User Tag List

First 5678917 Last

Results 61 to 70 of 229

  1. #61
    WALMART
    Guest

    Default

    i haven't read much of anyone's opinon,



    but why not believe in christianity? why believe in allah? why believe in buddah, or hinduism, or evolution, or atheism, or agnosticism?

    why believe in anything?



    cause we're all lookin' for answers. some are just more apt to dig deeper down the rabbit hole.

  2. #62
    sswwwaagggg gmanyo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    275

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 88reconcile88 View Post
    Why would Christianity be ''the truth"!!! Why wouldn't it be Islam, Buddhism, Taoism, or even Egyptian and Greek mythology.
    Well something is true, and many things are false. If Christianity is true then the base principles for Islaam are false, although the teachings might have some truth to them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marmie Dearest View Post
    On a serious note Id like to say that though I am not one, I do believe Catholics are the only real Christians because they adore Mary as mother of God, bringing a balance of masculine and feminine, and they tend to believe in the actual teachings of Jesus ... You know, like take care of the poor and the sick and the dying.
    From what I've seen Catholics like to do rituals not explicitly (or implicitly) prescribed by the Bible and have strange beliefs about exclusivity in the church through the Papacy due to very weak interpretations of one or two verses which really don't say much. Most, although not all, Christians that I see taking care of the poor are non-Catholic (and being from a missionary family, I've seen a lot) although admittedly this could easily be a bias (I am tentatively a Protestant myself). That's not to say that Catholics aren't Christians, but I don't see how they're the only "real" Christians.

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    *a bunch of stuff*
    There can only be one truth. If one religion says that God is a pig and the other says that God is a monkey, they can't both be right. I guess she could be some sort of pig-monkey thing, but then there is still an objective truth, and both of them were partially right. Also, with such polarized religions it would be very difficult for them to both be correct, even in a partial sense. For many of their claims, either one is right or the other.

    There is definitely one objective truth. I guess, like with your math analogy, there could be multiple ways of getting there/different understandings of the same thing, but there is definitely only one answer, and you can definitely be wrong. If one person says the answer is "there is no value for x" and the other says "x equals five", they cannot both be correct. If one person says x is 3 and the other says x is 5, there is a very small chance that they are both correct, although neither would have the complete answer ( [x-5]*[x-3]=0 would yield x=3,5 as its answer). With truth claims being so different, it is highly unlikely that they are both right, especially when considering opposing views (God is real vs. God is not real).

    Also, while "all religions are essentially paths to the same thing" is often said with good intentions it is not only ignorant, but can actually be insulting to people with solid beliefs. You are essentially saying that one person's beliefs are the same as another's, and this can offend people. When you look into it, beliefs of different cultures are vastly different.

    (highlighted because I feel that it is a point not frequently made and easily missed)
    Quote Originally Posted by Qlip View Post
    I'm starting to see you and your avatar as a cloud of odor that eminates from trashy threads.

  3. #63
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,585

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gmanyo View Post
    There can only be one truth. If one religion says that God is a pig and the other says that God is a monkey, they can't both be right. I guess she could be some sort of pig-monkey thing, but then there is still an objective truth, and both of them were partially right. Also, with such polarized religions it would be very difficult for them to both be correct, even in a partial sense. For many of their claims, either one is right or the other.

    There is definitely one objective truth. I guess, like with your math analogy, there could be multiple ways of getting there/different understandings of the same thing, but there is definitely only one answer, and you can definitely be wrong. If one person says the answer is "there is no value for x" and the other says "x equals five", they cannot both be correct. If one person says x is 3 and the other says x is 5, there is a very small chance that they are both correct, although neither would have the complete answer ( [x-5]*[x-3]=0 would yield x=3,5 as its answer). With truth claims being so different, it is highly unlikely that they are both right, especially when considering opposing views (God is real vs. God is not real).

    [SIZE="3"][COLOR="red"]Also, while "all religions are essentially paths to the same thing" is often said with good intentions it is not only ignorant, but can actually be insulting to people with solid beliefs. You are essentially saying that one person's beliefs are the same as another's, and this can offend people. When you look into it, beliefs of different cultures are vastly different.
    There may be only one objective truth. In a sense, that is part of the definition of objective: 2+2=4 for everyone, however one arrives at it. Religion, however, is not in the business of finding objective truth. That is the job of science. It is precisely when religion tries to assert objective truth that the kinds of conflicts you describe occur, and believers look either like ignorant children or closed-minded fanatics. If your "beliefs" are so solid as to rest on objective facts, they are not beliefs, but simple acknowledgment of objective reality.

    Religion reveals subjective truth, which by definition, will look different to each believer. There will be similarities, enough so to make it possible and satisfying for humans to form faith groups around common interpretations and practice. The goal of a believer, then, is more like the goal of a lover than that of a mathematician: to have a satisfying relationship with a partner/spouse. Many people are working toward that goal, though each couple will realize it differently.
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  4. #64
    sswwwaagggg gmanyo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    275

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    There may be only one objective truth. In a sense, that is part of the definition of objective: 2+2=4 for everyone, however one arrives at it. Religion, however, is not in the business of finding objective truth. That is the job of science. It is precisely when religion tries to assert objective truth that the kinds of conflicts you describe occur, and believers look either like ignorant children or closed-minded fanatics. If your "beliefs" are so solid as to rest on objective facts, they are not beliefs, but simple acknowledgment of objective reality.

    Religion reveals subjective truth, which by definition, will look different to each believer. There will be similarities, enough so to make it possible and satisfying for humans to form faith groups around common interpretations and practice. The goal of a believer, then, is more like the goal of a lover than that of a mathematician: to have a satisfying relationship with a partner/spouse. Many people are working toward that goal, though each couple will realize it differently.
    So you're basically saying that people should believe not true things just to help guide them through life? How is religion not in the business of finding objective truth? It is only in modern (or, postmodern, I guess) culture that people have decided that "religion" (whatever that even means anymore) is no longer allowed to make truth claims, and only "science" can do that. Because "religion" and "science" have to be separate for some reason.

    If one religion is true, then it should work perfectly with science. It would be strange if one were only allowed to make objective claims from an atheistic standpoint, which is what I have to assume you mean by "science" since I don't see how science and religion should conflict.

    I guess from an atheist's perspective it would be fine to believe untrue things simply because they help you get through life, but you'll have to come to terms with the fact that they are, objectively, wrong. Your religion wouldn't be a path leading to the right answer, it would just be a lifestyle, and a very inconsistent one at that. And believing everything is simultaneously true requires an huge logical gap. You can't really say "I'm a Christian, I follow the Bible, my God is true to me, but other religions can be true, too" because Christianity is, by definition, dogmatic and exclusive. You'd have to realize that the entire foundation of Christianity is wrong.



    On another note, can we abandon the word "religion" and instead use "worldview"? It's a much better term. The word "religion" is bogged down by centuries of misuse, overuse, and misunderstanding.

    world·view
    noun /ˈwərldˌvyo͞o/ 

    A particular philosophy of life or conception of the world
    - I have broadened my worldview by experiencing a whole new culture
    Quote Originally Posted by Qlip View Post
    I'm starting to see you and your avatar as a cloud of odor that eminates from trashy threads.

  5. #65
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,585

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gmanyo View Post
    So you're basically saying that people should believe not true things just to help guide them through life? How is religion not in the business of finding objective truth? It is only in modern (or, postmodern, I guess) culture that people have decided that "religion" (whatever that even means anymore) is no longer allowed to make truth claims, and only "science" can do that. Because "religion" and "science" have to be separate for some reason.

    If one religion is true, then it should work perfectly with science. It would be strange if one were only allowed to make objective claims from an atheistic standpoint, which is what I have to assume you mean by "science" since I don't see how science and religion should conflict.

    I guess from an atheist's perspective it would be fine to believe untrue things simply because they help you get through life, but you'll have to come to terms with the fact that they are, objectively, wrong. Your religion wouldn't be a path leading to the right answer, it would just be a lifestyle, and a very inconsistent one at that. And believing everything is simultaneously true requires an huge logical gap. You can't really say "I'm a Christian, I follow the Bible, my God is true to me, but other religions can be true, too" because Christianity is, by definition, dogmatic and exclusive. You'd have to realize that the entire foundation of Christianity is wrong.
    Do not put words in my mouth. It takes both objective and subjective truth to comprehend the world and act constructively in it. It is not a matter of what religion is allowed to do, but rather of what it is able to do. It can try, for instance, to determine the age of the earth all it wants, but if it does so by counting generations in the Old Testament, it is doomed to failure.

    Religion and science are as separate as male and female, day and night, sound and silence. They are two sides to the same coin; complementary ways of looking at the world. They work best together, each making use of its particular strengths, much as coworkers with disparate skills collaborating on a project team. Any religion which operates in this manner can "work perfectly with science". Actually, the fault is not so much with the religions per se, as with specific (groups of) believers who want to claim more for religion than it can deliver. Science, similarly, cannot tell us why we are here, what our purpose in life is, or what is moral and good.
    Quote Originally Posted by gmanyo View Post
    On another note, can we abandon the word "religion" and instead use "worldview"? It's a much better term. The word "religion" is bogged down by centuries of misuse, overuse, and misunderstanding.
    Use whatever terms you like, as long as the definitions are clear. To me, the difference between religion and world-view is that religion includes the idea of a deity, while a world-view need not.
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  6. #66
    actinomycetes raindancing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    353

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fluffywolf View Post
    Not everyone is capable of objectively discussing religion with people that have different beliefs.

    I myself wonder if to some extent it is because those people have been 'forcefed' their beliefs to them, not wanting to hear anything about other beliefs or opinions, because they would feel like they might start questioning their own faith, which is a blasphemy to them and their society.

    Minor observation to support this notion:

    Every theist I have met that has chosen their beliefs later in life themselves, or are reformed because they wanted to, are always people that seem open to objective discussion with anyone from any other belief. They don't need to question their own belief.
    I've wondered this as well... Have certainly seen some people that support it. I was raised in a very religious family. (Baptist, specifically.) There was certainly no tolerance for other religious views. The funny thing is, a lot of people seem to genuinely think they are being objective. At least superficially. I do wonder how much they analyze their thought patterns and motivations. (Which in turn makes me wonder, if it is so easy for humans to delude themselves regarding their reasoning, how many delusions am I living under ) Anyway, they're happy to engage in 'debate', certain that they can convince you of the truth of their beliefs. It hardly matters if you point out things that don't make sense... they know they're right. Any disagreement or question on your part is merely nit picking, obtuseness, or a hardened heart. (That last one really gets me. I have heard this scripture used numerous times: "The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned." And because a lot of these people are family I feel like I'm going to implode from biting my tongue...)

    On a little side note, I have noticed a lot of mistrust about anything labeled as 'Philosophy'. Many of the religious people I know seem very wary, even threatened by it. Or else see it as some pseudo religion that needs to be disproved.
    “Can a man of perception respect himself at all?”
    ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky

  7. #67
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,585

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by raindancing View Post
    I've wondered this as well... Have certainly seen some people that support it. I was raised in a very religious family. (Baptist, specifically.) There was certainly no tolerance for other religious views. The funny thing is, a lot of people seem to genuinely think they are being objective. At least superficially. I do wonder how much they analyze their thought patterns and motivations. (Which in turn makes me wonder, if it is so easy for humans to delude themselves regarding their reasoning, how many delusions am I living under ) Anyway, they're happy to engage in 'debate', certain that they can convince you of the truth of their beliefs. It hardly matters if you point out things that don't make sense... they know they're right. Any disagreement or question on your part is merely nit picking, obtuseness, or a hardened heart.
    Reasoning is a process, and is only as sound as the facts and assumptions from which it starts. (Garbage in, garbage out.)
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  8. #68
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,540
    Homo sapiens has the ability to respond to the imagination in almost the same way we respond to reality.

    This ability to suspend our disbelief gives us art and poetry, movies and music, opera and ballet, ideology and religion.

    So to ask whether a religion is true or false is just as silly as asking whether a poem is true or false.

    So the question we should ask of a religion is whether it supports freedom and equality for all.

  9. #69
    Senior Member swordpath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    MBTI
    ISTx
    Posts
    10,552

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    Homo sapiens has the ability to respond to the imagination in almost the same way we respond to reality.

    This ability to suspend our disbelief gives us art and poetry, movies and music, opera and ballet, ideology and religion.

    So to ask whether a religion is true or false is just as silly as asking whether a poem is true or false.

    So the question we should ask of a religion is whether it supports freedom and equality for all.
    What if we want oppression and condemnation?

  10. #70
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,540
    Quote Originally Posted by swordpath View Post
    What if we want oppression and condemnation?
    Well, we will now be able to see this acted out in reality, as the Egyptians, the Libyans, the Tunisians, the Iraqis, the Afgans have chosen to be Islamic States ruled by Islamic Law called Sharia.

    And Sharia, as you know, is not based on freedom and equality, but rather submission and inequality. And this is submission and inequality freely chosen as an act of faith in Allah.

Similar Threads

  1. Why Do People Believe in Ghosts?
    By Tellenbach in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 09-19-2014, 09:16 AM
  2. Why I do not believe in God
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 248
    Last Post: 01-09-2013, 09:40 PM
  3. Why I no longer believe in MBTI
    By murkrow in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 72
    Last Post: 03-06-2011, 11:24 AM
  4. Prophecy In Christianity: Related to Ni?
    By Usehername in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 12-18-2007, 06:32 AM
  5. Do you believe in a higher power?
    By ygolo in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 09-03-2007, 08:58 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO