Topic: The Topic... (religion) (Read 1345 times)

N00bvin · « **Reply #60 on:** February 07, 2003, 10:09:00 PM »

Religion is not for everyone. For those of you who can imbrace it without "knowing"... I applaud you, since you are doing what is the definition of "faith". For those of you playing on my team... the hedonists

, I applaud you as well.

I DO believe in science... and so far it has done me no wrong. I've yet to see a "proven" miracle, or something to stir my "faith". Maybe if I won the lottery... I would be thanking God, but until that time... I worship only myself. That is not in a vain way, but I believe in myself... there is no higher power that is going to do shit for me. I had nothing in my past to drive me towards this... both my parents were raised in the church systems, but left it up to me. I think most with that background has my same views.

No matter what your beliefs, do not fight each other. No matter what I believe in what is right and wrong... and being good to your fellow man is "right" as long as what they believe in doesn't harm anyone. Don't let your faith be blind however... know why you believe...

The only thing I WILL preach is tolerance.

jasonmvt · « **Reply #61 on:** February 07, 2003, 10:30:00 PM »

QUOTE

In the domain of faith, such relativism as you advocate would make existence impossible. There is no way even strict materialists such as you appear to be can adhere to the standard you are setting for Christians; you are judging them for having a different viewpoint from your own, which is neither provable nor absolute

In fact, the relativism to which I have been referring to is only meant to proclaim this: Believe what you choose to the extent that it governs your own existence solely; do not attempt to force your methods upon others out of a determination that they are in fact the only correct ones.

I do have beliefs regarding creation, death, and afterlife, but they do not demand that others must follow my path to reach enlightenment; merely that they work for me personally as Chrstianity may work for others. I concede that my beliefs are just that, my beliefs and that they are what I choose to follow. They are what I have accepted as truth, and what truth others may find is no more or less significant -regardless of how different they may be from my own.

Lizard_King · « **Reply #62 on:** February 07, 2003, 10:35:00 PM »

QUOTE

Believe what you choose to the extent that it governs your own existence solely; do not attempt to force your methods upon others out of a determination that they are in fact the only correct ones.

While I am far from an advocate of coercing others into agreeing with one's faith (besides which, you can't force people to believe something, only convince them to, since it is ultimately an internal decision), I really don't understand your statement. Do you believe that you exist in a space wholly independent of everyone else, and thus that everyone exists according to how they believe they do?

tupac · « **Reply #63 on:** February 07, 2003, 10:38:00 PM »

jasonmvt · « **Reply #64 on:** February 07, 2003, 10:47:00 PM »

L K,

You are trying to pigeon-hole me into an absolute relativist's corner. I am merely stating that proclaiming others will certainly suffer in afterlife because the religion, or lack of, that they are a part of is of a different nature than one's own is a form of moral bigotry. Accept that what others believe is as significant as what you do; it is simply different, neither correct or INCORRECT.

Lizard_King · « **Reply #65 on:** February 07, 2003, 10:50:00 PM »

QUOTE

Well, i didn't read all the posts except the first page

and

QUOTE

sorry if i rambled on, but u should here me opinions on whether life exists and what life even is, maybe later

Why should anyone "here" your opinions if you do not bother to read ours?

That said, I find the mention of race interesting in your post. Would it make things better if it were a black/asian/indian/arab preacher saying those things?

Also, I think judging the entire Christian faith on the basis of televangelists is a bit weak, and I think such a narrow view is seriously limiting the ability of your criticism to be effective. I am sure that gainpresence is far more able than I to detail why Christianity and liberty are inextricably related; the founding fathers were Christians and Deists, not an atheist among them, and they certainly had their shit together.

Also, why is it that anti-religionists are so persistent in attributing courage to their stance and cowardice to that of their opponents? It seems to me that neither group has the monopoly on bullshit.

jasonmvt · « **Reply #66 on:** February 07, 2003, 10:54:00 PM »

QUOTE

the founding fathers were Christians and Deists, not an atheist among them, and they certainly had their shit together

Yes, and I think James Madison stated quite insightfully, "Who does not see that the same authority which can establish Christianity, in exclusion of all other religions, may establish with the same ease any particular sect of Christians, in exclusion of all other sects?"

Lizard_King · « **Reply #67 on:** February 07, 2003, 10:55:00 PM »

QUOTE (jasonmvt @ Feb 8 2003, 07:47 AM)

You are trying to pigeon-hole me into an absolute relativist's corner.

Um, no I'm not. Actually, I'm asking you what you think that I may better understand it, and thus differentiate it from the moral relativism you claim not be a part of.

And I still think that your clarifications have not succeeded in distancing you from a moral relativist...using terms like "moral bigotry" is a pretty solid indicator that you want to go beyond simple toleration in a negative sense (ie that you don't want to interfere with others) to the positive sense, promotion of the poisonous concept that all ideologies and religions are created equal.

(by the way, I use positive and negative in their legal sense of what they affect, not in the general sense of good and bad...sorry about that but working for lawyers does that to you)

jasonmvt · « **Reply #68 on:** February 07, 2003, 10:59:00 PM »

QUOTE

promotion of the poisonous concept that all ideologies and religions are created equal.

It is only 'poisonous' to those who feel their ideals are threatened by simply the existence of others.

Ace25 · « **Reply #69 on:** February 07, 2003, 11:01:00 PM »

QUOTE

Also, why is it that anti-religionists are so persistent in attributing courage to their stance and cowardice to that of their opponents?

I think that would be a 3rd group of people, because I wouldnt call evolutionist anti-regionists.. I am not against religion, I am against what religion in todays society has become. It started out great, way to give people hope, meaning, life, but has been so twisted, distorted, and abused over time for gain of power, money, land that I feel I couldn't trust the majority of the "Church's employees" if I were to meet one.. guess I can say the same for most gov't officials as well, not picking soles on the church.. I know many are very good upstanding citizens, but its the bad minority I see in the news every day...

QUOTE

It seems to me that neither group has the monopoly on bullshit.

Really? What groups are you referring to here? Anti-religionists vs religionists?

jasonmvt · « **Reply #70 on:** February 07, 2003, 11:01:00 PM »

I know that the quote refers to church & state, but it also applies to one's tolerance and acceptance of other particular beliefs.

Lizard_King · « **Reply #71 on:** February 07, 2003, 11:03:00 PM »

QUOTE (jasonmvt @ Feb 8 2003, 07:59 AM)

It is only 'poisonous' to those who feel their ideals are threatened by simply the existence of others.

Not true at all. It's poisonous to anyone who has ever been affected by the material consequences of flawed ideologies and religions, which are often promulgated by people's refusal to pass judgement on others. While their is certainly a place for reasoned debate on all ideas, it must be constrained by the realization that the moment those ideas are put into action, they have consequences. Just ask the tens of millions dead thanks to Communism.

Lizard_King · « **Reply #72 on:** February 07, 2003, 11:05:00 PM »

QUOTE (jasonmvt @ Feb 8 2003, 08:01 AM)

I know that the quote refers to church & state, but it also applies to one's tolerance and acceptance of other particular beliefs.

I think that is a bit of a stretch, unless you mean it in a strictly legal context, which has little to do with the argument at hand. Madison was precise about his speech, and if he meant to issue a big hug to every worldview other than his own on a personal, moral level I think he would have done so.

jasonmvt · « **Reply #73 on:** February 07, 2003, 11:08:00 PM »

Ah, the argument weakens. Communism did not kill millions, it's corrupt executors are responsible for that. By that rationale Catholicism killed many more. Besides, flaws can be found in any ideology or religion by those who choose to see them. Who's to say that Christianity is not poisonous then?

Ace25 · « **Reply #74 on:** February 07, 2003, 11:10:00 PM »

QUOTE

Just ask the tens of millions dead thanks to Communism

Ummm, I thought it was the fanatics that ran the communist state that killed all the people, but communism as a gov't system, if run like designed, would probably work very well. It does require its people to agree and conform to it, that was the problem, it was forced upon so many unwilling to be part of it... and also the insane leaders like Stalin...

Author Topic: The Topic... (religion) (Read 1345 times)