I can pretty much agree with you here actually (all religions right in their own way...at least in part...as they are human contrived sysytems to make sense of the world around considering our limited perspective/ability to know etc...)...though I would more likely perhaps say Christianity is not the only wrong religion...same difference - effectively...and while you may be imbued with Christian virtue - and your religious views are more positve then negative - and I like that - in the end (I don't think) you can really call yourself a Christian - because by definition the prime docrine of accepting Christ as savior and the bible as the (one and only true) word of the lord - seems to irreparably contradict the tennents of other religions...(which don't at all recognize such and which are composed of completley different ritual & observance & acceptance...)
Following Gods Commandments...
#41
Posted 09 June 2004 - 12:39 PM
I can pretty much agree with you here actually (all religions right in their own way...at least in part...as they are human contrived sysytems to make sense of the world around considering our limited perspective/ability to know etc...)...though I would more likely perhaps say Christianity is not the only wrong religion...same difference - effectively...and while you may be imbued with Christian virtue - and your religious views are more positve then negative - and I like that - in the end (I don't think) you can really call yourself a Christian - because by definition the prime docrine of accepting Christ as savior and the bible as the (one and only true) word of the lord - seems to irreparably contradict the tennents of other religions...(which don't at all recognize such and which are composed of completley different ritual & observance & acceptance...)
#42
Posted 09 June 2004 - 11:14 PM
You're right Sasun. In his understanding of Christianity...all the messiahs built that consciousness during the course of human history. Buddha, Krishna, Orpheus, Moses, Zaratushtra, Mani etc. with Jesus being its culmination...
#43
Posted 10 June 2004 - 12:23 AM
Thoth is right. Religion creates certain values, ethics, morals, and beliefs for its members and suggests and encourages its members to live their lives according to certain practices. This leaves little room for tolerance. There needn't be any rigid dogmatism or fanaticism for any religion to become intolerant. Religion, by nature, is intolerant. Therefore, there should only be one kind of religion. Diversity is important in other aspects of life but it is dangerous when it comes to people’s beliefs. If God was wise He would’ve made sure that people all over the world practiced only one kind of religion.
#44
Posted 10 June 2004 - 07:51 AM
It is dangerous to have different beliefs? I don't think you would be happy if somebody forced you to have Domino's beliefs I am sure in that case you would blame God for not being allowed to have a different belief. So no matter what God gets blamed.
Do you think you are wise enough to correct God?
Is that really so? Out of all religions let's take Christianity for instance. Christ said "Love your enemy". This statement alone proves your conclusion completely false.
All major religions hold very high values and high standards of tolerance, hence by nature they are all tolerant. It is another issue if parts of followers of these religions observe the high standards. So don't blame religion because of its abuse, it is not fair.
Edited by Sasun, 10 June 2004 - 08:28 AM.
#45
Posted 10 June 2004 - 08:56 AM
Religions are by nature tolerant???????? In what universe of the many in Domino's multiverse are you refering to?
And while you are correct - the staement attributed to Christ to love ones enemy seems to imply a sort of tolerance (though its not exactly the same thing...the statement/commandment to "have no enemies" might be more directly applicable in this case....but what I find is that few Christians seem to abide by this particualr tenant - and there seems to be plenty of other verses that give one leeway to smite God's enemies and to view those who believe otherwise as lesser...and the mark of a particualr religion should be the behavior and beliefs of its followers - no? I mean if you look at all the documents underpinning the United States you would think that we were the most pure nation on Earth eh? Yet within that framework we have found ways to justify slavery, beat up on lesser nations, undertake coups, violate civil rights of folks, etc etc etc - so one must look beyond the propoganda - which will always make one out to be "good guys" - I mena we have no religions that explicitly call out for evil do we? But its the actions (and writings) of the followers that matter....heh lets hear it for the crusades and the inquisition!
#46
Posted 10 June 2004 - 09:49 AM
As of my comment about God being wise: it doeasn't botter me because God doesn't exist in the first place. Since I don't believe I am wise enough to correct and yet I see so many things that should have been different if a "wise" God existed than it's enough for me to say that God doesn't exist.
#47
Posted 10 June 2004 - 10:02 AM
http://www.canada-os...yston/saga.html
#48
Posted 10 June 2004 - 10:23 AM
As of my comment about God being wise: it doeasn't botter me because God doesn't exist in the first place. Since I don't believe I am wise enough to correct and yet I see so many things that should have been different if a "wise" God existed than it's enough for me to say that God doesn't exist.
First of all, there are other teachings that are just as good to get you there. As much as I value Christ's teachings I also know that to follow a right path one needs not necessarily follow Christ's path, it could be some other path, but one thing is sure a person must take a path to get somewhere.
Secondly, where Christ has appeared people did not necessarily follow him, on the contrary, they crucified him. So if Christ appeared in all places of earth that would not mean everyone would follow.
Ultimately, it is up to the person, would it really change things if Christ appeared in all places every hundred years and was crucified every time, be it physically or rejected in other ways.
There are many teachings, but how many people follow them? There you are Anoushik, you think that you are not wise enough, yet you also conclude that there is no God. You believe some moral principles are right, yet you do not always follow them (I am not pointing fingers, we are all like that with the exception of a few pure beings).
Critics of religious values are many, yet these critics do not follow anything, their religion is ignorance and blindness. All they can say is, ohh I don't believe this, I doubt this, I suspect that. There is no knowledge in that, only a show of ignorance. Very often they criticize religion in order to justify their immoral and inhumane life.
Show me a fool that cannot criticize a wise man. It is indeed very easy to see the virtues of religious teachings, but blind men or men with prejudice against religion do not like to see it. If a religion teaches love, then it teaches love, there is no other way to look at it. One must be blind to say that, oh it teaches love but see it does not. Don't mind the bad followers or hypocrites of religious establisments. When you try to evaluate a religion, read its main scriptures and weigh in and out how it sits with you. It makes no sense to learn about religion by how Joe practices it. You have your own mind and conscience, what matters is what you think of it, not how others see and practice it.
#49
Posted 10 June 2004 - 10:29 AM
#50
Posted 10 June 2004 - 10:48 AM
#51
Posted 10 June 2004 - 11:17 AM
Anoushik, had there not been religions we would not have morality, we would be beasts. Wars are not caused because of religion but because of human misunderstanding. But most of the wars had nothing to do with religion.
As to religion guiding us, how can religion guide a person if a person is not willing to follow it ??? You should ask to yourself, why do you not follow a religion? The purpose of religion is to change the human nature from bad to good, from low to high, to teach rightous behavior, etc... What puzzles me, why do you expect someone to force you or compell you do things? It is impossible to force someone to be compassionate, to love, to be humble, and other things that religions typically teach.
There are two sides, teacher and student. Religion is the teacher, man is the student. If the student sleeps at the class no matter how brilliant the teacher is there will be no learning. Learning is a difficult task, religious practice is more difficult.
Religion is always there, it is up to you to follow it. But you prefer to criticize it with or without reason. In that case all bad students should criticize their teachers.
Well, I said what I said. It seems a simple logic to me, but if you don't understand then I am unable to make you understand, as simple as that. The same goes with religion and not understanding it.
#52
Posted 10 June 2004 - 11:23 AM
Thoth, if this is the case you are forgiven by Gamavor!
THOTH, care to explain? Have you stolen an owned property? If that's the case, I hope it was done with tact and grace. Poetic skills at their finest.
#53
Posted 10 June 2004 - 11:48 AM
No one need to force her... as she will adopt my belief very soon by choice...
Prediction...
Hyeforum in 2010 change its name to "Fadixian multiverse" after a general vote, where the members all adopted Fadixian multiver and rejected any other kind of belief.
By then... I would have brought evidences from my lab... that the theory in question is the best to discribe the world we live in.
#54
Posted 10 June 2004 - 08:44 PM
Well... I don't know about that just yet...
#55
Posted 10 June 2004 - 09:01 PM
As to religion guiding us, how can religion guide a person if a person is not willing to follow it ??? You should ask to yourself, why do you not follow a religion? The purpose of religion is to change the human nature from bad to good, from low to high, to teach rightous behavior, etc... What puzzles me, why do you expect someone to force you or compell you do things? It is impossible to force someone to be compassionate, to love, to be humble, and other things that religions typically teach.
At one point you're saying that religion gives moral guidance and can change the human nature from bad to good, and then you're saying that it is impossible for religion to be able to change people who don't want to be changed. Then what is the purpose of religion? From your argument I can say that people who follow religion and want to be good already have this goodness in them, it just needs to be nourished through religion (much like a teacher nourishes and develops the talent of a certain student, but the talent has to be there) but if people are lacking this goodness (likewise the understanding of morality) then religion really has no real purpose. It is only for a select few who long for guidance in life. The rest will likely misuse and abuse the teachings of religion for their own personal gain. This is why I think religion is dangerous, and the more religions there are the more dangerous it becomes.
#56
Posted 12 June 2004 - 10:41 PM
Some don't want to be changed, some want to be changed but have no faith in themselves, some want to be changed and have faith in themselves but are lazy to work. Deep inside everyone wants to be happy and satisfied with life, this change is the only thing that can make one truly happy and satisfied. This is what those who have gone through this path will say with absolute confidence.
Everyone has a degree of goodness, it is not possible to find somone who has no virtue at all. So everyone can use religion to be good and better if they choose so. If you agree that people should be good, and if you agree that if people follow religion they will benefit from it, then I don't see what the problem is.
These select few are said to carry the humanity forward, while the rest of people live for themselves.
Knives can be properly used for the benefit of the kitchen, and knives can be misused to hurt people. Should we conclude that knives are dangerous?
If religion can be misused, it is not the problem of religion but the problem of misuse. If we agree that religion properly used is beneficial for the humanity then it is unfair to call it dangerous. Dangerous are people who are willing to misuse it for selfish needs. Religion is not to be blamed. If there was no religion these people would find something else to misuse.
I must make a note, when I refer to religion I have in mind the pure, intended meaning of it, not the religious structures, hierarchies, authorities, etc. I hope this makes my point clearer. We find that many religious people are misusers rather than sincere practicioners working to transform their nature. Nevertheless, religion in the sense of spiritual discipline and growth is our only hope.
#57
Posted 13 June 2004 - 08:31 PM
If deep inside everyone wants to be happy and satisfied with life and you say that the change in a person brought by religion makes one happy and satisfied why doesn't everyone want to be changed? Is it because some people don't know of the benefits by turning to religion? Or they aren't born religious? Whichever reason it is it shows that only some will truly benefit from religion. If it had been otherwise this world would have been a different place.
#58
Posted 13 June 2004 - 08:46 PM
I disagree. Religion is not our only hope. Secular humanism should have been much more encouraged in our society and throughout the history of mankind. In fact, I strongly believe that humanity would have been better off if there was no religion at all (or at least religion wasn't given so much importance).
#59
Posted 13 June 2004 - 09:14 PM
#60
Posted 13 June 2004 - 09:48 PM
What is secular humanism? Where does it come from?
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users