again to be the son of the God. John 14:6 "I am the way the truth and the life, no one comes to the father but through me." That's pretty definitive don't you think?

Sorry, I don't mean any disrespect. But I think your misrepresenting Christianity.
There's a permanent tension in music isn't there? On one hand you have three chords, you know, four four and three chords. Then there's the people like me, who say "Well, why don't we add a fourth chord and put it in five four?" - Bill Bruford

Re: Dangerous personal question

Postby Jason Toddman » Fri May 07, 2010 8:03 pm

To Dreadnought
Who was talking politics? I said he'd be CONSIDERED a Socialist by most people. I didn't say I believed he WAS one myself. And you're right about most everything else you said, and I agree he was largely non-political (although his talk about setting up a new eternal kingdom might not be taken that way by many folks). I myself intended no application of modern politics to Jesus's teachings nor would do so - in part because my interest in modern politics is almost non-existent.
He called folks to a higher morality and self-sacrifice; terms most Christians I ever knew paid lip service to at best. Christians today are by and large (with some exceptions perhaps - but I don't know any) as bad as the hypocritcal Pharisees and other religionists he condemned in his own time. Every Christian thinks they're the perfect Christian. Every Jew thought they were perfect back then too. But they're no better than everyone else. In fact, some of the most heartless and unforgiving and all-round unpleasant people I ever knew were practicing Christians who thought they had a monopoly on goodness and righteousness - especially Fundamentalists. I think Jesus would give most of that crowd the hardest knocks on the head of all. people haven't improved one bit since his time.
I may be misrepresenting Christianity as YOU perceive it (which is not necessarily how everyone else perceives it; no disrespect intended); but in turn I think Christianity misrepresents Christ himself. Buddhaism misrepresents Buddha too, for that matter. All historical characters have probably been misrepresented to one extent or another.
As for what Jesus said about his being the way and truth and the life... he's not the only one to have ever made that claim. I won't go into specifics that might offend anyone (having Asperger's Syndrome, I offend people too often by accident to want to do it on purpose) but considering history of religions and cults in general; I find it easier to believe that Jesus was either delusional or (more likely) misquoted / misunderstood by his disciples. It is clear they misunderstood many of his other teachings (Paul alone contradicts Jesus's teachings many times); why not this? Basically, I DON'T believe every word in the Bible to be divinely inspired. I used to; not anymore.
I absolutely respect your right to believe exactly what the Bible says if this comforts you and seems right to you; I'm the last person who'd ridicule an honest faith. But so many Christians have conflicting beliefs about even the most basic Biblical teachings (and so many are hypocrites besides) and yet are such Absolutists (believing they are right about EVERYTHING) that I have no faith in modern Christians or Christianity at all anymore. They're too devisive. Paul the Apostle himself said that the greatest attribute is Love - yet I do not see any Love in the blindness and bigotry I've seen in many prominent Christians today. Christ accepted sinners as the flawed beings we/they are; I dont' see that in most of his followers.
You may be different; I'm in no position to judge. But History shows that the majority of people are always WRONG; not right! I can cite examples, but hopefully you can think of enough of them yourself so that I don't need to.
But I can admit I may be wrong here. That is definitely possible.
I never heard a Christian ever admit the same thing. So far, anyway.
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

Re: Dangerous personal question

Postby dreadnaught3200 » Fri May 07, 2010 9:20 pm

Ok. I'm starting to understand you better now, I'm sure you must understand when you start throwing around terms like "God-centered form of Socialism", "Liberal" and "Paul a Bush era Republican" that it might sound like your bringing politics into it. And unfortunately, a lot of people do just that, to try and sanctify their political agenda. And as previously discussed... It pisses me off! lol

That being said, sadly I have to agree with you as far as the hypocrisy of a lot of Christians goes. Your absolutely right. When asked Jesus said that the most important commandment was "You shall have no Gods before me" and (More relevantly to the point I'm making here) "Love thy neighbor as thyself". A lot of Christians seems to have forgotten about the second part, and spend most of their time hating. Though, I feel obligated to say that: growing up in the church, I have met many Christians who actually live out their faith, and who do try to represent Christ everyday. There are still true Christians out there, though in my experience they tend to keep a low profile.

