I don't believe in God. I guess that makes me an atheist. In the light of Heath's death I have a hard time when I hear people say "Rest in peace, Heath, you're in a better place now" because what place could ever be better for Heath to be in than with Matilda? I also find it very hard to stomach when people say "God must have had bigger plans for him", because how selfish would it be for a God to take away the father from a 2 year old child, what other purpose would come higher than the purpose of a father to raise his child and see her grow up into a mature woman? But... I also understand that this is something that is comforting to cling to and I do believe that there is more. I do believe that Heath will be his girl's guardian angel and watch her whenever he can. So I guess I don't believe in the concept of a God (and especially not one that we should fear), but I do believe in spirituality.
Mel
Well I guess it is time for me to weigh in on this issue. I have never done so before really to
anyone, except for in general..I dont think I believe in god. I used to from the time I was a very
small child. I was very involved in church and held my belief as you hold a warm and comforting
blanket around you. In times of distress or worry I would pray that gods will be able to make the outcome
a good one. I was a good believer. I did what I believed to be the Jesus way. I started to notice
the judgemental ways of the people in the churches. It turned me completly off of church. So then
I embarked on a life of spiritual connection to god on my own. Until finally when I held a point that
I truly had to use what i had learned and put it to the test.
The bible says when it comes to faith.
"Ask and you shall be given. Seek and you will find." That is as basic a statement as its possible to
read. No misinterpretation can be made. No i didnt get it right, there. It is plain and straight. Well
My brother was going thru hell. He needed desperately to have god to cling to. He prayed for
faith. He prayed for solace. He prayed for guidance. He prayed for sanity. I prayed for all of
that along with him....because I knew that god would give him what he had promised. After all
god doesnt break promises right.? Well he never received that faith or solace. And I waas devastated
because of it. So any god that breaks a promise. Is no god to me... I dont need him. And now
I find myself deeply missing a god to pray for and rest on. But i just can never get that faith back.
I told bro Patrick the other day. I would love for him to pray for a very dear friend in need. Because God and i arent on very good terms these days. And he believes with all his mind and soul. So
maybe he can do something where obviously i can not.
Maybe that is too much information. But you asked.
again, i want to thank you all for your honesty. like i've said before, i love hearing what people think about the whole god issue. i was a youth pastor for the christian faith, non-denominational...and i've spent years listening to opinions of non-believers, athiests, agnostics, etc.....and i still find it interesting.
here's another set of questions for you all, and again, this is not at all in any means to try and push anything, this is just a questionaire:
1) is there an absolute truth?
There is a universal truth. And this I believe comes from God.
2) is there right and wrong? (if so, what determines that?)
Yes. What determines it? Human conscience.
3) is there heaven and hell? (some of you have already answered this)
There is a Heaven and a Hell. But I believe that Heaven and Hell also exist now in this world. We simply continue on in whatever state (or world) we are presently in when we die.
4) if there is a heaven , does there have to be a hell?
Everything has an opposite. So yes. There must be.
5) if there is a god, does there also have to be a devil?
Once again I believe in opposites. So yes.
6) can there be more than one god?....(if you believe in god/gods at all)
There is only one God.
Maybe these questions were directed at someone else. :D
thanks for your answers david. very insightfull. i appreciate that.
not sure what you mean about the questions being directed elsewhere though. ??????
again, i want to thank you all for your honesty. like i've said before, i love hearing what people think about the whole god issue. i was a youth pastor for the christian faith, non-denominational...and i've spent years listening to opinions of non-believers, athiests, agnostics, etc.....and i still find it interesting.
here's another set of questions for you all, and again, this is not at all in any means to try and push anything, this is just a questionaire:
1) is there an absolute truth? yes, and that truth shall set you free
2) is there right and wrong? (if so, what determines that?) yes, the still voice in your soul tells you so
3) is there heaven and hell? (some of you have already answered this) no
4) if there is a heaven , does there have to be a hell? I don't know
5) if there is a god, does there also have to be a devil? no
6) can there be more than one god?....(if you believe in god/gods at all) yes, the creator in his/her infinite manifestations
again, please know, this is open for personal opinions, and i'm not intending on bantering, or quoting , or whatever....i'm just curious.
if you don't want to answer, please still write on this thread anyways, as understanding where everyone is at 'spiritually' is very insightfull.
thanks
forsythia
"pentecost...i don't know what the pentecost is. my mother never explained it to me. i guess the world ends and guys like me and you march off into hell"
[/size]
"There is no divorce."
