Do you have a religion? Introduce me to it!

[confused453]

So basically, Geordi La Forge completely understands both. He's both blind AND can see infrared.

What a great example! It appears he could see even more than that.
Geordi La Forge - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[waitasec]

I apologize for it not being so radiant, I tend to ramble a bit. However, since it was one of my second statements, I thought most people with basic reading comprehension would have noticed it.

My apologies.

ooops....


first impression...

0 for 1

 

[Rocky S]

I'm going to quote you without the annoyingly bright red color, if you don't mind. Not because I find the color red to be annoying, but because I find sifting through the post annoying with the 100's of redundant BB code that was poorly and automatically inserted to your post, of no fault of your own. =P

Yeah I thought I would try it. I usually use this color red which is not as bright. lol I usually use a different color to distinguish when I respond, and to wrap in quotes. I am a profoundly horrid speller and do us spell check. Which using a different colour also helps me to spell check, and to distinguish because I have minor dyslexia and the words tend jumble..

I'm sorry which bible? I'm assuming you're talking about the "Holy Book (of Christianity)."

Yes

That book was not written by any god, it was written by humans. If it's the "Word of God" then god would have wrote it "Himself" and it would not be "inspired." Inspiration is different than "direct word." Being inspired to write something is different than being instructed to write something.

Yes and then at the same time a resounding no .Inspiration literary means God Breathed in the context of scripture. Most Christians believe that the writers of both the old and new testaments were inspired By the spirit of God and the Holy Spirit preserved his word in the bible.

Also, that book has been proven to be erroneous in a number of ways, so I'm wondering why you would describe it as infallible.

Explain and give examples and proofs of this fact, please.

And you believe all these things because this book told you they were true?

Yes

This is why I keep asking for a "why" part to my question. You believe in this book and the quotes you've provided... Why?

I hate to sound cliche but it is called faith which is what justifies us before a Holy God. The "Why?" part is a little redundant to ask people of faiths. I don't read the bible to try to prove why, I read the bible to obey it and to believe in it, and to better understand my faith..

Explaining why you believe in the aspects of Christianity and the content written within it's "holy book" would be helpful. Are you in agreement with Vadergirl123, in that you believe that this book is true because you read it in the book?

Yes

My same question I asked her also applies to you as well... Do you often trust everything you read in books and accept them as fact?

Books in general no, the bible yes, the reason; what I gave above...

 

[Leyora]

ooops....

first impression...

0 for 1

Congratulations on a post that contributes nothing to the thread and was already discussed in the first page.

If your first impression of someone is that you're offended when they point out that you can't read... That's kind of sad. Especially when the statement is 100% true.

Can you not handle the truth?

If I misread something and someone told me I had poor reading comprehension, especially at 7 in the morning... I'd apologize for not seeing what I missed the first time and re-read the post... It's set in vitual stone so it's not going anywhere.

I wouldn't be offended at all. Perhaps a bit embarrassed... Offended at the person and think they're giving a terrible impression? Absolutely not though. In fact, I'd be pleased with them that they made me aware of my mistake.

Are you afraid to admit your mistakes and when you're wrong? I'm not.

 

[waitasec]

Congratulations on a post that contributes nothing to the thread and was already discussed in the first page.

If your first impression of someone is that you're offended when they point out that you can't read... That's kind of sad. Especially when the statement is 100% true.

Can you not handle the truth?

If I misread something and someone told me I had poor reading comprehension, especially at 7 in the morning... I'd apologize for not seeing what I missed the first time and re-read the post... It's set in vitual stone so it's not going anywhere.

I wouldn't be offended at all. Perhaps a bit embarrassed... Offended at the person and think they're giving a terrible impression? Absolutely not though. In fact, I'd be pleased with them that they made me aware of my mistake.

Are you afraid to admit your mistakes and when you're wrong? I'm not.

odion was actually trying to help you with your attempt on getting to know why he would believe as he does.

2nd impression
0 for 2.

don't worry...i had a rough start here too

 

[Riverwolf]

I'm sorry, I think I missed something. You DO believe in an entity that could be described as a "god" or "God" -- Yet you haven't found evidence for this. Thus, it's just a hopeful wish? A desire?

So... you believe there is a "god" because you hope there is? Or do you NOT believe in a "god" but hope there is?

I do believe in Gods, because I have a tendency of deification.

Thank you for answering my question by the way! Probably one of the few posts that actually knew outright what their answer was and attempted to explain and why. (Despite your conflict of believing in gods that you claim are unverifiable.)

Not really a conflict. It's more that I just accept Gods as a given without really thinking about it.

However, deification, in my mind, is more of looking at the same thing with a different attitude. An example of a God currently alive on earth is Amma, the Hugging Saint. She is viewed by many of her followers as a Goddess Incarnate. Being thus deified, she is a God to them. However, to someone who does not deify her, she is not a God.

 

[Leyora]

Explain and give examples and proofs of this fact, please.

Sure thing. The book has a lot of errors in it.

Let's first start with the contradictions. Which you can look up either in your own bible, or do your own Google search for tons of amazing websites that organized this data for you... I recommend you do both.

Here's a few examples.

PSA 145:9 The LORD is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works.

JER 13:14 And I will dash them one against another, even the fathers and the sons together, saith the LORD: I will not pity, nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy them.

Manipulating fathers and sons, not pitying someone, not sparing someone, not having mercy on someone, and destroying someone... Is contradictory to "being good to all." Also, how can he have "tender mercies over all his works" while simultaneously "nor (having) mercy."

EXO 15:3 The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name.

ROM 15:33 Now the God of peace be with you all. Amen.

The peaceful God of war. I guess you could assume that God being a "man of war" considers war to be peaceful...

PSA 58:8 As a snail which melteth, let every one of them pass away: like the untimely birth of a woman, that they may not see the sun.

Snails do not melt.

"And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham." (GEN 22:1)

"Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God; for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man." (JAS 1:13)

I'm sorry... Does God tempt people or not?

These are few examples. It's in your own bible. There are plenty of websites that details these... I copied these examples from this website: A List Of Biblical Contradictions

I hate to sound cliche but it is called faith which is what justifies us before a Holy God. The "Why?" part is a little redundant to ask people of faiths.

No it's not. Why do you have "faith" in this bible? What led you to this faith? Did something make sense? Why do you not have "faith" in something else? What, in your mind, makes you have faith in just this particular book and religion and not something else?

I don't read the bible to try to prove why,

Why not?

I read the bible to obey it and to believe in it, and to better understand my faith..

You just contradicted yourself. You don't need to understand something better to have faith in it.

Books in general no, the bible yes, the reason; what I gave above...

Faith is not a valid answer. At least to me, because you didn't specify how you came or have this faith. Did you have the faith first, and then study the bible later? Did you read the bible, then have faith that it was true? Or why have faith in this book and not another? If you "just do have faith" in this particular book why not "just have faith" in another?

Sounds like you had a choice to make. Or was it?

 

[kerravon]

Voices, feelings, or just instant knowledge?

It came in the form of "thoughts". So an instantaneous thought. Just like a thought that might have come from your subconcious. Except it is externally injected. You can feel the thought being shoved in externally. The "thought" "feels" different. It's a bit like trying to explain what chocolate tastes like to someone who has never eaten chocolate though.

Also, do you know where this telepathic communication is coming from? The "entity" from "above"?

I assumed that it was from the computer programmer/God, as the most likely explanation. But technically it could have been from some other source. Also technically this is completely unreproducible and unverifiable, so it can't really be used in scientific analysis, although the 666 and 9/11 "coincidence" are verifiable, so there may be mitigating circumstances.

Also, I left out a bit of the story. I was actually raised a Christian, but dropped that some time after dropping Santa Claus. But the principles espoused in the bible as per modern-day interpretation made it look like Christians would be nicer people than atheists. That really irked me, so I attempted, as an atheist, to be better than any Christian. Also the same thing was being done by communists. I also attempted to be a better communist (as far as "from each according to their ability") - as a capitalist - than any damned communist.

So I said earlier that I determined after a decades-long struggle who my enemy was. And it wasn't "Muslims". When I realised that the term "Muslim" can be as meaningless as the term "Christian", the Christian principle of "love thy enemy" kicked in, and I chose to "become" a Muslim (without changing on iota of anything at all). Well - there was one thing that I was forced to change. I couldn't really continue believing there was no god while calling myself a "Muslim", so I decided to "believe" in God, with strict conditions. The strict condition was that it was a deist God. ie God constructed the universe but in absolutely no way did anything whatsoever to interfere with the universe since then.

