what do you believe?

[forsythia12]

i thought maybe we could start a thread, (not sure if it's been done yet, and sorry if it has)  about our religious beliefs, or lack there of, and relate it to bbm.  is anyone a christian on the board?  or any other religion?  has bbm changed your mind about anything?  do you struggle with what you believe vs. what you loved about the movie.  i thought this would be interesting since even jack and ennis talked about what religious beliefs they grew up with, and how they felt about it as adults.
what about non-religious people.  have you been turned off because of the church's prejudices or peoples attitudes?
i don't wish to get into heated debates........just wondering what you all think, and maybe we could learn about each other in a peacefull way, or express our beliefs without judgement.
in college, i took relgious studies, and we had open discussions everyday.  we had so many different beleifs in that small room, and with 30 of us, it was the most interesting conversation i've ever been part of.
anyone want to add to this, or pose a question up for discussion?

[mvansand76]

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

[souxi]

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

Exactly right Mel. Surely the best place for Heath to be is here, with his daughter,family and friends who love him? If God had "better plans" for him then I,m afraid God sucks, and I,m catholic by the way. I said this on another thread but I,ll repeat it here. I want to know, WHY God has to take the good ones? Why can,t he take some of the bastards in this world? There,s plenty of them to choose from. It,s just so unfair and it makes me really angry. 

[injest]

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.

[Scott6373]

I can't believe in the dogma and rigidity of organized religion.  Even the so-called liberal religious traditions are stultifying to me.

Very recently my beliefs in "God" and spirituality have been tested, but not in the way that most people might think.  Yes I am questioning the whether or not a spiritual force, a "God" does exist, but it's from the opposite pole that I had been on.  I was convinced that faith in something you may or may not ever see was foolish.  Now I find myself grasping for that spiritual center...perhaps too late, but nevertheless...it's what's happening to me.

[injest]

I don't think it is ever too late to start thinking about where you are and what your purpose is in the greater scheme of things. 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. I have been so adverse to religion for so long...

you remember that scene in Independence Day when the man said "I havent' spoken to God since the day your mother died"?? That is me. Very angry with God.

thinking of Him as the Spirit..seems to be easier for me...

less oppressive than the God of my mother and the Pentecostal religion that seems determined that we should all be in hell...

[Artiste]

I believe in the Infinity!! And humanity in That!

In that, there is no hell, we just make hell; better, to make heaven now which we can: joys and loves for all humans!!

We all know that God exists!!

I do believe in the Infinity, and think that others too, even the Atheists and Agnostics (I do not know if that is the right spelling as I can not find it in the dictionnary); that comforts me!!

It is comforting to know that I am not the only one believing in God!! And maybe having troulbles with that at times, in the ups and downs of life!! Other times are glorious as I see Love and innumerable mysteries more and more!!

Maybe I'm now more open to those mysteries again since the four who beat me up and left me for dead, etc., that did not help; on the other hand, I see that as mysteries and with the Grace and some humans (such as my mother, my brothers and my past gay lover... and others as well, their kindness and help of some too on Bettermost), I have been able to see... that: some mysteries cleared themselves to moi, yes to me and I feel humble and know better my tasks for love on Earth as well as in Heaven now... and that Heaven starts on this Beautiful Earth!!

To me, Heaven starts here on Earth; I have no douibt about that too!! To my own experiences and that of others!!

I seek humilité/ humility??  Is it humbleness, is it ??

I try more and more for ouverture in French / openness, opening, outbreak, overture, width, span, etc., I guess; and to be disponible (to use the French word, I guess that's available in English).

That helps me. Maybe that is why I am attached to Annie's story and the BM movie?? Maybe, that helps someone:
openess and availablity!!

As First Nation, open and available to Mother Earth and Father Spirit!!

At times one is not that open nor available, so one laches-yells-faults temporarily dire labours out - I guess, (like I told off a sister-in-law, and she accepted that even if I was wrong towards her or a bit right?? !!), at least she accepted me there and then with her openess and immediate availabilty even if I was yelling and wrong, and we became good friends since she saw me in dire times and was open to me then and made herself available to hear me, even if I was partly or totally wrong towards her!!

I believe in the Infinity and in Humanity!!

Your comments are great,

keep care!! HUGS!!

[forsythia12]

these replies are great guys.  glad you wrote your opinions.  like i've said in other threads, i'm a christian, and sometimes i question what i believe, other times i'm comfortable with it.  i think that's part of establishing who we are, and what we stand for, when we examine what we think.
watching brokeback made me grow i think.  i mean, i still have my core beliefs, but i know i'm not so black and white, and i'm thankfull for that.  i think watching brokeback made me love people more, and even made me love god more.
as far as heath's death, well, i'm not sure what to say in response.  i do believe in god, heaven, hell, and all that, so all i can do is trust that god knows  what he's doing, even when it doesn't seem right.  the bible says that his thinking is not our thinking, and if it was, he wouldn't be god, so i just trust that there's a purpose in it.  i will say though, heath obvioulsy had some difficulties, and was struggling, whether it be due to sleep deprivation, stress, or depression, he was taking various meds for his condition.  that saddens me because his death was indeed an accident....and it's a shame.  as far as where god was during this?  i don't know.  i do think we have choices, and because of that, there are consequences to our choices.  god doesn't make these choices for us, and thus, we often suffer from our own decisions.
i know this may sound like i'm talking ill of heath, and i don't want to ......i just think he wasn't in a good place, and trying to medicate his afflictions, sadly, made it worse.

i don't know if i blame god.
there are several things on this earth that happen that make me wonder why he would allow them.
and as far as believing in something we may never see, well, i guess that's what faith is.....

i do understand what you're all saying though.  i think it's really neat to get a glimpse into all your thoughts and beliefs on the issue, and i hope you keep writing.

[Wayne]

   Great thread Forsythe!!  I'll catch up with y'all soon ...     

[ifyoucantfixit]

            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.

[David In Indy]

            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.

