Poll: Give up your religion to save a stranger

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

What exactly is evil? And what is evil when it comes to saving one's life? Have you ever had to face adversity in your life where you had to break the law in order to survive? I have. I have been homeless. I had to eat out of dumpsters in order to survive. And while it was not legal to do same, I would do it again in a heart beat. Do you understand the difference between wanting to survive and being asked to give up one's life for another because they are vastly different.

I would think saving the life of someone spraying bullets into a crowd is evil. It's about the only scenario I can come up with, though. I'm more of the "needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few" thing, myself.

...

Actually, I just thought of an example of sacrificing your religion to save a life. Let's say you had a "cigarette religion". I have asthma and just being within 10 feet of you might kill me. In order to save me, would you give up smoking?



Or, let's say that you feel everything can be saved by giving out bibles. You are a missionary and go to a village in the middle of nowhere and they are all starving to death. You hand out free bibles because you think that's what Jesus would want you to do to get to Heaven. Meanwhile, everyone dies because bibles are inedible. All you had to do is actually feed people food, and leave the bibles for later. However, that would be giving up your religion (assuming your religion loves cherry picking to find the most shallow expressions of religiousity), so you failed to do the right thing.

 

[Draka]

That is what I am saying: How can you tell the difference between your life and the belief you practice?

They are interconnected. That is my belief.

However, many people have left their religion for whatever reason. If it were a part of them they would not be able to leave it no more than I can say my mother is not my mother. However, when we grow older, our preferences (likes and dislikes) changes over time. What music I loved before may not be the music I love now. So, that is not a part of me. What is a part of me cannot change; they, mature. It's a constant flow. Nothing is static. Beliefs are no different.

If I were Christian and someone said "turn away from god or give me your child", coming from your post, you'd probably tell that person "that's impossible".

I'd think, of course I can. That does not mean I don't believe god exist. It means I made a choice to turn away from god (which people do all the time) to save my child. If I can do that, why cant others?

I'm not asking people to disbelief. I'm asking people to turn away. The former is not a choice for some people and it is for others. The latter is a choice unless someone is forced.

You are making some assumption of a religious practice then. Not religion itself. Either that or you honestly think one can physically "turn their back" on a deity. You are asking if people would give up a religious practice as they cannot give up a religion like that. A religion is merely a set of beliefs concerning our spiritual lives, often including deity beliefs and ritualistic practices. The only thing one may, by choice, give up are practices.

Abandoned, reject, turn from are not shutting of your belief it is walking away from it. I'm not asking people to not believe in god (for example). I'm asking if they can turn away from their belief (give it up) to save another human being.

Example: The Dharma is a part of me. I cant change that. However, my choice to follow the Dharma is a choice. If someone said "stop believing in the Dharma or your child gets it" I cannot. If someone says "give up your faith in the Dharma and your child gets it" I can. People change beliefs all the time. Why not to save another human being?

I also don't believe people who change beliefs means their foundation is crackled. They are maturing in their real self. Who they are. Whether they are atheist or Hindu, it does not matter. Buddha-nature/true self has no labels. You can't change from one thing to another. There is no religion.

In my OP, I am asking people to abandon their religion not their belief to save another. People are mixing up the two.

No, you are separating that which cannot be separated. Religion IS your set of beliefs. Your whole way of looking at the world. How you interpret reality itself. You cannot "abandon" that on command. You may abandon going to church or doing certain rituals, but you cannot turn off your way of understanding the world and THAT is what religion is.

Guys: I am not asking you to not believe what you believe. That's impossible. I'm asking you will you turn away from your belief/religion/practice to save another human being. People turn away from religions all the time. There is nothing wrong with their line of thinking; if anything, they are maturing in their true-self. If we don't realize that we change when we grow older and our beliefs are not static as what we believe as a teen can change as an elder, then we are stuck in a box.

I am asking if you can step out of that box in order to save another human being.

People don't decide one day to just "turn away" from their religion, their worldview. It is a gradual thing. A changing of experiences. Being given reason to doubt things you didn't doubt before. learning about something new that changes your way of looking at something. It is not up and chosen, it is a process.

@Draka

Best and short way I can put. Let's use music again.

I am asking, can you turn the music off to save another human being?

not

Can you just stop loving music to save another human being?

Give up music, abandon, turn it off, turn away, etc are actions that we choose to do. People do it all the time. It is not because of a broken foundation.

Why are people mixing up the two?

I could turn music off whether I liked it or not, that doesn't matter. Turning off my appreciation for music is something I can't do. I may have the radio off, but I know the songs, I hear them in my head, I sing them to myself, I tap the beats on my desk, I make music myself on instruments...turning off the radio (going to church) does NOT stop the music (religion).

Guys, @Draka bypass my recent comments. This sums it up well:

"I think she means more in an outward way... Such as being forced to deny your God if it means saving another's life. =)" ~@Corthos

In other words, you just want to know if we can lie. If we can put on a show. If we can stop doing things outwardly that would make people think we believe what we believe. Lie. Yes, we can lie and many already do in the world to keep from being in danger for believing the wrong thing or not believing at all. Obviously we can lie. We can't, however, "give up" how we spiritually look at and understand the world, otherwise known as, religion.

 

[JayToka]

To me, that's a no-brainer. Without thinking, if I was in a position to help a fellow human, I would give my life. Why, because that person I have helped might be a person that goes on to change humanity in ways I cannot imagine, so by saving that person, I could be saving humanity. Just a thought.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

@Draka

The only thing one may, by choice, give up are practices.

Our practices are our beliefs. They are interconnected. Like I said. If someone demand that I turn away from god (practice) to save my child, I have the ability to do so. I cannot lie about my belief but I can stop going to church, pray, etc.

These things are also a part of me (in analogy). That is why people arw taking this question personally. A lot of "Us" cannot separate our practice from belief. Belief is not a choice (liking mustic).

Practice (cuting the radio off/verb) is. Can someone give up their practice/religion to save another human being?

You may abandon going to church or doing certain rituals

Yes. Many of "Us" do not separate these things from our beliefs. However, we still have a choice to go to church.

Will people let go of going to church/prayer/etc/verbs to save another person's life?

People don't decide one day to just "turn away" from their religion, their worldview. It is a gradual thing.

I didnt say it was overnight. The point is they can turn from their belief/practice. If they cant, why cant others to save a life?


Im not asking to give up your beliefz (again). I am asking can you give up your practice/religion

Your "outward sign" of your faith

To save a life.

And no, this does not mean you are lying. Im not talking about your belief/inner spirituality. I am talking about your belief/religion/practice.

It is hard to answer for some because their practice is a part of them. People leave their belief all the time. Why cant othera to save another persons life?

 

[Draka]

@Draka



Our practices are our beliefs. They are interconnected. Like I said. If someone demand that I turn away from god (practice) to save my child, I have the ability to do so. I cannot lie about my belief but I can stop going to church, pray, etc.

These things are also a part of me (in analogy). That is why people arw taking this question personally. A lot of "Us" cannot separate our practice from belief. Belief is not a choice (liking mustic).

Practice (cuting the radio off/verb) is. Can someone give up their practice/religion to save another human being?



Yes. Many of "Us" do not separate these things from our beliefs. However, we still have a choice to go to church.

Will people let go of going to church/prayer/etc/verbs to save another person's life?



I didnt say it was overnight. The point is they can turn from their belief/practice. If they cant, why cant others to save a life?


Im not asking to give up your beliefz (again). I am asking can you give up your practice/religion

Your "outward sign" of your faith

To save a life.

And no, this does not mean you are lying. Im not talking about your belief/inner spirituality. I am talking about your belief/religion/practice.

It is hard to answer for some because their practice is a part of them. People leave their belief all the time. Why cant othera to save another persons life?

