Religion

[Saidon]

the hole god thing is for the insane people.

Why is it insane to believe, have faith and hope for something greater? Although you are entitled to your opinion, even if its not backed up with evidence and somewhat lacking depth.

To seek truth should be everyone's goal, most people that claim that they are an atheist have simply ignored the possibility due to not caring. If one researched every religion very carefully, and not rely on media perpetuated stereotypes (like what the media does to Muslims) and the internet for such, since a plethora of information and websites regarding religion have some false information. Which is why the proper books should be sought after. Don't rely on people to find the answers for you, like the creator of this thread who stated his parents not being able to give a valid answer to his questions, go out of your way and search yourself.

Im not putting an imperative on you, it's just my 2 cents and is in response to a few ignorant posts.

Me having a religion, has helped me a lot in my life. By trying to apply all the rules and advice it gave me I have become a better person as a result of such. Each to their own, most that read this will assume the immediate and predictable responses in regards to "Where is proof?" and "I am better as it is without religion"

Well, since I have responded to many of those all my life, I know already that aforementioned majority will throw yet another typical response as a result of a lack of interest/care etc. Hence, no difference really. I don't see how anyone's mind is going to be changed as a result of advice by a stranger on a forum so my post too is unnecessary.

All in all, if you are going to say something, try to back it up with evidence.

And if you are unsure of something, seek a freaking answer, can't find it through people? Look through other resources, don't rely too much on people on such a huge extent.

The proof is out there, many just refuse to see it.

If you sneezed during the reading of this post, Bless you

Peace off.

[Kyle_Dimetri]

Meaning that if there is a "God", I want hard evidence that I can believe.

A lot of people I know seem to go on a feeling, blind belief or were simply brought up that way.

Despite being raised to believe in a "God", I simply don't.

U have just proven my point and you're logic is just as fucked up as most ppl who posted on this forum. Everything you guys need is hard, tangible/visible proof. Well i might as well assume you don't have faith nor ever simply hope b4. I almost feel sorry 4 u........almost

[lemmingllama]

U have just proven my point and you're logic is just as fucked up as most ppl who posted on this forum. Everything you guys need is hard, tangible/visible proof. Well i might as well assume you don't have faith nor ever simply hope b4. I almost feel sorry 4 u........almost

Just because we dont believe in God, it doesnt mean that we dont have faith. I dont believe in one all powerful deity, but I can still have faith. Most of us are just not happy with organized religion.

[Diablo]

information. Which is why the proper books should be sought after. Don't rely on people to find the answers for you, like the creator of this thread who stated his parents not being able to give a valid answer to his questions, go out of your way and search yourself.

Maybe you didn't read my post properly. Many people point out the fact that my parents could not answer my questions about god. The thing is that was the point in my life where I really started to doubt the existence of god. The problem with the believers is that they do not want to consider the fact that there is a possibility that god does not exist.

Many a times I hear my friends saying that they've got their job by the grace of god, but everyone fails to show me a solid proof of the thing they say. On the other hand I have got a better paying job then them and I don't even believe in god. I know of a person who has gone to Shirdi(A Holy place) many times spending all his cash, but still doesn't have a job.

Btw If you guys think that I don't want to accept that there is an god I've read Gita(Holy book of Hindus) and m gonna soon read Bible and Koran.

I'd rather keep my mouth shut than speaking about any unknown facts.

[flashfire]

Can't answer your poll as i'm agnostic, perhaps if you were to redo the poll with more options it would help

[† Emotional Outlet]

Diablo states in the third post that he cannot edit the poll. Regardless, there's no reason why you simply cannot elabourate on your beliefs in your post. Tell me what you think about what other people have posted. Tell me what you think about what I had posted, that agnosticism and atheism/theism are compatible. If you disagree, please tell me why. Either way, it would be interesting to hear more of what you believe. I like hearing different points of view.