Hi Janice!!

Can I butt in for a quick minute?

I can relate to what you said. I have also had many times in my life where I've asked God for an increase in Faith. And most of the time it seemed as if nothing happened. In fact I'm going through it right now I think. And once again I've started questioning the existence of God. But I don't consider myself a non believer. I consider it a period of spiritual dryness. Nearly all of the greatest saints in the church also experienced similar periods of spiritual darkness in their lives. There is nothing wrong with it. In fact it is quite human and normal. Everyone goes through it I think.

But if I understand your post correctly, it doesn't sound to me as if you are "non believer". If you were, I don't think you would have asked Brother Patrick to pray for you. Why would you ask him to pray to someone or something you don't believe exists? "Seek and you shall find". Maybe you are still seeking. I think we all continue to seek throughout our lives. We won't have all the answers until we get to Heaven.

I get very angry with God sometimes, because I don't understand why certain things happen. Why did my Mother have to die of Leukemia 4 years ago? Why did God take her during a time I needed her the most? It's impossible for us to understand a conscience and wisdom greater than the Universe. There is "our way" and there is "God's way", and God's way doesn't always make sense to us. But I take comfort in the fact that God knows best. Sometimes I think it's better we don't always get what we ask from God. God gives us what we need, and he does it in his own way, on his own time. What I think is most important is we continue to ask and continue to seek. And if we open our hearts up to receive it, God will fill us with his love and presence in a way perfectly tailored for each of us.

That's what I believe. I've come to a point in my life where I feel God's presence around me all the time. And I'm greatful for it. But I continue to seek, because I don't always understand. He's there, and I feel his companionship and guidance, but this doesn't mean I don't still get confused, and even angry sometimes. But God is patient, and he loves each of us. He is a perfect friend. He knew each of us, and loved each of us before time began. He knows what is best for us, even when we don't. I hope you don't give up on God Janice because he will never give up on you. He understands your anger and your confusion.

Anyhow, that is my 2 cents. Well maybe 4 cents.

Sorry about that.

[ifyoucantfixit]

      David
       Well I never ask anyone to pray for me.  I ask for prayers for others......I think the issue with
my brother is over.  He committed suicide. Without that faith we both needed so desperately for
him to find.  He certainly wont find it now. 
       As to the second thing, it was not for me either.  It was for someone else.  Someone desperately
looking for their own faith now.  I figured if anyone had any influence, and for some outside reason
something is listening to him, then maybe he could help the other person.  It doesnt help me.
I could be helped only if the other person is helped....Because no one is listening to me.  And i am
not asking anymore even.  I send positive energy and thoughts.  To me that is the only thing I
can do honestly.  The rest would only be a lie in my eyes.  I dont lie.

.....thank you for the words tho.  I do
appreciate your feelings and care.    janice                                   

[Shakesthecoffecan]

I was a Christian, and I am still connected with that identity somewhat, but I do not consider myself one.

What I believe in right now is Harmony. This sounds so cheap but I was introduced to the idea in the movie Latter Days. Rebecca Jordan's character says she believes in harmony and I got to thinking about it and it make a lot of sense. When things are in harmony tings are good. When they are out of balance then it is a mess.

My problem with Christianity began as a child, a saved, born again believer. The concept of fearing God rubbed me the wrong way. I was not comfortable with something I was supposed to fear. Now as an adult I understand better how ideas and concepts change, especially thru multiple interpretations.

But Pandora's box was open. I just cannot accept that I, or anyone, is doomed to spend eternity in a lake of fire because we were born and lived past infancy. This concept of original sin is to me a yoke put on humanity by people who want to control it.

Today I had an exchange on my blog with the only other person I have heard of who read Flannery O'Conner's Wise Blood it is quite a tale. Hazel Motes ( a male) is a young boy who goes to the county fair and sees a girly show. When he comes home his Mamma can tell something has a hold of him and she grabs him and in a youthimism amongst my people she "jerks a knot in him" and says: "Don't you know Jesus died for you?" and little Hazel Motes says: "Well I didn't ask him too!"

Damn when I read that something clicked. Here I and a hundred generations had been beholding to the actions of a man who may of very well been schizophrenic, my ancestors standing on one another's shoulders to coax me, come here boy, put on the mantel of this mans suffering.

You have people like Jerry Falwell who would say things like Jesus does not hear the prayers of Jews. Okay, so God did not hear the prayers of Jesus in the Garden the night before his death? When he prayed the lords prayer? He was a Jew. The 12 who succeeded him were Jews, sometime later the Greeks created a name to identify the followers and naming something, honestly is like putting bullets in a gun.

I admire Jesus of Nazareth. He was committed man who spoke common sense to the masses and called them to be better than they were. I personally believe he could have been a homosexual. He never said a word against it. He actualized the archetype that was available to him and went with it. It is the same thing that responds to us when we pray. By praying we are harmonizing with the universe, ourselves, our future. Of course we will see results.

So when asked if I am a Christian I say no, I am a human. That is all anyone needs to be, but that is my opinion and I do not mean to offend anyone with what I believe.

[forsythia12]

wow.  shakestheground.  that was very profound.  as a christian, i'm not sure i agree with everything you say, but i sure as heck understand it. i have several difficulties myself with the faith, but i do continue a relationship with jesus, and although i go through trying times and doubt, i still feel his stength and guidence.
thanks for your input.
i hope you keep writing and stay in touch with me.
hugs
forsythia

[David In Indy]

I was raised Roman Catholic, and both my parents were devout. I attended Catholic grade school, we went to Mass every Sunday and on holy days. I was an altar boy. The whole nine yards. I grew tired of all the judgmental attitude of the Church. I always felt so judged and hated. And not only that, but since I am actively gay, I'm excommunicated anyway, and I can no longer partake of the Eucharist until I go to confession and repent. Big deal.

I don't consider myself a Christian either. At least not in the Catholic sense, or in any sense probably. I don't like the direction Christianity is going. Hating people, judging people and shutting people out is NOT my idea of being a Christian.

Janice I am SO sorry to hear about your brother!!

(((Janice)))

[ifyoucantfixit]

 


          I too believe we are meant to vibrate together.  The more people that are like
minded and caring the better the results.  Just like more energy makes a better light.  That
is what I believe.  Maybe prayer or positive thought is the same thing.  A transfer of positive
energy.  From the person praying, or thinking, good fortune and health for the other.  I dont know.  But that is how i see it all.
           I thank you all for the honest way that you are now telling how you feel..All I know is   like Jackie Bissetts character in Latter Days says.  "if your religion doesnt accept all kinds
of different things..gays, drinking or any other thing that has merit in this life." (paraphrase) then
I am sure not joining that church.  I would rather go to hell with all of you, if that is the real
results,  Than live an eternity with those judgmental, hateful, mean spiteful people that
label all of the people i care about as sinners.  If thats what being a sinner does for you
.  "Bring it on."  We can join hands and walk into that fire pit together...........I just dont
happen to believe there is such a thing.. so i dont fear it.

[forsythia12]

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?

2) is there  right and wrong?  (if so, what determines that?)

3) is there heaven and hell? (some of you have already answered this)

4) if there is a heaven , does there have to be a hell?

5) if there is a god, does there also have to be a devil?

6) can there be more than one god?....(if you believe in god/gods at all)

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"

[David In Indy]

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. 

[forsythia12]

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. 

thanks for your answers david.  very insightfull.  i appreciate that. 
not sure what you mean about the questions being directed elsewhere though. 

[David In Indy]

thanks for your answers david.  very insightfull.  i appreciate that. 
not sure what you mean about the questions being directed elsewhere though. 

I just meant I already believe in God. Maybe these questions were for those folks who question his existence.

[Shakesthecoffecan]

1) is there an absolute truth?
    I think there is until some situation arrises that creates a gray area that the absolute truth does not cover.

2) is there  right and wrong?  (if so, what determines that?)

   Yes, but it can be complicated. You can do something that is wrong, but if it is for a greater good then that can justify it.

3) is there heaven and hell? (some of you have already answered this)

   There is, but I think it is a state of mind, I think if it exists in the hereafter, it can exist here too. Some of us live in a personal hell because we are unable to escape circumstances.

4) if there is a heaven , does there have to be a hell?
   Not necessarily. I tend to see the hereafter as one thing, there is a human need to seperate good and evil, but I think they need each other for context sake.

5) if there is a god, does there also have to be a devil?

   I think it comes from a need people have to put a face on god or the devil, I tend to think of good and evil as concepts but if it helps someone understand by making them into persoanlities I can relate to that.

6) can there be more than one god?....(if you believe in god/gods at all)

   God I hope not. Like Ennis said, "Ones enough".

[Soluki]

1) is there an absolute truth?  No there cannot be.  It is not logical.  One learns the truth through series of events and experiences, and since those, by their nature are fluid, so isn't truth.

2) is there  right and wrong?  (if so, what determines that?)  As we perceive it, yes.  But right or wrong are as saying that soemthing is good or bad.  We are exaggerating the parts of a whole that we perceive as either good or bad, and assigning that quality to the whole.  People, things and events are neither good or bad.  They are empty.  It is our perceptions of parts that cast them as good ro bad, beautiful or ugly, etc.

3) is there heaven and hell? (some of you have already answered this)  I am Buddhist so this question is relative to where one is their cyclic existence

4) if there is a heaven , does there have to be a hell?  Since all things are dependant arisings that consist of many things, yes.  If there is a "heaven", there must be a "hell"

5) if there is a god, does there also have to be a devil?  See above

6) can there be more than one god?....(if you believe in god/gods at all)  The wise man serves many Gods but his soul follows only one.  That is your choice.

[brokeplex]

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"

I was raised Southern Baptist and never have left the church. But, I don't cotton to the interpretation of the scriptures by the Southern Baptist Convention.
I go to church every now and then, when DL drags me there. I like to sing the hymns, but the sermons are a snoozefest. It is funny how we eventually resemble our parents, when I was younger it was my mother who dragged my dad to church Sundays. Now it is DL who occasionally drags me to church.

[ZK]

I was brought up a Roman Catholic and attended a Catholic Primary School.
For a long time now I have not been able to decided where I belong.

I certainly try and live my life to be honest and love thy neighbour. I also believe in religous tolerance, to me whether you are Christian or other religions then we are all on the same path, which path we take may be something different but the fundamental beliefs seem to be same.

I am a fervent believer in "what goes around comes around". I also like to think that I practice what I preach, rather than just preach

There are just some basics beliefs/foundations of Catholicism (at least) that I have trouble coming to terms with. So yes believe in God, but am I a Catholic, no. However when recently one of our family friends died suddenly, I found myself reverting back to the Catholic doctrine/prayers without thinking ..."may perpetual light shine upon him". So may be its a true what they say here, "once a Catholic always a Catholic".

[delalluvia]

Neo-pagan here.

Left the Christian religion behind, oh, about 11 years ago now.  Never been happier.

No, I didn't have a "crisis of faith", no I wasn't "angry at god".  I just sat down one day and decided to find out if I believed because I believed it, or because it was what I was taught and brought up with.

So I started researching my faith.  I decided that it would be best if I went directly to Jesus' own words, after all, everyone else/church leaders, etc., probably put their own spin on things. 

For those of you who believe in signs, when I picked up the Bible to start to read the gospels, so I'd know Jesus' own words, the sentence that leaped out at me was

"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 they were going to hell?  Women were all going to hell for divorcing abusive/bad husbands?

But there it was.  In two books of the gospels.  I then started researching, maybe Jesus didn't really mean divorce.  Maybe the translation was wrong...but nope.  The translation was correct. 

That all by itself started the turn.

The more research I did into Christian religion, the more I realized that the main strength of Christianity - that it was really true and not "made up" like everyone else's religion - was false.  Christianity was even more a make-believe hodge-podge of stories and beliefs cobbled together from the pagan religions and philosophies around at the time.  There was little to no proof that the stories of the bible were any more true than the Odyssey or Illiad.

But I was still a spiritual person, not a big believer in dogma, so if Christianity were no more true than any other religion, then there was no great fear or terror in leaving it for a religion that had no dogma, a religion where your relationship with the gods was personal and had little to do with how you lived your life - morality/ethics having nothing to do with religion.

So I became a neo-pagan.  It had no dogma and in the particular path I follow, the gods are elemental forces.  An idea that appeals to me with my science background.  And I've found a great peace and happiness with it.  Unlike my former Christian belief which bored me to tears and made me greatly unhappy with myself most of the time because I could never live up to perfect standards of behavior and was constantly having to beg forgiveness and grovel and feel bad about myself...gah, I don't know how people stand it.

But being from a science background, I am also greatly atheist/agnostic friendly.  I understand that my faith in the gods is completely irrational, not logical and unprovable.  But since my religion doesn't foist itself on anyone, having to prove itself as 'true' is never an issue.  It's a personal thing.

[forsythia12]

"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?

thank you ZK.  that was very interesting.  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 know i sound preachy, and i don't mean to be.  i'm just responding from a different viewpoint, just to keep this thread going, and to show many sides of our belief system today.
keep posting.  i'd love to hear more of your thoughts.
 

[delalluvia]

1) is there an absolute truth?

To quote Pontius Pilate "What is truth?"  No, there isn't.  Truth is sometimes- oftentimes - a matter of perspective here on earth, so the idea that there is One Absolute Truth or absolute anything for that matter runs against what is the usual case.

2) is there  right and wrong?  (if so, what determines that?)

No, not really.  Right and wrong are pretty much subjective and determined by society and time.

3) is there heaven and hell? (some of you have already answered this)

From my religious path?  No.  There is an afterlife where you have to account for your life, and if you've done bad, then you will be punished according to the degree of your evil-doing - but one is not punished forever.  Everyone else goes to the standard afterlife.  It's a nice place.

4) if there is a heaven , does there have to be a hell?

No.

(5) if there is a god, does there also have to be a devil?

No.  If you're talking one god, then no, he can encompass all - like the Christian god.  He created everything so that means he created evil as well.  He is complete unto himself, so he is good/bad/everything in between.

6) can there be more than one god?....(if you believe in god/gods at all)

Yep.

"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....
 

[/size]

OK, but to play devil's advocate right back at you, what you are saying from the 'other side' is pretty much what Jesus said - that humankind just rationalizes away their sin.

I didn't take the Bible literally when it suggested some impossible things - the Devil flying Jesus up to a mountaintop where he could "see all the kingdoms of the world".  Well, there is no such mountain, so I can take that story allegorically.

But when Jesus said something mundane very clearly why would anyone believe they have to "explain" that as well?  There is no "explaining" what he meant by no divorce.  He meant what he said.

There was abuse in marriages back then as well - abuse and who knows what all.  Do not think for an instant that there wasn't.  Yet Jesus still supported no divorce. 

To say that he meant something other than that is just rationalization.

The Christian Bible is a guideline for living.  It's not impossible to do now.  The Amish come pretty close to doing it.  It's that many modern people who call themselves Christians don't want to lead those kinds of lives, so they rationalize and explain away what they don't want to do.

So back to your "other side" opinion, you're saying Jesus meant "no divorce" but only until he was crucified, then it didn't matter what anyone did so long as they were sorry about it afterwards because he died for our sins.

If that's the case, then there are no guidelines whatsoever.

The people who lived closer to Jesus' time certainly didn't believe that.  They still stoned people, imprisoned people, and exiled them for not hewing to Jesus' teachings - the ones before he was crucified.

I don't believe that the Christian bible is just a book of suggestions for better living that you are free to wander off of whenever it suits you.

You can, of course, but you will pay the price.

[delalluvia]

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.

In the Star Wars films, the Force is "an energy field created by all living things, that surrounds and penetrates living beings and binds the galaxy together."

I can certainly get behind this belief, too. 

[forsythia12]

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 really don't understand why you thought i meant anything otherwise.  i was being quite polite, and i find your reply very rude.  indirect warnings of me 'paying the price' for what i choose to believe?  you've proclaimed yourself as a neo pagan who's left the christian way behind, yet you tell me if i don't live up to biblical standards, i'm going to pay the price?  
this post is supposed to be friendly, not pointing fingers.  i was just trying to explain some passages in the bible about divorce, in response to some interesting things you had to say in your earlier post.  
i'm very offended and upset.  this was not my intention for this thread, and it was meant to be a SAFE place to discuss religious matters, therefore, if this becomes offensive or argumentative, then, i suppose this thread will have to be locked by a moderator.

[delalluvia]

Well, let me start off this way Forsynthia, I apologize if you were offended, that was not my intention at all.  You asked for my opinion and I gave it as matter of fact and as objectively as possible.

The "you" in "You will pay the price" was an editorial 'you'.  It didn't mean you in particular.

It is my belief that that is the way it will go for such people.

I understand completely if others don't believe the same.

But these are my beliefs and that's what you asked for.  I'm sorry if they make you uncomfortable, but there's not much I can do about that.

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.

Certainly, and I did.  See, here is where I and the Christian bible parted ways.  Yes, the Bible says husbands ought to love their wives, but Jesus also said he didn't come to cancel the laws of Moses - meaning rules on adultery.  So he says both.  Which one did he mean?  According to my bible, he's saying this to a crowd and his disciples.  What do you think he meant?  Pretty much what he said.

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.

True, but Matthew 5:16 and 1 Peter 2:12 state that good works also glorify god, so there's that contradiction.

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.

See above answer.

