Religion

[Ezekiel Rage]

Whats yours? And do you consider yourself a person that could change its religion?

As for me, I am an atheist. I was agnostic once but i changed to atheist a few years ago. Just the mere thought of there being a god makes me cringe. But if someone can prove me wrong I'd gladly change.

[Devil_Rising]

I'm basically "pagan", for lack of a better term. Meaning, I am very much into the Celtic/Native American/Shinto type ideal that nature is very sacred, and that everything IN nature has a spiritual presence and power to it, etc. I suppose I do believe in "Gods". I do believe there is some sort of intelligent force of creation out there. The Celts called it "Awen", the "Flowing Spirit". The Chinese call it "Chi". Christians call it "God". I also believe in the Celtic ideal of reincarnation, in which you are reborn pretty much the same person you always were, you just don't retain memories of past lives (usually).

Whatever. I'm certainly not religious by any means. I think religion is a terrible idea, and I think there is a HUGE difference and distinction between being spiritual, and being religious. Anyone can have spiritual beliefs. But to me, religion denotes dogma, and the type of "One God, One Truth", "We're Right, You're All Wrong, and Going to Hell, Nyah Nyah", type mentality that the monotheistic religions seem to have. I think religion, in that sense, has done FAR more harm than it has good to humanity throughout history.

Having beliefs is fine. I think spirituality of some kind is a necessary component of human civilization. But religion? Bad news. People become insane, and go to war over zealous religious beliefs. Nobody has ever gone to war over their spirituality.

[Mako]

I am Serbian Orthodox, and no, I don't think I would ever change that.

I am not too much of a religious person though, only going to church 2 or 3 times a year. For all we know, God could be some sort of intelligent alien...

[cortjezter]

just a quick note.... hot-button topics like politics or religion are very easy for people to get upset about and get people in trouble. mind your manners, and remember that in the debate forum, rules are strictly enforced (unlike some leniency in other places).

be careful

[thresholdXCI]

Erm, well I guess I'd fall under being Anglican/ Church of England. Although having said that, these days, I'm not a particularly religious person. To the point I tend to consider myself more agnostic. But to be honest my exact religious stance changes depending what mood I'm in, who I'm talking to and how long I've decided to muse on the topic.

[TheGreekDollmaker]

I used to be an Orhtodox Christian but i became Non-Religious/Agnostic at the age of 12.

Basecly i had discovered Evolutionary Biology and instead of throwing that out the window because it contradicted me i searched the subject.That was propably the start since i was introduced to a whole spectrum of scientific theories and people.

At first i was biased (because thats what religion makes you when you are young) but the more i grew up the more i understood the evidence and everything else about science.

Its quite suprising too because my father Paints Saints for the Church and Makes an shovel ton of money (First bullet dodged) and he isnt that religious (Second bullet Dodged).

I have a rather cynical view of the world sometimes due to this.I consider the truth to be better than Conformity, thats why i mostly not happy with the world.

Edit:Make that a sceptic actually.

[Nintend()\/\/|\|312]

just a quick note.... hot-button topics like politics or religion are very easy for people to get upset about and get people in trouble. mind your manners, and remember that in the debate forum, rules are strictly enforced (unlike some leniency in other places).

be careful

Oh yes. I remember trying to have a religion topic a couple years ago that didn't end in sunshine and rainbows. Hopefully this one will have better luck than mine had. I second cort's plea for everyone to play nice.

Anyway, I'm agnostic. I think I'm the kind of person that could change their religion, although I think it is unlikely that it would ever happen. Even though agnosticism is probably the least satisfying set of beliefs someone could have, I really don't mind all of the uncertainty.

This is also a very interesting date to start a religion topic on. My immediate family isn't very religious but since we come from Christian roots, we still celebrate Christmas. I think it is a good example of my family's attitude toward religion in general. We love the sense of community and all of the fun cultural aspects that religion brings although our moral and belief systems are a strictly personal matter. (Even though we often have friendly debates about morality and beliefs amongst ourselves, and others, if they want to join in.) So, for us, Christmas is less about the birth of Jesus and more of an excuse to all get together, eat a lot of turkey and buy each other presents.

[Devil_Rising]

Even biblical scholars say that, according to their calculations, Christ wasn't born anywhere near December, anyway.

So as far as I'm concerned, Christmas is about family and friends, and lights, and Santa. Santa is the patron god of cheer, giving, and twinkling lights, after all.

[hellfire888]

im not religious at all.. im a believer of science.

[TheGreekDollmaker]

im not religious at all.. im a believer of science.

How can one ''believe'' in science.

Science isnt a religion, its mankinds growth of knowlage towards the natural laws and phenomenas in the know universe (String Theory doesnt count).

To ''believe'' would implly a lack of imperial evidence, which is clearly untrue since Science relies upon the scientific method.

[Nintend()\/\/|\|312]

im not religious at all.. im a believer of science.

How can one ''believe'' in science.

Science isnt a religion, its mankinds growth of knowlage towards the natural laws and phenomenas in the know universe (String Theory doesnt count).

To ''believe'' would implly a lack of imperial evidence, which is clearly untrue since Science relies upon the scientific method.

Well, I suppose science does require at least a little bit of faith. Scientists typically put their faith into things like theories and experimental trends. These are really just a collection of leaps of faith, better known as hypotheses, that haven't been proven wrong yet.

However, contrary to most religions, science's followers are encouraged to have as little faith as possible. (For example, believing in the existence of supernatural beings requires too much faith for most scientists because gathering data necessary to come to some conclusion regarding things that, by definition, do not exist in nature is very difficult.)

This lack of faith results in science's followers constantly testing their beliefs. To survive the onslaught of experimentation, science's belief system is dynamic, meaning that if one of its beliefs starts to require too much faith, it can be scrapped for a theory that requires less. (Newton's theory of gravitation being replaced by Einstein's general relativity is a good example.)

After hundreds of years of scientists constantly honing their belief system, you end up with science as it is today; so widely accepted that its teachings are an essential part of most formal educations (science class) and many of its beliefs are so infallible that they are often regarded as truths.

[Zidane]

I'm a laid back Catholic. Which means I follows the teaching of Jesus and whatnot, but I'm not a dick about my religion. Also I never go to church unless I HAVE TO.

[Popple]

I'm a laid back Catholic. Which means I follows the teaching of Jesus and whatnot, but I'm not a dick about my religion. Also I never go to church unless I HAVE TO.

I'm Catholic as well. And FYI: EVERY Sunday is a Holy Day of Obligation which means that it's just as important as Christmas, Easter, etc. I'm not here to point fingers (believe me, I've missed a few weekends) but it's funny that you say you only go when you HAVE TO - which to a Catholic means every weekend.

I've been thinking about making a post here about my thoughts on what I believe and my ideas on science/evolution/etc but I haven't put it together. And I'm not quite sure anyone would want to read it. Maybe I'll get around to it some day.

[cortjezter]

i was raised catholic, but do not currently practice unless coerced by my parents for a holiday when i'm home.

i think the idea for catholics is that you should go every chance you get, but that doesn't make every weekend a day of obligation; i have never, ever heard that, and trust me, if it were an edict from the vatican, my parents would have regularly pointed it out just to prove i had to go. just a couple generations ago, when the populace was much more agrarian, getting to and from the nearest church was just not possible more than once every month or two. i seriously doubt that everyone up until 50-60 years ago was a heathen for not going to church every sunday; the exact opposite is probably true. previous generations were much more religious and probably better off because of it. today, fewer people (percentage-wise) go to any kind of church or recognise religion, and look what a shovel hole of a society we have.

as someone who isn't religious, i'm not saying it's the answer to our problems, but it certainly seemed to help in a lot of ways that modern life currently lacks.

[thresholdXCI]

Well I'm no Catholic, so I might be being a bit ignorant, but the college I went to was a Catholic one and they had pictures of the Pope up everywhere. I never got that. How can the Pope be any more important than any other man? He's a figure man created, not God. It got me thinking. I mean look at the picture below, could he get much closer to being a false idol?

[Popple]

Vatican Catholic Canon 1246 and 1247:

Sunday, on which by apostolic tradition the paschal mystery is celebrated, must be observed in the universal Church as the primordial holy day of obligation. The following days must also be observed: the Nativity of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Epiphany, the Ascension, the Body and Blood of Christ, Holy Mary the Mother of God, her Immaculate Conception, her Assumption, Saint Joseph, Saint Peter and Saint Paul the Apostles, and All Saints.

On Sundays and other holy days of obligation, the faithful are obliged to participate in the Mass.

Again, I don't want this to turn into a finger pointing game I'm just pointing out that Sundays are Holy Days of Obligation under the Code of Canon Law. Should you miss any Holy Day of Obligation at any time, you are supposed to refrain from participating in communion until being absolved from your sins by a priest through confession. I, personally, have missed a few weekends and still participated in communion though so the extent that people follow these laws will vary obviously.
link

[Zidane]

I follow what Jesus said. So all I really need to do is be a good guy and help others in need. At the end of the day every rule made by the Catholic church is a rule made by man. So Jesus wants me to be a good person? I will. Church won't change that.

Also, Popple, don't be afraid of giving your opinion on anything. You'd be surprised who agrees with you.

