What Religion do you Follow??? - Page 15

Ben Lahnger · 03-28-2009, 02:15 AM

Lead? Well LEAD me not into temptation!

Mir · 03-28-2009, 02:40 AM

I follow Mirism, where I worship myself, everyone else worships me, and then we have high tea, with cookies and cake.

Mr E Nigma · 03-28-2009, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mir

I follow Mirism, where I worship myself, everyone else worships me, and then we have high tea, with cookies and cake.

MMmMMmmm cake!

Ben Lahnger · 03-29-2009, 01:24 AM

I wish I would have been clever enough (and born early enough) to say "Religion is the opiate of the masses" ... because is so totally true!

Bonquisha Brown · 03-29-2009, 01:30 AM

I'm a Christian, I was raised that way, and I try my best to be a damn good one. It bothers me that Christianity is so hated here, especially since I suspect many of you were raised Christian. Well, it's a free country so to each his own, I suppose.

Ben Lahnger · 03-29-2009, 01:32 AM

Whoa! Who said anything about hate?

Why you gotta go playing the hatred card now?

Bonquisha Brown · 03-29-2009, 01:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben Lahnger

Whoa! Who said anything about hate?

Why you gotta go playing the hatred card now?

Sorry, hate was a bit of a strong word. But it certainly hasn't enjoyed much popularity here.

Ben Lahnger · 03-29-2009, 01:43 AM

I think most people know that if you poke, rib, tease or question many Christians about their beliefs, they get overly defensive quite quickly.

So I notice that in many forums (including this one), people will intentionally go down that road because they enjoy the visceral reaction that most Christians will give. It's almost predictable.

As with many things in life, the less of a sense of humor you have about a particular thing, the more likely people are going to be to joke about it.

Me, there's nothing anyone can say to me about my belief system that is going to offend me, because nobody gets out of here alive. That's the biggest punchline ever!

Bonquisha Brown · 03-29-2009, 01:50 AM

I see your point. But when people insult my religion it feels like they're insulting me as a person. Maybe I'm looking too much into people's online views... Still, whether you're hearing it, reading it, or whatever, a shot at someone's personal beliefs is still a huge one, considering that's a major part of your character.

Ben Lahnger · 03-29-2009, 01:52 AM

That's a valid point, which is why I WOULD be greatly concerned if there actually was some hate speech being doled out in this thread.

Bonquisha Brown · 03-29-2009, 01:55 AM

Well, not this thread specifically, but as lame as it is, I've lurked a bit and seen quite a bit of anti-christian statements. Although, some of them were stated in at least a somewhat polite - if pushy way.

Ben Lahnger · 03-29-2009, 02:08 AM

Yep, I understand that.

Kinda like the polite but pushy way my sister tells me that she thinks the laws of this land should be made to align with the standards of her Christian faith, even when those standards are disagreed with by a majority of the population.

Yep, that pushy stuff gets around alright.

But I strongly believe you have the right to believe what you want, so long as you believe the same should be true for others.

Drake Dun · 03-29-2009, 03:46 AM

There's a big difference between having a right to your beliefs, and having the right to expect other people not to comment on them. People like myself criticize Christianity for a variety of reasons. If you think the criticisms are mistaken in some regard, the answer is simple - point out why they're wrong, or ignore them. If they sting because they're right, maybe you need to rethink your beliefs. Trying to enforce a code of silence under the euphemism of "respect" is no answer.

I think you can make a case that a matter which is truly personal, like say your taste in music, is one on which other people should keep their mouths shut. Most religious belief systems, however, are painfully not personal. If your religion tells you that it's right or wrong for other people to do this that or the other thing, and that you have the right or duty to enforce those standards of behavior upon them by voting, etc., then your beliefs are affecting other people, plain and simple. Even if the only way you hold those beliefs out against the world is to tell people that they are (wrong / evil / sinners / destined for eternal torture), you can hardly throw up your hands in shock and defense when they repay you with a similarly vitriolic attitude.