I understand that discussing religion is a difficult thing to do. It is deeply personal and it's hard to see people's criticisms of belief systems without feeling like they are attacking you personally. A debate this is, though, and I would prefer to see fewer attacks and more discussion. It's very disheartening to see people just dig in their heels and try to shut others out.

Diablo, is the Gita you're speaking of the Bhagavad Gita? I have a copy of that somewhere, in addition to a Koran (in Arabic and English), perhaps an Arabic version of the Bible, and the Tao Te Ching. I've tried to read the Bhagavad Gita, but it's a little dense for me, haha. There are some interesting snippets, though, that were extracted for us to read when I was in high school.

[Diablo]

@Emotional Outlet

It is the Bhagvad Gita I'm talking about, I read the English version, unfortunately I can't read Sanskrit or else it's really great in Sanskrit.

Mind if I ask where are you from.

[† Emotional Outlet]

Most things are apparently better in its original script. There are just so many intricacies conveyed in certain languages that are difficult to translate effectively. It's difficult for me to read things in Arabic for the same reason--the way things are combined and the concepts expressed don't always translate correctly in my head.

I was born in the Philippines, but I was raised in the US. A lot of time was spent in California and I had moved around quite a bit because my dad was in the Navy, so I ended up in Japan for a few years and a smattering of different states. I spent a month in Canada and a day in Mexico, haha. Why do you ask?

[Diablo]

Me being a person from India never had any part of Bhagvad Gita in my syllabus nor even in my Social studies. So, I was wondering where might you be from to have parts of Gita in your high school syllabus.

[animeking503]

Agnostic. I don't care about religion one bit. I'm not going to interfere with someone else's faith either though

[loskilos]

I don't hate religion I just don't believe in it. You must agree with one thing, a lot of religions stories are as crazy as some anime out there.

[Gaara0]

Do i believe in God I think of god as hope I'have been in a lot of bad situations in my childhood at some point i did think God will help us in a point where there's no hope? then why is god not helping me and how would god know my cry for help or someone like that really exist but at the end i did get out of that Thinking that everything is doomed no one will help me now won't do anything good that someone is God So God is Hope That i Have

[† Emotional Outlet]

Me being a person from India never had any part of Bhagvad Gita in my syllabus nor even in my Social studies. So, I was wondering where might you be from to have parts of Gita in your high school syllabus.

Haha, I want to say it was my World Literature class I took when I was in North Dakota. We went over a lot of different texts, including the aforementioned Tao Te Ching, Rig Veda, Gilgamesh, and a smattering of other things. It was all very interesting, and while I can't say the same of my classmates, I thought it opened up my world view quite a bit to be exposed to these kinds of texts.

Gaara0, your view is very interesting! I think for a lot of people, the idea of God simply being a personification of hope and not necessarily an omnipotent being might ring true. It's not that far off from what the Greeks did, personifying every aspect of their life and nature into people, or even simply the concept of Lady Luck. She isn't always on your side, but when she is, it's always sweet, haha. Perhaps God as a personification of hope is similar.

[FuzzyDunlop]

Regardless, there's no reason why you simply cannot elabourate on your beliefs in your post. Tell me what you think about what other people have posted. Tell me what you think about what I had posted, that agnosticism and atheism/theism are compatible. If you disagree, please tell me why. Either way, it would be interesting to hear more of what you believe. I like hearing different points of view.

I understand that discussing religion is a difficult thing to do. It is deeply personal and it's hard to see people's criticisms of belief systems without feeling like they are attacking you personally. A debate this is, though, and I would prefer to see fewer attacks and more discussion. It's very disheartening to see people just dig in their heels and try to shut others out.

____________________

However, as far as I understand it, the two terms ("atheist" and "agnostic") are not mutually exclusive, but quite the opposite. The concept of agnosticism is compatible with both atheism and theism because it has nothing to do with belief, but rather, as stated, knowledge. In this case, knowledge of the existence of one or more deities. Thus, you can be an agnostic Christian, an agnostic atheist, or any combination thereof.

