• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

[NT] NT & religions (& God)

NightSymphony

New member
Joined
Jan 20, 2008
Messages
8
MBTI Type
IXTJ
Well, ever since I was younger (Around the 6 or 7), I have never really believed in God. At all, actually. I used to think that there was something wrong with me, since every many people I know are strong believers in God.
Now that I think about it, I never really did ever believe in God, it seemed too unreal. And now, I know that I do not at all believe that there even is a God. I am Atheist.

And I am pretty much OK with that. Because I know that no God could possibly create all this pain.

However, a few people I knew wanted to convert me to Christianity. I am happy with being Atheist, though.
 

Priam

New member
Joined
Dec 20, 2007
Messages
272
MBTI Type
INTP
Actually, I took a class on Islamic religion back in college, and I'd say Muslim theology is theoretically a bit more compatible with a need for logical coherence than is Christian theology. If, as many Muslim scholars have written, "God" is simply a way of expressing the same concept that Plato referred to as "the sun" in his cave metaphor--the single, universal truth of which all the varied phenomena we perceive are merely an imperfect reflection--then I can see an NT deriving a great deal of insight from the pursuit of an education in theology. But "Islam" understood as a set of unquestionable truths and rigid rules would be just as problematic from an NT standpoint as any other religion understood the same way.

I actually have the most objections with Islam! At least with Christianity and, depending on the specific movement in Judaism, there's room to debate the (in)errancy of their respective holy documents, the Quran is specifically THE WORD and unquestionable. The only room for debate is one of interpretation and application, which leaves no ability to grow in human understanding. What was progressive in 600AD isn't so much anymore.

Is it much more theologically consistent? Absolutely! Mohammad did an excellent job of tying up the strings left dangling in both Judaism and Christianity, but I can deal with hanging strings much better than monolithic unquestioning as a central dogma. Plus the idea of "submission" before God seems antithetical to my own understanding.

My personal belief rests on the tenet that God, whatever it may be, gave us emotions and intellect for a reason and intended us to use them, to reach out and understand the glory of creation, not to dogmatically preach "my way or the highway"! We are in a process of ongoing revelation, more beautiful and poetic far beyond any Psalm or hymn could encompass, an egalitarian lifting of the human spirit closer to full understand of ourselves and the universe. I believe that God speaks to us all as prophets; though some listen more than others, and that the truth we are whispered is unique to our paths; though sharing with others can help us find commonality and a better understanding of our direction. If I had to identify as anything, the Quaker concept of the "small, still voice" resonates deeply.
 

lazyhappy

New member
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
107
God could exist- is unlikely but a possibility. everything had to start somewhere. but what made him? what made that?

i think thier could be a element that we havn't discovered yet that can create itself- how else did one atom form from nothing

or the universe could of always existed (which i have trouble believing) .

argh i have no time!
 
Last edited:

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,192
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I actually have the most objections with Islam! At least with Christianity and, depending on the specific movement in Judaism, there's room to debate the (in)errancy of their respective holy documents, the Quran is specifically THE WORD and unquestionable. The only room for debate is one of interpretation and application, which leaves no ability to grow in human understanding. What was progressive in 600AD isn't so much anymore.

Another curious difference is that Christianity tries to support the veracity of its scriptures by pointing out the thousands of document pieces/scraps and copies that are used to compare one to another [to show how little variation there has been].

meanwhile Islam claims divine origin for its scripture by pointing out there are only 6-7 (?) valid authentic copies of scripture. This lack of quantity is assumed to be a mark of divinity.

My personal belief rests on the tenet that God, whatever it may be, gave us emotions and intellect for a reason and intended us to use them, to reach out and understand the glory of creation, not to dogmatically preach "my way or the highway"! We are in a process of ongoing revelation, more beautiful and poetic far beyond any Psalm or hymn could encompass, an egalitarian lifting of the human spirit closer to full understand of ourselves and the universe. I believe that God speaks to us all as prophets; though some listen more than others, and that the truth we are whispered is unique to our paths; though sharing with others can help us find commonality and a better understanding of our direction. If I had to identify as anything, the Quaker concept of the "small, still voice" resonates deeply.

That was beautifully said.
 

Mr Galt

New member
Joined
Feb 7, 2008
Messages
294
MBTI Type
ISTP
"I am a false prophet. God is a superstition."
-Eli Sunday, There Will Be Blood
 

ShyINTP

New member
Joined
Jan 22, 2008
Messages
10
MBTI Type
INTP
I'm a hardcore atheist. In my worldview, there is no god, no afterlife, no absolute meaning with life and to boot we are all biological robots.

My feelings exactly!

From a logical stand point, if you allow for existence of one God, why not for two, or three, or the whole specie? .. as the ancients believed.

Since the civilization as we know it is 12,000 about years old (which is also highly debatable), it sounds rather silly, that the latecomer to the world religion stage -- Christianity -- is the "true" religion. There is more than enough evidence that they are just the latest plagiarism and modified copy of the ancient religions.

The only God(s) for me would be more advanced species living in the universe. (Organized) Religion is such a poor dogmatic replacement for the true wonders of the universe ..
 

Priam

New member
Joined
Dec 20, 2007
Messages
272
MBTI Type
INTP
Just saw this with the recent thread bump.

Another curious difference is that Christianity tries to support the veracity of its scriptures by pointing out the thousands of document pieces/scraps and copies that are used to compare one to another [to show how little variation there has been].

meanwhile Islam claims divine origin for its scripture by pointing out there are only 6-7 (?) valid authentic copies of scripture. This lack of quantity is assumed to be a mark of divinity.

To me, the shocking thing actually is how close to samizdat the various original language texts of the Bible have remained, though to be fair they weren't disseminated nearly as far or for as long as the various second or third generation translations. However, even the Latin bible from one end of the Roman Catholic world greatly resembled the bible from the other end, and this long before the printing press revolution.

The problem comes in when people don't realize that they're reading not a second generation, but rather a fourth generation copy of the original work that's been translated through at least three different languages, each of which had to use circumlocution to describe words that didn't exist in their own language. No matter how well-intentioned the scribe (and most of them honestly were), there are just some errors of meaning that always leak in.

However, even reading the original Greek/Aramaic/Hebrew texts, the saving grace of Christianity's ability to move with the times, is how impossible it is for any respected scholar of the Bible to argue that it is anything except an arbitrarily made thing, even if the books themselves are completely accurate. Some church officials over a millenia ago sat down and decided what of a few dozen books floating around were canonical, which were heretical, and which fell somewhere in-between. It's clearly recorded in church history and impossible for anyone who calls themselves a scholar to argue. The best case that can be made was that these leaders were wise people who could be trusted to make the right choice, but the concept of an infallible Bible sinks right there.

And that's a frickin' relief.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,192
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
To me, the shocking thing actually is how close to samizdat the various original language texts of the Bible have remained, though to be fair they weren't disseminated nearly as far or for as long as the various second or third generation translations. However, even the Latin bible from one end of the Roman Catholic world greatly resembled the bible from the other end, and this long before the printing press revolution.

yes, the transmission accuracy was very impressive; they took their work seriously.

The problem comes in when people don't realize that they're reading not a second generation, but rather a fourth generation copy of the original work that's been translated through at least three different languages, each of which had to use circumlocution to describe words that didn't exist in their own language. No matter how well-intentioned the scribe (and most of them honestly were), there are just some errors of meaning that always leak in.

Exactly. Inevitable, because no two languages are alike. So when you translate, some nuance of meaning is ALWAYS lost.

Which is why we have different "styles" of translation. Some translate literally word by word (or close to it). Others translate by "meaning of the phrase." Some even translate more on meaning of passage. But the nuances of the language change, meaning that if there is a "literal perfect" version of the Bible, then any translation is necessarily imperfect and wrong.

it is funny how anyone who does translation automatically understands these limitations, but getting it through the head of the layperson is like pulling teeth sometimes.

The best case that can be made was that these leaders were wise people who could be trusted to make the right choice, but the concept of an infallible Bible sinks right there. And that's a frickin' relief.

Yup. I generally think the people were trying to make the best choices they could, I'm not a conspiracy theorist. But they could still make mistakes, and sometimes there is no "perfect" choice, they were left with choosing between imperfect options. If you view the Bible in light of that, then you get a better sense of how to "take it."

And yes, it should be a relief because now we don't have to worry and fret about having the "perfect translation or understanding" of the texts. We are only obligated to try our best and get from it what we can.
 

disTant_eCHo

New member
Joined
Feb 10, 2008
Messages
171
MBTI Type
INTP
I have a curious question:
how does NT view religions?
what is the NT's notions of "God" ? can NT be as 'spiritual/religious' as most NF seems to be ?

and what does NT think , specifically, of Christianity concept of God? does it make sense? is it acceptable, or it is not acceptable for NT's rationale? and what's the reasons?

and for some unknown reason, is it true that NT's are more interested towards the New-Age-ism, or Buddhism, Hinduism, or even pantheism notion of "God" , rather than those Abrahamic religions (ie: Islam, Christianity, Judaism) ?
does this have anything to do at all with one being an "NT" (as opposed to an SJ, or ST, or NF, etc ) ?
I am an INTP and I am quite Christian. I wasn't raised in a very big Christian environment, it's just something that I developed on my own.
 

Night

Boring old fossil
Joined
Nov 2, 2007
Messages
4,755
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5/8
I see absolutely no friction between logic and religion.

Religion is an alogical construct; working to reconcile theism with reason is to miss the point of spirituality altogether.
 

Sinister Scribe

New member
Joined
Oct 11, 2008
Messages
62
MBTI Type
INTx
Enneagram
5
I've found that NTs tend to have strong thoughts/feelings on the subject of religion. I know NTs who are very strongly religious, but I also know a few NTs who are extremely atheistic. A lot more of that has to do with individual background and experiences, I think, than as a personality type.

I'm an INTJ, was raised in a conservative Christian church but won't set foot in a church service. I still consider myself religious, if only for the reasons Pascal had as an intent when he wrote about what would later become known as Pascal's Wager.
 

Valiant

Courage is immortality
Joined
Jul 7, 2007
Messages
3,895
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
8w7
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
I have a curious question:
how does NT view religions?

Can't speak for all of them, but I guess we tend to be sceptics and atheists.


what is the NT's notions of "God" ? can NT be as 'spiritual/religious' as most NF seems to be ?

Gee. I don't know. :D I guess there are stupid NT's as well as bright NF's.

and what does NT think , specifically, of Christianity concept of God? does it make sense? is it acceptable, or it is not acceptable for NT's rationale? and what's the reasons?

It doesn't make any sense. Especially the bible. Except for the part of it that have become standard western ethics. And no, i'm not talking about the burning of cities because of a little good sex. :D

and for some unknown reason, is it true that NT's are more interested towards the New-Age-ism, or Buddhism, Hinduism, or even pantheism notion of "God" , rather than those Abrahamic religions (ie: Islam, Christianity, Judaism) ?

Well, first off, the Abrahamic religions have so many flaws. And so much shit has been done in the name of christ and islam. And the jews of Israel aren't exactly without sin, either. I believe religions is a great way of creating a mob mentality that the rulers can use to control the populace, and it always provides favourite enemies of other religions. I just can't see how people are as stupid as they are. I thought the bible was complete bullshit when I was eight. How stupid are you guys? I'd totally want to be a salesman and try to sell you shit, cause I'd fool you in one minute. ;)
And the only one that is tempting is actual buddhism, philosophy. I wouldn't ever believe in gods. It's a ridiculous concept.

does this have anything to do at all with one being an "NT" (as opposed to an SJ, or ST, or NF, etc ) ?

Being an NT is probably connected with doubt. I think most of us are probably sceptics by nature. We need irrefutable evidence, and I think most of us can smell bullshit and stay clear of it. Religion is bullshit.
Religion is crowd control, and we're not part of the crowd. I don't think NT's are as prone to mob mentality as most other types.
 

Googly_Eyes

New member
Joined
Oct 12, 2008
Messages
15
MBTI Type
INTP
I wasn't raised Christian but I went to a Catholic elementary school. I can't necessarily say I ever believed in God despite all the praying/worshiping I did because I was too young to think for myself. When I did start speculating though, my transformation into an atheist wasn't instantaneous. I didn't want to let go of my "beliefs" and would exhaust all my energy on trying to square the circle, so to speak. Eventually I realized that I never even cared about my "beliefs" to begin with though, which made it a lot easier to consider whether or not I actually believed it.

I wound up becoming a non-religious theist for a while (I was starting high school at the time. It was a lot easier for me to abandon my beliefs without being taught them as if they were facts), then became a deist, became a pantheist, became utterly agnostic, then a passionate atheist, and now I'm an atheist with strong opinions on God and religion but don't really care to express them unless someone's planning on doing something like fly a Boeing 747 into an enormously populated building or waking me up on a Sunday morning to "Spread the good word of the Lord."

I thought the bible was complete bullshit when I was eight. How stupid are you guys? I'd totally want to be a salesman and try to sell you shit, cause I'd fool you in one minute. ;)
I've always noticed that of all the people who are raised religious but become atheist/agnostic, ENTJs are the first to stop believing and it always happens at a very early age. It's usually because they see religion as a method of control and, well, they're ENTJs.

I've also always got the impression that most of the "religious entrepreneurs" I've heard of seem like ENTJs (lol).

Being an NT is probably connected with doubt. I think most of us are probably sceptics by nature. We need irrefutable evidence, and I think most of us can smell bullshit and stay clear of it. Religion is bullshit.
Religion is crowd control, and we're not part of the crowd. I don't think NT's are as prone to mob mentality as most other types.
I agree.

and what does NT think , specifically, of Christianity concept of God? does it make sense? is it acceptable, or it is not acceptable for NT's rationale? and what's the reasons?
I don't think so. There are too many reasons for me to want to go into detail. All I can say is that I've debated many a Christian (theist) over the internet and after spending enough time thinking about and researching religion in general I've come to the conclusion that religion is simply the epitome of ignorance. Everything about it is illogical and each of its defenses are illogical.

I also agree with meme theory and see religion as a sort of unconscious "life-form" that survives by infecting our minds and "reproducing" in the minds of children. Religion is a parasite which improves its survival rate by reducing ours.

There are plenty of reasons to believe in God, but none of them are reasonable.
 

01011010

New member
Joined
Jun 22, 2008
Messages
3,916
MBTI Type
INxJ
I'm Agnostic/Atheist. I have two NF friends that are Agnostic and two NT friends that are deeply religious (Christianity). Personality type isn't a factor. Yet, I think NTs are more prone to question what they believe as opposed to 'blind faith'.

I have no issue with religion in itself. Some individuals need the moral structure and a belief to help them move through life more smoothly. To each their own. As long as I'm not being directly affected I could care less what anyone else chooses to believe.
 

RaptorWizard

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
5,895
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
I am God.

I am the power of Christ. And much like Christ, I love the little children...they are delicious.

That must mean you are...

RaptorJesus.jpg


RAPTOR JESUS!
 

Cartesian Theater

New member
Joined
Jul 8, 2012
Messages
40
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
9w1
I have a curious question:
how does NT view religions?
what is the NT's notions of "God" ? can NT be as 'spiritual/religious' as most NF seems to be ?
I view organized religion as a useful social construct that creates a uniform sense of ideology and conduct within a culture. It also provides the general public with a sense of security, understanding, love and connection which they would otherwise struggle to find on their own. I think NTs are capable of being spiritual/religious, but not blindly so like other types. We need to rationalize our beliefs, and so I don't think we could follow a religion without first dissecting it into believable concepts.

and what does NT think , specifically, of Christianity concept of God? does it make sense? is it acceptable, or it is not acceptable for NT's rationale? and what's the reasons?
The Christian concept of God is one of the muddiest concepts of God there is, simply because there are so many sects of Christianity, all with their own ideas and principles, and many of them don't seem to follow the bible's idea of God at all. So one Christian's idea of God might make perfect sense to me, while another's would be total nonsense. I really can't answer this.

and for some unknown reason, is it true that NT's are more interested towards the New-Age-ism, or Buddhism, Hinduism, or even pantheism notion of "God" , rather than those Abrahamic religions (ie: Islam, Christianity, Judaism) ?
does this have anything to do at all with one being an "NT" (as opposed to an SJ, or ST, or NF, etc ) ?
I think that a lot of New-Age religions as well as many Eastern religions (like Buddhism and Hinduism) appeal to intellectuals because they don't involve so many nonsensical stories and rituals like many monotheistic religions. What rational reason is there for a church to have stained glass windows, elaborate robes for the preachers, and crazy ceremonies in which you drink wine that represents the blood of a mystical demi-god who apparently died for your sins which he himself defined to the general public? It's all crazy flashy stuff that appeals to most people's instinct of "ooh, shiny, cool!" but has no place in personal faith. I've met a fair number of NT's who are monotheistic, and most of them get really into the technical aspects of religion (learning Hebrew and interpreting different parts of the Torah, for example) while shunning most of the flashy parts.

What it all comes down to is practicality. NT's value practical application above EVERYTHING, even their own faith. If our faith is impractical, we think of it as useless and something that needs to be destroyed. That's probably why so many NT's are anti-religion- they see all the impractical sides of religion and ignore the more practical human needs for faith, ideals and community. Buddhism is a lot more practical in some ways, since it tells us that we must work hard, help others and live simply, rather than saying "pray ten times a day to a 3D replica of a disgusting corpse and then go on living your life as a horrible person because you're going to heaven anyway."

I don't mean to offend anyone by the way; I'm just drunk.
 

Anonymous

Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
605
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
I have a curious question:
how does NT view religions?
what is the NT's notions of "God" ? can NT be as 'spiritual/religious' as most NF seems to be ?

and what does NT think , specifically, of Christianity concept of God? does it make sense? is it acceptable, or it is not acceptable for NT's rationale? and what's the reasons?

I don't see the concept of a deity as a social construct like some others, because I don't see it as social. I think it's more related to a person's own comfort levels with uncertainty and mortality. Not coincidentally, the same people you see clinging strongly to religion also frequently cling strongly to the state (nationalism), or ever smaller sects the more extreme you get. A threat to their god or to their state is a threat to their identity and meaning as a person.

I am ambivalent towards gods and religions. I do not believe in any gods or the supernatural, nor see any reason to.
 
Top