What Religion Do You Practice/Not Practice and Why?

[sprinkles]

I think there's a word for that, but it's an -ism.

 

[Mole]

I think you'd like GK Chesterton or benefit from giving him a read.

G.K.Chesterton is entertaining and a good writer, but he was a good apologist for an institution has has changed quite a lot and perhaps needs a new contemporary apologia.

 

[Xander]

I've been watching some of the "Big Think" stuff on YouTube and something resonated. I don't associate with an ism or an ist mainly because once you have one associated with you people believe they know what you think and what you're going to say. Personally I'd rather have a conversation than an assumption, hence I resist labels and use esoteric references rather than give answers to encourage a discourse, an investigation of what is actually going on rather than a pre set recipe.

 

[Noon]

Might be having a small crisis of faith atm. I mean, the faith itself is reasonably solid but I'm having trouble reconciling a good tree's bearance of a few bad fruits. It's made worse when I'm reminded of people I know and like, who were pretty much stellar for me all around, and think about how far apart we're drifting - intellectually and otherwise - because of this subject. On one hand it's c'est la vie and on the other it almost feels like it shouldn't be worth it.

 

[Passacaglia]

Might be having a small crisis of faith atm. I mean, the faith itself is reasonably solid but I'm having trouble reconciling a good tree's bearance of a few bad fruits. It's made worse when I'm reminded of people I know and like, who were pretty much stellar for me all around, and think about how far apart we're drifting - intellectually and otherwise - because of this subject. On one hand it's c'est la vie and on the other it almost feels like it shouldn't be worth it.

Sorry to hear that.

It sounds like some fellow believers are drifting into the crazy end of the pool?

 

[Noon]

Sorry to hear that.

It sounds like some fellow believers are drifting into the crazy end of the pool?

Haha you might say that

I think there are a few principles all people with humanitarian leanings can agree on. We might for instance all want good for people, believe in the general goodness of people and such things. It's so broad that I won't write a wall of text about it, but when you further believe in those things from within a specific context, a context which others can distort or co-opt almost arbitrarily, or perhaps which others may simply accept while leaving the principles it's supposed to contain, the shattering of those ideals can be a bit heavy. My immediate response is to think about taking the principles and abandoning the context, but for the most part I like the context enough that it isn't as simple just to do it.

 

[LonestarCowgirl]

Might be having a small crisis of faith atm. I mean, the faith itself is reasonably solid but I'm having trouble reconciling a good tree's bearance of a few bad fruits. It's made worse when I'm reminded of people I know and like, who were pretty much stellar for me all around, and think about how far apart we're drifting - intellectually and otherwise - because of this subject. On one hand it's c'est la vie and on the other it almost feels like it shouldn't be worth it.

Some Christians don't understand agape love, and how their harsh judgment of people (and their fruit) is not kind or loving. Jesus didn't die on the cross for perfect people. He died for sinners.

When people offend me, whether they're saved or unsaved, I take back my power by loving them. I know that I can't allow the disgust or pain I feel to rule over me because doing so opens the door for more strife and pain to ruin my ability to effectively represent Christ, and it eats away at me emotionally. I don’t want that to happen to me or to others.

We are all God's children created by God. If God created the people that disrespect him (and us), surely there is something good in them. It may be buried under baggage from years of hurt and it's waiting to be awakened by our Christ-like caring toward them. (The good neighbor looks beyond the external accidents and discerns those inner qualities that make all men human and, therefore, brothers.)

 

[Passacaglia]

Haha you might say that

I think there are a few principles all people with humanitarian leanings can agree on. We might for instance all want good for people, believe in the general goodness of people and such things. It's so broad that I won't write a wall of text about it, but when you further believe in those things from within a specific context, a context which others can distort or co-opt almost arbitrarily, or perhaps which others may simply accept while leaving the principles it's supposed to contain, the shattering of those ideals can be a bit heavy. My immediate response is to think about taking the principles and abandoning the context, but for the most part I like the context enough that it isn't as simple just to do it.

Hm, I'm having difficulty following your thoughts, but I think I get the gist.

It's always a shame when people lose sight of the humanitarian aspect of faith.

 

[Mole]

Some Christians don't understand agape love, and how their harsh judgment of people (and their fruit) is not kind or loving. Jesus didn't die on the cross for perfect people. He died for sinners.

When people offend me, whether they're saved or unsaved, I take back my power by loving them. I know that I can't allow the disgust or pain I feel to rule over me because doing so opens the door for more strife and pain to ruin my ability to effectively represent Christ, and it eats away at me emotionally. I don’t want that to happen to me or to others.

We are all God's children created by God. If God created the people that disrespect him (and us), surely there is something good in them. It may be buried under baggage from years of hurt and it's waiting to be awakened by our Christ-like caring toward them. (The good neighbor looks beyond the external accidents and discerns those inner qualities that make all men human and, therefore, brothers.)

Reading your posts I can see they are written in boilerplate. Boilerplate lacks any spontaneity. Boilerplate is an official way of talking. Boilerplate is an extreme way of avoiding ourself. Boilerplate hides a rising hysteria.

There seems to be no way out for you. No way for you to reach yourself or to reach us.

 

[Noon]

Some Christians don't understand agape love, and how their harsh judgment of people (and their fruit) is not kind or loving.