So I quoted two posts of yours because I loved both. In regards to the first, I agree completely. I always encourage people to be open to their beliefs and to challenge them too. I think if someone is going to have strong beliefs of any kind that greatly influence their life they should be able to express those beliefs, and defend their point of view as well.

And about atheistic/agnostic nomenclature...Doesnt this mean everyone is an agnostic? No one knows for sure whether or not God exists, unless they change what it means "to know" something. ie, an atheist will say they "know" God doesnt exist because there is no evidence that he does, while a believer will say they "know" god exists because they can "feel" him. So if we use your definition where agnostic relates to knowledge (and I think thats a good way of defining agnosticism), then I think this makes the term agnostic superfluous, since everyone has their own subjective notion of what knowledge is.

[wyattearp23]

I'm a agnostic. I neither believe or disbelieve without any proof of the fact either way. I just simply exist and that is all that matters and should matter to me. With that being said, If you try to force your beliefs on my by some misguided idea of duty. "DON'T" ok!

[† Emotional Outlet]

It isn't "my" definition of agnosticism, haha.

noun

1. a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience. Synonyms: disbeliever, nonbeliever, unbeliever; doubter, skeptic, secularist, empiricist; heathen, heretic, infidel, pagan.

2. a person who denies or doubts the possibility of ultimate knowledge in some area of study.

3. a person who holds neither of two opposing positions on a topic: Socrates was an agnostic on the subject of immortality.

adjective

4. of or pertaining to agnostics or agnosticism.

5. asserting the uncertainty of all claims to knowledge.

6. holding neither of two opposing positions: If you take an agnostic view of technology, then it becomes clear that your decisions to implement one solution or another should be driven by need.

Origin:

< Greek ágnōst ( os ), variant of ágnōtos not known, incapable of being known ( a- a-6 + gnōtós known, adj. derivative from base of gignṓskein to know) + -ic, after gnostic; said to have been coined by T.H. Huxley in 1869

Link.

Like I said, a lot of people prefer to use it because it's a "nicer" term than simply saying whether they believe God exists or not--and really, since agnosticism is based on knowledge and not belief, I think they're rather two different things with different goals. Atheism is as much a belief as any other religion. I know the argument generally goes that you don't have to prove the non-existence of something but rather the opposite, but I don't think it makes atheism a "fact".

Someone who had never heard of hockey (or insert anything else everyone else knows exist) before in their life, never seen it on television, never heard of it on the news may believe that hockey doesn't exist.

It is a rather superfluous term, all things considered, especially because people turn to it as a crutch, as a way of appearing less offensive to people. However, trying to get people to adjust their views on what the term "agnostic" means is as tall an order as trying to get people to realise that atheism isn't about hating God or hating religion, haha.

[Flamus]

I believe that no person with a brain can believe in religion. I am open to the concept of God but religion is just means to control the masses and fill coffers. It might not of started this way but, unfortunately, that's how it is now.

[Kyle_Dimetri]

Nah, i'm not a christian but i have strong faith and belief in most of the christian teachings even though their teachings can be a bit confusing at times

[ShredAlert]

Born and raised Christian as well (Roman Catholic). I knew the first moment I clicked on this thread to read it that there would be debates about religion (well isn't that a surprise? ).

I know that the Church hasn't been all good throughout history (it is and always has been run by people you know, people who can be greedy and crazy and just think about their own benefits). I do however also like the good things the Roman Catholic Church has done throughout history (charity for example).

So yeah, stuff like the Crusades and all were influenced by the Church. One thing I cannot stand though is fighting in the name of 'God'. Killing in his name is just stupid and pathetic. Fighting to protect and fighting for gain are two different things (depending on the perspective of the individual either can be misunderstood easily).

Anyway, everyone should have the right to believe what they want. As long as society is peaceful and happy carry on believing in what you want. Atheists and people who don't believe in God don't get any ill will from me. What made everything is the one question that people want answered. If God made everything what made God? What was the one thing in existence before everything else? Should we call that God? Whatever the case (I might be sounding crazy xD) I am not one of those Christians that will try to convert people to my faith. I am happy to be a Roman Catholic.