Now, for those who know me here, I'm a feminist of the old school. I believe that women being able to divorce is one of the powers women wrested from men to give them opportunity to be something other than chattel in society. Women have the power and the strength now to divorce unsuitable/abusive spouses.
There was no way I thought that it was right that there was no divorce and that Jesus supported the Hebrew bible rules that if one did divorce, one was committing adultery. In a Christian world, one was bound for hell for adultery if you were not sorry, and I knew the reasons my mother got divorced 3 times and my sister 1. There was no way they were ever going to be "sorry" they got divorced. And so there were going to hell? Women were all going to hell for divorcing abusive/bad husbands?
yes, i too struggled with the divorce thing. my mom did a lot of divorcing, and as a married woman with a marriage that has had many, many ups and downs, i have considered it from time to time.
i'm going to play 'god's advocate' for a minute, if you don't mind.
about being an adulterous if one divorces, well, i think the bible points out the sin of our actions, and what the consequences would've been had jesus not have died for our sins. no, i people don't go to hell for divorce, but the whole message of the bible is that we are sinners, and our sin is not god's plan, as god says "i hate divorce". the bible is full of "don'ts" and i think the point is only to show how we absolutely cannot live up to god's standards, or refrain from sin, thus, we needed jesus to 'pay the price' for us. the message is that we can't do it alone, we can't abstain from sin, therefore we cannot be made perfect for god...except that jesus took on all the sin of the world for us, and paid the penalty, and if we claim him as our savior, we will be made clean through him.
i'm sorry, i'm not trying to preach. i'm just trying to explain what most christians believe about the impossible 'don'ts' in the bible. i'm not trying to change your mind, and i fully respect your belief. i'm just stating the 'other' side, if you will.
also, i think god hates divorce because a lot of the time it's based on serving #1...rather than putting one's spouses' needs ahead of one's own. we live in a world that teaches "whatever makes YOU happy", and we are used to looking out for ourselves first and formost. this is not all a bad thing, but it can be if we're consumed with ourselves rather than others.
anyways, divorce is on the rise now, and i don't think it's god's desire that we all get divorced. i think a lot of marriages suffer because we've forgotten how to give, but rather focus on recieving. you may disagree with me, and let me point out that god would never ask a woman to stay with a horrible husband. abuse, violence, adultery, or anything else that's harmfull, unproductive, or toxic is nothing to put up with, and warrents a divorce most definately. god said "husbands, LOVE your wives, and give yourself up for her as christ gave himself up for the church." so , god wants men to put their wives needs above and beyond their own, and anything less, is not god's way....
:)
I have been looking at some of the Native American belief systems and the idea of a Spirit (or God) as a connecting force is comforting to me.
well, i'm not sure how to take your last entery delalluvia. the tone sounded very......cold. i'm not sure why you think i make up my own version of what jesus said. no i didn't. if you take scripture, you need to look at the context it is written in, and you need to look at the other scriptures revolving around that topic, and the bible says that HUSBANDS OUGHT TO LOVE THEIR WIVES AND GIVE HIMSELF UP FOR HER. that is NOT taking jesus command and making it my own, and i resent that. yes, there was abuse then, as there is now, and no, it was ungodly for a man to do that. there are other scriptures that back that up, so please don't put modern christians in a box and label them.
as far as amish people. yes, they live peaceful lives, but they too are also affected by 'the fall' and are considered to have sin in their lives (in the christian faith), and they too need to rely on god for their strength and purity. the bible says we ARE supposed to work at the commands, and work out our salvation, but we cannnot save ourselves by our own merit, which is like the pharisees who were strongly rebuked by god becuase they depended on their own works, and not god.
as far as no divorce except after jesus' death, no, that's not what i meant either. the bible is in two sections. old and new testament. the old testement shows us the LAW of god, given to the jews under moses. the new testament is how we can obtain salvation, which is "not by works alone!", but rather what jesus did on the cross.
I have a problem with beating up anyone over the Bible. It has been translated and retranslated and reinterpreted so many times, there is no way of knowing what is supposed to be in there and what is not.yes, injest, you are right. it's a very complicated issue, and things often get heated, hence all the religious wars going on.
Neo-pagan here.