Little unclear on your meaning here - are you considering me judgmental of other people?

 

[LonestarCowgirl]

Little unclear on your meaning here - are you considering me judgmental of other people?

Of course not, we're all saints here! I related to your experience of reconciling fruit. Speaking of fruit, did you know the [MENTION=3325]Mole[/MENTION] is harmless to fruit trees and in fact can be beneficial in the garden as they eat grub worms and other pests that can be harmful to trees? It's true.

 

[Mole]

Of course not, we're all saints here! I related to your experience of reconciling fruit. Speaking of fruit, did you know the [MENTION=3325]Mole[/MENTION] is harmless to fruit trees and in fact can be beneficial in the garden as they eat grub worms and other pests that can be harmful to trees? It's true.

Ah, I was wrong. You write more than boilerplate. Why, here you are having a go at Mole. Sure it's indirect, and disguised by calling Mole beneficial and harmless, but getting the knife in with Mole eating grubs and worms and other pests.

So here you have been provoked by Mole to getting close to expressing your true feelings.

But don't stop here. Your feelings are your own, and we love to hear them.

 

[LonestarCowgirl]

Ah, I was wrong. You write more than boilerplate. Why, here you are having a go at Mole. Sure it's indirect, and disguised by calling Mole beneficial and harmless, but getting the knife in with Mole eating grubs and worms and other pests.

So here you have been provoked by Mole to getting close to expressing your true feelings.

You're very good at that! I'm so close.

But don't stop here. Your feelings are your own, and we love to hear them.

Thank you for the encouraging words.

 

[Coriolis]

When people offend me, whether they're saved or unsaved, I take back my power by loving them. I know that I can't allow the disgust or pain I feel to rule over me because doing so opens the door for more strife and pain to ruin my ability to effectively represent Christ, and it eats away at me emotionally. I don’t want that to happen to me or to others.

I wish all people who call themselves Christians would try as faithfully to represent Christ in their daily lives.

Reading your posts I can see they are written in boilerplate. Boilerplate lacks any spontaneity. Boilerplate is an official way of talking. Boilerplate is an extreme way of avoiding ourself. Boilerplate hides a rising hysteria.

It's only boilerplate if you didn't come up with it yourself.

Ah, I was wrong. You write more than boilerplate. Why, here you are having a go at Mole. Sure it's indirect, and disguised by calling Mole beneficial and harmless, but getting the knife in with Mole eating grubs and worms and other pests.

You have it easy. The former member known as "garbage" invited much . . . messier . . . ribbing due to his username.

 

[Mole]

You're very good at that! I'm so close.
Thank you for the encouraging words.

G'day Skinny, it's plain you are a dedicated person, and a serious dedicated person at that. This is a very good foundation to build on.

As you can guess my interest is in spontaneity, and your good foundation gives you stability and safety to explore spontaneity. And dear Skinny I can see the gleam of spontaneity in your eye.

 

[Noon]

When people offend me, whether they're saved or unsaved, I take back my power by loving them. I know that I can't allow the disgust or pain I feel to rule over me because doing so opens the door for more strife and pain to ruin my ability to effectively represent Christ, and it eats away at me emotionally. I don’t want that to happen to me or to others.

I don't understand how you can keep doing this (not allowing disgust or pain to rule over you), and this is what I'm having the most trouble with. I don't understand how people can be intentionally cruel, or go out of their way to be so, or how good intentions can be used against you, and how in the end sometimes there's never a rebalance. It's not difficult to understand literally, but it's difficult to really accept. Not out of narcissism or moral outrage; it's hard to stay motivated. Sometimes I'm afraid that one day something so bad will happen that I won't recover from the stress. And then what? Aren't you useless to yourself, to religion, and to the world at that point?

 

[Cygnus]

 

[LonestarCowgirl]

I don't understand how you can keep doing this (not allowing disgust or pain to rule over you), and this is what I'm having the most trouble with. I don't understand how people can be intentionally cruel, or go out of their way to be so, or how good intentions can be used against you, and how in the end sometimes there's never a rebalance. It's not difficult to understand literally, but it's difficult to really accept. Not out of narcissism or moral outrage; it's hard to stay motivated. Sometimes I'm afraid that one day something so bad will happen that I won't recover from the stress. And then what? Aren't you useless to yourself, to religion, and to the world at that point?

I've been there in thought, and I moved on.

I understand where you're coming from, but I don't want to understand feelings that don't serve me well.

I have no fears of someone permanently robbing me of my joy because I've always found the exit door and escaped. What can man do to me?

In order for me to thrive in an environment, there must be respect. I can dislike the way people treat me and treat themselves even and still survive, but if people abuse me or themselves to a point where I can no longer filter out the abuse, then I prefer to remove myself from them.

 

[Lark]

I find it interesting how anthropologists have considered that the true basis of religion is humanism or hope while atheists have considered it to be human failings and delusional thinking.

I guess it just depends were you start from as to where you're going.

 

[Coriolis]

I find it interesting how anthropologists have considered that the true basis of religion is humanism or hope while atheists have considered it to be human failings and delusional thinking.

These are not mutually exclusive, and to some degree may even overlap. Just different perspectives on the same thing.