Me and religion

[entropie]

It was like 6 years ago, I have been attending for the last time in my religion class. The teacher we had, everybody loved. He gave good grades and was a man of the people. Pretty sure he was ENFP. On every party we had, when a class made their exam, he was given the "golden toilet brush" that was given to the best teachers. His teaching were like this: he presented a topic, we started arguing in class. He delivered inputs until the point, when all input was met. Like for example abortion, you reach a point in a discussion, when you have two sides with good arguments and when you are stuck and need to decide for one side. Everytime that happened, he presented the religious view and it often naturally gave explanation to the things.

Well he hated me. In every exam he denounced me with bad grades. Never had something else than a 4 that is on a scale from 1(good) to 5(failed) and 6(dumbass). He once gave me a 3- didnt know if he wanted to provoke me.

Then I had my final exam. In germany you choose 5 topics in 13th grade. With me it was physics, math, biology, english and religion. It is not a free choice, the topics need to be of certain fields. Like for example philosophy or religion as society science. I scored in religion 1 out of 15 points. That is a 5- and had it been 0 points I would have failed my whole exam.

I have no problems with people. I get along with everyone, you can get along with. At least it is not my impression that I am difficult. So I did not understand, why that man hated me so much. By the time in school, I was living my life like Jesus. Until today I have never cheated on any human, I am god damn proud of. I have not killed someone. I try not to destroy life, I try to make life. And I try to protect the innocent. So what was so different in my beliefs about religion ?

In school I have been a sample child. Did my work, was a great and easy boy and I was dependable. After school, as it is with all great boys, I collapsed my wavefunction. I started heavy drinking and ended up with pot. Never did any hard drugs though. By that time, I needed to choose my field in university and I choosed religion, because that question from school so much bugged me. I got into that for one year and never really attended any classes and eventually after this bad year, I recovered, became healthier and started to study engineering, what I have by now finished with a B.Sc. and still work on my M.Sc.

It was not my teachers fault, I wasted this year. That was a natural thing, I needed for my personal development. That I choosed religion was out of a spontaneous idea, I had when I subscribed.

I just need to know to understand, why I could be that far away from religion, even if I think I am not.

In my eight thread I have posted:

Another view on the 8

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Type Eight
---
Bad boys
-
While ones are sample childs, eights are bad boys. Their self-perception is: "I am upsetting". And they even like it to be "upsetting". One can imagine, how much problems eights have with church, where you are told: "Be nice and honest and good and pious". That makes no sense to an eight. The good guys are to eights sissies or cowards.
-
Altercation
-
An eight woman explained, she needed 40 years to develop confidence in Jesus. Because like Jesus was portraied - as blond, blue-eyed softie, who looks down smilieing on children - he did not tell her anything. This Jesus was not worth of her loving. Eights need someone, who get with them engaged into an altercation.
-
Justice
-
Eights do have, by factory design, a sense for justice. They see the dumbness and injustice in the world and they love to unmask it. They want to put mischief down. Without the eight the world would probably never change. One would get along with the dumbest systems.

----
This is a crucial thing that is part of my personality.

If you have read this now, thank you for doing so and something else. I do not want to be analyzed. I am looking for the thing that could make someone religious or better what it is that defines religion.

To come to the definite answer, why I am so far off with religion.

I guess "definite answers", is a good word to start with...

 

[Ilah]

I would define religious as some one who follows an organized religion and sticks to all the basic beliefs, values, rituals, etc. that are part of it.

I contrast with spiritual which I use for people who have a strong belief in God but does not necessarily follow an organized religion. I define God rather loosely here to include Goddess, the gods, the godesses, Spirit, universal power or whatever term you use to describe a higher power(s).

There are Christians who have a deep faith but don't agree with everything the church teaches any modify it to fit their own ideas about what is right. I would call them spiritual, but not religious.

The New Age movement I would also classify as spiritual, but not religious.

I had strong beliefs, but they didn't always agree with what they taught in church. This was very traumatic for me. I have a theory this is not uncommon in people with a strong N (since my independant beliefs were very N driven), but I have nothing to back this up with.

 

[Totenkindly]

I would define religious as some one who follows an organized religion and sticks to all the basic beliefs, values, rituals, etc. that are part of it.