When it comes to John 14:6, we know Jesus made statements claiming to be the son of God from secular writings of the time, both from Jewish and Roman officials. I'm not sure about this one in particular, but there is no question Jesus said such things. The apostles may have misunderstood him on specific issues, but this one is pretty concrete.

And yes I believe the bible is God breathed. Considering what the bible teaches, if you can't trust what it says, there's really no point in studying it at all.

Ok if it makes you feel better: I am a Christian, I am not a perfect Christian. In fact in many ways, I'm a pretty poor example of one. More to the point, in what I just said, I'm probably not right about everything. And I know a lot of Christians who will tell you exactly the same thing. As you pointed out, Christ taught and loved sinners/imperfect people like me. Even if he wasn't the son of God, he was still the greatest man who ever lived. That there are any Christians who misrepresent his legacy is the real tragedy of the situation.
There's a permanent tension in music isn't there? On one hand you have three chords, you know, four four and three chords. Then there's the people like me, who say "Well, why don't we add a fourth chord and put it in five four?" - Bill Bruford

Re: Dangerous personal question

Postby Jason Toddman » Sat May 08, 2010 2:09 pm

The point I was trying to make was indeed that many people bring politics into it. Many Christians for instance decried Obama as being 'un-Christian' for his 'Socialist' values. It is that kind of nonsense I was ranting about. I for one have NO political agenda; because I think modern government is hopelessly complicated and screwed up.

I'm sorry if anything I said came as offensive to you inparticular Dreadnought. Especially as I am in perfect agreement with MOST of what you've said in your posts. Even where I do not fully agree, I respect your viewpoints and your right to believe them or say them. I never intended to imply otherwise. The terms you cited that I used were analogies, not literal, for comparison purposes. I'm not too good at expressing my viewpoints yet; which is one reason I'm pretty much a recluse.

The secular writings you cite all refer to either the Gospels/Epistles that we know or other writing made by believers at the time (which was decades after Jesus died in most cases). What I was saying is that we have no firsthand account by Jesus himself written by his own hand (and therefore unfiltered by others) stating clearly what his teachings were. There is no way to know for certain what he actually preached himself and what was put into his mouth long after the fact by others. As word spread about Jesus throughout the known world, it inevitably got changed with each new telling; the Gospels were written (decades after Jesus died) supposedly to set matters straight. This is where faith comes in; the belief that they are 100% error-less. For me, that is insufficient.

There are many books in the Old Testament that indicate that they were written specifically to bolster the authority of the Jewish preisthood of the time. I won't go into detail on this though because there's no need other than to indicate why I personally ceased to belive in the Bible as divinely inspired. I have no right nor wish to take that away from you; especially if you are happier with what you believe - and most likely you're happier with your life and beliefs than I am with mine. There is nothing wrong with a honest and straightforward faith in Jesus; in fact I commend you for it. I'm simply incapable of having such a clear faith myself anymore.
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

Re: Dangerous personal question

Postby mikeybound » Sat May 08, 2010 10:26 pm

i am perhaps the most honest person on this thread. weather you are a christian, muslim, spiritual, agnostic or even atheist, you are believing what another person told you. people don't understand the nature of the universe! i don't either, and i pity the fool who thinks they do :bondage: . there seem to be a ton of people saying they have all the answers, and precious few willing to admit they don't and probably never will.

Re: Dangerous personal question

Postby Jason Toddman » Sun May 09, 2010 6:40 am

mikeybound wrote:i am perhaps the most honest person on this thread. weather you are a christian, muslim, spiritual, agnostic or even atheist, you are believing what another person told you. people don't understand the nature of the universe! i don't either, and i pity the fool who thinks they do :bondage: . there seem to be a ton of people saying they have all the answers, and precious few willing to admit they don't and probably never will.