Maybe if you could convince a certain subset your fellow Christians to stop being unbearable asses to everyone who's not in the club, things would calm down a bit. Or divorce yourself from their position in unequivocal terms by identifying an actual difference of belief, not just with zero-content hand waving about "extremism" that leaves us with no discernable way to distinguish you from other people using the same label.

Here, let me demonstrate the point:

Leviticus 20:13. If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them.

In case you're wondering, the speaker is YHWH. So assuming this character exists, basically we have five options:

1) Your god is (or at least was) a monster, and you worship him anyway (congratulations, you're a monster)
2) Say your god is not a monster, because the Bible is right - we should put gay people to death (congratulations, you're a monster).
3) Abolish sense and meaning with inane, postmodernist and/or hyperlegalistic apologetics that would make C.S. Lewis blush (my favorite: it's okay to be gay, it's only bisexuals we should put to death).
4) Claim your god never said any such thing, and the Bible contains at least one critical material error.
5) Acknowledge that the god of the Bible is a monster, and stop worshipping him.

Options 4 and 5 are the only way to go for a person who is both honest and has a shred of humanity, but you know what? I have never been personal witness to any Christian taking either of those approaches. Not once. This is another one of my open challenges. Any Christian reading this, please do pleasantly surprise me.

1 and 2 are alarmingly common, but not nearly as common as 3. 3 isn't nearly as dangerous, but it's intensely frustrating. The simple truth is that even "moderate" Christians have never cleaned the garbage out of their closet, even though they have long since left behind lighting people on fire and all that. Some part of them is still humping this authoritarian model of social relations in which we get an owner's manual to life from a magical sky daddy, and we never have to nor indeed are allowed to question it. Though they have gone a long way toward thinking for themselves, they can't dredge up the guts to take that last step and actually openly espouse a mature model of morality.

Put it this way: come out and say, point blank, that you value your own moral intuitions and philosophy and those of your fellow real, existing fellows (i.e. humans) over what's written in the Bible, and that even if the Bible does or did state in plain language that we should put gay people to death, you would still reject that openly and proudly. If you can do that, you extinguish 85% of the ire I have toward you as a Christian.

If you can't, your beliefs are still dangerous. They should be criticized, and as long as I'm around, they will be.

HumanePain · 03-29-2009, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake Dun

There's a big difference between having a right to your beliefs, and having the right to expect other people not to comment on them. People like myself criticize Christianity for a variety of reasons. If you think the criticisms are mistaken in some regard, the answer is simple - point out why they're wrong, or ignore them. If they sting because they're right, maybe you need to rethink your beliefs. Trying to enforce a code of silence under the euphemism of "respect" is no answer.

I agree with this 100%. Taking the time to listen to criticism with patience (and forgiveness...hello, one of the virtues of Christianity) will lead others to the same realizations I have, which is more tolerant because I follow Jesus specifically, not the pre-Jesus Jews or the apostle Paul, who never met Jesus. (The pre-Jesus Jews and Paul are the ones who have their panties in a twist about homosexuality.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake Dun

I think you can make a case that a matter which is truly personal, like say your taste in music, is one on which other people should keep their mouths shut. Most religious belief systems, however, are painfully not personal.

Sad but true. This is where power seekers use religion to leverage social power.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake Dun

If your religion tells you that it's right or wrong for other people to do this that or the other thing, and that you have the right or duty to enforce those standards of behavior upon them by voting, etc., then your beliefs are affecting other people, plain and simple. Even if the only way you hold those beliefs out against the world is to tell people that they are (wrong / evil / sinners / destined for eternal torture), you can hardly throw up your hands in shock and defense when they repay you with a similarly vitriolic attitude.

Agreed. Jesus wanted his followers to tell the world so that others who were sick, poor in spirit, depressed, and in the grip of addiction etc would know there was a way out. He wanted to save people, individuals, not nations or other organizations. He disagreed with what the Jews were doing with organized religion at the time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake Dun

Maybe if you could convince a certain subset your fellow Christians to stop being unbearable asses to everyone who's not in the club, things would calm down a bit. Or divorce yourself from their position in unequivocal terms by identifying an actual difference of belief, not just with zero-content hand waving about "extremism" that leaves us with no discernable way to distinguish you from other people using the same label.

That is what I teach my children, will teach my grandchildren, and try to do here (on rare occasion).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake Dun

Here, let me demonstrate the point:

Leviticus 20:13. If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them.

In case you're wondering, the speaker is YHWH. So assuming this character exists, basically we have five options:

1) Your god is (or at least was) a monster, and you worship him anyway (congratulations, you're a monster)
2) Say your god is not a monster, because the Bible is right - we should put gay people to death (congratulations, you're a monster).
3) Abolish sense and meaning with inane, postmodernist and/or hyperlegalistic apologetics that would make C.S. Lewis blush (my favorite: it's okay to be gay, it's only bisexuals we should put to death).
4) Claim your god never said any such thing, and the Bible contains at least one critical material error.
5) Acknowledge that the god of the Bible is a monster, and stop worshipping him.

Options 4 and 5 are the only way to go for a person who is both honest and has a shred of humanity, but you know what? I have never been personal witness to any Christian taking either of those approaches. Not once. This is another one of my open challenges. Any Christian reading this, please do pleasantly surprise me.

1 and 2 are alarmingly common, but not nearly as common as 3. 3 isn't nearly as dangerous, but it's intensely frustrating.

This whole set of statements is based upon the Old Testament (Pre-Jesus Jews), with which I disagree. There are other violent punishments, such as stoning to death your own children when they disrespect you. Talk about self-extinction!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake Dun

The simple truth is that even "moderate" Christians have never cleaned the garbage out of their closet, even though they have long since left behind lighting people on fire and all that.

Although I disagree with the use of the term "garbage" I agree the closet needs to be cleaned. That is why I am trying to spread the concept of "Jesus only".

I am transposing Jesus quotes from the bible into a "Jesus only" compilation, to make clear what Jesus said as opposed to "the entire bible" loyalty which only leads to polarization and the reduction of salvation's effectiveness in these modern and enlightened times. I expect some persecution from this, but Jesus warned this would happen if we spread His word. Bring it on.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake Dun

Some part of them is still humping this authoritarian model of social relations in which we get an owner's manual to life from a magical sky daddy, and we never have to nor indeed are allowed to question it.

This is needed for some people for salvation to work, but Jesus loved questions, He loved answering them. I don't believe He intended for us to stop asking "why"?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake Dun

Though they have gone a long way toward thinking for themselves, they can't dredge up the guts to take that last step and actually openly espouse a mature model of morality.

Well, here I am!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake Dun

Put it this way: come out and say, point blank, that you value your own moral intuitions and philosophy and those of your fellow real, existing fellows (i.e. humans) over what's written in the Bible, and that even if the Bible does or did state in plain language that we should put gay people to death, you would still reject that openly and proudly. If you can do that, you extinguish 85% of the ire I have toward you as a Christian.

If you can't, your beliefs are still dangerous. They should be criticized, and as long as I'm around, they will be.

I will say this "point blank":

I value Jesus' moral intuitions and philosophy over what is written in the pre-Jesus Old Testament, and further, even in the New Testament I exclude some of the comments written by a converted Jew who never met Jesus, and thus had limited experience of what Jesus was about.

This position of mine is taken not to appease you or anyone else. I follow Jesus to save myself from myself. My personal choices almost destroyed me, and allowing Jesus to live within me provides me a template for me to follow that has better judgment, makes wiser choices, and rewards me better than a self-navigated life. It is for my own benefit.

I discuss Jesus here and elsewhere not to further the aims of an organized religion that seeks to compound growing financial contributions from its followers and enjoying the use of those funds tax free, I only hope to show others who may need it a way to salvation and a way to ease pain and suffering, to look at life through new eyes (as children, "born again" as said by Jesus).

Jesus said that physicians don't see the healthy, they are for healing the sick. You Drake obviously do not need Jesus, but would you take away a crutch from someone with a lame leg? Would you take away all hope from someone who desperately needs a knot at the end of the rope they are dangling from?

I agree with criticism, we improve by faults and learning from them, but to perform wholesale lobotomy of Jesus from our collective souls leaves a vacuum that only existentialists and others can endure (Jillian for example), and will leave the rest who are not as well endowed with intelligence and reason as yourself a hopeless, painful life full of despair. Do you not have compassion enough to leave Jesus for those who need it?

But yes, I understand your contempt for those who demand an all or nothing acceptance of the bible, and demand unquestioning loyalty. Others in the past have done this, resulting in the deaths of millions of innocent men, women and children.

Ben Lahnger · 03-29-2009, 01:30 PM

Hmmm ...

Well, I do agree that anyone who professes their beliefs or values here (religious or otherwise) should expect comments, queries and even criticisms. Otherwise, if you don't want the cyber-puppet-theater to comment on your views, don't stand on this very public soapbox and profess them so loudly.

So I profess that I believe it all ends when we die, there have been many amazing philosophers and moral leaders in our planet's history but no god or god-made-flesh, and the only reason to be a good person is because you only have this one trip ... this 2,000,000,000 heartbeats ... to get it right. There are no do-overs, no get out of hell free cards, no posthumous forgiveness ... and if you use your senses and brain optimally you'll ascertain that the greatest thing to value in this life is not the transience of money or possessions but the elevation of the quality of human existence. Do unto others is as close to a religion as I get, and I have no fear of mortality or need for an explanation of why I am here to make me search for an omnipotent force to comfort my worried mind on my way to my grave.

Comments welcomed. :-D

CrimsonPythonidae · 03-29-2009, 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben Lahnger

Hmmm ...

Well, I do agree that anyone who professes their beliefs or values here (religious or otherwise) should expect comments, queries and even criticisms. Otherwise, if you don't want the cyber-puppet-theater to comment on your views, don't stand on this very public soapbox and profess them so loudly.

So I profess that I believe it all ends when we die, there have been many amazing philosophers and moral leaders in our planet's history but no god or god-made-flesh, and the only reason to be a good person is because you only have this one trip ... this 2,000,000,000 heartbeats ... to get it right. There are no do-overs, no get out of hell free cards, no posthumous forgiveness ... and if you use your senses and brain optimally you'll ascertain that the greatest thing to value in this life is not the transience of money or possessions but the elevation of the quality of human existence. Do unto others is as close to a religion as I get, and I have no fear of mortality or need for an explanation of why I am here to make me search for an omnipotent force to comfort my worried mind on my way to my grave.

Comments welcomed. :-D

Well said. This is basically the same way I see things.

Last night I watched two documentaries with my boyfriend, one from the viewpoint of a christian (apparently the most idiotic and annoying one they could find) and another about athiests.
I am athiest and my boyfriend is not. I am of the opinion that this may present a problem but I think he refuses to see that. Whilst watching the athiest doco' he made several shitty comments about athiests having no morals, having no will to live, believing in nothing and developing drug and alcohol addictions. Actually one of his statements was "they find their life meaning at the bottom of a bottle of scotch".

Needless to say I did not put out last night.

Drake Dun · 03-29-2009, 10:40 PM

Thanks for the response, HP. It shows the kind of forthcomingness I often complain about not getting from people, and it nicely satisfies my request for an "identif[ication of] an actual difference of belief".

When you say that you reject the Old Testament, can I take that as a more gingerly worded version of (4)? That's very relieving, but it does leave a puzzling question - upon what criteria do you make that decision? I think I can guess, of course. You're thinking for yourself. It's exactly what anyone does with a philosopher who isn't surrounded by all sorts of curious metaphysical claims and pretensions to trascendent truth. I think that's great, but wouldn't it put you at odds with the vast majority of your fellow Christians?

I think that among the many admirable teachings attributed personally to Jesus, there are some which are... less admirable. But that could come down to a question of interpretation or personal estimation, so put it this way. If they dug up a manuscript verifiably in Jesus's own hand in which he plainly states that gay people should be put to death, how would you respond to that? This is really where the tires hit the road, I think. Either you accept the man as an absolute, categorical authority figure (presumably because you buy the metaphysical claims), or you admire him as a philosopher and are ready to limit that admiration if necessary.

I think that all but a tiny sliver segment of the Christian constituency would squirm and dodge and do anything possible, regardless of the fact set, to ever say anything like "Well, Jesus was wrong on that." That's dangerous, and it's a problem, and what I'm trying to tease out here is whether that problem extends to you or not. I don't want to be melodramatic, but I think this is one of the most poignant cases of what I consider the central cultural problem of our time - that we have never quite washed our hands of a jungle morality centered around authority, group loyalties, and fear.

Your question about taking away a needed crutch is an extremely difficult one for me, so what you're going to get is a jumble of thoughts rather than a concise, clear position. So in no particular order...

* I agree that there is a risk of damaging people by taking away their beliefs, and also that there are at least some cases in which even if those beliefs are objectionable, the wise thing to do is to let sleeping dogs lie. People on their deathbed strike me as an obvious case. Better to let them squeeze a last few drops of comfort out of their fantasies. Determining which other cases qualify is the killer part.

* A related question is the difference between never becoming religious in the first place, and becoming religious and then losing it. I think you'll find that the people who experience acute horror at the thought of a godless universe fall almost exclusively into the second category. So I think there's an analogy to be made to drug addiction here, if you'll forgive the brutal straightforwardness of that. If a heroin addict goes cold turkey, and subsequently throws herself off a building, was the problem that she went cold turkey? Well.. yes, sort of. But the deeper problem was the heroin in the first place. So we'd be doing ourselves an enormous disfavor to use this concern as a reason to condone heroin addiction. OTOH we might want to think carefully about how we approach the addiction instead of just pointing a rocket launcher at it.

* One distinction to be made is between private and public communications. I think that the rough and tumble of public discourse is exactly as it should be. Private discourse often allows and requires more discretion. I could go into the reasons for that.

* There is the danger posed by the beliefs to be weighed in - and that varies depending on the content of the beliefs. So you'll notice that even though my conclusions on academic questions about supernatural intelligences, etc. suggest that from a rational perspect all religions are in a sense equally absurd, I'm a lot more shrill with religions I perceive as morally threatening - particularly Christianity and Islam. I'm downright abusive with people who shun medical treatment in favor of prayer. I have one eyebrow up in the case of Judaism and Hinduism. Wiccans and some Buddhists believe silly things, but they're harmless, so I don't feel a need to get on their case.

* I certainly cannot agree that everybody except some brainy atheist elite needs Jesus. A simple look around the world should suffice to prove that, unless you think that everyone in India, China, etc. is miserable. Whether they need something is a harder question, but my experience (especially in Japan) suggests to me that the parts of religion I find particularly objectionable are things which they do not need and are, in fact, better off without.

* I think it's entirely possible that we could have something which fulfills many of the roles religion takes without (1) making absurd metaphysical claims or (2) bullying people. I often have fantasies about building something like that, but I have deep reservations about the ecstatic abandon that seems to be required to do so. Even Jesus, who seems to have been a pretty good guy, was swept away into megalomania by his enthusiasm in the end. It wasn't enough for him to be *a* path to salvation. He had to be the *only* path to salvation. This, by the way, is the one thing that deeply compromises him as a moral teacher IMO.

* And that reminded me of another related issue. You've got all these religions going around not just telling people that they can make them happy, but that they can't be happy otherwise. That has an effect on people, and especially upon the insecure. Christianity has an especially bad track record here. I wouldn't ask you not to direct your question about taking things away from people toward me, but it might apply with equal force to the very thing you're defending.

Uuuh.. I'm sure there is more to say, but I'm out of steam. Long story short, I acknowledge the concern, and agree that it has to inform my choices, but I definitely don't see it as a reason to take a broadly hands-off approach.

By the way, it might interest you to have a look at the"Jefferson Bible", formally "The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth". He did something a bit like what you're talking about with that.

Fae-wolf · 03-29-2009, 11:07 PM

I like the basic message of Love and humility that Christianity teaches

HumanePain · 03-30-2009, 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake Dun

By the way, it might interest you to have a look at the"Jefferson Bible", formally "The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth". He did something a bit like what you're talking about with that.

Thank you very much for the reference! I almost got a chill seeing that Thomas Jefferson attempted the same distillation as I, and to realize that I was on the same path as he was...well...it was flattering, but more importantly it reinforced my thoughts that I am on the right path.

It will take me some time to digest his work. Thanks again.

Jonathan · 03-30-2009, 09:21 PM

I don't hate Christianity, I just find it rather silly most of the time.

I love my Jewish friend, she does the whole kosher thing. One time I got a bacon cheeseburger, and she said something about how she couldn't get one. I asked why and got the story, but was given absolutely no hard time about my lunch choice.

When people use religion or what have you as a guideline for the way they live their lives, it can be a fine thing. When people cross over that line separating "This is what I do" and enter into "This is what other people should do", it becomes difficult to have a nice lunch.

Ben Lahnger · 03-30-2009, 11:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jonathan

When people use religion or what have you as a guideline for the way they live their lives, it can be a fine thing. When people cross over that line separating "This is what I do" and enter into "This is what other people should do", it becomes difficult to have a nice lunch.

Thank you very much. Well said.

And I'd like to credit most of the recent respondents in this thread with holding fairly well to that ideal.

Mr E Nigma · 03-31-2009, 12:58 AM

Drake Dun I'm right there along with you man.

I think ultimately, my biggest problem, with people of religion.

Is that a lot of the christians I've met are what I like to call "crutch christians."

That term being used to define someone who uses their religion and/or what they like to describe as god in order to rationalize their own behavior.

For example: Someone performs a negative act, to the most extreme being murder or some sort of violence, rationalizing it by saying, "I will be forgiven" or even "God told me to." Other examples I've witnessed personally would be, "I'm sorry we can't be friends anymore, not unless you hold jesus within your heart, because I can't be around sad people who might make me sad." (I'm not a sad individual, just because I lack emotions that most people possess doesn't mean I'm sad..... or "If you ask jesus to forgive you you'll be a good person and I won't hold any of your wrongdoings against you." (Meanwhile that person speaking those words, just cheated on her boyfriend 2 weeks prior, cheated on every art history test within the previous semester, and cusses like a sailor. Anytime I've brought up any of said situations, she told me she prays every night and knows jesus has died for those sins and that she's been forgiven so her doing those things is okay.)

And that's not even a tenth of what I've experienced as far as situations like that go. Where everything is "okay" because "jesus forgives me." And doing certain acts "are okay because I pray and will be forgiven."

That shit is absolutely annoying.

badteccy · 03-31-2009, 01:12 AM

I don't believe in fairytales. However, I think most ideas in religion are pretty good (the ones based on common sense).

crucifix · 03-31-2009, 05:08 AM

I am an atheist.

Corpsey · 03-31-2009, 08:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lakita in the house

I am a christian. if you don't believe in god and jesus you'll go to hell. thats why them homos are evil they dont let god in their hearts and cleanse the evil satanic spirits from them

That reminds me of something.

Hell is just a translation error. Hell = Hades which literally translates to the grave.

So yeah, all homos (including you) go to the grave.