What evidence would be required for you to abandon your religious belief

[ThePainefulTruth]

That link reads like a bunch of gibberish. You're a transhumanist, which itself has turned into a sort of sci-fi religion. I don't see the need to come up with a bunch of confusing, pretentious gobbledygook to describe it.

No animal or human or god can die as a substitute for our repentance--which repentance even the Bible makes clear is what is required for our salvation, according to John the Baptist and Jesus himself. It was Paul who melded the Jewish/Jesus movement with the pagan Mithraism of the Romans which was centered in his native city of Tarsus; saying we don't have to try to be good to be saved, only believe....based on his hearsay.

 

[Milton Platt]

I felt that Christianity was a man made concoction, based on logically looking at the Bible, piece by piece. Eventually stopped praying, stopped going to church. Then, became indifferent to Jesus, and all that I had been raised with. Eventually claimed to be an atheist, but honestly, felt empty at times. When you have religion all of your life, it can be hard to 'let it go.' Even if logically you feel it's the right thing to let go of. I know this sounds crazy lol but, I see it all differently, now. Even the Bible readings. And maybe subjective reasoning is just as important as objective reasoning. I feel this way now because of the experience I had recently ...what I consider to be an 'encounter' with the Holy Spirit. I know you won't believe me, but it happened.

That's the best I can put it all to words.

An interesting journey. I went to church a few times off and on when I was a child (my parents never did unless it was a funeral). I did try seriously studying he bible as an adult. I have read it many times as well as most of the apologists.
Their arguments never held water. Not having an "experience" of whatever nature yours was, I can't speak to that.
My inclination is to say that I would tend to chalk it up to some sort of natural phenomenon, rather that supernatural. But one never knows untill he is actually in that position and it would be disingenuous for me to say outright what I would do.

Thanks again.....

 

[Milton Platt]

I am familiar with the bible, thanks.
So are you simply trying to say that you would not be willing to look at evidence that questions what you want to believe? Not interested in debating here, it's just that your response was mostly bible quotes rather than a reasoned response.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

No animal or human or god can die as a substitute for our repentance--which repentance even the Bible makes clear is what is required for our salvation, according to John the Baptist and Jesus himself. It was Paul who melded the Jewish/Jesus movement with the pagan Mithraism of the Romans which was centered in his native city of Tarsus; saying we don't have to try to be good to be saved, only believe....based on his hearsay.

Er, I'm not a Baptist or an Evangelical so that argument doesn't work with me. Fail.

 

[Desert Snake]

Er, I'm not a Baptist or an Evangelical so that argument doesn't work with me. Fail.

I'm not even sure it was an argument.

 

[Desert Snake]

No animal or human or god can die as a substitute for our repentance--which repentance even the Bible makes clear is what is required for our salvation, according to John the Baptist and Jesus himself. It was Paul who melded the Jewish/Jesus movement with the pagan Mithraism of the Romans which was centered in his native city of Tarsus; saying we don't have to try to be good to be saved, only believe....based on his hearsay.

Mithraism=/=Xianity.
No, faulty research.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I'm not even sure it was an argument.

He seemed to have all randomly decided to accuse me of believing that my religion teaches that we're saved by grace through faith alone. That's more of a Baptist or Evangelical concept. Catholicism teaches that it's faith and good works (i.e. living in a Christ-like manner), along with active repentance, that are the path to Salvation. So him telling me that silliness is ironic since it's Catholics who are usually accused of following a "man-made religion of works" by Protestants. Lol.

 

[Desert Snake]

He seemed to have all randomly decided to accuse me of believing that my religion teaches that we're saved by grace through faith alone. That's more of a Baptist or Evangelical concept. Catholicism teaches that it's faith and good works (i.e. living in a Christ-like manner), along with active repentance, that are the path to Salvation. So him telling me that silliness is ironic since it's Catholics who are usually accused of following a "man-made religion of works" by Protestants. Lol.

Yeah, it's a total mess. Even the idea that Xians don't have to be ethical, etc, is a mis-interpretation of those Xian ideas.

 

[Desert Snake]

Oh my goddess, did you get this out of a snack box?

No animal or human or god can die as a substitute for our repentance-

Jesus isn't an average human, and the sacrifice is nothing like the Jewish temple sacrifices. Jesus also did not sacrifice Himself for 'all' sins, He only sacrificed Himself for His followers; it's conditional.

-which repentance even the Bible makes clear is what is required for our salvation

So...?

, according to John the Baptist and Jesus himself.

Yes...therefore..

It was Paul who melded the Jewish/Jesus movement with the pagan Mithraism of the Romans which was centered in his native city of Tarsus; saying we don't have to try to be good to be saved, only believe....based on his hearsay.

Wrong. You have turned Jesus into a character that He isn't, and never was, whether the adherents were 'Jewish', or not. You really got everything wrong, it's almost an achievement.

 

[Quintessence]

What evidence would you need to be personally convinced that your religion was false?

Nothing. I honestly find the question confusing, because it presupposes religions are somehow about being "true" or "false" to begin with. I don't understand that outlook at all. Religions aren't a science. Their aim isn't to objectively describe what's out there in the world. Religions are like an art. They're out there to see beauty, weave stories, and find meaning. Religions are not "true" or "false," you either like the aesthetics or you don't. The only thing that would "convince" me is changing my aesthetic preferences. And even then, I'd still be some flavor of contemporary Pagan. I'd just be switching up what gods I focus on, which happens as a natural process in my path anyway.

 

[Milton Platt]

Nothing. I honestly find the question confusing, because it presupposes religions are somehow about being "true" or "false" to begin with. I don't understand that outlook at all. Religions aren't a science. Their aim isn't to objectively describe what's out there in the world. Religions are like an art. They're out there to see beauty, weave stories, and find meaning. Religions are not "true" or "false," you either like the aesthetics or you don't. The only thing that would "convince" me is changing my aesthetic preferences. And even then, I'd still be some flavor of contemporary Pagan. I'd just be switching up what gods I focus on, which happens as a natural process in my path anyway.

You have a unique path...
Most theists I have met would argue that their religion is true. By that they mean that the god is real, and the dogma somehow matters. By your measure, Harry Potter could become a religion, then?

 

[Mackerni]

That link reads like a bunch of gibberish. You're a transhumanist, which itself has turned into a sort of sci-fi religion. I don't see the need to come up with a bunch of confusing, pretentious gobbledygook to describe it.

There is no term out there to describe the universal ascension to mass deification. What do you call an afterlife that believes you'll be in your own body again? I see nothing wrong taking words that don't technically exist yet because they're true to Latin formation. Hell, if you really wanted to you could go to that Wikia and edit my page. If I like what I see I won't change it back. Extropy is a word and it s the word that describes the process of universal deification. Vers- describes the totality of everything living in extropy. -sophy is the knowledge of that upcoming event.

It is true that transhumanism and I share a lot of the same qualities. However that may be, transhumanism is a philosophy and extropiversophy is a religion of the philosophy of transhumanism. For all purposes aside, I do not call myself an extropiversor in my signature, in my title, or religion. I use terms that already exist.

 

[Deidre]

An interesting journey. I went to church a few times off and on when I was a child (my parents never did unless it was a funeral). I did try seriously studying he bible as an adult. I have read it many times as well as most of the apologists.
Their arguments never held water. Not having an "experience" of whatever nature yours was, I can't speak to that.
My inclination is to say that I would tend to chalk it up to some sort of natural phenomenon, rather that supernatural. But one never knows untill he is actually in that position and it would be disingenuous for me to say outright what I would do.

Thanks again.....

And, thank you. You are open minded, and that is a good thing.

 

[Deidre]

There is no term out there to describe the universal ascension to mass deification. What do you call an afterlife that believes you'll be in your own body again? I see nothing wrong taking words that don't technically exist yet because they're true to Latin formation. Hell, if you really wanted to you could go to that Wikia and edit my page. If I like what I see I won't change it back. Extropy is a word and it s the word that describes the process of universal deification. Vers- describes the totality of everything living in extropy. -sophy is the knowledge of that upcoming event.

It is true that transhumanism and I share a lot of the same qualities. However that may be, transhumanism is a philosophy and extropiversophy is a religion of the philosophy of transhumanism. For all purposes aside, I do not call myself an extropiversor in my signature, in my title, or religion. I use terms that already exist.

Having said all of that ^^....are you happy? Does this belief system bring you joy, and peace?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Nothing. I honestly find the question confusing, because it presupposes religions are somehow about being "true" or "false" to begin with. I don't understand that outlook at all. Religions aren't a science. Their aim isn't to objectively describe what's out there in the world. Religions are like an art. They're out there to see beauty, weave stories, and find meaning. Religions are not "true" or "false," you either like the aesthetics or you don't. The only thing that would "convince" me is changing my aesthetic preferences. And even then, I'd still be some flavor of contemporary Pagan. I'd just be switching up what gods I focus on, which happens as a natural process in my path anyway.

I have honest questions (after third pargraph). Forgive me if I asked this before.

In regards to religion, I see true and false differently than it being right or wrong. For example, it is true that everyone's religion is true for the individual. It is also true that according to each individual (myself included), their religion works for them.

If we did not see our religion as true or false, the question in the OP would be easy to answer. Why? Because there is no true or false. A good example: you can change your belief from paganism to believe in one God, go to Church to follow that God, find fellowship with God-minded people, and completely divorce yourself from any pagan idea that is in your lifestyle (rather than religion). If nothing is false, this would be easily done.

However, it cannot (making a huge assumption of you) because paganism is your life. It's your world view. It's what your life is shaped around. If this was not true then it is a religion not your life. We can change religions. We cannot change our realities; who we are not what we want to believe. In other words, asking you to change your religion is actually asking you to change you. (Change into superman or something)

My questions

I am confused when you say there is no true or false (reading the posts) and that isn't part of your belief.

1. If paganism is your life not your religion how could any other worldview, philosophy, religion, faith, whatever be true?

This is not an objective question. Everyone has their own truth. This is subjective. From your point of view. Paganism is your life just as Buddhism is my life. I cannot change to be a Christian or Wiccan just because I (for sake of arguement) resognate with their values. That's just adopting something that is not a part of who I am just what I would want to be. Spirituality doesn't work that way.

2. From your eyes, how can there be any other truth than the one you are living? (Subjective)

3. If you cannot change to any other religion (that's like changing into another person, right?), then you must have some definition of what is true and what is false?

4. If you do not, and anything to you can be false--even your own beliefs--why do you believe in them? What makes you live In your faith, As your faith, and Through your faith if everything is true and nothing is false?

5. Do you have a truth? Or is it everyone's truth yours?

I know these are a lot of questions. Some of them kinda overlap, mistakenly. I hope you understand what I am asking and know I am not meaning to be rude, just inquisitive.

 

[leibowde84]

It wouldn't be any specific evidence but a superior explanatory model of existence.

Based merely on logic without any supporting evidence. Isn't that just requiring that it "make sense"? Hasn't that proven to be unreliable?

 

[George-ananda]

Based merely on logic without any supporting evidence. Isn't that just requiring that it "make sense"? Hasn't that proven to be unreliable?

No, what I was trying to say is that my religion (Vedic/Theosophical) explains beyond the normal phenomena (evidence) in a way much superior to any other system of thought I have found. So, my point there was if another system explains the evidence better, I would accept that better understanding and system.

I hope that clarifies it a little.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

Oh my goddess, did you get this out of a snack box?

Jesus isn't an average human, and the sacrifice is nothing like the Jewish temple sacrifices. Jesus also did not sacrifice Himself for 'all' sins, He only sacrificed Himself for His followers; it's conditional.

The point is that we're here to make our moral choices ourselves. No one can sacrifice himself as a substitute for a person's genuine repentance, much less so that he doesn't even have to try to be good as Paul declared. The idea is Satanic, symbolically speaking of course. Paul was almost certainly the Beast of Revelation, the number of the beast (which isn't 666, Arabic numerals coming later) is Jewish Gematria for Tarsus. Let him who has wisdom understand. (Which I'm not claiming btw. I was put on to Gematria by some modern day Jewish followers of (a human) Jesus, Ebionites.

I think I remember you, when I was exploring Deism. Funny, you were nicer then. lol

Yes, sorry, I gotta go where the evidence, or lack of it, leads me, and this just looks like a set up. You may be sincere, but I don't see an inkling of anything that would make me doubt the rock solid reality I've been witness to, and seen the evidence build up for, all my life. Why would God or the Holy Spirit or whatever seek out a minuscule chosen few and give you nothing but It's word as validation--in the face of this vast, exceedingly rational universe. If God was going to break It's silence and violate our free will, why not everywhere at once, in all the different languages, so no one could exploit that power? How do we know it's not a hallucination, or a (self-)deception? How do you know? Did you at least receive some proof, some verification? We're hearing this on the Internet after all, and look at all that unbroken string of false religions, with none of them having the first thing to show for themselves besides hearsay.

If you'd been told to sacrifice one of your children, or even your dog, would you have? I don't ask that question lightly This stuff is dangerous.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Jesus isn't an average human, and the sacrifice is nothing like the Jewish temple sacrifices. Jesus also did not sacrifice Himself for 'all' sins, He only sacrificed Himself for His followers; it's conditional.

Well, that is where we're going to have to disagree. Christ's Sacrifice was for all sins - past , present and future. His Sacrifice was/is the Key that unlocks the gates of Heaven. But it's up to you to accept it.

 

[Mackerni]

Having said all of that ^^....are you happy? Does this belief system bring you joy, and peace?

It is 1) secular, which means it keeps my sanity and 2) anti-nihilist, which helps me be happier ... especially for the future.

I love what I believe I just wish other people believed the same. Or at least know about it. I know that's selfish. Unless I somehow get massively successful with turning people away from their past religion, it's not going to happen in my lifetime. I do think however that my beliefs will eventually catch on with popular science and by the time my consciousness gets dumped into a new body, it will be known worldwide.