Just in an interest in knowing what it is you believe, may I ask you exactly how you define pagan. Christians in the later years of the Roman Empire described the followers of the ancient Greco-Roman gods as pagans. I have heard animists described as pagans. The native religions of the American Indian have been described as pagan.
I attend 4 sci-fi conventions in Texas every year, and when I see booths with "pagan" literature or speak with individuals advocating a 'paganism' I always get different answers. I've even spoken to Wiccanists who describe themselves as pagan.
A Pagan is defined differently by different people, that's why you get different answers. Some people consider pagans to be anyone who isn't a follower of the 3 great monotheistic religions. Others don't consider Hindu, Buddhist or Native Americans to be in the pagan category, some new age religious people consider the moniker pagan itself to be offensive, since it was used in a derogatory sense by the early Christians. [shrug]
Neo-pagan is just a quickie catchall I use because it refers to a new version of an old religion. My path is more properly called reconstructionism - a new religion based on an old religion constructed out of as much of original material as possible.
so for you, you have found the part of Christianity that works in your world view and fashioned it to fit your life? sounds reasonable to me,
Why did you feel a need to abandon organized Christianity? you could not mold a niche within a church? or you did not wish to do that? I am just curious as I enjoy reading history, and I read a book last month about the decline of the pagan world in the 4th century AD, so the subject of paganism is on my mind.
ok I understand,
I guess I am a "cafeteria" Baptist. I have no qualms about picking and choosing the beliefs which are compatible with my conscience and rejecting those that conflict with me. But I understand that many people with sincere religious beliefs can not do this. Some of the doctines and interpretations of scripture creates a conflict in many women, it also creates a conflict with gays.
Maybe it is because in my denomination a doctrine known as the "Priesthood of the Believer" is taught. Essentially that encourages a personal relationship with Christ without passing thru doctrine or ministers.
That's pretty much it. I had a related discussion on another board once.
The topic was "Can a person be X and a Christian?" (X does not refer to being gay in my example)
I voted no, because X was specifically forbidden by the Bible, not hinted at, flat out "be this and die". Quite a few people on the board opposed me because they too were 'cafeteria Christians' and believed X was OK and compatible with Christianity. One person who sided with me, agreed with me but for a different reason I thought quite interesting.
She said X couldn't be compatible with Christianity simply because of language, understanding and communication.
When we say 'Christian' those familiar with the religion have an idea of what a Christian should be. We all hear the word and have the same basic understanding. To add something unassociated with Christianity to the definition of a Christian and you suddenly change the understanding of the word and communication falls apart.
It would be like saying, "I'm a vegetarian, but I eat meat 3 times a week" or "I'm a Christian Scientist and I have Blue Cross."
The word no longer has an understandable meaning.
How very pagan. ;)
could I be a pagan at heart? well, if the pagans will sing the old gospel hymns from the Broadman Hymnal, I'll join up! I think the hymns are about the only thing that draws me back to church every 6 months or so, and DL's prompting.
Yep. ;D
Nothing wrong with enjoying good music and a great deal of wonderful music is religious. I personally enjoy Masses and Xmas music. I don't have to be a Christian to enjoy it. Hymns I really like I find new words for. Some pagan sites have entire Xmas songs reworded back to celebrate a pagan holiday.
I've always been interested in the fact that early Christianity expropriated pagan holidays, renamed them and made then central to the faith. Easter, and Christmas both have their roots in pagan holidays, which of course have their roots in the changing of the seasons : the solstices and equinoxes.
I have wanted to be at Stonehenge when the sun is lined up with the key stone, supposedly the light shines around the stones at an interesting angle. The people who built Stonehenge were I believe Druids and didn't they worship the changes of the seasons?
you sound like you are a classics scholar, I have a close friend I met in college was a classics scholar and then got tempted by Microsoft money and never went back.
A cruel god ain't no god at all.
Bliss,
I am sorry about what you had to go through. When I was a young teenager my Mom and I watched my Grandma die slowly of colon cancer, over a 2 year period. It was completely horrible, and at the end my Mom had lost all her faith in God and I wasn't far behind, becoming an Athiest and eventually an Agnostic. Two years after my Grandma died my most beloved Grandpa also died of cancer, although more quickly and with a lot less suffering. It is so hard to believe in a benevolent God who would let such terrible things happen to such good people. My Grandpa is my hero to this day, 24 years after I lost him. I am an Agnostic now, rather than an Athiest, only because some optimistic part of me wants to believe that the world is too complex to be completely sure of what is and what isn't.
Susie
oh boy. i say this only because i have a different view and i'm affraid to post it because it's a very biblical view of these very issues. i don't wish to argue, debate, prove the existence of god, or lack there of, nor do i wish to defend my own beliefs, so please, please.....if you disagree with what i'm about to say, that's totally okay... i completely respect that, but i beg you not to come at me with arrows. :(
first off, i am a christian, but i struggle with my faith at times, and i'm not perfect in any way, shape or form. i am only giving this view because it's appropriate for this thread, and it's what i've come to believe. i used to hate god. i was a complete athiest, but the angrier i got, the more i wanted to know how 'god' could allow such shitty things to happen, and that's what got me asking questions. i guess, deep down, i didn't want to 'write god off', but rather seek the idea out even more, and now, i feel like i have a lot more answers.......or at least, answers that work for me.
basically, from a christian stance, we are living in a sinful world, and we are sinfull people...some worse than others, but sinners nonetheless. due to this, the world is full of suffering, pain, and death, among other injustices, and this was never god's will. am i saying that these dear grandparents deserve the suffering? no, but i'm saying there is a reason for the world being the way it is, and as difficult as it is to fathom, the bible fills in the rest of the story, and god's plan to help heal the world of this so that manind recieve everything god first intended us to have.
personally, i don't think anyone grieves about our pain and suffering as much as god does, and although it seems like HE DID IT, or HE allowed it, the bible teaches something much different, and for me, it's comforting. i used to blame god for everything wrong in the world, but now i see it much differently, and to me, this biblical version makes much more sense.
i do NOT wish to insult or critsize anyone who believes differently, and i'm not saying that my way is the way it is. it's just another point of view.
i'd be happy to post more about the bible or anything else regarding this, but i don't want to preach, or turn people away from this thread. i'm very open to any and all belief systems...and i want people to feel safe here to ask questions, post their beliefs, and explain themselves to any extent.
thanks for all your thoughts on this, and my heart goes ou
t to all those who have watched their loved ones suffer unimaginable pain. right now my neice has cancer, and i too am watching her fight for her life everyday. she's only a child, and so, i know how cruel cancer is.
please keep posting you guys, 'cause i think this thread is important, and it's good to know what people really believe in.
It's interesting you bring this up forsynthia. On a freethinkers/atheist board that I go to, someone posted this:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1720092,00.html
After like 38 years as an atheist, the author Anne Rice (Interview with a Vampire) has returned to Christianity. The discussion about it on the board finally concluded that the reason she returned to her religion was for comfort. She could not reconcile herself to the fact that she would never see her child or husband again (both passed away). So in that respect, religion as a personal comfort, few people find fault with it. It's only when people try to take that comfort out into the world and spread "the Good Word" that troubles start happening.
forsythia has no 'N'.
but, back on topic, i suppose you're right that problems can arise when people 'spread the word', but it depends on how it's done. i think my post was tastefully done, and i doubt anyone took offense to it after the debriefing i gave with it. also, i think most people, when they go out and tell others about their faith, usually have good intentions...they just may go about it the wrong way. the person who does this needs to first make sure that their opinion is not unsolicited in any way, and that's what i did with the post, and i think it's appropriate for the type of thread this is. i wouldn't post this anywhere else on the forum....
that's interesting about the article. yes, i agree, it is comforting for many people.
I'm sorry if I gave you the impression I was criticizing your post - let me spell it right - forsythia I was not, I was speaking about proselytizing in general.
People may have good intentions, but you know the saying, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Almost all proselytizing is unsolicited, so people shouldn't be going on missionary work at all because in doing so they are being presumptive that - unasked - people want to hear about another religion's message.
My Mormon friend even admitted that he was sending people to a Mormon hell on his missions. If people had never heard the message of the Mormons, then they wouldn't go to hell. But if they had heard it and rejected it, then they were going to hell. So basically, by going on a mission and educating people about Mormonism, he was sending more people to his religion's hell than otherwise would be if they remained ignorant.
Yes, i hear what you're saying. i used to do mission work. i was a youth pastor for a non-donminational , christian based youth organization who reaced out to highschool kids. i thoroughly enjoyed the work, and believed in what i was doing. i never pushed anything, and i loved those kids for exactly who they were. we just told them about the bible because it's hidden in our schools. i just think in order to make an informed decision, you need to know what it is your (not you personally) rejecting. these kids knew nothing about any religion, and that is one we could teach, outside of school. had nothing to do with taking them to church, or advising them away from other religions. for me, once i became a christian, it was important for me to take courses in religious studies in college/university so i could fully understand what it is i do, and do not believe. i wanted to learn all about buddhism, judeaism, catholicism, islam, and hinduism. there are many more i will learn about too in my own personal study at home. i do this because i dislike ignorance. i don't want anyone to be sheltered from any information whatsoever. i want people to know about stuff, and i always want to know more. that's when i think informed decisions are made...and that's why i believe my mission had good intentions, and did no harm. .....or at least none that i know of. i believe in education, and i'm sad that due to political correctedness we don't teach kids this stuff anymore. 80% of the teens we had have never heard of the christmas story before, and i think that's a shame. i don't believe in chanting christian prayers in the beginning of each class, or praying to a christian god in school because that would discriminate, but i do think schools need to teach, at least a little bit, the wide variety of faiths we have. i think if they knew what others believed, they would understand eachother more....so, that was part of our mission.
Unfortunately, not all missions are like yours. My Mormon friend went on a mission to a staunchly Catholic country with the intent (good or not) of basically subverting people's belief in their current religion so they would accept his. He actually taught that there was a "right path" and that was the Mormon path.
So his mission wasn't about 'educating people' about all kinds of religions, only about the "right" religion - his religion. And of course, the people of the country he went to were not ignorant of religion, having been steeped in Catholicism their whole lives.
Personally, I believe for a person to make an informed decision, they have to be adults, fully capable of analytical thinking. This excludes children and most young teenagers, so I believe children should be exposed to all types of religions or withheld from information about religion until they're old enough to understand them. After all, I certainly wouldn't want a child reading the bible. It has such stories of rape, violence, cruelty and incest that would make anybody's toes curl and just letting them read the 'good parts' does them a disservice, IMO.
well, our organization was christian, so it was definately bias, as we did not 'teach' other religions. that's up to other religions to become more involved. we did tell them what WE believed, and then it was up to them to thiink about it, or seek other stuff. we just wanted to get the 'ball rolling' so to speak, in their thought process.
i have two little ones and they go to church, and we read them their children's bibles, which doesn't exclude bad stories, but explains them in age appropriate manners.
one of our goals was to inform teens about a different way of life compared to what they've been exposed to in secular groups. they were personal messages that we sent, and we were there to be their friend , no matter what they believed, and we were there as 'mentors', i guess, or there to answer any questions they had. they knew we were christian, and they knew what we were about, so they had the desire to know more to begin with. i just wanted to learn about other religions for my own education, and i love to learn, so that was personal. we didn't do the teaching, but we encouraged kids to ask questions. these teens were anywhere from 15-18, and they were adult enough to think abstractly, or at least the ones i knew anyway. we had fun with them, we loved them, we were their friends, we were just 'there' for them, and our motive was out of love for god, and a love for people....not for numbers or quotas.
i understand what you say, and a lot of mission work i see out there is shamefull, but i do see a lot of good being done too. for example, the bible teaches to give to the poor, or to give your neighboor the shirt off your back....so when i see habitat for humanity, or 'loaves and fishes' doing work in el salvadore, or mexico, buildiing houses for people, etc....and they're asked why they do it, and they reply "because i love god, and i love his people"...that to me is a positive mission. that's putting one's faith into action, and faith without deeds is dead...
i appreciate your posts, and i enjoy discussing this with you. i respect where you're coming from
i didn't take any offence to the "n" in my name...just making a correction.
Your mission sounds nice, forsythia, much nicer than his, even if you could try hard and not find a nicer person than my Mormon friend. But however nice he was still butting in where he wasn't invited. And again, not anything personal, but I do feel it does a grave disservice and misrepresents a religion if someone only reads to children or teens 'age appropriate' matter from the Bible. You end up with an adult like a friend of mine who told me she named her dog Jericho because that was her 'favorite story' from the Bible.
I looked at her aghast, and asked, "Your favorite story? Do you know what happened to the people of Jericho after the walls came tumbling down?"
She didn't. She went home, read it, came back the next day and said, "OK, I just like the name."
Even the Christmas Story is 'edited' so to speak. People traditionally end the telling of the tale in Luke with the baby being born in the manager. No body keeps reading after that. Where Mary isn't allowed to take her new born baby into god's presence at the Temple for weeks because she is 'unclean', having just given birth and not worthy to be in god's presence because women are basically not as good as men.
IMO, people tend to leave stuff like that out from telling children/teens because it would cause awkward questions they don't want to answer and it might turn them away from Christianity. Yet, this is their religion, too. So in teaching this way, they give children/teens the sanitized, PC correct version, then these children are strongly influenced by their religion, and grow up basically knowing very little about it except the 'good parts'. IMO, that's extremely misleading.
You end up with people like my friend, or cafeteria Christians/bible thumpers picking and choosing the parts they like and ignoring the rest, fundamentalists crowing against homosexuals, not having read the parts where everyone is admonished against eating shellfish or pork or wearing two different materials of clothing or in the Christian bible part, Jesus being against divorce and Paul being against people getting married and actually having sex.
This is why I believe that children need to be kept from any religious studies until they're old enough to understand and teens until they're capable of analytical thinking so they can make an 'informed' decision.
To teach only sanitized versions earlier, when children can't hear the rest of the stories due to their 'R' rating is wrong. Religious leaders certainly knew what they were doing when they said to teach a child when they are young and they won't stray afterwards. That's called indoctrination.
I wouldn't call you an athiest in this situations...I would call you an agnostic....that is: you believe in something, just none of the established religions...
I was raised fundementalist Pentecostal. Pretty much turned me OFF religion....I do believe there is more to the world than what we see. I just don't believe that you have to be a member of a certain church or believe a specific dogma.
I am an Agnostic now, rather than an Athiest, only because some optimistic part of me wants to believe that the world is too complex to be completely sure of what is and what isn't.
first off, i am a christian, but i struggle with my faith at times, and i'm not perfect in any way, shape or form. i am only giving this view because it's appropriate for this thread, and it's what i've come to believe. i used to hate god. i was a complete athiest, but the angrier i got, the more i wanted to know how 'god' could allow such shitty things to happen, and that's what got me asking questions. i guess, deep down, i didn't want to 'write god off', but rather seek the idea out even more, and now, i feel like i have a lot more answers.......or at least, answers that work for me.
basically, from a christian stance, we are living in a sinful world, and we are sinful people...some worse than others, but sinners nonetheless. due to this, the world is full of suffering, pain, and death, among other injustices, and this was never god's will.
the bible fills in the rest of the story, and god's plan to help heal the world of this so that manind recieve everything god first intended us to have.
It sounds like you are a very strong person, stronger than most.
Your mission sounds nice, forsythia, much nicer than his, even if you could try hard and not find a nicer person than my Mormon friend. But however nice he was still butting in where he wasn't invited. And again, not anything personal, but I do feel it does a grave disservice and misrepresents a religion if someone only reads to children or teens 'age appropriate' matter from the Bible. You end up with an adult like a friend of mine who told me she named her dog Jericho because that was her 'favorite story' from the Bible.
I looked at her aghast, and asked, "Your favorite story? Do you know what happened to the people of Jericho after the walls came tumbling down?"
She didn't. She went home, read it, came back the next day and said, "OK, I just like the name."
Even the Christmas Story is 'edited' so to speak. People traditionally end the telling of the tale in Luke with the baby being born in the manager. No body keeps reading after that. Where Mary isn't allowed to take her new born baby into god's presence at the Temple for weeks because she is 'unclean', having just given birth and not worthy to be in god's presence because women are basically not as good as men.
IMO, people tend to leave stuff like that out from telling children/teens because it would cause awkward questions they don't want to answer and it might turn them away from Christianity. Yet, this is their religion, too. So in teaching this way, they give children/teens the sanitized, PC correct version, then these children are strongly influenced by their religion, and grow up basically knowing very little about it except the 'good parts'. IMO, that's extremely misleading.
You end up with people like my friend, or cafeteria Christians/bible thumpers picking and choosing the parts they like and ignoring the rest, fundamentalists crowing against homosexuals, not having read the parts where everyone is admonished against eating shellfish or pork or wearing two different materials of clothing or in the Christian bible part, Jesus being against divorce and Paul being against people getting married and actually having sex.
This is why I believe that children need to be kept from any religious studies until they're old enough to understand and teens until they're capable of analytical thinking so they can make an 'informed' decision.
To teach only sanitized versions earlier, when children can't hear the rest of the stories due to their 'R' rating is wrong. Religious leaders certainly knew what they were doing when they said to teach a child when they are young and they won't stray afterwards. That's called indoctrination.
Don't even get me started on Mormonism. Such an interesting set of beliefs, and so far from traditional Christianity. I recommend Jon Krakauer's book Under the Banner of Heaven, a fascinating study of Mormonism including the history of the religion.
Can you imagine what would happen today if some guy turned up claiming to be the son of god, and then a bunch of his followers got together and wrote a book about it? They'd be laughed off the airwaves!
I believe the Bible is like everything else, it has good and bad in it, nothing that is com[pletely good or completely bad can survive, it has to be an alloy.
You wil find a comandment to love your neighbor in one place, and stone him in another. Do with the book what you will, but live by what is in your heart.
Quote from: Shakestheground on Today at 07:43:38 PM
I believe the Bible is like everything else, it has good and bad in it, nothing that is com[pletely good or completely bad can survive, it has to be an alloy.
You wil find a comandment to love your neighbor in one place, and stone him in another. Do with the book what you will, but live by what is in your heart.
O.K I am going to plagiarise now.
What you say, for me makes the most sense of all.I am going to pinch the last sentence. and any time asked re religion in future,that is going to be my stock answer!!!!
Just thought I would warn you in advance of my future theft of your words,ad verbatim.
Anne Rice has long been one of my favorite authors (until recently), and I have her book about Christ, although I haven't read it yet. I believe she was raised a Catholic and was quite religious in her youth. I can imagine that her beliefs provide her comfort during these personal trials. And if belief can comfort people, then great. Like you, I think problems arise with proselytizing, but some religions require that, and those people trying to convert others truly do believe that they are being helpful, so I try to cut them some slack. At least those who try to convert with words and not force.
we are talking about wo different things here. you're saying 'sanitizing' and i'm not.....
if someone is going to teach someone else about a topic, that person needs to start at the beginnning. the basics need to be taught first. you don't start teaching math by teaching algebra. you do it from the level of understanding that they already have, based on experience, age, and maturity. this has nothing to do with sanitizing. i don't leave stuff out, i teach at the level of the individual, and in an appropriate way for their cognitive ability. big difference.
While I agree with you that some things - obviously you can't explain sodomy or incest to a 6 year old and expect them to understand without a lot of questions you'd rather not deal with - need to be withheld from very young children, but there are plenty of other things about religion - good and bad - that can be discussed, even with young children. Even a 6 year old girl can understand if told that she is not as good as the boys because as a female, because Eve ate the apple, she's the source of original sin and why terrible things happen on earth.
That's pretty easy to understand.
I could certainly understand favoritism at that age.
So it makes no sense to keep that negativity from children under the auspices that they're not old enough to understand. They can and do and will understand some things. Older children can certainly understand that if they don't follow the rules of their religion, very bad things will happen to them in the afterlife as punishment - only it's forever. They get disciplined in this life when they don't follow the rules. Again, while negative, this is something easy for them to understand.
I see no reason to sugar-coat a religion. If children/young teens are going to make an 'informed choice' about religion, they need to know as much about it, warts and all, that they can absorb - from the very beginning - not at some vague undetermined date in the future after they've already been indoctrinated with all the 'good' stuff.
As Jess pointed out, withholding such information leads to very boring church services where the sermons repeat the same material over and over and over again ad nauseum because church leaders don't want to discuss the bad parts. So you have generations of people who don't read their bibles, are not encouraged to read their bibles, only know the 'good parts' and have no clue what their religion is telling them but call themselves Christians/whatever and are proud of it.
The church leaders are quick to draw in children, converts, baptize left and right, completely aware that their flock has little idea of what they've signed up for, so they avoid sermons that will cause doubt and controversy.
I find that very disingenuous, but of course, religious leaders are trying to make a living with a religion and have no reason to rock the boat.
[/quote
exactly my point earlier. there is no debate between us here. we both agree that properly informing people is important. that's what i do with my kids...that's what i did with my ministry.
and about the church described in an earlier post, yes it is indeed a diservice to its' congregation to leave things out, good or bad, or shy away from tough, or 'controversial' topics.. i'm thankfull that the churches i've belonged to were not like that.
Quote from: Shakestheground on Today at 07:43:38 PMQuoteI believe the Bible is like everything else, it has good and bad in it, nothing that is com[pletely good or completely bad can survive, it has to be an alloy.
You wil find a comandment to love your neighbor in one place, and stone him in another. Do with the book what you will, but live by what is in your heart.
O.K I am going to plagiarise now.
What you say, for me makes the most sense of all.I am going to pinch the last sentence. and any time asked re religion in future,that is going to be my stock answer!!!!
Just thought I would warn you in advance of my future theft of your words,ad verbatim.
Not to mention that mental institutions are full of people who think they are Jesus ... delusions of grandeur. Certainly in today's jaded society Jesus and the miracles he performed would be viewed with more skepticism than they were in Biblical times.
There is actually something I have trouble understanding about Mormonism in general. Mormons believe that they are born chosen by God, so how can they convert people to Mormonism? Jews believe this also, and hence they do not try to convert people. In fact, there is a complex process one must go through in order to become a Jew.
Hmmm, that is interesting. Wonder why?
We were talking about how trying to convert by words isn't as bad as converting by the sword and it's not, but it can be insidious and lead to problems.
Sometimes people can become fanatical but they don't seem so, and thus, begin to lead people from the rear.
It's almost a passive-aggressive thing. If you read my thread in Current Events about "Oklahoma really sucks this week" you will read about a bill put forth by religious fundamentalists that want children who are raised with fundamentalist beliefs to basically answer questions wrong on a school test - if the questions conflict with their beliefs - and still get graded satisfactorily. They will argue that this is only for the devout, yet what they are doing is trying to force the school system to accept their beliefs over everyone elses as grade-worthy in an accredited school. It's not like they're forcing anyone to do this... but they're trying to make their religion exceptional over everyone else's. >:(
At my job today, a manager walked by, saw a memo I had pinned up and asked to make a copy. This is an internal memo reminding us of who we can - legally - and cannot release information to. The memo is titled "Thou Shalts".
When the manager came back to give me back my copy, he made mention that while training, he actually had an new employee refuse to read the memo because
"It's making fun of the 10 commandments and it's blasphemy!"
As if the King James version of the bible has a copyright on the words 'thou shalt'. ::)
He also made mention of sitting down with a new employee and handing her the training manual for her client and saying "Now I want you to use this as your bible..."
She immediately shook her head, "No sir, uh-uh, no, I can't use that as my bible, I have a bible, it's the Word of God..."
These people are not aggressive, not ugly, they are very nice people. But the limitations they put on themselves require that the rest of us make exceptions for them in public spheres when they are the ones who should be making allowances for the rest of us since they are in the minority.
Leading from behind. It's insidious and dangerous because their actions do appear so innocuous.
I did read this thread, although I didn't comment there. This goes back to the whole separation of church and state concept. The widely accepted theory of evolution is not anti-religion or anti-anything really, just a likely explanation. A minority of religious people are unable to reconcile it with their beliefs and therefore take it as a personal attack. The majority of religious people understand how science and religion can co-exist. IMO, at least in the United States, science belongs in the public schools, and religion should be taught in religious institutions only. As I see it, a certain concept is taught, and that is what is being tested. Not whether that concept is right or wrong, correct or incorrect, but whether the student understood the concept. A different viewpoint should not be an excuse for refusing to learn. As far as I understand it, evolution is taught as the dominant theory, but not as fact, and so I don't understand what the objections are based on. There is room for disagreement without wholesale rejection.
i don't think i understand your quote here. who are "they"? christians? religious people? who?
i just want to make sure, because you said "they are the minority".....and if it is christians you're referring to, well, they are not in any way the minority. in fact, according to the ARIS, 76.5% of americans have self proclaimed themselves as christians, or 151,225,000 people, compared to 13.2%, or 13,116,00 self proclaimed non-religious/secular people in the u.s. so, i'm a little confused. or are you just referring to "them' being a minority only in your work place? do you think minorities need to make allowances for the majority?
When Del said 'they are in the minority' I THINK she meant that those two people she was referring to were in the minority at her job....not that there are not Christians there but that they were the two that made a big deal and insisted on bringing up their religion, using innocent comments to 'testify' in an inappropriate setting.
Spirit came into the world in the form of Twist, some even say his name is contrived to twist the meaning of earlier spiritual pronouncements.
When Del said 'they are in the minority' I THINK she meant that those two people she was referring to were in the minority at her job....not that there are not Christians there but that they were the two that made a big deal and insisted on bringing up their religion, using innocent comments to 'testify' in an inappropriate setting.
Wayne, I believe that alll the women in Jesus' life had some form of the name Mary. Why is that?:o Are you saying he was GAY ?!? ;)