[cortjezter]

Vatican Catholic Canon 1246 and 1247:

that is interesting. i wonder how they reconcile all those people from the past 1500 years or so who didn't live close enough to a church to go every week...

i'm more down with zidane's philosophy. in fact all of the dogmas of church (especially catholic) are what drives me crazy. most of them are just arbitrary and silly, man-contrived rituals for the sake of being a ritual. it's just my opinion, but i don't jive that way.

[Devil_Rising]

lol I thought this was just a post talking about our individual beliefs (or lack there of).

Not a debate on the finer points of one particular religion's dogma.

[Garfitor]

I'm an atheist. I'm certainly no fan of organized religion, in particular those that feel the need to meddle in the lives of nonbelievers. I'm perfectly okay with individual spirituality, I'm just opposed to people seeking to convert or kill in the name of their beliefs, or letting those beliefs stand in the way of simple rationality.

i seriously doubt that everyone up until 50-60 years ago was a heathen for not going to church every sunday; the exact opposite is probably true. previous generations were much more religious and probably better off because of it. today, fewer people (percentage-wise) go to any kind of church or recognise religion, and look what a s*** hole of a society we have.

as someone who isn't religious, i'm not saying it's the answer to our problems, but it certainly seemed to help in a lot of ways that modern life currently lacks.

I'd be very interested to hear what you have in the way of evidence for that statement. I find it much easier to spot ways in which a religious lifestyle is detrimental to society. One merely needs to look to the Middle East, where there is constant bloodshed in the name of religious beliefs, or at our own country, where we're still debating whether homosexual couples should have the same rights as heterosexual couples, kids dying because their parents chose to pray instead of seeking medical attention... I see far more dissent and unhappiness coming from religion. Oh, and I'd also like to note that the total percent of irreligion in the United States is somewhere around the 15% mark. I don't really see us as a large enough population to turn society into a shovel hole.
I don't know, maybe it's just me, but I don't see our society as so much of a shovel hole anyway. I think kids nowadays are more despicable, but I'd blame that more on them being raised in daycare or by the TV instead of at home by parents, and that's an issue I don't know how to fix. But I don't blame their lack of faith. I think the power system is crap, and could use an overhaul. But it's hard to blame that on lack of faith when we have one atheist in congress, with everyone else claiming to be a believer in one religion or another.
In any case, I don't mean for this to cause a massive debate or anything, just curious to hear you back up that statement.

[Nintend()\/\/|\|312]

as someone who isn't religious, i'm not saying it's the answer to our problems, but it certainly seemed to help in a lot of ways that modern life currently lacks.

I'd be very interested to hear what you have in the way of evidence for that statement. I find it much easier to spot ways in which a religious lifestyle is detrimental to society.

Yeah, sometimes spotting the benefits of religion can be much harder than identifying its disadvantages. cort will probably share his own ideas later but I thought I'd maybe share an anecdote with y'all.

I have a friend who had a really tough time going through high school. She was really quiet and didn't have many, if any, friends at the time. She was struggling with the academic side of high school as well. Regardless of how hard she studied, she only barely passed her classes. To make matters worse, her life at home was even less enjoyable. Her mother spent all of her time wither working or taking care of her older, disabled brother, so she had to do all of the cooking and cleaning for the rest of her family herself. Her dad was abusive. All throughout high school she felt unpopular, inept, unloved and extremely depressed.

She told me that the only reason why she didn't commit suicide is because she managed to find support in the form of a youth group at a local church. It was the only place where she could talk to people about her problems and be free front he criticism she received from her teachers and parents.

Now, one can argue that the only reason why the young people at the church were so nice was because they just wanted to indoctrinate another zealot into their masses. This may be partially true, but I don't think that was their only reason. (Even if that was their 'master plan', they failed. She doesn't go to church anymore.) Regardless of how messy their intentions may have been, it was ultimately a community support system that was the byproduct of a religious movement that saved her life.

Nowadays, there are probably a lot of secular support groups out there that may have been able to help her as well. However, back when she was in high school, in the community that she lived in, the church was the only place to turn to when you couldn't get help at school or home. In many places for many people, churches are probably still the primary source of community support.

Anyway, my point is that religion is more that the extremist-hate machine the media makes it out to be. Although you often hear about churches like Westboro Baptist that seem to do nothing but breed hate and intolerance, there are many that do the opposite. Besides, if people weren't blowing each other up and denying each other rights because of what they think their god wants them to do, they'd probably be blowing each other up and denying each other rights for other reasons. Or maybe not. I don't know. But I do know that there is a lot of loving thy neighbour going on out there that isn't getting the attention that it deserves.