That is all.

[Dae314]

Having gone to a Christian high school where I took classes that evaluated and studied scripture for 4 years, then to a Christian college where I've taken several classes on Biblical ethics and gotten to consider aspects of the Christian faith that appear troubling to most people, and also gotten the chance to listen to several very well established and respected Christian scholars speak about things, I think I can consider myself at least knowledgeable in the academic side of Christianity. On the actual practice side of things, I "became Christian" back in elementary school, but really only figured out what that meant in my freshman year of college. So faith wise, I'm technically still a young believer. However, given my academic background in Christian studies, and the inherit logical basis of my major (Computer Science), I believe that my walk may be more evolved than some others who have been Christian for only as long as I have been. However, each person progresses at their own pace so there are likely as many people in my time zone ahead of me as there are behind me. I do not belong to any denomination, and a lot of what I concluded about the Christian faith came from my own study of scripture and listening to Christian scholars, pastors, and friends.

That said, now I'd like to address the scriptures that most people find troubling (even Christians). Most of the scripture that people have problems with is found in the Old Testament portion of the Bible. The Old Testament is a mix of narrative, poetry, and other works that basically tell the creation story of ancient Israel. Many (if not all) of the controversial laws people refer to are found within the law of the ancient Israelites. Therefore, one of the most common defenses Christians use against those criticisms is that Jesus in the New Testament overturned the old laws of the Old Testament. Although that view is "correct" it leaves a gaping hole for Christians since the next question to come from that would be "then why do we read the old testament if all its rules were overturned by Christ's sacrifice?" One of the best answers to this that I read in a book on Old Testament ethics is that the Old Testament should be viewed as an ethical paradigm rather than a direct 1-to-1 law correspondence (by this I mean just straight up obeying the laws set in the Old Testament). I've heard some scholars also talk about this idea, but most of the information on this came from the book I read about Old Testament ethics. Jesus himself asserts that while he came to establish a new covenant, he did not come to abolish the old law, and I believe it is Paul who also says that ALL scripture is good for teaching and rebuking. These passages create a tension that I think is neatly resolved by viewing the Old Testament and it's laws as an ethical paradigm. In order to evaluate the Old Testament as a paradigm, you need to understand more about ancient Israel than I'm willing to explain in this post, but what you basically do is evaluate what the situation was when the law was established. Then consider what the thought paradigm for that law was in the context of ancient Israel and the way life was at the time, and come out with a logical way of applying such a law in the present world which would achieve the same goal envisioned by ancient Israel. How do you know that you've evaluated the scripture correctly? You correctly evaluated the paradigm of thought behind an Old Testament scripture when you are able to apply that paradigm anywhere in the scriptures (Old and New) and it does not cause conflicts.

While I cannot be sure that this view is a completely 100% correct way to evaluate Old Testament scripture, I know that it is one of the most logical and practical theories on evaluating Old Testament scripture that I've ever heard. It is the method of thought that I use to evaluate the Old Testament, and it's been pretty successful as far as I've used it. Some things are hard to evaluate (for example, what do you think the paradigm of thought was behind the law of the jubilee?), but difficult passages are part of the reason why I see scripture as having so much value.

I hope this helps people who struggle with these passages to understand them more fully. Also, please do not ask me for my interpretation of certain OT passages. For Christians, I believe that God speaks through scripture sometimes in ways that only you can hear. I encourage you to read and evaluate the scripture on your own or with more mature Christians than me so you can understand what God is saying through the passage you have a question about. For non-Christians (I say this just as an umbrella term), I imagine that my answer to you will not be sufficient since I'm not actually a Biblical scholar. I would encourage you to seek out Biblical commentaries or find a Biblical scholar to evaluate your question for you since that will probably be a lot more satisfactory than listening to my answer. Remember, I didn't make up this method of OT interpretation nor am I professing to be a master at this way of interpreting scripture, rather I'm just sharing what I found to be a good method in the hope that it can be helpful to you too.