I contrast with spiritual which I use for people who have a strong belief in God but does not necessarily follow an organized religion. I define God rather loosely here to include Goddess, the gods, the godesses, Spirit, universal power or whatever term you use to describe a higher power(s).

In general that's how I use the terms as well.

I had strong beliefs, but they didn't always agree with what they taught in church. This was very traumatic for me. I have a theory this is not uncommon in people with a strong N (since my independent beliefs were very N driven), but I have nothing to back this up with.

Theory and experience backs it up pretty nicely, short of an actual type survery.

S's tend to see the tangible, focus on the actual religion manifestations, including the sacred texts.

N's are interested in the insinuations of the religion, not as much the tangibles. They want to know the reason behind things and the larger pattern.

Religion is codified ethics. Rules are tangible and more easily applied; ethics are nebulous. N's will generally feel uncomfortable in rigid environments where the hidden/underlying meaning is ignored.

 

[Samuel De Mazarin]

This idea that religion needs to be something where one starts by just throwing oneself to the winds of faith has always been disturbing to me... and frankly, not all religions demand this of people...

If I were a dedicated Christian, I would know the scriptures inside and out, particularly the Pentateuch, the Psalms and Ecclesiastes, and of course the four Gospels... and then start working with a verse or a small set of teachings at a time... applying them in my daily life... if I saw change from a moral perspective, it would make it easier for me to continue to explore the more hard-to-swallow metaphysical teachings... or to at least debate them from the standpoint of someone who'd been making some progress along the path, not merely questioning from outside...

 

[Little Linguist]

It was like 6 years ago, I have been attending for the last time in my religion class. The teacher we had, everybody loved. He gave good grades and was a man of the people. Pretty sure he was ENFP. On every party we had, when a class made their exam, he was given the "golden toilet brush" that was given to the best teachers. His teaching were like this: he presented a topic, we started arguing in class. He delivered inputs until the point, when all input was met. Like for example abortion, you reach a point in a discussion, when you have two sides with good arguments and when you are stuck and need to decide for one side. Everytime that happened, he presented the religious view and it often naturally gave explanation to the things.

Well he hated me. In every exam he denounced me with bad grades. Never had something else than a 4 that is on a scale from 1(good) to 5(failed) and 6(dumbass). He once gave me a 3- didnt know if he wanted to provoke me.

Then I had my final exam. In germany you choose 5 topics in 13th grade. With me it was physics, math, biology, english and religion. It is not a free choice, the topics need to be of certain fields. Like for example philosophy or religion as society science. I scored in religion 1 out of 15 points. That is a 5- and had it been 0 points I would have failed my whole exam.

I have no problems with people. I get along with everyone, you can get along with. At least it is not my impression that I am difficult. So I did not understand, why that man hated me so much. By the time in school, I was living my life like Jesus. Until today I have never cheated on any human, I am god damn proud of. I have not killed someone. I try not to destroy life, I try to make life. And I try to protect the innocent. So what was so different in my beliefs about religion ?

In school I have been a sample child. Did my work, was a great and easy boy and I was dependable. After school, as it is with all great boys, I collapsed my wavefunction. I started heavy drinking and ended up with pot. Never did any hard drugs though. By that time, I needed to choose my field in university and I choosed religion, because that question from school so much bugged me. I got into that for one year and never really attended any classes and eventually after this bad year, I recovered, became healthier and started to study engineering, what I have by now finished with a B.Sc. and still work on my M.Sc.

It was not my teachers fault, I wasted this year. That was a natural thing, I needed for my personal development. That I choosed religion was out of a spontaneous idea, I had when I subscribed.

I just need to know to understand, why I could be that far away from religion, even if I think I am not.

In my eight thread I have posted:

Another view on the 8

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Type Eight
---
Bad boys
-
While ones are sample childs, eights are bad boys. Their self-perception is: "I am upsetting". And they even like it to be "upsetting". One can imagine, how much problems eights have with church, where you are told: "Be nice and honest and good and pious". That makes no sense to an eight. The good guys are to eights sissies or cowards.
-
Altercation
-
An eight woman explained, she needed 40 years to develop confidence in Jesus. Because like Jesus was portraied - as blond, blue-eyed softie, who looks down smilieing on children - he did not tell her anything. This Jesus was not worth of her loving. Eights need someone, who get with them engaged into an altercation.
-
Justice
-
Eights do have, by factory design, a sense for justice. They see the dumbness and injustice in the world and they love to unmask it. They want to put mischief down. Without the eight the world would probably never change. One would get along with the dumbest systems.