   

[forsythia12]

well, apology accepted.  i am sorry too, for taking it personally.  no, beliefs don't offend me, i thought you were attacking what i believed.  i'm not one for debates, i intended this thread to be used as a learning tool.
yes, you're right,....good works do glorify god, but good works cannot SAVE us.
it says "who among you is good?  no one...for we all fall short of the glory of god" therefore, we need jesus to cleanse our sins.  we are not to give up, of course, but again, our salvation is not based on our merrit alone.

no, jesus didn't mean to have god's law abolished, that's not what i meant.  i meant that because of jesus, we can be considered sinless.
in romans, paul asks "so than shall we give up?  no, we need to work out our salvation with fear and trembling.  run the race.  fight the good fight"  and he's referring to our deeds; however, again, he points out that this is to glorify god, not to buy our own salvation.

as far as modern christians taking things and making it their own, so it suits their needs, well yes, i suppose that's true.  i think there are many many flaws with the christian faith.  they did horrible things in the past, and still do today.  i think there's fault in many religions.  i guess that's why i believe that we have sin in our lives.
there will be sin and hypocrisy in the church.....and sadly, many of us cannot practice what we preach.  i know i often can't, and for me, i know i need god to help me live the way he inteded me to, 'cause i personally cannot do it alone.  i cave into my sin daily, but i turn to him over and over again, hoping to have a more god honoring day than i did the day before.

[injest]

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.

[Artiste]

There has to be a God!!

No persons can make all the snowflakes, each is different??

How can a person or persons  make Earth, Mars, the Moon, etc.??

There must be an Infinity, or something like that??

Hugs!!

[forsythia12]

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.
i hope this thread will keep going though 'cause i think it's neat to talk about what people believe or don't believe in.
thanks for your post

[brokeplex]

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. 

[Artiste]

I am surprised no one describes some islamics as some muslims and so other so-called religions and non-religions: who murder gays, and enslave women as pagans, to-day!!

American First Nations are not pagans!! Some of those who stole their lands and lives, plus livelyhood were and are!!

Many other persons or so-called civilized are pagans as thugs, thiefs and murderers... in my book!

What are your opinions??

I think that there is a God and therefore, I respect life and humans!!
Hugs!!

[delalluvia]

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.

[brokeplex]

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, I still consider myself a Baptist but I am happy to ignore interpretations by the SB Conventions which I find intolerable. 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.

[delalluvia]

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,

It is reasonable, many many people do it.  But not me.  If you read my description to Forsynthia about my Christian beliefs, I couldn't make Christianity work in my life.  Religio Romana reconstructionism works very very well for me.  I still have a little Wiccan in me because of tradition mostly.  The women of my family were either herbalists or curanderas.

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.

No. I couldn't make it work.  In order for me to reconcile Christianity to myself, I basically had to rewrite the entire religion.  One ex-boyfriend used to laugh and call it "Delalluvianity".  Basic beliefs I couldn't buy, the divorce thing, the 'original sin' thing, the illogic of "the only way to my father is through me" thing, the women are subservient thing, the exclusionary thing, and all the mind control things -  I cannot even think nasty thoughts about a handsome guy or have any doubts about Jesus, etc. or else I'm courting damnation - I didn't like some of the things Jesus/Paul/whoever said.  It was many things.

[brokeplex]

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. Now, I take this belief a bit further along than most Baptists would.  DL who was also raised SB sometimes laughs at my interpretations, but it works for me.

[forsythia12]

good to hear from you brokeplex!  keep posting.

[delalluvia]

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.

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.   

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.

How very pagan. 

[forsythia12]

yes, you are very right to say that the meaning of christianity, the definition, and all that it involves has changed drastically over time, as with many many new churches under the 'christian' umbrella.  you make a very good poing delalluvia.
thank you for that.

[brokeplex]

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.

[Artiste]

I saw many different parts of Italy last night on TV... on a French channel in France, and was surprised to find out about religion(s) and art there!! But in all the towns or cities, in ONLY one  NUDE art was allowed - otherwise, the popes, etc., killed you?? !!

Religious believes did vary very much in Italy and the rest of Europe.

It was I think in only one city in Italy where you could draw, paint, or sculpt a nude body, without being murdered for it!! That became the Renaissance!

One man (was it the King in Spain? living in Italy) built a mile long corridor so he could see not only nudes sculptures, but other such art, walking from one end of it to the other, so he would NOT be killed!!

Maybe one can build that now, since many countries or religions do not allow an artist to create nude art to-day? Or will it come to that (even in the USA, England, France, etc., ), since a parent can NOT even take photos of his/her nude child (infant) anymore without police bringing you to court for that in Canada??

To me, every human is nude!! So, why are certain religions and other institutions or peoples or persons, against that??

Hugs!!

[delalluvia]

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. 

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.

[brokeplex]

Yep. 

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?

[delalluvia]

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.

Well, you can pretty much tick them all off.  Almost all of them were pagan holidays.  I also like to count off the so-called saints who were really gods/goddesses or other demigods that the Christians renamed and the famous churches that were built over pagan holy sites.  When I go to Rome next year, I plan on doing a tour of what some place used to be rather than what it is now.  Do you know that some people still leave bouquets of flowers where Julius Caesar was murdered?.  And I was really thrilled to read that when the last solar eclipse occurred over eastern Europe last year, people were rushing to greet it carrying tripods - an ancient gift to Apollo the sun god.  Some habits die hard. 

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?

I wanted to be at Stonehenge during the fall equinox, but I missed it by a few days.  The Brits celebrate the summer equinox there with a Druid ceremony and a lot of partying.  However, everything I read is that the winter equinox is what was most important at Stonehenge.  Obviously if you're living off what you caught and grew the summer before, you're pretty anxious for the winter to end so you can get back to eating well.

No, standing stone circles in the British isles were built by pre-historic peoples - about 4-5000 years ago.  The Druids came later.  They have recently claimed it for their ancient ancestors, but no, it wasn't a Druid construct.  The Druids were a variant of animists, but not a lot is known about them since the Romans were so good at wiping out those troublemakers 

[brokeplex]

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.