Okay, the thing is, for many people there are no real "practices", just beliefs. Just believing is their religion. How they view the world. How they view others. That IS religion. Practices are but part of religion. Religion, your beliefs, and yes even practices, make you who you are. Now, think about this, if your religion, your beliefs, make you the kind of person to want to save a person's life in the first place, then to "turn your back" upon that religion would be to negate that part of you that would want to save a person in the first place. Catch 22. If I even could "give up" my religion/beliefs/faith/etc, then to do so takes a part of me away that would care enough to save that life. That gives meaning to that life. Unless I am lying flat out then I couldn't "give up" my religion to save a person. To me it would be like creating a time machine to go back in time to save the life of a person. I could never save the person because if I did, the time machine wouldn't exist for me to use as the death was the inspiration for the machine. It is a paradox. I cannot "give up" my worldview/religion/belief/practice to save a life because, if I did, I may not save the life at all anyway as my motivation to care in the first place was birthed from my religion/worldview/etc. From WHO I AM, and my religion, my beliefs, my practices, have formed who I am. Take that away and you change the essence of the person. That is, unless, of course...you are just lying.

 

[JoStories]

That is why I said there may be things some people will do that we don't like. But on the whole, if all people lived by their conscience there would be much less evil in the world than there is now.

I strongly disagree. In Buddhism, life is about balance. How would we know what bad is without the concept of good and vice versa. You call it evil, which is something I don't believe in. The idea of Yin and Yang is about the balance in life. You will have those whom we could call extremely good; Gandhi, and extremely bad; Bundy. Even your Bible gives at its very beginning a lesson in the concepts here; IE: Cain and Abel. One of the issues I have with the monotheistic faiths is that you rely on this duality. Either one has to be ALL good or ALL bad. Life is not like that, IMO.

 

[JoStories]

Firstly let us understand that there is a difference between a criminal and a sinner. A criminal is someone who breaks man's laws. A sinner is someone who breaks God's law. Breaking God's law is evil.

It is a choice each of us must make. What are we willing to do to survive. I am not perfect - but I do know hunger as I once lived in great poverty. In those times I never stole anyone's food. And I never did anything against my conscience just to be satiated.

Now if I who is so imperfect could keep this standard I am sure there are many more who would rather choose death than be part of a gang, for example. And there are many who have lost their lives doing so.

First of all, I don't believe in sin. That is a Christian concept that in my faith has no place or meaning. God's 'law' is arguable, IMO, as you believe that the Bible was written, or rather inspired by God to be God's words but I do not. There is too many inconsistencies and too many mistakes for that to be true. So this breaking of God's law you mention is only from your POV. Again this comes back to the duality that is reflected in the monotheistic faiths. Good/Bad...Being a sinner V being someone who keeps God's laws, which are unique to each of the monotheistic faiths. I assume you don't follow all of the laws that would pertain to the Jewish faith. Such as not eating shellfish or pork, or the type of clothing you wear. Should you be a Jew and break those laws, you are, in essence, breaking God's laws.

 

[Thanda]

I see.

I can tell you firsthand that people who lend too much importance to afterlife beliefs nearly always fall prey to the trap of just knowing that they have earned a good afterlife already and the people they dislike will end up sorry for being so "stubborn".

It is not just self-justification unleashed, it is also under the guise of spiritually justified judgement.

Those people are like the plague here in Brazil, where so many people sympathise with the poisonous, lazy doctrine of one Rivail, adopted name Allan Kardec.

I have started a threat about such things uit was called "Be True to Yourself Before You Seek the Truth".

 

[Thanda]

I strongly disagree. In Buddhism, life is about balance. How would we know what bad is without the concept of good and vice versa. You call it evil, which is something I don't believe in. The idea of Yin and Yang is about the balance in life. You will have those whom we could call extremely good; Gandhi, and extremely bad; Bundy. Even your Bible gives at its very beginning a lesson in the concepts here; IE: Cain and Abel. One of the issues I have with the monotheistic faiths is that you rely on this duality. Either one has to be ALL good or ALL bad. Life is not like that, IMO.