----
This is a crucial thing that is part of my personality.

If you have read this now, thank you for doing so and something else. I do not want to be analyzed. I am looking for the thing that could make someone religious or better what it is that defines religion.

To come to the definite answer, why I am so far off with religion.

I guess "definite answers", is a good word to start with...

I don't know - you wanted to look at this from a religious/philosophical position, which I think is right. Let me look at it from a pedogogical perspective. (BTW, I am ENFP - sort of like you expected this teacher to be).

Geez. In terms of lessons I formulate my lessons in almost the exact same way, but it takes a lot to get me to fail someone. Why do you think that happened? Do you think you were treated unfairly because you received grades that were biased?

If so, that is not correct - the teacher would have been really awful, unfair, and just totally stupid to nearly fail someone due to having different ideas. Personally, I think it is fascinating when people think differently and I long to understand where they are coming from. I mean, that is REALLY interesting and cool stuff. If someone thinks like I do, it is not really all that engaging because they are at the same point in their evolutionary development as I am. It's more interesting when the person has an idea that is totally antithetical to your own.

In a classroom setting, I always maintain a kind of detached professionalism. Meaning, if we have a debate about something - I teach English, btw, and often have discussions about history, politics, etc. - I generally do not give an opinion as much as stimulate the conversation. After all, I am giving an English class, not a social studies class. So if people like to talk about these things, I basically moderate the discussion instead of participating in it, and I correct English mistakes. Sometimes the debate reaches a standstill - like you mentioned - at which point I will throw in an idea just for argument's sake to get it going again until I notice that the subject has been "talked out." It's a great method because the students practice the language in a challenging way without them noticing because they are so engaged about the topic at hand.

In a more private setting, I am a bit more confrontational and emotional - I must admit. Even though I might seem like I am fighting and resisting the new idea, I am really challenging the other person to demonstrate their idea in the clearest possible way so that I can analyze its validity. ALAS, most people think I am ATTACKING their idea just because I am being a jackass - so they ignore me or attack back viciously. No problem with that, actually. But an outsider must think, HOLY CRAP!!! Usually, though, I try to tone my arguments down because I realize how upsetting that is for some people. So yeah. I try not to get too emotional but I cannot maintain this cool detachment that is so obvious in my classes. I believe I "wear a hat" in that setting.

It could be that this teacher was either unable or unwilling to look at your arguments from this professionally detached perspective. That is a TERRIBLE teacher. I cannot FAIL or ALMOST fail a student just because he raises ideas different from mine. Even if my Fi kicks in and says, "HOLY CRAP!!! What is this guy - an amoral fart?!?!?!" I cannot FAIL him if his ideas are sound, his logic rational, and his writing flawless. Nuh uh. WRONG. UNETHICAL. You MUST BE detached - you MUST. Or you must leave teaching alone. Of course, he was teaching RELIGION, not ENGLISH - BUT - still....It's a religion class, not a brainwashing section. Unless he says, "Please give the Catholic/Protestant viewpoint," or whatever, you can say whatever you want.

Perhaps your teacher was trying to challenge you - push you - because he knew you had potential. However what some people do not understand is this: Giving awful grades over and over again can be stimulating at first, but demoralizing in the long run, and it is a tactic I refuse to use. I think that's playing games. I'd much rather engage someone in an active debate where both sides are emotional and rational at the same time than put someone in the position where the person says HOLY CRAP WHAT DID I DO WRONG?!?!?!? (F reaction) Or WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU?!?!?!?! (T reaction)

Okay, every teacher is different, but I never would have done that. I only fail if it's the last resort - I cannot construct and alter grades - that is unethical. Some people do not deserve a passing mark. I'd say that is about 1 in every 200 or so. Teachers that fail on a regular basis for no reason are just crap. :steam: