Are you religious?

Excellent article.

 

Me...I was raised Jewish, now, I'm a jew when it's convenient. Like when working for someone else I take the appropriate days off.

Otherwise I am just me and believe in myself to do what needs to be done.

 

Me? Nah, I'm not religious. And I could really careless if you are.

It's not the belief structure that makes a person, it's their actions.

If your religion is more often the reason you do things against me, rather then your independent thought, then I don't really want to talk to you.

I'm of the opinion that a person can lead a good life on their own terms, instead of always having to resort to some doctrine written by some person several thousand years ago for enlightenment.

 

42

 

:lol:

 

I'm definately not. There's always someone higher on the totem pole. Humanity just hasn't found them yet or they haven't bothered with us because we're that far down.

I do believe religion came about when the world really needed structure and it was the birth as society as we know it today. Me I'm a loner and best in crowds of 1 or 2.

 

Exactly! (And yes, I get the reference. :p )

When I saw this thread posted I thought, "Uh-oh, here it comes," but I'm pleasantly surprised to see this thread remain civil.

Me? I consider myself an athiest, but I do accept that if when I die there's either a heaven or hell or whatever, or if someone can give me absolute proof that any particular religion is true, then I'll accept it. I'm not that blind.

 

I consider myself a hater of religion. Stops free thinking, progression and the ability to evolve and better mankind. Infact, as richard dawkins stated it's a form of child abuse as religion is forced on children by their parents who don't know any better and grow up going on blind faith instead of asking and pursuing answers to questions. I'm a firm believer in science, I believe in evolution and that the earth wasn't created 6000 years ago.

In my mind, religion as restricted mankind for 2,000 years and it's only since the last 100 years that we have progressed and escaped religious dictatorship.

I read about the comment about the virgin mary, the immaculate conception. Oh, the church believes now that this didn't happen but the resurrection did. The thing and point is with religion is that it's a w.i.p and is evolution itself as it keeps chopping and changing what happened, what didn't, what is, and what isn't.

What I find so outrageous is that some christian nut job in American filed to the courts and put Charles darwin on trial to prove that natural selection/evolution doesn't happen and scientific Fact prooved otherwise.

They ignore carbon dating, amongst hundreds of facts but strongly go on blind faith. IMHO religion should illegal. in all it's formats.

 

What this whole article is saying, is that we basically use "religious" as a verb when people devout a ton of time/belief in something (like a vegetarian). The title of this thread, however is clearly pointing towards the discussion of religion, and using the adjective religious to show that. Hence, it is used as it should be.

The thing is, if you base your entire life and morals on a Religion, you're religiously following that, its common sense. It is where the word comes from when someone says "i'm a religious Yankees fan". As in, they're following the Yankees so much and care so much, its almost as if its a religion and life-changing experience for them.

I understand there are different ways to take the word, but as its stated in the first post and title, this is clearly talking about religion itself, and how religious someone is when discussing supreme beings. Not if you're religious or not about your favorite Food or Beer.

 

I've got his religion - Root of all evil dvds. One of the best hard hitting documentary's I have and he touches on the most fundamental flaws with all the religious formats. I'd recommend it to anyone.

I have to hide it from my mum when she visits she's a devout catholic as is all of my family.

 

You keep up with the other prominent athiests?

There are some great ones. I just got finished reading Christopher Hitchens - God is Not Great was an amazing read. He's got a different style than Dawkins, but equally intelligent and informative.

Others are Dan Dennett, Sam Harris, James Randi, and a few other guys that names escape me.

 

I'm not your typical Atheist, though. I don't specifically hate religion. I just don't follow it.

And I can be cool with a religious person, hell some of my closest friends are very religious. We get along easily because we understand each others point of view, even though we do not accept it. But because we're civilized human beings we can ignore it and go on about our way.

What I do hate, are those that have the constant need to shove their views down your throat. This applies to both the religious and the non-religious.

I have a friend, who isn't even really my friend anymore. He's a fellow atheist. But because he's so -intent- on proving that his views are 100% right, and anything else is 100% wrong. It really appalls me to see someone so stuck up his own ass, that he simpyl can't just sit down and accept that people are naturally different.

Some people simply need to believe that there is a higher power waiting to accept them in Paradise. I fully accept that. And as long as they are content with me being an Atheist, then it's all good.

 

People do alot of crazy things in the name of religion. There's violence and murder all over the world in the name of religion, or in the name of their particular "God". It's horrible and so wrong. That kind of "religion", I, too, hate. Religion that accepts a certain "class" of people and snubs others, is religion that I hate. religion that hates gays, and preaches they're going to hell, is religion that I hate. And the list goes on. THIS is why I say that I am not "religious".

You are correct about that.

Then there are those of us who don't need to believe in God or a higher power, but choose to do so. The latter would be me.

I like your philosophy Ryan. Just be nice and get along!

 

I am Christian. I was raised Protestant, fell away from belief and faith as a young adult, and rediscovered it.

I have no doubt my beliefs are helped by being raised in a church that taught how to have faith. Like any relationship, passively hoping the great feeling will last forever without any work is not likely to be successful. Faith is more than a feeling and, like love, over time it needs renewal. That's part of the human condition. Neither of those feelings are a given for life without some effort. That's my experience.

Currently I am a backslider. Per the definition in the southern U.S. Meaning I am not attending a church or practicing the traditional faith activities. I've been very involved in churches for a large part of my adult life, but have had long periods of un-involvement. That does not lessen my faith, sometimes it strengthens it.

The term "religious" is one of those things that sounds very different depending on if you are inside a community of faith, or outside. As I was raised "religious" meant "practicing." As in taking part in traditional faith activities within a faith community. So, inside my own faith community one can have faith without being religious, if one is not observing religious holidays and rituals. But I completely understand what non-believers mean when they ask if someone is religious - they are probably asking about faith.

My own personal faith views the Bible as a whole, with the contradictions and the statements in it that demonstrate that it is not a literal, historical document and was never intended to be. So, factually, the age of the earth or whether historically the walls fell at Jericho have nothing to do with my faith. There is a verse in Kings (or was it Chronicles?) that says (paraphrased) 'this is not history, for history please see the documents ... '

The Bible is about a faith journey, not science or history, to me. So the big bang theory, evolution, science of various kinds, history as documented outside the Bible, and all of that exist peacefully alongside faith for me. It doesn't matter if they contradict each other or not, faith is faith, and is not intended to be science or history.

Acts of violence, destruction and war in the name of any faith are a burden to that faith. To me those acts say nothing about the faith, just the people who commit them. Such people are looking for any justification for their rage and violence, so it can be important in their own eyes. IMO it's flawed thinking to accept them at their word. (9/11, abortion-doctor killings, and so on. IMO those people have no real religon or faith, they are just murderous criminals.)

Just imo.


Dan I used to facilitate a class at a church of adults who were exploring how much belief they had or didn't (when I lived right outside Wash. D.C.) If you had specific questions and wanted to pm them, I could try to send you stuff that might interest you. I do not give answers, don't have them definitively, I just provide info for thought. I don't try to convert people or tell them what they should think or believe. That's between them and God.

If you are up for some ponderous reading the first few chapters of Cost of Discipleship by Bonhoeffer has been very helpful to people who are not sure if they can believe or not. It is a dated writing style, though, modern readers find it requires thought and patience, sometimes in short supply. It is entirely Christian. IMO it is for people who wish they could have faith but are having trouble overcoming intellectual barriers. If that's not you I wouldn't necessarily recommend it.

 

I do like this point of view, and I'd have it too if I believed in a omnipotent God, except for one thing... that God in the older books is one of the most jealous and violent Gods in the history of religion.

Then with the omnipotence comes the greater questions, like the Problem of Evil, Problem of Suffering, and so on down the line.

 

Ooh, hey, this is a private section? If so, I noticed quite by accident (browsing New Posts).

Anyways, there was quite a bit for me to say, but much of it was already said well enough at another forum. I hope I may get away with quoting here: