What's your religion?

[Juusu]

Haruhism! :>

[Bea Rabbit]

wow. so many Atheist here. :O
cant imagine how my life without god.
my self is a moslem.

[Socke]

Atheist and proud of it.

[Sinestra]

My religion huh? I belong to

NO'MAAM

The national organization of Men against Amzazonian Masterhood.


Just joking i personal am not a fan of organized religion but i dont have a problem with those who have faith as long as they dont try to force their beliefs down my throat. If they want to talk to me about it sure thats fine but once i say im not interested or thank you for your time. Dont press the issue be on your way and there wont be a problem.

[NightWish]

Thread closed while I work out what to do with the last few pages of discussion, that has veered too far from the original topic.

---

I've removed a whole range of posts that were off-topic in this thread. I don't yet know if I will ever put them in their own thread, because the effort required to moderate such discussion is too high.

Spoiler for justification:

The posts appear to be focused on the origins of religion and the arguments around the validity of theism and deism. The debate started out innocently enough: a few off-topic posts here and there, which attract a few more, and so on. Although off-topic, some of the diversions were quite interesting. However, it ended up being all off-topic and very cyclic. I think it is clear some posters need to brush up on their logic skills but others need to improve their situation reading skills, to know when to back off and accept that an online forum is an imperfect medium for such debates.

Predictably, the sides became entrenched and couldn't restrain themselves: one side not really getting the arguments and the other not willing to walk away. All of which demonstrating the need for a mediator, a role filled by the moderation staff. Unfortunately the level of mediation required to keep such a debate going would take a lot more time than it is reasonable to ask of the staff.

I am going to open this thread again but with some explicit rules; ignore them and the thread will probably be closed permanently or you'll be barred from posting.

• No off-topic posts
  The purpose of this thread is for members to state their religion or spiritual focus (or lack thereof). This can include explanations and justifications, provided you stick to personal history and not the history/tenets of the religion itself, or questions about the same.
  
  Future diversions from the topic will not be tolerated.
  
  
• Be polite to your fellow forum members
  Do not insult or harass other members for their life choices, no matter how strongly you disagree with them. Discussion is always welcome, but harassing people will not be tolerated.
  
  
• No proselytizing
  To paraphrase Vexx, this thread is NOT for proselytizing. Details about the religion, etc. itself can be provided using a link (wikipedia would be a good choice). Similarly, if you want to know more details about the religion itself, do your own research or ask in private. Do not post discussing it.
  
  This works both way: asking probing questions about the poster's choices, the history that brought them to their religion, is fine, but if you find their position objectionable or they are being evasive/not answering, walk away. This is not the place to coerce people into re-evaluating their beliefs.
  
  
• No meta-posting
  Do not debate the thread in the thread. If you want to argue the rules, contact me (or another member of staff) directly.
  
  If you see a problem use the report button:

  Click the button found to the left of the post, just under the poster's avatar. Using the Report button is anonymous and helps the Moderators to locate and deal with problems quickly.

[Proto]

To tell the truth, I'm confused as to what this thread is for now. Could you clarify on what topics are valid for discussion in this revised thread version?

[xris]

I thougth NightWish covered all this in his post.

Originally Posted by NightWish

The purpose of this thread is for members to state their religion or spiritual focus (or lack thereof). This can include explanations and justifications, provided you stick to personal history and not the history/tenets of the religion itself, or questions about the same.

This thread is NOT for proselytizing. Details about the religion, etc. itself can be provided using a link (wikipedia would be a good choice). Similarly, if you want to know more details about the religion itself, do your own research or ask in private. Do not post discussing it.

Originally Posted by Proto

To tell the truth, I'm confused as to what this thread is for now. Could you clarify on what topics are valid for discussion in this revised thread version?

Originally Posted by NightWish

Do not debate the thread in the thread. If you want to argue the rules, contact me (or another member of staff) directly.

[Haak]

I'm a muslim, but I really don't know a lot about it's history as I'd like to. Nor do I know much about the middle east conflict. Which is really the main thing people think of when they think of a muslim, so it's kind of unfortunate when they ask my opinion about it. At some point I'll try and do some research...

[KiNA]

Then salam from your fellow muslim brother .. I do try to keep track of any muslim around AS here.. but real life requirement takes precedent over a lot of things (especially when it comes to an internet community)

[ash0ka]

I'm an atheist but I take a lot of philosophy from Buddhism.

[Nightbat®]

"Where Science ends, God (/religion) begins"

If I am able to accept many scientific theories as 'plausible', then the theory of the existence of a higher power isn't that far off
But as I'm getting older, I have as hard a time believing science as I do believing religions

Though this still does not make me religious, at least science comes up with a bit more than "Because we say so" and certainly doesn't glue themselves to "because it is written"

Science may also fill in the blanks with things they have no definitive proof of, but at least they'll correct it when they turn out wrong
and the proof science brings to the table is more real than heavily editted stories from times long ago
We don't believe in Snowwhite either!

Do the lights go on or off after I die?
Dunno, I'll find out eventually, right now I'm too busy trying to live

[ninryu]

jewish here.

[Agito Akiyama]

Born Jewish but later decided I'm an Agnostic Atheist (If that's the correct term)
I do believe in god though I don't believe in the bible and the traditions, It's fun and everything but meh.

[monster]

Originally Posted by Nightbat®

"Where Science ends, God (/religion) begins"

And that's the problem: the idea that science and religion are necessarily mutually exclusive of each other. Christianity, for example, certainly doesn't spend the majority of its time trying to explain in detail how everything in the physical world works. And God is a spiritual being, which is outside of the realm of science. So it is a pointless exercise to try to fully "replace" God with science, or vice versa.

[Nightbat®]

Originally Posted by monstert

And that's the problem: the idea that science and religion are necessarily mutually exclusive of each other. Christianity, for example, certainly doesn't spend the majority of its time trying to explain in detail how everything in the physical world works. And God is a spiritual being, which is outside of the realm of science. So it is a pointless exercise to try to fully "replace" God with science, or vice versa.

Science and religion are mutually exclusive
Science doesn't believe in god since they can't prove it (yet), and religion doesn't believe in science because it undermines their written rules

[fertygo]

Originally Posted by Haak

I'm a muslim, but I really don't know a lot about it's history as I'd like to. Nor do I know much about the middle east conflict. Which is really the main thing people think of when they think of a muslim, so it's kind of unfortunate when they ask my opinion about it. At some point I'll try and do some research...

Originally Posted by KiNA

Then salam from your fellow muslim brother .. I do try to keep track of any muslim around AS here.. but real life requirement takes precedent over a lot of things (especially when it comes to an internet community)

Wow not expect you two is muslim too, sallam from south-east asia.
I hear on UK (and on others EU Country), islam keep growing huh... can you tell a little about live as muslim on there ?
Well it must be not really different, but I'm curious on little things, like how atmosphere when Friday sholat' etc

and KiNA, your wife is muslim too?

[monster]

Originally Posted by Nightbat®

Science and religion are mutually exclusive
Science doesn't believe in god since they can't prove it (yet), and religion doesn't believe in science because it undermines their written rules

It's more like science doesn't care about God, since it can't describe God. And religion doesn't necessarily care about science, since explaining the way physical world works might not be its main concern, such as the case with Christianity.

And because of that, you can have a scientist who is also religious.

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by monstert

It's more like science doesn't care about God, since it can't describe God. And religion doesn't necessarily care about science, since explaining the way physical world works might not be its main concern, such as the case with Christianity.

And because of that, you can have a scientist who is also religious.

Wellllllll, the latter only holds true if you're not a "religious literalist" for whom the results of scientific evidence directly threaten your holy texts because you might have to take some of the writings metaphorically.... which puts the whole house of cards at risk in your mind as a literalist. No scientist can function properly with a religious literalist brain filter because they eliminate possible data models by unsupported assertion rather than via negation by experiment.

Science is okay with the knowledge map containing "Here be Dragons" regions (like the old maps where they'd draw that in unknown areas), it just keeps chipping away to remove those unknowns instead of leaping to assertions about them.

edit: religion is on safest grounds when it focuses on principles of living, or how to prepare for any afterlife/reincarnation, make good memories for others, Golden Rule, etc. It is in quicksand when it comes to trying to maintain the fractional component of its earliest pre-science purpose of "explaining why lightning, where stuff came from, etc".

[ChainLegacy]

Also, there are scientists that disagree with your interpretation, monstert. Their argument, paraphrased by me, essentially goes like this: science operates on evidence that can be tested and observed directly or indirectly, therefore essentially anything is in science's jurisdiction, even if we do not have the answers yet. Religion can't fill in that gap because it just offers possibilities without the type of objective information that science requires. So rather than give religion any increased credibility, it is actually more scientific to just say "I don't know."

[monster]

Originally Posted by Vexx

Wellllllll, the latter only holds true if you're not a "religious literalist" for whom the results of scientific evidence directly threaten your holy texts because you might have to take some of the writings metaphorically.... which puts the whole house of cards at risk in your mind as a literalist. No scientist can function properly with a religious literalist brain filter because they eliminate possible data models by unsupported assertion rather than via negation by experiment.

Well, yes, obviously not everything in the Bible, for example, is meant to be taken literally.

Science is okay with the knowledge map containing "Here be Dragons" regions (like the old maps where they'd draw that in unknown areas), it just keeps chipping away to remove those unknowns instead of leaping to assertions about them.

Well, that's assuming everything in religion is covered by the map in the first place. For those areas that aren't even in the map, science has little or no relevance.

Originally Posted by ChainLegacy

Also, there are scientists that disagree with your interpretation, monstert. Their argument, paraphrased by me, essentially goes like this: science operates on evidence that can be tested and observed directly or indirectly, therefore essentially anything is in science's jurisdiction, even if we do not have the answers yet.

Only if, by anything, you mean matter and energy.

Religion can't fill in that gap because it just offers possibilities without the type of objective information that science requires. So rather than give religion any increased credibility, it is actually more scientific to just say "I don't know."

Religion doesn't have to fill any gap. I can believe that God created the world and still scientifically determine how chemicals bond, etc.