That is something I also have to agree with, with a few reservations. We ALL believe what another person told us, unless you're willing to say your parents always lied to you as a kid (disregarding things like Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny). It's in our Nature to retain the beliefs we grew up with to one extent or another. To me, God is just Santa Claus for grown ups. But I can understand if people cannot believe that themselves; it is not easy to reject things we were taught were true as children (again except for things like Santa Claus). Anyway, to NOT ever believe what we are told unless we see it with our own eyes makes us a total cynic - and IMHO those people are even more unpleasant to be around than the most stringent Fundamentalist.
As for your last remark, I DO admit I don't have all the answers, and not just probably but DEFINITELY never will. But like you and Dreadnought and everyone else, I have a right to have, and freely express, my opinion - just as you have the right to disagree with it. Let's all at least be civil about though, please?
Last edited by Jason Toddman on Sun May 09, 2010 8:57 am, edited 1 time in total.
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

Re: Dangerous personal question

Postby mikeybound » Sun May 09, 2010 8:40 am

ok! we can all be civilized people :) .

Re: Dangerous personal question

Postby Scottstud94 » Sun May 09, 2010 9:01 pm

WOW, this is what this sections all about!

Re: Dangerous personal question

Postby dreadnaught3200 » Sun May 09, 2010 10:40 pm

To Mikey

There seems to be a lot of discussion on this thread in response to people who claim to: "Have all the answers". My question is, who is that exactly? Most people (myself included) love to vent their opinions on issues with which they are familiar, that's normal. But if you actually ask someone "Do you have all the answers?" I'm sure almost universally the response will be "No way".

We're all just people trying to figure out who we are, and what all this means. Everyone, and I do mean everyone has faith in something. Whether that be in religion, spiritualism in general, atheism (Or science if you prefer) or something else that I've never heard of. It's a fundamental fact of human nature that we need something to believe in, otherwise life would be meaningless. Even atheists who believe the entire universe is a cosmic accident (Which as I've said, I find totally incomprehensible), accept the limitations and shortcomings of Science on the basis of faith. Everyone has it. So of course we believe what someone else told us, what else is there to believe in? However we got here, all we have is each other to figure out why. And personally, I think its that quest for answers that really makes us human.

Oh hey Jason, I couldn't agree with you more about modern politics. It's totally screwed up, you can't win.
There's a permanent tension in music isn't there? On one hand you have three chords, you know, four four and three chords. Then there's the people like me, who say "Well, why don't we add a fourth chord and put it in five four?" - Bill Bruford

Re: Dangerous personal question

Postby Jason Toddman » Sun May 09, 2010 11:25 pm

Hey Dreadnought, some people might say the same thing about religion too. :twisted: At least, in the modern world.
Basically agree with your last post except for one small thing. You make it sound like Science and Atheism necessarily must go together. This is not so.
Science basically handles things that can be proven... demonstrated... reproduced. Anything that cannot be proven is NOT necessarily false; it just can't be proven. This is part of what is known as the Scientific method.
When science says it cannot prove the existence of God or the veracity of Jesus as Savior (or any other Biblical theme you care to name except those that CAN be proven), it is not saying they are false. It just means they cannot be proven or demonstrated and therefore lie outside the realm of Science. That does not mean it is false. It of course does not mean it is true either but that's a whole different matter. My point is that science (actual science not that pseudo-scientific Creationism science that insists the world was created in 6 days and is only 6000 years old and that sort of thing) and religion do not conflict except in the eyes of the Beholder. There may have been a Creator God who set up all the rules; that is entirely possible. It just cannot be proven. That does NOT make it false. If the Creationists (who do not respect the scientific method but insist on blind faith rather than find evidence for much of their dogma) just stuck to that without tossing in extra baggage that was discredited centuries ago, they might have a better case.
I am an amateur scientist. I am NOT an atheist. A word that might describe me more accurately is Deist. I believe in God but NOT necessarily in what either the Bible or the Church says. I am also an amatuer historian and know more about how the Bible was written than most laymen and probably some priests. Like you, I cannot believe something as complex and grand as the Universe came out of nothing. However, I also cannot believe in a god who seems to display virtually zero understanding of Human psychology or societal needs as either Jesus or the God of the Old testament apparently do. Being a Deist seems to be the most reasonable compromise.
Like Scotstud94, my faith is more in science than religion, Science does not have all the answers; it is still a work in progress and far from complete. Even the Bible did not spring into being overnight; it took over 1000 years. Modern science has been around less than 500; and has already changed more lives than all religions combined have in the same time frame. Religion though is important for other reasons that are not the job of science. So both have a place in our lives; it's not a choice between good and evil we're discussing here.
That's my opinion, for what it's worth.
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...