So basically the sequence was that first I "believed" in God, and then God (I presume) actually made contact with me, which is certainly not what I expected.

By the way, this is a useful picture to me:

Brain in a vat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'm not saying that that's exactly how this universe is implemented, but it does answer the "problem of evil". ie all the evil things you see happening in the world may not really be happening. You basically can't trust anything at all. The main weapon we have at our disposal is the scientific method, and I believe it is with this that we must strive to defeat God.

What a unique twist on such a close answer...

I don't understand this sentence.

 

[Leyora]

By the way, this is a useful picture to me:

Brain in a vat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I try to avoid the "Brain in a vat" or "The universe probably only exists in my head" scenarios as much as possible.

I don't understand this sentence.

It's meant to be cryptic. I'm like a puzzle that will eventually unfold over time. We'll make it a fun little game. I know I think it's fun. =P

 

[kerravon]

Are you afraid to admit your mistakes and when you're wrong? I'm not.

Trust me on this. You made a mistake claiming that someone had poor comprehension skills (ie implying that they are stupid). It doesn't matter one iota whether you believe it is true, or even if it really is true. It is considered offensive in polite conversation. And your repeated justifications of that claim just add more and more to the offensiveness, instead of letting it slide. The repeated offensiveness may indeed get you banned, and it won't be an abuse of power. Personally if I was in charge of these groups, I wouldn't ban you, but that's because I don't care if people are offensive. Numerous people have told you that you were offensive, and that you shouldn't have said that, but you insist that they are all wrong, and only you are right. If it were me, I would have just apologized and moved on. Actually, if it were me, I would not have accused someone of being stupid unless someone was really and deliberately nasty to me first.

 

[Sir Doom]

I suppose I am a theist as I believe in god(s).

Why do I believe in god(s)? Because I have yet to encounter a better option. When I say "better" I mean "better for me". Most of the time I try to include the rest of the universe if I can help it, but that's really just to enhance the benefit to myself, anyway. So far, the best case scenario includes god(s). I never abandon the best case scenario unless I'm forced to do so by finding a better option.

Have you found a better option? I'm interested in better options.

 

[kerravon]

I try to avoid the "Brain in a vat" or "The universe probably only exists in my head" scenarios as much as possible.

Why? It's a very plausible scenario, especially with the right computer technology which we will probably even invent in this universe after it has aged an extra 0.1% or 0.01% or whatever, and it answers the problem of evil. Good luck finding a better model than that.

It's meant to be cryptic. I'm like a puzzle that will eventually unfold over time. We'll make it a fun little game. I know I think it's fun. =P

I don't think it is fun. I am not interested in "games" with you. Please do not send cryptic messages to me. And I think you're more likely to be banned before "over time" happens.

 

[Leyora]

Trust me on this. You made a mistake claiming that someone had poor comprehension skills (ie implying that they are stupid).

I didn't claim they did, or not in a sense of baseless-ness. It was a correct statement so it wasn't a "mistake." It was a factually CORRECT "claim" that they had poor reading comprehension while reading my post. I didn't say they had bad reading comprehension all the time or in general... Just in that one instance.

Your example (IE) is in error as well because pointing out something that factually happened does not automatically imply that someone is stupid. People make mistakes all the time, that's what makes you human. When you make a mistake do YOU automatically imply that YOU'RE stupid? Because that's what you just said and I'd hate to live in your existence of life if you believe for every mistake you've made... Automatically implies that you're stupid. I feel a little bad for you now.

It doesn't matter one iota whether you believe it is true, or even if it really is true. It is considered offensive in polite conversation.

Pointing out facts is offensive? You must have hated school. Even more so, you must have thought your teachers to be horrible unethical monsters when they graded and corrected the errors in your papers. Again, I must say, living in your existence would be miserable... And I'm sorry you live such a life.

And your repeated justifications of that claim just add more and more to the offensiveness, instead of letting it slide.

I only repeat the claim when someone like you brings it up. I do believe I stated that this was a matter that was resolved on pages 1 and 2 and I in fact told this to "waitasec" when he brought it up again.

Not only did I NOT bring it up again until waitasec did, but I didn't bring it up again until you did in your post I'm replying to right now. So... who's the one not letting it slide now? (Hint: It's not me.)

The repeated offensiveness may indeed get you banned, and it won't be an abuse of power.

Yes it would. If people are offended when they're proven wrong to the point they need to ban that person to make them "feel better" and "be right" (when they're not) then that would be an abuse of the moderation tools. If that person can't have a discussion in a rational manner not only is there a problem, I'd say that person shouldn't be able to moderate posts to begin with.

Like I said, I've had enough of that (and many others as well) when I visited the VFX forums a long time ago. (In case you're unaware, they were the forums run by narcissistic Young Earth-Creationist VenomFangX... Who believe he was right 100% of the time and everyone was wrong. When someone would bring evidence or facts into a conversation and prove him wrong, or he felt offended and embarrassed when he was wrong... He'd immediately ban the person and delete the "offending" post.)

Personally if I was in charge of these groups, I wouldn't ban you, but that's because I don't care if people are offensive. Numerous people have told you that you were offensive, and that you shouldn't have said that, but you insist that they are all wrong, and only you are right.

A billion people could tell me that the ocean is made of Jell-O pudding & Sprite and they'd still be wrong.

Again... I didn't insist they were "wrong" either. I insisted that my statement was correct. Odion did have poor reading comprehension at that moment because a very clear statement was overlooked. Whether another person is offended by this statement neither makes it "wrong" or "right" nor does it make the statement of Odion having poor reading comprehension at that moment false. It just makes that person offended.

Either way, I apologized and if you notice, I haven't spoke of it since someone like you brings it up again.

There's nothing more I can do but that.

If it were me, I would have just apologized and moved on.

Which I did. Looks like you're the one having poor reading comprehension now.

Actually, if it were me, I would not have accused someone of being stupid unless someone was really and deliberately nasty to me first.

1. I never accused anyone of being stupid. You are wrong.
2. Nobody has been nasty to me at all.

A little bit confused and "offended" at the way I word posts... But nasty? Nah. I guarantee you I haven't been "nasty" to anyone else here either. Pointing out the facts is not being mean... Especially in a DEBATE FORUM.

 

[Leyora]

I suppose I am a theist as I believe in god(s).

Why do I believe in god(s)? Because I have yet to encounter a better option.

What do you mean by "better?" Also, why is the option of "The universe exists without god(s) on it's own" not a "better" option? How is it less "better" than another mysterious option that I'm not sure what to use as an example because I don't know what you mean by "better."

When I say "better" I mean "better for me".

I still don't understand what you mean by "better" though, even if it is just for you. Like... what would be "better?" If something "better" came along, would you like that option more?

Most of the time I try to include the rest of the universe if I can help it, but that's really just to enhance the benefit to myself, anyway. So far, the best case scenario includes god(s). I never abandon the best case scenario unless I'm forced to do so by finding a better option.

Why is believing in a god or gods the best case scenario? With some of the gods that exist in most religions... I'd say it's a terrible scenario.

Have you found a better option? I'm interested in better options.

Still don't know what you mean by "better." Also, what are we talking about? How existence... well, exists? Why is it better for you to believe in a god or gods?

Why? It's a very plausible scenario, especially with the right computer technology which we will probably even invent in this universe after it has aged an extra 0.1% or 0.01% or whatever, and it answers the problem of evil. Good luck finding a better model than that.

So you're saying the universe only exists in my brain? That's false, because you believe the universe only exists in your brain? We can't all have the universe only existing in our own brains.

I don't think it is fun. I am not interested in "games" with you. Please do not send cryptic messages to me. And I think you're more likely to be banned before "over time" happens.

Then ignore whatever you think may be cryptic? They're not just for you, don't be so full of yourself. If you're not interested figuring it out or participate in "games" then simply don't. I'm not sure how else you want me to answer your confusion to what I typed in which I described as cryptic.

Being banned because you don't understand something? You have very odd and hostile feeling logic. Especially when I complimented you.

 

[User Name]

My thoughtline branches off of 3 Pagan Pantheons; Celtic, Norse, and I am very picky but believe in all of the Aztec Gods. The Hindu deities are included, but I do not consider them to be a Pagan pantheon.

My philosophy structure is mostly based on Hinduism and Unitarian Universalism, but the rest of it would be based on Paganism.

As for the hereafter, I do believe we should expect the unexpected, even though I personally do not believe anything will come afterwords, otherwise why would the Gods create death, if it were not meant for us to die?

I believe in the original understanding of Karma; do good and get good things, do bad and get bad things.

 

[Leyora]

My thoughtline branches off of 3 Pagan Pantheons; Celtic, Norse, and I am very picky but believe in all of the Aztec Gods. The Hindu deities are included, but I do not consider them to be a Pagan pantheon.

My philosophy structure is mostly based on Hinduism and Unitarian Universalism, but the rest of it would be based on Paganism.

As for the hereafter, I do believe we should expect the unexpected, even though I personally do not believe anything will come afterwords, otherwise why would the Gods create death, if it were not meant for us to die?

I believe in the original understanding of Karma; do good and get good things, do bad and get bad things.

My thread is a two-part one. You forgot to answer why you believe this.

 

[Sir Doom]

What do you mean by "better?" Also, why is the option of "The universe exists without god(s) on it's own" not a "better" option? How is it less "better" than another mysterious option that I'm not sure what to use as an example because I don't know what you mean by "better."

:|

bet·ter 1 (btr)
adj. Comparative of good.
1. Greater in excellence or higher in quality.
2. More useful, suitable, or desirable: found a better way to go; a suit with a better fit than that one.
3. More highly skilled or adept: I am better at math than English.
4. Greater or larger: argued for the better part of an hour.
5. More advantageous or favorable; improved: a better chance of success.
6. Healthier or more fit than before: The patient is better today.

Probably 1,2 and 5 in this context. You should really gain a better grasp of English words if you plan to do a lot of posting.

BTW, the 'mysterious' other option is "A universe containing god(s)." Not that tough. Its the opposite of the option you gave. I would have thought you were a bit more intuitive than this.

I still don't understand what you mean by "better" though, even if it is just for you. Like... what would be "better?" If something "better" came along, would you like that option more?

Yes, naturally. I hold no belief that I won't abandon in the face of a better option. That's the entire point.

Why is believing in a god or gods the best case scenario? With some of the gods that exist in most religions... I'd say it's a terrible scenario.

Well, as soon as I start caring what 'most religions' think about god then maybe I'll burn that bridge. Until then, I'll just happily choose to believe that gods aren't terrible because its better if they aren't terrible. Additionally that they do exist because its better if they do exist. See how this works?

Still don't know what you mean by "better." Also, what are we talking about? How existence... well, exists? Why is it better for you to believe in a god or gods?

It is better for me to believe in god(s) because the universe itself would be better if it contained god(s). I always believe in the better option, remember? I see no benefits to a lack of gods and I see incalculable benefits to their inclusion. Better. Regular old better.

 

[Leyora]

:|Probably 1,2 and 5 in this context. You should really gain a better grasp of English words if you plan to do a lot of posting.

I know what the word better means. I'm asking YOU to tell me what you mean by it. This is like telling me that you're eating, and you have a salad in front of you. You come up to me and say, "Suggest or bring something better for me to eat." -- However, since I have no idea what you consider to be "better" I have no idea what to bring you, or even THINK about what to bring you. Would spaghetti be better? Would a bowl of rocks? What if I think soup would be better, but you're allergic to the soup I bring?

So, being sassy with me and trying to suggest that I don't understand what you're talking about because I don't understand what the definition of the word "better" is, is both a waste of your time and mine. It gets you nowhere.

BTW, the 'mysterious' other option is "A universe containing god(s)." Not that tough. Its the opposite of the option you gave.

We already establish that this is your current option. How can it be your current option AND the unidentified "mysterious" option? You basically just said, "The alternative to a universe containing god(s) is a universe containing god(s)."

I would have thought you were a bit more intuitive than this.

I am, and like I just pointed out, you're the one not being intuitive because the statement I just typed above, which is what YOU said, makes 0 sense.

Yes, naturally. I hold no belief that I won't abandon in the face of a better option. That's the entire point.


Well, as soon as I start caring what 'most religions' think about god then maybe I'll burn that bridge. Until then, I'll just happily choose to believe that gods aren't terrible because its better if they aren't terrible. Additionally that they do exist because its better if they do exist. See how this works?

Ah, so you just make stuff up as you go along? This is essentially what I'm getting from what you believe in.

It is better for me to believe in god(s) because the universe itself would be better if it contained god(s). I always believe in the better option, remember? I see no benefits to a lack of gods and I see incalculable benefits to their inclusion. Better. Regular old better.

So essentially... anything you don't know the answer to you just "believe exists" as you see fit. I see. It would be wonderful if that worked in reality, but it doesn't. (IE. I can't believe that my sandwich is ice cream, therefore it becomes ice cream.)

 

[arthra]

Hello!

For anyone who's theistic, I'd like to hear what you believe in, and why. This meaning that I'm curious about what your theistic views are that you believe, and for what reasons you believe in them. I'd prefer you don't link me a Google or Wikipedia page if you can avoid it. I'd like to get personal accounts.

As I'll most likely have questions and I'm opening this to all religions, I've posted this in the "Debate" forum.

The presence of something that changes the way you think and makes some fundamentalists pretend that some basic things in our reality don't exist when they clearly do intrigues me. I'd like to know how you've come to this process and way of thinking. It must be something life-changing and powerful for you to have such strong feelings, regard, and firmness in what you know. So, I welcome you to share it with me.

Thanks in advance!

I came upon the Baha'i faith after years of searching and investigation... I found it is for me at least the best combination of the spiritual principles of all religions as well as the most advanced social teachings for our time..such as the equality of men and women...the abolition of prejudice...oneness of humanity.. the establishment of a representative world parliament, an international court of arbitration, universal education and eliminating the extremes of wealth and poverty.

I've raised a family based on Baha'i principles for the past forty years and my children have been interested in improving society and raising the human condition... For myself the Faith has provided guidance and achieving goals over my life.

 

[kerravon]

So you're saying the universe only exists in my brain? That's false, because you believe the universe only exists in your brain? We can't all have the universe only existing in our own brains.

From my point of view, I have no idea whether you really exist or not. There's no way for me to tell. From your point of view, you either:

1. Know that you're mere computer code and keeping that to yourself.
2. Don't know whether you're computer code or not, so not keeping anything to yourself.
3. Are, or believe you are, real, and I am just computer code and either I don't know that, or am keeping that to myself.

Then ignore whatever you think may be cryptic?

Do not reply to my messages with cryptic messages. If you want to play childish games, do it with someone else.

They're not just for you, don't be so full of yourself.

Once again, you are being offensive, and run a very good chance of being banned. You will no doubt think that you are a martyr, the one person in the whole world who doesn't think "the ocean is made of Jell-O pudding & Sprite", and everyone else except you is so stupid. But you won't be a martyr. It won't be an abuse of power. It will be because you're childish and offensive and degrade the boards, unlike the vast majority of respectful people who post here.

If you're not interested figuring it out or participate in "games" then simply don't.

Alternatively, you could realize that these boards are for discussion and communication, and not for being offensive and playing games, and you could simply stop doing what you're doing, so convinced that you are right and all the others who have told you you were, and are, being offensive, are wrong (and just as stupid as if they thought the ocean was made of Sprite).

I'm not sure how else you want me to answer your confusion to what I typed in which I described as cryptic.

It's very very simple, so try to get this through your skull. These boards are for communication. If you have something to say, then express it as clearly as possible so that communication is actually possible. Do not deliberately be cryptic so that communication fails. Do not play childish games with people without asking their permission first, as adults rarely enjoy childish games, and most people here are adults.

Being banned because you don't understand something?

No, you will be banned because YOU don't understand that YOU are being offensive and that it isn't a case of everyone else in the world being so stupid, and that they may as well be saying the ocean is made of Sprite when faced with your superior intellect.

You have very odd and hostile feeling logic.

No. You do. Ask any of the intelligent adults posting in this thread. You know, the ones who aren't playing childish games.

Especially when I complimented you.

Sorry, whatever you "complimented" me about pales into insignificance compared to the offensive behaviour you have continuously exhibited in this thread.