[cortjezter]

i absolutely agree that religion has probably caused far more damage throughout history than the good it produced, but at the same time, the good really ARE good things, like honesty, decency toward others, etc. i guess you can tack whatever hypothesis you want onto what causes the youth of today to be generally much less friendly/wholesome/"good" than generations past, but what i'm talking about occurs among the youth and adults alike.

i personally think that the lack of a common (and by that i mean ubiquitous/frequent, not unified) set of morals/values that were mostly propagated through families and reinforced by their churches is clearly different now than it was then and to me could very well be a contributing factor. not saying the world used to be perfect--it never has been--but compared to the trend of non-religious people today who either don't have a moral compass or have one weakly ingrained by the lessened family unit has made society into a greedy, self-centred, consumerist mob of shovel . i guess in many ways, churches are like a secondary family unit. today we tend to not have either primary or secondary...

even though i'm non-practising now, i'm glad i was raised catholic; more for the life lessons that harmonised with what my parents were also trying to teach me, not for the man-made nonsense.

[Devil_Rising]

But those concepts existed thousands of years in human society, before Christianity or Islam, the "big religions", ever came along. Long before the Monotheistic "One God, One Truth" ideals. Ancient pagan peoples of ALL types, all over the world, had concepts of human decency, and honesty, and loyalty, and compassion for others, giving and working together a community. All those things are woven into human existence, dating back before our memory extends.

It has been, by and large, man-created things like empire, and religion, and capitalist/consumer society, that have indoctrinated people and driven them to be more hateful and violent towards each other than they ever really were beforehand. People always fought. Sure. But empires, "civilization", and the monotheistic religions and crusades...they made an "art" out of war, they brought killing, mass killing, genocide, propaganda, etc., to a whole other level.

I'd say those things have certainly had a negative effect. People of old didn't fight over beliefs. They fought each other for resources, or because of stupid tribal issues of pride, etc. But they didn't commit mass murder, by the millions even, over their "God". In fact, ask Native Americans who know their s*** about their history, they will tell you that in their society, as in many others (like Celtic, etc.), they acknowledged and respected each others' different gods and beliefs, even if they didn't share them. Only, really, since the advent of these "One God, One Truth" religious machines, have people gotten SO crazy over belief, and been whipped into a bloody frenzy, hating others because they're "WRONG", and we're "RIGHT". Such silly, sad goings on......

[Jirachi]

It may be hard to believe but despite being christian i believe for the most part in evolution(i believe in the idea not the "it takes millions of years for something to evolve" if you think about that rationally common sense will tell you many if not all species of life would've died of way more then already has) I don't believe in the big bang though as explosion just don't happen randomly something must cause them. as far as which domination i belong to i'm not sure.

[Popple]

It may be hard to believe but despite being christian i believe for the most part in evolution(i believe in the idea not the "it takes millions of years for something to evolve" if you think about that rationally common sense will tell you many if not all species of life would've died of way more then already has) I don't believe in the big bang though as explosion just don't happen randomly something must cause them. as far as which domination i belong to i'm not sure.

That's not hard to believe. The Catholic church has accepted and embraced evolution in recent years. We don't dispute the facts that science has proven and are confident that evolution has taken place. We don't know when and/or how life on Earth got started but we do know that God had a hand in it in one way or another (life didn't "start" because a lightning bolt hit a rock and created some primitive life form). God created all of the elements necessary for life. The church leaves it up to the individual to believe what they want about how life as we know it came to be. It is acceptable to believe that over millions of years the elements did eventually "morph" (or whatever you want to call it) into life forms and then continued to evolve. It is also acceptable to believe that God created the animals and living creatures from the start. But we do know that evolution has taken place and that there are animals and life forms that are extinct and there are animals and life forms that have evolved over millions of years into what we see today.
It's interesting to note that the Catholic church accepts 2 different theories concerning the origin of humans (again, leaving it up to the individual to decide what to believe) as of now in the church's eye neither theory is more or less important or more or less correct or more or less incorrect.
Theory 1: Humans were created by God from the beginning and never evolved from any kind of animal. Separate from any other species. The reason we are different is because God created us with a soul.
Theory 2: Humans, at some point in history, evolved from primates. The reason we are what/who we are now is because God gave us a soul.
Like I said, both of these theories are accepted by the Catholic church but it's not necessarily important which one you believe. The important part is that you believe that God had a hand in creating humans because we have a soul and that's what makes us different from any other animal on the planet. We don't know when, and you can decide how (Theory 1 or Theory 2), but we do know that God was a part of the process.

The Catholic church has had some serious mishaps in the past concerning science (remember Copernicus and Galileo?). But we've learned from our mistakes and have realized that there are just some things that the church doesn't know. When we see convincing evidence from the scientific community about things such as evolution and the history of the universe (which I didn't discuss here) we don't try to refute the claims, rather we embrace them and realize that these are the truths that we have to go on at this point in history.