'What religion are you?' poll discussion

Gareth_Lazelle

Mr.Harley_Quin wrote: »

Yes of course I could name a nasty atheist, but his atheism is not driving him to be horrid. He just is.

The suicide bomber is doing something he sees as morally acceptable.

Perhaps he is doing it in the name of religion, and maybe it is the driver - but if he didn't see it as morally acceptable he wouldn't do it.

If he sees that sort of act as acceptable, would he consider doing it for some other cause or issue? Probably.

Consider that some folks see evil actions in defence of their homeland as acceptable - they are clearly not driven by religion (even if they are religious as individuals), but they do see the attack as morally acceptable.

Do you think that there are folks with strong religious beliefs out there that would never participate or encourage these sorts of evil actions? Of course there are.

So is it unfair to tar all religious folks (and their beliefs) by the actions of a few? Definitely.

Beliefs can often shape morality, but often morality shapes beliefs (and that does mean that folks are often guilty of twisting their beliefs to suit actions that they consider acceptable - GWB and TB are good examples of the religous twisting their faith to make evil actions acceptable...).

People can be evil. Religion can be evil. Neither are evil by default. Strong leaders are frequently evil (if only because they impose their morality on others, whether they like it or not).

<edit>I can't believe I'm on here defending religion...

adrian_clark

Gareth_Lazelle wrote: »

The suicide bomber is doing something he sees as morally acceptable.

Perhaps he is doing it in the name of religion, and maybe it is the driver - but if he didn't see it as morally acceptable he wouldn't do it.

If he sees that sort of act as acceptable, would he consider doing it for some other cause or issue? Probably.

Consider that some folks see evil actions in defence of their homeland as acceptable - they are clearly not driven by religion (even if they are religious as individuals), but they do see the attack as morally acceptable.

Do you think that there are folks with strong religious beliefs out there that would never participate or encourage these sorts of evil actions? Of course there are.

So is it unfair to tar all religious folks (and their beliefs) by the actions of a few? Definitely.

Beliefs can often shape morality, but often morality shapes beliefs (and that does mean that folks are often guilty of twisting their beliefs to suit actions that they consider acceptable - GWB and TB are good examples of the religous twisting their faith to make evil actions acceptable...).

People can be evil. Religion can be evil. Neither are evil by default. Strong leaders are frequently evil (if only because they impose their morality on others, whether they like it or not).

<edit>I can't believe I'm on here defending religion...

The Bible teaches that people are evil by default that we are all wicked from our mother's womb. Psalm 51:5. It explains why you don't have to teach young boys to pick up sticks and wack people, it's in the DNA.:mad: So if you are teaching that we are not evil by default but by choice does that mean that everybody is essentially good?:A

MothballsWallet

adrian_clark wrote: »

Many cruel men have done many cruel things in the name of religion. The Protestant Reformation was a response to the apostasy of the medieval Church of Rome. However, the point is that the love of Jesus Christ is the life to be patterned after. He claimed, "I am the Truth, the Light and the Way, nobody comes to the Father but through me". In a world of competing truth claims, false religions and conflicting philosophies that's a huge claim: I am the 'Truth' and 'Nobody'. That means there is only one truth, and no other truth claim will connect you to your loving father in heaven because nobody else has paid the penalty, taken the punishment and faced the justice of a justly angry and righteous God.

ROFLMAO :rotfl: I can't say anything else right now as I'm laughing so much.

Gareth_Lazelle

adrian_clark wrote: »

The Bible teaches that people are evil by default that we are all wicked from our mother's womb. Psalm 51:5.

Not all faiths teach that however (and not all variations of Christianity push original sin either),

And.. As it happens my experience is that that sort of belief truly is evil, :mad: because it is saying that good is the exception, not the norm. And if people start to think that they are evil by default then they can become evil to meet the expectations of others.

When folks condemn and condescend you as 'evil' simply because you don't pray the way that they do, then why should you treat them with any more respect than they show you?

adrian_clark

MothballsWallet wrote: »

ROFLMAO :rotfl: I can't say anything else right as I'm laughing so much.

You have many laughing with you, it's an important aspect of our cultural mandate but that's fine, it's good to laugh. They laughed and mocked Jesus for his claims to be God as He was brutally tortured before being hung on a wooden cross to die slowly and painfully by asphyxiation and loss of bodily fluids. That's our God that He would willingly lay down His life to take the punishment of those that would laugh at Him.

We live in a world with many competing truth claims. The exclusive truth claim that we are due to celebrate on 25 December is intriguing. How is it that the whole of human history revolves around this homeless Galilean preacher who was betrayed, abandoned at laughed at? There are many ideas, philosophies, scientific theories and religions but there can only be one truth.

robin_banks

All a bit heavy but ftr I'm an atheist.

adrian_clark

stevepg56 wrote: »

or get bummed by a bunch of peadophile cathoilc priests, where in your book of fairy tales does it advocate that> huh?

It's a good question thank you. In 1 Corinthians 6v13,17 it says: "The body is not meant for sexual immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. And God raised the Lord and will also raise us up by his power. Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I then take the members of Christ and make them members of a prostitute? Never! Or do you not know that he who is joined to a prostitute becomes one body with her? For, it is written, "the two will become one flesh. Flee from sexual immorality".

The point is that it is good for men and women to be married and sex is a great gift to be enjoyed. Expecting men to be celibate to join a churches clergy is going to have consequences. So the Book encourages marriage, it says church overseers (including priests for the Roman Catholics), "must be...the husband of one wife", 1 Tim 3.

Here's to marriage, sex and wisdom, Happy Christmas :beer:

adrian_clark

Mr.Harley_Quin wrote: »

So it seems to come to these standpoints. Holy books are true because they say they are. Any and all of the mistakes they contain can be dismissed with clever semantics. Theists are free to cherry pick the bits they like and ignore the fact that holy books, if read open mindedly and minus rose-tinted glasses, are like horror stories.

Atheists would change their minds in an instant given a scrap of proof, of which there is none.

My final point is based on the table below.

ReligionMembersPercentageChristianity 2.1 billion33.0%Islam 1.5 billion21Hinduism 900 million14Buddhism 376 million6Sikhism 23 million0.36Judaism 14 million0.22Bahaism 7 million0.1Confucianism 6.3 million0.1Jainism 4.2 million0.1Shintoism 4 million0.0

How can anybody sensibly think they are right? The very best bet would be that 9 of these are wrong. Of course there is also a great chance that all ten are wrong.

This is a poetically brilliant post, thank you. I totally agree 9 of these must be wrong, just as out of the many conflicting ideas, philosophies, and scientific theories to explain life most have to be wrong. The point is made perfectly that from a process of deduction all these truth claims cancel each other out leaving only one truth claim as credible, plausible and true. There can be only one. Our task is simply to apply the free will we've been gifted to determine which one. :money:

lizimuffin

MrsTine wrote: »

I'm actually a little disappointed there is no option for pagan... I'm not asking for every pagan religion, but a catch-all would have been nice... not just "other" *sniffle*

I'm with you on this one.....I was recently in hospital and they asked me religion, I stated Pagan
they told me that I would have to put in 'other' I said to them that this was wrong as there are a lot of faiths that weren't on the list and we aren't all the same!
Next time I went in, they had 'pagan' - result!!

DavidLaGuardia

lizimuffin wrote: »

I'm with you on this one.....I was recently in hospital and they asked me religion, I stated Pagan
they told me that I would have to put in 'other' I said to them that this was wrong as there are a lot of faiths that weren't on the list and we aren't all the same!
Next time I went in, they had 'pagan' - result!!

Except that "pagan" is not a specific religion but a blanket term only a few notches down from "other". I'm not referring to the perjorative perspective of some christians, who label anything but Judaism/Christian/Islam as pagan, but the correct meaning of pagan as any polytheistic religion that emcompasses Wicca, various African Tradtions, Native North American and belief stemming from various pre christain European peoples etc. etc. Feel free to be what you like but if you say "pagan", you may as well say "other".