Why are you religious/not religious?

Ziggy wrote:I'm much more inclined to live a life structured by my own standards and ideology, as opposed to focusing on appeasing God and adhering to the multitude of rules and guidelines of Christianity.

^^^ This.

Ziggy wrote:I'm an atheist. I'm much more inclined to live a life structured by my own standards and ideology, as opposed to focusing on appeasing God and adhering to the multitude of rules and guidelines of Christianity. My stance on the afterlife is strong; I don't believe there is anything after death. Consciousness, in my opinion, ends once our brain stops functioning. I am not afraid of 'going to Hell' and I'm not interesting 'going to Heaven'.

I just live my life how I wish to live it, and I don't adhere to any book or bible. However, at the same time, I don't brag about this. It's not something I pretentiously boast in front of religious peers or anybody, really. I even went to a highly religious high school for two years. And I don't impose my mindset on those who are religious. They can live their life however they choose, and I don't have any problem with that as long as it does not encroach on any of my interests.

This is essentially my mantra. I don't know what lies beyond when I finally do kick the bucket, maybe there is a god, maybe there isn't, it doesn't really matter. What matters to me is that I leave a lasting impression when I finally leave this world, so even when I am long gone, I will be remembered, even if it is only a small amount of people who will remember me.

If you want to belive in religion I have no problems with it, so long as you don't try to force your viewpoint on to me, as I think is purely down to each individuals thoughts and opinions, and they should discover what religion, or no religion is what they want to believe in.

Gauz wrote:That and the Catholic religion contradicts itself... a lot. So much and so excessively that i'd rather not listen to their somewhat hateful bullshit half the time. While it may spread love, it spreads just as much hate if you look deep enough.

I still can't understand why people can't realize that there is a difference between Catholic and Christian. It's really not that contradictory. That's another thing: nobody seems to understand that the Catholic church from 1500 and the Catholic church in 2009 are not the same.

Ukurse wrote:All the Catholics think that they are right, and so do the Muslims. Unless they are both correct, then obviously one of them are wrong, and that means that for hundreds of years atleast one of these religions have been spreading a lie from one generation to another. It is easy to say that it it the Muslims who are wrong, and that it is the Catholics that are right, but how can you back it up, If you believe in it so much, prove it to the Muslims.

And again.

I'm concerned with the "All the Catholics think that they are right" thing. The Catholic church is far more liberal than you may think. My own pastor is an evolutionist.

Vigil wrote:As I grew older and more and more cynical, I really didn't see the point of religion, because it took a leap of faith into something that may or may not be real, whereas science seemed to have a bettter grasp on somethings.

Sure, you could argue that science is just as much a leap of faith, as very little has actually been certifiably proved, and a lot of ideas are still only theories. I still felt science was a logical progression of ideas and concepts, while religion, even though it's core values and ideals are in the right place, its too open to misinterpretation, which lead into some of the bloodiest acts of human history.

Science =/= alternative to religion

Science cannot explain the orrigin of our world. I find atheism to be a rather stupid religion to practice, as it is essentially just a way to rebel against the idea of the divine. People constantly try to justify it by treating it as agnosticism, which is a far better alternative, but they are most definately not the same.

Zaki90 wrote:While I do believe in Islam and the Quran, I feel that the followers have opinionated the words of the Quran. They did not "change" the words, they manipulated them to make it support their ideals which inflects on every other people who are listening to them.

Maybe because the previous words invovled taking part in an apocalyptic war?

Ascendant Justic wrote:Religion also builds up massive levels of dissapointment. People get hurt, lose their house to a fire, and lose a loved one to the previous cause and they think that they did something so horribly wrong that "god" cast this upon them, and thus depression ensues where they think they are worthless and their life is a sin and blah blah blah.

The first Great Awakening ended a long time ago...

And... bell just rang. I'll finish this up later (maybe).

I would also point out to Ukurse that while both Islam and Catholicism believe that they are right, both also believe that the other will get into Heaven just fine (well, the Quran says something along those lines, but it probably isn't taught much in the Middle East).

Gauz wrote:"I love everyone" - what 'god' says in the bible.... a lot.

"Kill homesexuals, people who work on the sabbath, gluttons, sinners, deviants, enslave neighboring countries peoples, be sexist..." - what 'god' also says in the bible... or tells you to do.


Don't believe me? I can name the passages if you wish.

Please do.

Ziggy wrote:I'm an atheist. I'm much more inclined to live a life structured by my own standards and ideology, as opposed to focusing on appeasing God and adhering to the multitude of rules and guidelines of Christianity.

I think you guys blow the "rules" way out of proportion.



So, I'm just going to end this with: Atheism is completely stupid. I cannot come up with a single reason for you to be an Atheist instead of an Agnostic. There is absolutly no logical reason to be an Atheist (which was ironically founded on logic and reason).

On top of that, some of you guys really need to get your facts together. Cathoic is not Christian, the Catholic church now and the Catholic church from the renaissance are not the same thing, and Christianity is much more liberal than most of you give it credit for (sometimes a little too liberal).

Atheism is someone's choice just like being Christian is a choice. And on the same note, why would there be a logical reason to be a Christian Civbase?

Agnosticism is the most logical conclusion one can reach. After that, belief in Atheism, Christianity, and other religions are purely based on faith.

However, while most religions recognize their faith-based nature, Atheism claims that you should not believe anything based purely on faith. There lies the illogical nature of Atheism.

What if I dont want to believe in any form of religion or atheism? What does that make me then?

...agnostic.

Hmm I just realized that I cant read.

Ascendant Justice wrote:Hmm I just realized that I cant read.

^^

Civ wrote:I still can't understand why people can't realize that there is a difference between Catholic and Christian. It's really not that contradictory. That's another thing: nobody seems to understand that the Catholic church from 1500 and the Catholic church in 2009 are not the same.

Catholicism is a branch of Christianity. I think the point you're trying to make is that there's a difference between Catholics and Protestants.

And yes, the Catholic church is nowhere near as awful as it was in medieval times, but its past practices demonstrate the danger of a powerful religious institution.

Civ wrote:Science =/= alternative to religion
.

That all depends on how you define religion. If you define religion as a foundation for morale values, then yeah, science can't replace that. To be honest though, I strongly disagree with the idea that religion has anything to do with morals in modern times.

Sure, the bible tells you not to steal, and not to kill, and not to commit adultery... ect...

But those rules are not exclusive to the bible. Those are the rules of society. You can spew all the bullshit you want about how you think Judea-Christian values are the foundation of modern society... but I'm not gonna buy it.

Those simple rules are what's necessary to keep society together, and a stable society is what keeps us alive.

If you consider a religion to be something that tells us how the universe was formed... well then science falls behind in that area too. Science does, however, promote principles like integrity, modesty, and it promotes discovery. It gives purpose in life just as any religion does.

Anyway, religion can't explain the origin of our world either. It just CLAIMS to.

Civ wrote: So, I'm just going to end this with: Atheism is completely stupid. I cannot come up with a single reason for you to be an Atheist instead of an Agnostic. There is absolutly no logical reason to be an Atheist (which was ironically founded on logic and reason).

Perhaps, but the assumption that there is no god is nowhere near as illogical and stupid as the assumption that every single thing in the bible is absolutely true. You really have no room to talk Civ. Agnostics are the only ones who hold the right to look down at everyone else and laugh.

I mean really. I think full blown atheists are just as stupid as deists. Those who follow an organized religious doctrine are on a whole different level, and that's where it starts to bother me.

You tell me that you think there's a god, and I'm okay with that. You tell me you think you know exactly how the earth was formed, how life was created, and that you know what's going to happen in the future... then I'm sorry but I really can't take your beliefs seriously.

That said, I'm not a full blown atheist. I think that there is a possibility of there being a god. I am, personally, a little doubtful of that proposition, just as I'm doubtful of many theories for the origin of the universe, but I think it's a possibility.

My main reason for thinking that intelligent design should not be taught in school is not for disagreement with the idea, but for the baggage that the concept carries with it. Most of those who are fighting for it to be taught in schools have strong religious agendas, and that is NOT okay in a science class. We're simply not ready for that yet.

Rotaretilbo wrote:I would also point out to Ukurse that while both Islam and Catholicism believe that they are right, both also believe that the other will get into Heaven just fine (well, the Quran says something along those lines, but it probably isn't taught much in the Middle East).

Actually, we think that if you follow the Bible, you'll be just fine. But apparently, most Catholics have read and understood the Bible enough to take their own decisions. My main point is that priests don't eat pork. At all. I was shocked by this discovery back in freshman year at a Catholic highschool.

So, if you follow the Bible like it tells you to follow, then your fine.

CivBase wrote:

Zaki90 wrote:While I do believe in Islam and the Quran, I feel that the followers have opinionated the words of the Quran. They did not "change" the words, they manipulated them to make it support their ideals which inflects on every other people who are listening to them.

Maybe because the previous words invovled taking part in an apocalyptic war?

No, you see, for some reason all the people in America talk about is all about social crap. Don't listen to music and crap like don't do drugs. They find the itty-bitty little reasons that barely even make sense and incorporate it into their speech.

It is like if the minister at your church is talking about how Jesus was walking down the street and gave money to the poor. This poor man was wicked and listened to music. He spat at him, and Jesus cursed him. Then he tells your parents that music is prohibited in Christianity. And before you know it your parents are stripping every last song off Itunes.

Zaki90 wrote:

Rotaretilbo wrote:I would also point out to Ukurse that while both Islam and Catholicism believe that they are right, both also believe that the other will get into Heaven just fine (well, the Quran says something along those lines, but it probably isn't taught much in the Middle East).

Actually, we think that if you follow the Bible, you'll be just fine. But apparently, most Catholics have read and understood the Bible enough to take their own decisions. My main point is that priests don't eat pork. At all. I was shocked by this discovery back in freshman year at a Catholic highschool.

So, if you follow the Bible like it tells you to follow, then your fine.

Vigil wrote:

Zaki90 wrote:While I do believe in Islam and the Quran, I feel that the followers have opinionated the words of the Quran. They did not "change" the words, they manipulated them to make it support their ideals which inflects on every other people who are listening to them.

Maybe because the previous words invovled taking part in an apocalyptic war?

No, you see, for some reason all the people in America talk about is all about social crap. Don't listen to music and crap like don't do drugs. They find the itty-bitty little reasons that barely even make sense and incorporate it into their speech.

It is like if the minister at your church is talking about how Jesus was walking down the street and gave money to the poor. This poor man was wicked and listened to music. He spat at him, and Jesus cursed him. Then he tells your parents that music is prohibited in Christianity. And before you know it your parents are stripping every last song off Itunes.

wait what

ReconToaster wrote:

Civ wrote:I still can't understand why people can't realize that there is a difference between Catholic and Christian. It's really not that contradictory. That's another thing: nobody seems to understand that the Catholic otchurch from 1500 and the Catholic church in 2009 are not the same.

Catholicism is a branch of Christianity. I think the point you're trying to make is that there's a difference between Catholics and Protestants.

I wouldn't even consider Protestant as a religious group. There's much more differences among the Protestant branches than there is between most of these branches and Catholicism.

ReconToaster wrote:

Civ wrote:Science =/= alternative to religion.

That all depends on how you define religion. If you define religion as a foundation for morale values, then yeah, science can't replace that. To be honest though, I strongly disagree with the idea that religion has anything to do with morals in modern times.

I would consider religion as a foundation for moral values (among other things). Whether people follow these values is questionable.

ReconToaster wrote:But those rules are not exclusive to the bible. Those are the rules of society. You can spew all the bullshit you want about how you think Judea-Christian values are the foundation of modern society... but I'm not gonna buy it.

Well, considering none of us have proof for or against it, there's not much I can say about that. Being a believer, though, I'd assume that such is the case.

ReconToaster wrote:If you consider a religion to be something that tells us how the universe was formed... well then science falls behind in that area too. Science does, however, promote principles like integrity, modesty, and it promotes discovery. It gives purpose in life just as any religion does.

Science has principles... but I'm not sure society would function very well using only those principles.

ReconToaster wrote:Anyway, religion can't explain the origin of our world either. It just CLAIMS to.

It can explain the origin of our world. However, because it lacks sufficient evidence, science does not accept it, and I see no problem with that. Like I said, Science =/= alternative to religion.

ReconToaster wrote:

Civ wrote: So, I'm just going to end this with: Atheism is completely stupid. I cannot come up with a single reason for you to be an Atheist instead of an Agnostic. There is absolutly no logical reason to be an Atheist (which was ironically founded on logic and reason).

Perhaps, but the assumption that there is no god is nowhere near as illogical and stupid as the assumption that every single thing in the bible is absolutely true. You really have no room to talk Civ. Agnostics are the only ones who hold the right to look down at everyone else and laugh.

I'm just saying that the basis behind atheism is refusing to accept the remote possibility of something that cannot be proven. I would have to disagree, atheism is far more illogical and stupid.

A good analogy (though a tad drastic) would be like America enslaving people to promote freedom.

ReconToaster wrote:You tell me that you think there's a god, and I'm okay with that. You tell me you think you know exactly how the earth was formed, how life was created, and that you know what's going to happen in the future... then I'm sorry but I really can't take your beliefs seriously.

And I'm okay with that. I don't need you to take my own beliefs seriously. That's why they're beliefs.

ReconToaster wrote:That said, I'm not a full blown atheist. I think that there is a possibility of there being a god. I am, personally, a little doubtful of that proposition, just as I'm doubtful of many theories for the origin of the universe, but I think it's a possibility.

My main reason for thinking that intelligent design should not be taught in school is not for disagreement with the idea, but for the baggage that the concept carries with it. Most of those who are fighting for it to be taught in schools have strong religious agendas, and that is NOT okay in a science class. We're simply not ready for that yet.

I'm fine with intelligent design not being taught in schools, so long as it isn't dismissed.