You keep saying that life is about balance. What do you mean by this? Do you perhaps mean that a person should avoid doing too much good in order to make sure there is also some evil within him. Is this balance something that is within each person or is the balance something that is within the world.

If you say the balance is within the world then I may agree. The Lord has purposely kept the wicked on the earth (I fall into that category) that they may both learn from the righteous and be a lesson to them too.

But if you say that the balance must be between ourselves then I will respectfully disagree - I do not need any evil in my heart. I have it, but I do not want it. I am trying to improve and with the Lord's help I know I will conquer.

 

[JoStories]

My point: How far will you give your charity (giving your prized possesions to another) before you think of yourself first before another?

Once you think of yourself before another, that is the end of the charity line.

In Christianity, death is very important. They teach that the only way you can have life is through the death and resurrection of Christ. People have given up their lives for their faith. Islam included. They

give up their money.
give up their lives.

I was raised by a man; an atheist btw, who would give the shirt off his back if he had no other. That, IMO, is the epitome of charity. I cannot speak for Christianity as it does not work for me. The duality is something that I find contrary to what life is about. Yes, I suppose in that faith, people have given up their lives. I would give up mine for my best friend in a heart beat. I don;t fear death. I think that is a big part of this question, that fear of death. Most people fear the unknown and death is the ultimate unknown. So some faiths; Christianity for example, have this concept of the ultimate prize, that being admitted to heaven V having to be sent to hell for alleged 'sins'. I don't believe that. I have lost all of my prized belongings a few times for various reasons, and what that taught me is that they have no real meaning in life. They are material and go the way of the dodo. So give them up? You bet I would.

 

[JoStories]

I will recomment. What I mean is people do, in my personal opinion, leave their faith for many reasons. That does not mean they didn't believe in the first place. It just means they are able to let go of their faith for whatever reason. That is extremely hard to do; and, it is possible.

I disagree that giving up one's faith is hard to do. Faith changes IMO, over time and over the experiences of one's life. People disavow Christianity all the time for other faiths or even for atheism. That is not hard at all, IMO. For a very long time, I was Pagan and a Shaman to my NA tribe. I left that for reasons of my own and embrace Buddhism. That was not hard at all.

 

[JoStories]

You keep saying that life is about balance. What do you mean by this? Do you perhaps mean that a person should avoid doing too much good in order to make sure there is also some evil within him. Is this balance something that is within each person or is the balance something that is within the world.

If you say the balance is within the world then I may agree. The Lord has purposely kept the wicked on the earth (I fall into that category) that they may both learn from the righteous and be a lesson to them too.

But if you say that the balance must be between ourselves then I will respectfully disagree - I do not need any evil in my heart. I have it, but I do not want it. I am trying to improve and with the Lord's help I know I will conquer.

I don't mean that one can do too much good, but rather that those who are seen as doing ultimate good; IE: Mother Theresa, have a balance. Sure, she did a lot of good but she also was doing so for reasons of her own, which may have included the attention she garnered. IMO, the balance is something within us all. We make choices based on our understanding of what is the right thing to do or the wrong thing. Sometimes doing the wrong thing may seem best. You may not want that 'evil' but even you admit it is there. You fight this evil all the time as you see it as the epitome of what God would NOT want. What if God wants you to understand what that is and to learn from it? What is it you are 'trying to conquer'? One cannot be totally good, IMO. There are always ulterior motives for our actions. If I do a good thing, I get pride from that good. Its that balance again. And yes, I suppose one could say it is also a part of the world, but in that regard, I would say that the balance therein is about world lessons. IE: The Holocaust, The Inquisition, etc.