[delalluvia]

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.

Alas, I wanted to be, but I couldn't conquer my disinterest in teaching that goes hand in hand with any scholarly career.  So instead I focused on my science background, ran out of money and now I'm doing something not related to anything I'm interested in or studied for.    I've always been interested in Greek/Roman ancient history, and I read a lot while I was researching my religion and got extremely interested in comparative religions.  And to this day, I'm still reading up on it.  I just this week picked up 3 books;  on Caananites, Minoan civilization and a revisionist look at Itha-Baal, queen of Israel, aka Jezebel.

A friend of a friend also majored in the classics.  Last I heard of him he was a high muckety muck at the I.R.S.

[brokeplex]

funny how our lives and career take unexpected paths.

I wanted a career teaching Geography when I was younger. I ended up first working for an oil company as a Land Manager, then later ran political campaigns, and ended my working years again working as a Land Manager for my family's business interests.

my wise old uncle told my way back when I was in high school that careers follow unexpected paths, he was sure right. 

[Artiste]

Interesting all of you !!

I like History and Geography too!! Wonder if these two mix, as to make us think about Infinity??

Hugs!! Note: I heard yesterday on the news that since flour is becoming rare, that a country is now using the military to protect the floor mills; and so, do you remember the film where in Egypt was it, that was a similar scene? Did you see my new thread on that yesterday?? History repeats itself - Geography too??

[Monika]

I´m not religious at all. But I do believe in a lot of things. Myself, my parets, my friends, goodness, honesty, fun, freedom, love and humor. I have never felt the need to believe in a higher power, I rather depend on myself and real people around me. To me religions is like a spirital charter package. You get a book with rules and the answers to difficult questions handed to you. I rather use my own head to figure things out, I believe that the best thing the human race got going for it is our intellect, why not use it?

the meaning of life for me is to have fun and enjoy my time here.  Cause isnt that all we can ever ask for?


Monika

[Artiste]

Thanks buffymon!

Good idea to have respect and be respected... and have fun while on Earth as Heaven!!

Have fun Monika!

Hugs!

[Wayne]

A scientific Twist on the meaning of the phrase "Tree of Life"   

http://www.livescience.com/blogs/2008/03/06/tree-full-of-animals/

I always wonder if there is some completely different meaning to words - well, everywhere - but especially in the Bible.  Maybe they had some deeper understanding that became trivialized when the real meaning was forgotten.

Maybe they were talking about the scientific tree of life ... evolution.     

[BlissC]

Interesting thread. I usually tend to shy away from religious discussions online - mainly because places I've posted before that type of thread has descended into total chaos, with flame rows erupting and lots of general all round nastiness, though those other places haven't had the same sort of community feel as here.

I've always been I guess what you'd call agnostic. I've never had much time for organised religion, and I disagree with  various bits of the Bible, on homosexuality, divorce etc. etc. I used to have a feeling though that there was "something" out there though.

About four years ago after my aunty died, for a long time after I felt as though she was still around somewhere, and I did start to wonder if there was something out there. Last summer though my grandma died. She was diagnosed with advanced bowel cancer, and after an emergency operation and a few weeks in hospital, she came to live with us as there was no way she could manage on her own. Her doctors had warned us there was nothing more they could do, and that she had probably only about 6 months at the outside.

For four months she lived with us, and I watched her deteriorate every day. And at the end in her last couple of days I saw close-up everything she went through. For years she'd been a church-goer, and devout believer, but after seeing what I saw I could not comprehend that if there was a God he would be so cruel to let her endure what she went through. The night she died, a quote came back to me, it's a line from the movie, "And the band played on"...

A cruel god ain't no god at all.

On all the forums I posted on regularly at the time, I changed my signature to that as a kind of tribute to her, and it's stayed that way since then, and I no longer believe there's anything out there at all.

[forsythia12]

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.

[delalluvia]

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.

[forsythia12]

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.

[delalluvia]

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. 

[forsythia12]

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.

[delalluvia]

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.

[forsythia12]

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.

[delalluvia]

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.

[injest]

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.

or to teach sanitized versions period. Everyone knows how God supposedly destroyed Sodom and Gommorrah because of homosexuality...but how many preachers talk about the next few chapters?? the ones where Lot humped both his daughters with no penalty??

[optom3]

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 was raised really strict Catholic,turned me right off.Both me and brother went to catholic schools and without doubt some of the cruelest people I have met were the nuns at my school and the brothers at his school.As for church,it was so hypocritical,1.5 hours of in those days latin mass,followed bt over to the pub.It bred in me terrible fears,I remmeber the nuns and priests saying you must never chew the host wafer it has to dissolve on your tongue.I was 15 before I dared chew it.Also used to have nightmares about hell and even worse purgatory,sort of no mans land.
It also seemed pretty handy that you could behave as you wanted all week go say I am really sorry on Saturday,do your penance then start again.I know the theory is you are meant to be really sorry,but I question how many were.
I watched women worn down by year after year of childbirth as no form of contraception is allowed.Not to mention they could not afford all the kids in the 1st place.

Have gone back to a few churches since,as recently as last week,but still remain skeptical.I huess I believe ib a sort of Karma in that what goes round comes round.I have seen many examples of this in my life.
To this day though I cannot shake off the deep rooted Catholic guilt.
So I guess I am an agnostic untill someone shows me or I find out for myself,otherwise.
As for my kids,I just try to teach them right from wrong,period.I struggle a bit when they ask me about death,and this is where I am hypocritical,because then I do bring in religion and tell them they will go to heaven.But am suitably vague about it.Just tell them that the essence of their spirit will live on in peoples hearts and minds .so gone but not forgotten.

[BlissC]

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.

I guess I used to describe myself as agnostic too - like you Susie, there was an optimist in me that wanted to believe there was maybe something more. With everything that's happened these past five years though I find it difficult to have faith in anything – my mum was diagnosed with breast cancer, my aunty died of osophoegeal cancer, my grandma died of bowel cancer, two close friends of mine have died, myself, I've been diagnosed with two serious medical conditions, which while neither are immediately life-threatening have been life changing for me and have meant I've lost a lot of independence, and then only a few months ago my step-grandma was diagnosed with lung cancer.

