I'm here to learn

[Debater Slayer]

Salaam and welcome to RF!

 

[Spice]

Hi! Welcome to the land of The Misfit Toys of the Gods! LOL Just joking, though by now you have discovered quite a few of us are not of the "traditional." Enjoy!

Namaste

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Ideology, the science of ideas.

That's right up there with:

Doxology, the science of dogma.​

​

It's probably a good thing that I understand neither bumper sticker.

 

[I Am Hugh]

Hi! Welcome to the land of The Misfit Toys of the Gods! LOL Just joking, though by now you have discovered quite a few of us are not of the "traditional." Enjoy!

Namaste

Your collective variance in the adherence as well as deviation from the traditional is precisely what draws me here. And a sense of humor certainly helps. Thanks for the welcome.

 

[I Am Hugh]

That's right up there with:

Doxology, the science of dogma.​

​

It's probably a good thing that I understand neither bumper sticker.

The praise of dogma, like the science of ideas - glory to theology and knowledge of ideas. Sort of superfluous?

 

[dybmh]

I am also interested in learning different perceptions and so developing my own unique perspectives.

Welcome. It's a great pleasure to have you here.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Namaste. Greetings and salutations.

Welcome to the community.

 

[I Am Hugh]

Being anti-religious is not the same as being irreligious. Nor is being an anarchist or a libertarian being apolitical. These are misconceptions people often put forth when they want to pretend to themselves and others that they have no bias because they have taken no position. But of course they have both a position and a bias in favor of it.

Just sayin.

Correct. I'm neither anti-religious, anarchist nor libertarian. I am simply without an organized religion or politics. I don't vote, don't put trust in mankind to solve the problems of mankind. I obey the laws of government unless they present a conflict with God's will. My position, politically, is that of a neutral observer. I have opinions on the subject, but it ends there. Everyone has biases. The important thing is to recognize that and, in as much as possible, keep them in check. I have a practical rather than dogmatic perspective of spirituality, a scientific approach.

 

[I Am Hugh]

I'm not anti-religious, I'm only anti-religious interference in secular life. I am not, for example, at all bothered by the Society of Friends (Quakers) -- I went to a private boarding school run by them -- nor anti-Buddhist or anti-Hindu. They do not attempt to force their beliefs on anyone, and I am quite content to leave them alone, too.

But being a gay person, growing up before many RF members were even born, I can tell you about what Christians, Jews and Muslims had to say to me -- and it wasn't nice. I think, since a lot of Christians and Muslims are still doing it, I have a right to object. No matter your religious beliefs, you do not possess the right to interfere in the lives and beliefs of others. And to suppose that you do is, in my view, a failure of your religious views.

I completely agree. The ideological politicization of religion. along with its syncretistic compromise, has been the downfall of organized religion. Politics, science and sexuality as well. Live and let live has become, increasingly, perhaps, the sin of life. Also, as a gay person myself, I had to make a choice between my sexual desires or God's will. For a long time, I chose the former over the latter, knowing full well and accepting the consequences. Spirituality is a personal responsibility.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Welcome aboard!

 

[PureX]

Correct. I'm neither anti-religious, anarchist nor libertarian. I am simply without an organized religion or politics. I don't vote, don't put trust in mankind to solve the problems of mankind. I obey the laws of government unless they present a conflict with God's will. My position, politically, is that of a neutral observer. I have opinions on the subject, but it ends there. Everyone has biases. The important thing is to recognize that and, in as much as possible, keep them in check. I have a practical rather than dogmatic perspective of spirituality, a scientific approach.

I appreciate that. I tend to be a pragmatist as well.

 

[danieldemol]

Welcome to RF @I Am Hugh
What is the difference between your beliefs and Jehovah's Witnesses if you don't mind me asking?

 

[I Am Hugh]

Welcome to RF @I Am Hugh
What is the difference between your beliefs and Jehovah's Witnesses if you don't mind me asking?

Not at all.

When I was very young (4 or 5) the Jehovah's Witnesses visited us. My dad was atheist, though not the fundamentalist militant type and my mother was irreligious. She believed in God but not religion. She would talk to them, take their literature but not read it even though she was an avid reader. All the time I was growing up periodically they would show up and study their literature with her but she never got too much into it. She would just toss the books in the back of the broom closet under the staircase and the magazines in the trash.

When I was 12 I became an avid reader myself and collected books. I dug up the Bible and books out from the closet thinking if I ran out of stuff to read (Frank Herbert, Douglas Adams, Edgar Rice Burroughs, Jack London, etc.) I would read them. When I moved far away, at 27 I picked up the Bibles (NWT and KJV) and began an intense and independent study and became a believer. Since their literature was at hand I read it, going back to the mid-1950s. I lived out in the middle of nowhere and they never came out that far, but one night I decided to pray to Jehovah that if they had the truth send them to me. The next morning, I was folding laundry and prayed again the same and before I had finished, they rang my doorbell.

I began Bible Study but declined to join.

Now I use the Watchtower Library as a primary source. Though I don't agree with everything my beliefs are very similar.