Announcement

Collapse

Comparative Religions 101 Guidelines

Welcome to Comp Religions, this is where the sights and sounds of the many world religions come together in a big World's Fair type atmosphere, without those delicious funnel cakes.

World Religions is a theist only type place, but that does not exclude certain religionists who practice non-theistic faiths ala Buddhism. If you are not sure, ask a moderator.

This is not a place where we argue the existence / non-existence of God.

And as usual, the forum rules apply.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Your religious beliefs are false, now what?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Originally posted by lao tzu View Post
    In fact, I'm kind of fond of making honest responses only to see you dismiss them as trolling, so I think I'll continue. But if you'd like to try again, you might want to compare my first response to BP's ... which is essentially the same.
    There isn't enough Purex to wash away this amount of stupid.
    "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." ― C.S. Lewis, God in the Dock: Essays on Theology (Making of Modern Theology)

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by Jesse View Post
      There isn't enough Purex to wash away this amount of stupid.
      That's not really called for nor remotely productive.

      Comment


      • #93
        Originally posted by pancreasman View Post
        That's not really called for nor remotely productive.
        Well you are kinda right. More was called for, but I didn't feel like typing it all out.
        "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." ― C.S. Lewis, God in the Dock: Essays on Theology (Making of Modern Theology)

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by Jesse View Post
          There isn't enough Purex to wash away this amount of stupid.
          Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
          Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
          But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

          go with the flow the river knows . . .

          Frank

          I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

          Comment


          • #95
            Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
            Weather is keeping me from mowing, so I thought I'd look at what UUs believe -- the VERY FIRST goggle result was comical....

            http://www.uubloomington.org/worship/beliefs/Jesus.php

            Source: What UUs don't belive

            Although UUism comes from a Christian tradition, ours is not a Christian church per se (a small percentage of UUs call themselves Christian), but it welcomes Christians, as it does all people, in its catholicity. Ours is a non-creedal, non-doctrinal religion. So as we are not a Christian church, neither are we Buddhist, Confucian, Hindu, Islamic, Judaic, nor Taoist. We do, however, draw wisdom from these and other of the world's religions, which inspires us in our ethical and spiritual life.

            Most UUs don't believe that Jesus was a supernatural being. Many would say that the power of his love, the penetrating simplicity of his teachings, and the force of his example of service on behalf of the disenfranchised and the downtrodden are what is crucial, not his supposed miraculous birth nor the claim that he was resurrected from the dead. Some would say that Jesus was the son of God, as we are all sons and daughters of God, but not the same as God.

            Generally UUs regard Jesus as one of several important moral and ethical teachers who have shown humans how to live a life of love, service, and compassion. Our concern is not with how he was born or how he died, but with how he lived.

            © Copyright Original Source



            They spend more time talking about what they DON'T believe....

            That pretty much goes along with my real life experience with UUs --- a bunch of burned out hippies pretending to have church.
            I favor the UU over any Christian Church, Judaism, or Islam that are anchored and mired in an archaic past. You missed the meaning of the description, which is adequate, but incomplete. The UU is a Humanist based belief system that does not endorse doctrines of ancient paradigms. I do not endorse the Humanist beliefs of UU, but find them more reasonable and rational then ancient worldviews.

            As far as what they believe, they believe in their Cred, and most UUs believe in the Humanist Manifesto.
            Last edited by shunyadragon; 04-17-2015, 06:38 AM.
            Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
            Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
            But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

            go with the flow the river knows . . .

            Frank

            I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

            Comment


            • #96
              Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
              I favor the UU over any Christian Church,
              I am shocked. SHOCKED, I say.

              You missed the meaning of the description
              No, actually, I didn't. They're a bunch of pinko commie humanists.
              Last edited by Cow Poke; 04-17-2015, 08:54 AM.
              The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." ― C.S. Lewis, God in the Dock: Essays on Theology (Making of Modern Theology)

                Comment


                • #98
                  Originally posted by Jesse View Post
                  Shuyny likes to insert himself into things often.
                  Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
                    Shuyny likes to insert himself into things often.
                    when posts amount to air ball insults without substance. What is due is due.
                    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                    go with the flow the river knows . . .

                    Frank

                    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                      I am shocked. SHOCKED, I say.

                      No, actually, I didn't. They're a bunch of pinko commie humanists.
                      Spoken like a true disciple of McCarthy.
                      Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                      Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                      But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                      go with the flow the river knows . . .

                      Frank

                      I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                        Spoken like a true disciple of McCarthy.
                        I think (hope) he is just exaggerating for comic effect. You know, comedy?

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by pancreasman View Post
                          I think (hope) he is just exaggerating for comic effect. You know, comedy?
                          Regardless the response is suitable whether he was serious or not. There are actually many Christians today since Billy Graham and before who believe this. It is not unreasonable for him to believe it also.
                          Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                          Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                          But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                          go with the flow the river knows . . .

                          Frank

                          I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by pancreasman View Post
                            I think (hope) he is just exaggerating for comic effect. You know, comedy?
                            You gots it, bro! Anytime I say "pinko commie", you can bet I'm being facetious or comedic or..... yeah.

                            Shuny takes himself WAY too seriously. The rest of us don't take him that way.
                            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Jesse View Post
                              I don't want this turning into an off-topic flame thread.
                              Originally posted by lao tzu View Post
                              In fact, I'm kind of fond of making honest responses only to see you dismiss them as trolling, so I think I'll continue. But if you'd like to try again, you might want to compare my first response to BP's ... which is essentially the same.
                              Originally posted by Jesse View Post
                              There isn't enough Purex to wash away this amount of stupid.
                              While I'm more than a minor fan of irony, it's the unwitting irony that really brings out the chuckles.

                              Now follow along as best you can, lad, and see what "essentially the same" looks like.

                              Originally posted by lao tzu View Post
                              Most of the atheists I know have addressed this dilemma with their faith by abandoning it.
                              Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
                              Well, considering I've already been on one side of this issue, I can answer from personal experience as well as the hypothetical.

                              I was a Christian. A fundamentalist, Young Earth Creationist, evangelical Christian with a very strong, literalist view of Biblical inerrancy. When I came to realize that my view on inerrancy was wrong, it caused me to question all of the religious positions which I had simply taken for granted, my whole life-- including the existence of deity. This, in turn, caused me to realize that I had no good justification for my previous belief in God's existence, and I subsequently became an atheist.
                              Notice how the earlier post's "abandoning it" is echoed by the latter's "subsequently became an atheist." That's called "essentially the same." I can imagine that after laying down the Purex card it might be kind of hard to admit you were wrong, that there was an actual response to your question, that it was repeated as claimed, and that while "this amount of stupid" may prevent you from seeing the obvious, it doesn't prevent anyone else.


                              You don't "get" atheism. In this, you have plenty of company, so it bears repeating: Atheism is a lack of belief, and for many if not most of us who became atheists after abandoning another faith, it's a lack of belief that followed a course of years of soul-searching inquiry. At the end of that process, we found that "our religious beliefs were false."

                              You continued with "now what." Regarding brevity as the soul of wit: We gave them up.

                              There's a good deal more that could be said, of course.

                              For many if not most of us, that loss of faith was followed by loss of place in the community, by being shunned by lifelong friends, and more tragically, being abandoned by family. One of the most moving stories of this process was shared by the IIDB poster "Christ-on-a-Stick" — A Salvation Story (PDF). I've spoken of my own experiences privately with a number of members here on TWeb, and, in a semi-private forum on the TWeb that was lost, of the still somewhat uneasy rapprochement with my sister and the niece I was not allowed to contact for the next fifteen years while she was still a child. In much of the US, "atheist" is still a synonym of "evil," and evil is something to which children should not be exposed.

                              BP went above and beyond with his answer, outlining how he feels he'd react to finding that in some sense, his abandonment of belief was ill-chosen, and that there remained some divine essence that could survive the earlier inquiries. This is not at all the same as "finding his beliefs were false."

                              Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
                              Now that I am an atheist, if the existence of some sort of deity could be proven, I would investigate that deity with interest. However, the fact that a deity exists does not imply that such a deity either wants or deserves worship. There's quite a leap between "deity exists" and "the God proposed by orthodox Christianity exists."
                              More directly, I have a "pat" answer to what I'd find convincing enough to rejoin Christianity: the proof of Thomas. While it's conceivable that some highly intelligent extra-terrestrial race could mimic a man coming through a closed door and asking me to place my hand in his side, anything sufficiently advanced to pinch-hit for Jesus in that fashion might as well be Jesus, and I'd take up my old beliefs again.

                              Well, my belief in Jesus anyway. I can't imagine believing in the Bible again in the sense I once did, rather than the sense I do now. I find more meaning in the Bible as an atheist than I ever did as a Christian. Brought down from its pedestal, its flaws reveal a depth of history that's unapproachable while it remains an object of worship.


                              In full contact with your question, though, as suggested by the balance between my screen name and signature, I have taken up fundamental beliefs that to a large extent have replaced my beliefs as a theist. From the Blakney translation:
                              The secret waits for the insight
                              Of eyes unclouded by longing;
                              Those who are bound by desire
                              See only the outward container.

                              This is Lao Tzu, the anti-apologist, delivering a deliberately pseudonymous message: that the truth that can be found by searching for what's wanted is less than the truth that can be found.

                              I believe this. What if I'm wrong? Not entirely, of course. This is a message that can be checked, and it checks out, in science, and in my own field of mathematics. At our best, we approach our theorems and hypotheses as things which can be proven, or disproven ... or even found indeterminate.

                              But what if there are other truths, spiritual truths, truths that encompass a personal, eternal consciousness that can only be found by believing they exist? Everlastingly important truths. I have no idea how I could discover this, but what if it were true?

                              Now what?

                              Then I guess I'll be damned.

                              As ever, Jesse

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                                you're such a girl
                                Take your hand off my knee, you charmer.

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X