My mum, who despite everything had managed to retain her belief, said a couple of months ago that she remembered from when she was young her parish priest telling her “God only sends you what he knows what you can deal with”, and then added, well I've had enough now! I know what she means. Four times in the last five years I've had brain surgery, and after all that I've gone back to work and I'm trying to get on with my life. It isn't easy with the amount of medication it takes to get me through the day and having lost most of my peripheral vision, and having other problems due to my health problem and as a result of the surgery I've had. They say what doesn't kill you makes you stringer, and yeah, over the past couple of years in particular I've come to realise that I've got two choices – either give in and let life pass me by, or fight it and do whatever I can when I can because as far as I can see, life's a one shot thing, so I'm going to get on with living it. Sorry, this probably isn;t the most appropriate thread for it, but after all that's happened, when today my doctor tells me he wants me to have more scans and tests because he now suspects I may have got another neurological condition as well, I think I have the right to feel a little pissed with God if he's out there somewhere, and if he wants to convince me he is out there and there's some master plan to all this, he's gonna have to do a hell of a lot to convince me.

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.

I respect your view completely Forsythia – we're all entitled to our views, and I do appreciate that everyone's opinion is as valid as the next person's. My first problem with religion though is this whole idea of sin and sinners. Who gets to decide what's a sin and who are sinners? (more on that in a moment)  I'm asking not as a challenge (not sure if that's the right word), and I don't mean to cause offence, but because this genuinely interests me. Take a nine month old baby who's dying of leukaemia – is the baby a sinner? Is it a case of the sins of the parents being visited on the child? How does a child dying help the grand scheme of things? Where's the connection between sin and this suffering and pain?

The second thing I can't get past is the “rules and regulations” of the Bible etc. Take BBM for example. We're all here because of BBM, and we all accept Jack and Ennis's relationship. We accept that their relationship did hurt others – Alma and Lureen – and we accept that as people they had their faults, and made mistakes, but we accept their relationship – presumably because they love each other. According to the bible though homosexuality's a sin – yet we accept Jack and Ennis's relationship, and though we acknowledge the pain they caused others, we don't condemn them because of it.

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.

And this is the final bit I have a problem with. The Bible wasn't written by God – it was written by a bunch of people who claimed that they knew God's will. 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'm sorry that sounds a bit flippant, but I'm just trying to put my skepticism about it all into words.

The Bible was written by a bunch of ordinary people, who for whatever reason knew/believed they knew what God's will was. It wasn't even all written at the same time, and it wasn't put together in the form we know as “the Bible” until some considerable time after it was written. Anything that was written was subject to their own human interpretations, as well as their own beliefs and hang-ups, along with views on what was and wasn't acceptable according to the cultural beliefs at the time.

I guess at the heart of it, I have a scientific background, and these days I'm a geek and into programming and code and stuff, and things either are or they're not. I've always tended to look for the logic in things, and I guess that's where the problem comes with me and religion, because there isn't any black and white in religion.

As I said, I don't mean to be confrontational, or to cause offence, but this interests me, I guess because it's not something black and white that I can relate to.   

[BlissC]

I can understand that. I guess it's like the laws of physics - energy can't be destroyed, only converted into a different type of energy.

It sounds like you are a very strong person, stronger than most.

Nah, just too stubborn to let all this shit and this damned body of mine get the better of me. If it wants a fight, it's got one! 

Slightly OT, but one of my favourite bands is Faithless. They're a dance band, but their lyrics cover all sorts of things from peace, poverty, and racism, and much much more. Maxi Jazz, their lead man's a Buddhist, and his beliefs come across in, and influence their lyrics a hell of a lot (my signature's a quote from their lyrics), and they really believe in what they sing about.

[forsythia12]

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.

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.

as far as the jericho thing.....yes.    many people are misinformed, and that's one of the reasons i love to teach those who wish to know about the bible. we obviosly have the same concern that those who wish to know about things,  should be thoroughly informed.

[forsythia12]

as i read some of these posts, all i can say is that for me, i believe i have a personal relationship with jesus christ, he is my savior, and i know with my heart , mind, and soul that there is a god.  i beleive the bible to be true, and i base the way i live according to it's precepts.
that is my personal opinion.
i don't want to engage in biblical debates.  this won't do any good, because it comes down to whether you believe the bible to be true or not, or from god or not.  if not, that is completely fine, but discussing verses is pointless.  i have no problem explaining what i believe, or talking about my personal journey, but i really don't want this to become a scripture analysis thread. a lot of times when this is done, verses are taken out of context, misused, and misunderstood, so it's a heavy topic.  there has been some posts that i'd like to address where scripture was quoted; however, i don't think bantering back and forth is a good idea for this thread, as others may not join in thinking this is a christian based bible study.  i don't want people to be offended by anything.
i read everyone's posts, and i want to thank everyone for writing in.  your views are very interesting, and they are welcomed here.  i'd like everyone to keep posting, and discussing , as i will be doing the same, and if anyone would like to discuss specific verses, ideas, or anything else directly related to the bible, send me a PM, and i'd be happy to have that discussion.

[Shakesthecoffecan]

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.

[delalluvia]

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.

It is fascinating.  A modern day mystery religion - in the vein of the Eleusian Mysteries.

Sadly though, what Bliss said down below is incorrect.  The quote from her excellent post is:

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!

No, they wouldn't be laughed off the airwaves or run out of town on a rail.  Why did David Koresh have followers?  He said he was the son of god, the messiah.  He wasn't laughed out of Waco, his followers joined him in the burning pyre as martyrs.  Men, women and children.

And speaking of believing in things and people that can easily be dismissed and debunked, check this out

http://secweb.infidels.org/?kiosk=articles&id=367

and read it when you have a moment.  It's about the Mormon religion.  For those of you who are Mormons or sympathetic, beware, the author is not particularly religious and at times is irreverent toward the LDS

[optom3]

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.

[delalluvia]

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.

Reminds me of the Wiccan Rede:

"..an ye harm none, do what thou wilt..." 

[delalluvia]

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.

I believe you are right, Anne Rice was raised Catholic, hence the heavy Catholic influence of her early Vampire books.  The story of Louis and Claudia was Anne bringing her dead child back to life - resurrection in the only way she could.

I know proselytizing is a requirement of some religions but IMO that's one reason it's bad.  Despite the best intentions of people, they are literally ordered by their faith to butt into other people's lives and mind other people's business.

If a Mormon wants to offer people another way of life, then they should build their church in Tegulcigapas or wherever, have some Mormon families live there and show the people around them a different way of life by example.  Let the people most interested come to them, not send suburban Mormon kids there to teach and go door to door, convert a few, then go back home.

And yes, while I agree that voluntary conversion is much better than conversion by the sword as back in the old days and in some Islamic countries today, attempted conversion by words can be just as bad.  Words can be insidious and just as dangerous.

[delalluvia]

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.

[forsythia12]

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.

[BlissC]

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.

I like that too - I think I might have to "borrow" that one as well.  I think you've hit the nail on the head there Optom - it's what's in your heart that matters. Belief is a very personal thing, and I guess that even if you share the same religion with someone else, within that the precise nature of what you believe is going to be influenced by all sorts of things, whether that's what you've been "taught", your experiences, or your own interpretation of the Bible or the holy book of whichever your religion is.

[Shakesthecoffecan]

Wayne and myself have spoke of starting a thread about comparing the story Brokeback Mountain to the gospels, perhaps it is time to do that. I think it would be quite enlightening.

Lets us fast forward a bit to the year 2708. We are part of a team examining the scriptures of the Brokism religion. It is a mainstream religion, practiced primarily by homosexuals who hold that the spirit must reveal itself to ever fractured segment of society to ensure salvation to all possible.

In this religion the savior is one Jack Twist. Although the only documentation of this man seems to be in a first hand account written by a woman who knew him name Proulx. She tells us of the dark days in which our people had to live in the closet and to act on ones impulses would being danger. 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. He advocated leaving the closet, at any cost. He advocated a sweet life for people who would do this. He was a prophet. Prophets are almost always rejected by their disciples, and almost always end up dead. This Twist did in fact die, and in doing so he freed his people from the closet.

Together with this account are the gnostic accounts of those who did not know him but would have liked too, or even claimed to. Hundreds upon hundreds of accounts of miracles he performed, including returning from the dead to his beloved disciple. There is also the books of acts. Long, rambling accounts of the early church and its pilgrims. There was Celeste of the clear mind, The Front Ranger who felt the presence of the spirit, The Wulf, crying out in a desert of retail for deliverance. The various cults that arose in those early days like the cult of the washrag and the knights of Alberta who sought out the holy sites and relics.

Our research seems to indicate these Scriptures were edited and defined from a much larger pool by one Billy Joe Agnew, a hermit who resided at the Shady Rest Mobile Home Park in Valley, Alabama, around 675 years ago.

That is how these things start. My example is a sophomoric one, but my point is we commit to things we have to work at understanding, when it should be the other way round.

[delalluvia]

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.

They were viewed with skepticism back then too.  Jesus wasn't the only one around being touted as a miracle worker or savior.  They were apparently a dime a dozen.  The reason you don't read all the critical accounts of him is that the early Christian leaders made sure those works were burned.  Indeed, one writer wrote something like a 10 volume set of books cutting down Christianity left and right back in the 4th century.  We only have like 30 pages of his criticism surviving and that's because a Christian apologist quoted him in his book.

[delalluvia]

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.

[forsythia12]

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 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? 

[forsythia12]

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.

yep.  i agree. and i agree that  school is not the place to blanket-teach religion, unless they had it in some sort of extra-curricular course on religious studies, in which students can choose to take the class. 

[injest]

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.

[delalluvia]

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.

What Jess said.

I know a great many religious people.  Very few of them are like these two that I brought up.  Not even my very devout Mormon friend is like this.  Offer him something with caffeine - against his religion - and HE'll say - "No thanks."  Period.

I was actually talking to a customer a few days ago and she used her desperate financial situation to testify how god was her strength during this difficult time and she knew with his help she could make it through.

I found this funny the customer was so optimistic and positive and I made mention to my co-workers of the call.  One of my co-workers instantly launched into a "yes, um hum, yes, bring Him into your life.  It's true, it's true."

I could have made a comment how god might have helped this customer better by preventing her from getting into a financial mess rather than just helping her out of it, but didn't.  I chose to ignore my testifying co-worker.

[Wayne]

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.

 

J A C K       T W I S T

J          C            I S T

J E S U S   C H R I S T

[forsythia12]

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.

yes, okay.  i see that.  thank you injest.

[Shakesthecoffecan]

Wayne, I believe that alll the women in Jesus' life had some form of the name Mary. Why is that?

[Monika]

I´m not a religious person at all. Never have been, and I must say it feels very liberating. Here in Sweden not too many people are religious nowaday sso religion is not a topic often discussed here. It´s almost an non-issue here.

I believe in many things though. I believe in common sense, love, progress, equality, science, open-mindness, and I believe the meaning of life is to enjoy it.

I think that when we die, that´s it. But I find that thought almost comforting and it makes me take care of this life even more.

so I´m a happy non-believer

[Wayne]

Wayne, I believe that alll the women in Jesus' life had some form of the name Mary. Why is that?

   Are you saying he was GAY ?!?   

[Aloysius J. Gleek]

What a nice, sane young man.



 Me Vs. Christianity
[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktrMHTvCKXo&feature=related[/youtube]

[Artiste]

I like this:


      J A C K       T W I S T

J          C            I S T

J E S U S   C H R I S T