 

[Thanda]

I don't mean that one can do too much good, but rather that those who are seen as doing ultimate good; IE: Mother Theresa, have a balance. Sure, she did a lot of good but she also was doing so for reasons of her own, which may have included the attention she garnered. IMO, the balance is something within us all. We make choices based on our understanding of what is the right thing to do or the wrong thing. Sometimes doing the wrong thing may seem best. You may not want that 'evil' but even you admit it is there. You fight this evil all the time as you see it as the epitome of what God would NOT want. What if God wants you to understand what that is and to learn from it? What is it you are 'trying to conquer'? One cannot be totally good, IMO. There are always ulterior motives for our actions. If I do a good thing, I get pride from that good. Its that balance again. And yes, I suppose one could say it is also a part of the world, but in that regard, I would say that the balance therein is about world lessons. IE: The Holocaust, The Inquisition, etc.

"One cannot be totally good, IMO". Well I think this statement sums up why our perspectives are different. The belief we cannot be perfect does necessitate a belief that it is okay to not be perfect. It necessitates the belief that evil must have some good purpose within us and that is why it does not leave.

Whereas the belief that we are supposed to be perfect ("Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father who is in heaven is perfect") necessitates the belief that evil has no good purpose in our lives. In one of our scriptures it is written "Wickedness never was happiness".

But perfection is not within man's power to do alone. It comes as a gift of God to those who diligently seek it. In another scripture in the church it is written:

32 Yea, come unto Christ, and be perfected in him, and deny yourselves of all ungodliness; and if ye shall deny yourselves of all ungodliness, and love God with all your might, mind and strength, then is his grace sufficient for you, that by his grace ye may be perfect in Christ; and if by the grace of God ye are perfect in Christ, ye can in nowise deny the power of God.

33 And again, if ye by the grace of God are perfect in Christ, and deny not his power, then are ye sanctified in Christ by the grace of God, through the shedding of the blood of Christ, which is in the covenant of the Father unto the remission of your sins, that ye become holy, without spot.​

​

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I disagree that giving up one's faith is hard to do. Faith changes IMO, over time and over the experiences of one's life. People disavow Christianity all the time for other faiths or even for atheism. That is not hard at all, IMO. For a very long time, I was Pagan and a Shaman to my NA tribe. I left that for reasons of my own and embrace Buddhism. That was not hard at all.

I hear what you say and I nevee understood how people can just "leave themselves." Religion/practice is not like choosing clothes. We can flip flop what we do (which is what Im asking to give up), but what you believe?

That is why have of the people on this thread say Im asking a silly (my wording) question.

I have been a witch, a catholic, a pagan, and a buddhist throughout my life time. Not at the same time. What I did was change Practices; some of these beliefs are still a Part of Me; I cant change. I dont know how others do so.

If someone asked me can I drop/give up/abandon my belief to save a life, I have the ability to do so.

I am not giving up my belief (buddhism) because that is like saying can you give up reality. Reality isnt depended on me.

I CAN give up my practice. I would if someone else's life were in question. A buddhist can answer this from the perspectice of practice. Others find it hard because their religion is based on belief. I find that hard to believe a religion can only be based on belief/oneself.

That is why its hard to answer the question.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Actually, I just thought of an example of sacrificing your religion to save a life. Let's say you had a "cigarette religion". I have asthma and just being within 10 feet of you might kill me. In order to save me, would you give up smoking?

Good example

 

[Unveiled Artist]

@Draka and @JoStories

Post #161 explains my question. The one about the cigarretes and bible.

 

[Draka]

Good example

Not really a good example. People can quit smoking cold turkey, easily, with little effort or negative consequences, just toss the pack out and not smoke anymore (yes, they can, I've done so myself), and it doesn't change who they are as a person. It is different than giving up a core part of WHO YOU ARE. Smoking cigarettes is not who you are. It is a habit. Like brushing your teeth or biting your nails or tapping your foot to music. You can consciously decide to not do those things as they are actions. Religion isn't an action. It is a whole system in place within you that affects both who you are and what you do. I think the main problem we are having here is definition of religion itself. You seem to think that religion is merely actions separated from actual belief when religion is actually the whole kit-n-kaboodle which encompasses BOTH belief and practice. If you think you have the ability to drop your religion at the drop of a hat then you have no true religion. You have motions you go through. You have habits. You don't have a religion.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Not really a good example. People can quit smoking cold turkey, easily, with little effort or negative consequences, just toss the pack out and not smoke anymore (yes, they can, I've done so myself), and it doesn't change who they are as a person. It is different than giving up a core part of WHO YOU ARE. Smoking cigarettes is not who you are. It is a habit. Like brushing your teeth or biting your nails or tapping your foot to music. You can consciously decide to not do those things as they are actions. Religion isn't an action. It is a whole system in place within you that affects both who you are and what you do. I think the main problem we are having here is definition of religion itself. You seem to think that religion is merely actions separated from actual belief when religion is actually the whole kit-n-kaboodle which encompasses BOTH belief and practice. If you think you have the ability to drop your religion at the drop of a hat then you have no true religion. You have motions you go through. You have habits. You don't have a religion.

It is anology saying who you are was once a smoker and now you have changed by giving up the cigarrettes for good health.

I was once a Catholic, that was who I was. Now I am a Buddbist, that is who I am.

Who I was (a smoker) Catholic was something, as you say, changed gradually. Eventually,n.nwho I was changes for what I know now helps me more and is more healthy for my soul. I tossed the ciggarretes (left christianity) and follownthe Buddha.

I am a Buddha. I dont believe in him.

We-who we are-changes on a constant basis. Who we are changes as we age. The older I get, the more I realize this is true. It takes a lifetime to really mature in one's religion because as we grow older learn new things that may conflict with our faith. Its not easy.

People change their lives (have a motivation to quite smoking) all the time.

Nothing in life is static.

Why do you think it is?

Religion IS an action. That is why we dont understand each other.

 

[Draka]

Religion is NOT an action.

Simple Definition of religion
Popularity: Top 1% of lookups

• : the belief in a god or in a group of gods
  
  
• : an organized system of beliefs, ceremonies, and rules used to worship a god or a group of gods
  
  
• : an interest, a belief, or an activity that is very important to a person or group

• 
  
  

  Full Definition of religion
  

  1. 1a : the state of a religious <a nun in her 20th year of religion>b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
     
     
  2. 2: a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
     
     
  3. 3archaic : scrupulous conformity : conscientiousness
     
     
  4. 4: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith
     

  re·li·gion·less adjective

  
  
  A SYSTEM of BELIEFS. Beliefs. Beliefs. You cannot shut off, abandon, give up, turn back on beliefs as a mere choice. An ultimatum. A decision. You, yourself, say it is a gradual change. That change happens within you. Not a switch from the outside. Religion is a set of beliefs. Those beliefs are what bring about certain practices. You may give up some practices as a decision but you cannot just give up the beliefs. What aren't you getting about this? It is quite literally impossible for someone to just "give up" their religion at a moment's notice. No matter what the motivation may be. And if they say they have then they are either lying or never had a religion in the first place.
  

 

[Unveiled Artist]

@Draka

Who we are is what we do.

Our religion IS an action.

I was a witch not because I Believed in witchcraft. I was one because that practiced helped my life

I changed my belief/action/devotion for christianity when my mother brought us to Church (Ill combined that with Catholicism later in life)

I was a Christian not because of what I believed. I was a christian because of what I did for Christ. My belief was an action.

Who I was is not who I am now

Now I am a Buddha and I practice witchcraft and give reverence to the earth and help others

That is who I am because being a Buddha does not means thinking you are, it is an action. I am Buddhas because I "help" people from suffering. I am a part of nature because I devote myself to living with the earth from the seasons to how I eat.

If someone told me to give up helping others from suffering to save my child, that is what Buddhists do--so they cannot answer this question

If someone told me not to live with the earth to save my child, Id drop that in a heart beat.

Because religion IS an action. We can change our actions.

Would you do so to save a life?