What's your religion?

[Girl_who_cried_gnome]

Originally Posted by Ledgem

Both of these aspects view God in terms of life forms as we know them. All life has some form of sexuality, and all life is a product of life. God is something else. The Bible claims that God made man "in His image" but I don't know that God should be considered anything like a person. As far as we know and speculate, God isn't like other life - it's something else entirely.

EXACTLY thats what i was saying before i started to go off rambling about sexism in my post above lol

[Girl_who_cried_gnome]

Originally Posted by Kyuusai

Using "He" to refer to God is not an aspect of religion so much as it is an aspect of the language. However, God is called the "Father" because that is the best description of what the human relationship with Him is considered to be.

Judaism and Christianity absolutely recognize the "feminine" aspect of God in creation, but God doesn't have gender. Such descriptions are just metaphors as we view God in terms of our own experience and understanding.



It's just you. Mosaic law was written to accommodate an already misogynistic society, but women are not degraded by the moral and theological teaching. Mary Magdalene was considered a virtuous women despite her past. Mary was only viewed as adulterous by those around her, and was recorded as actually being virtuous. There are positive portrayals of women as well as negative, just as is the case for men.

i know this was mostly just based towards christianity... which in that case does only refer to him as either the "father" or "he" or atleast in a methodist congregation....

i also just dont understand why people just infer that the great spirit (going to use native american terms now) is a god, using the language to insist that it is genderized in terms of such great spiritual force being male

and yes i understand that this time is quite away from women suffrage but it seems to me that in other cases of the bible it states that woman are indeed a man's property and it just depicts how women are always seen as the ones who need to be "released of their sin" more when opposed to men... like mary for instance.... but i guess this is where the point of view comes as the bible was written by men : / sorry but i have a very feminist attitude when it comes to things like this

[Girl_who_cried_gnome]

Originally Posted by Gemstar

If God is the creator of all things then who created God ? How was God able to do the things he has done ? Doesn't he need food or had parents ? Did he just appear out of thin air ? And if he is the creator of all things how can he appear out of something he has created ?

its not a question of who, but what....

[TinyRedLeaf]

Originally Posted by Gemstar

If God is the creator of all things then who created God ? How was God able to do the things he has done ? Doesn't he need food or had parents ? Did he just appear out of thin air ? And if he is the creator of all things how can he appear out of something he has created ?

You're thinking of the cosmological argument for God, ie, the "argument from first cause".

Personally, I find it a weak argument, because it does beg the question of what "caused" God to exist. However, an easy way out of this objection is to point out that He is outside of time/space as we know it. Time did not exist before God, so asking what came before Him is somewhat meaningless.

Originally Posted by Girl_who_cried_gnome

also, if you put god in the terms of a human, why must it be a "he"? personally i think it would be more fitting to have God be personified (if necessary) as a woman... as such thoughts of a great spiritual being giving life to all existence resembles much to a woman giving birth to a new human life...

Well, I sometimes wonder why we assume God is white. (S)he could be a black woman.

Anyway, gender is a side issue as far as I'm aware. It matters more whether you are able to build a personal relationship with Him (or Her). From my point-of-view, humans made God in their image, rather than the other way round. So, um, go with whichever "image" makes you more comfortable, I guess?

[Anh_Minh]

Originally Posted by Ledgem

Both of these aspects view God in terms of life forms as we know them. All life has some form of sexuality, and all life is a product of life. God is something else. The Bible claims that God made man "in His image" but I don't know that God should be considered anything like a person. As far as we know and speculate, God isn't like other life - it's something else entirely.

Plenty of asexual life on Earth. In fact, I think that's most of the biomass.

Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf

You're thinking of the cosmological argument for God, ie, the "argument from first cause".

Personally, I find it a weak argument, because it does beg the question of what "caused" God to exist. However, an easy way out of this objection is to point out that He is outside of time/space as we know it. Time did not exist before God, so asking what came before Him is somewhat meaningless.

Isn't you counter argument basically "God is completely magical. Do not try to apply logic to it."? If we're going to think like that, what's the point of thinking about God at all?

Well, I sometimes wonder why we assume God is white.

We do? I've never been big on giving God a shape, but then I don't speak to him.

[TinyRedLeaf]

Originally Posted by Anh_Minh

We do? I've never been big on giving God a shape, but then I don't speak to him.

Neither do I. I was using "we" in a general sense. My statement wasn't directed at anyone in particular.

Originally Posted by Anh_Minh

Isn't you counter argument basically "God is completely magical. Do not try to apply logic to it"? If we're going to think like that, what's the point of thinking about God at all?

Does belief require logic? What makes gravity hippos any less "magical" than God?

I'm hardly in a position to argue for God's existence. I was merely stating a counter-argument I often hear. As I've said, I find it a weak explanation. In any case, so what if you can "prove" that God doesn't exist? It's not going to stop people from believing in Him. (Note: disregard the problematic semantics, I know you can't prove a negative.)

In the insistence on having rational explanations for God, we tend to forget that faith doesn't require proof. It's an assumption based on personal feelings. Ironically, the attempt to prove God's existence betrays a certain lack of faith. Genuine theists are seldom concerned about whether God, in fact, exists. It's the non-believers who kick up a fuss over the issue, and many religious people feel the need to defend their faith as a result.

Ultimately, I find religious experience to be something akin to having a revelation, a sudden inspiration that instantly clarifies everything you believe about life. My moment of revelation came when I suddenly realised that I could understand morality without reference to a divine entity. I subsequently realised that we, everyone of us, perceive "reality" from a unique perspective. Some of us are delusional, some of us are genuinely inspired, but individually, we can't tell the difference. It's up to someone else to tell us whether we are making sense. In other words, the revelation needs to be something that can be shared, otherwise it's fairly pointless.

Hence, religion.

And hence, my personal brand of secular humanism.

[WanderingKnight]

Isn't you counter argument basically "God is completely magical. Do not try to apply logic to it."? If we're going to think like that, what's the point of thinking about God at all?

Uuh... none? I mean, for the umpteenth time in this thread, religion means, deep at the bottom of it, accepting an irrational truth without even doubting it. Everything else can be built on top and analyzed, but the very core of God's existence can't.

I can't believe you still don't want to understand this.

[Anh_Minh]

Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf

Does belief require logic? What makes gravity hippos any less "magical" than God?

Gravity hippos don't break causality!

I'm hardly in a position to argue for God's existence. I was merely stating a counter-argument I often hear. As I've said, I find it a weak explanation. In any case, so what if you can "prove" that God doesn't exist? It's not going to stop people from believing in Him. (Note: disregard the problematic semantics, I know you can't prove a negative.)

You claimed that the First Cause argument was "weak". And to support that claim, you used what wasn't a counter-argument at all, but a fancy way of refusing rational disussion.

Rationality and faith don't mix. I accept that. But if you want a meaningful discussion, if you want to do more than just say "X is my belief, even though I have no rationale for it", then you need a minimum of logic.

So, take your pick. Either argument A is weak, because so and so... Or argument A is irrelevant, because you've thrown rationality out the window, and don't want to discuss your beliefs, other than to state them.

In the insistence on having rational explanations for God, we tend to forget that faith doesn't require proof. It's an assumption based on personal feelings. Ironically, the attempt to prove God's existence betrays a certain lack of faith. Genuine theists are seldom concerned about whether God, in fact, exists. It's the non-believers who kick up a fuss over the issue, and many religious people feel the need to defend their faith as a result.

Really? What I hear most often from believers is that the world without God doesn't make sense. Either because of the apparition of life, or because of the apparition of the universe itself. In addition, I hear that atheists are amoral creatures.

I'd say we all have reasons to be pretty defensive.

[technomo12]

Um w8 i cant understand why is it only the priest are allowed to drink the blood of christ ( inthe ceremonial eating of the bread)

aint it supposed to be given to all the attendees???

[Hijiroku]

athiest been athiest all my life even tho i was raised around alot of christian ppl.Plus i belive science over a book written by some guy anyday.

[Shirozoku]

Am i the only pastafarian here?

That's right, FSM owns bad...plus that our god has bigger balls than your gods...meatballs, that is...

[Dxon]

Athiest. Will always be atheist. Try to convert people to athiest.

[Ledgem]

Originally Posted by Anh_Minh

Plenty of asexual life on Earth. In fact, I think that's most of the biomass.

That's true, and there is also life on Earth that can change sexes. What I meant was that to ask God's gender is to arguably be thinking incorrectly about God. I'm no expert on this so don't direct the questions at me, but God is something that people consider to mostly be beyond our understanding. To think of God in terms of genders is too simple; it's like asking how many fingers God has, or how tall God is. That presumes that God is a being like what we know on Earth.

Anything is possible - maybe God is like that. But to assume it would cause more confusion about God. The only real-life example I can give you of what I mean is this: we previously assumed that all life was carbon-based, and when we sent out space probes that searched for life they sought out traces based on the life we know. Only more recently have scientists started to wonder (and attempted to create) life that was not carbon-based. We haven't found any yet, but if we did I could really prove my point perfectly and say that if we'd approached everything based on what we know, we'd miss out on new discoveries.

It may be the same with God. Trying to approach and explain the subject of God with the science that we know may cause us to miss an understanding of something else. I don't know, it's just a thought. For the record, I value science more highly than religion, but I value the open curiosity of the scientist more than anything.

Note to self: Physics, string theory, dark matter

Originally Posted by Hijiroku

Plus i belive science over a book written by some guy anyday.

Who's writing your science textbooks? Think carefully about that in light of what you wrote.

[Amirali]

Muslim......born and raised. Not a very regularly practicing one, but I believe in the prescribed principles and way of life.

[Girl_who_cried_gnome]

Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf

Well, I sometimes wonder why we assume God is white. (S)he could be a black woman.

Anyway, gender is a side issue as far as I'm aware. It matters more whether you are able to build a personal relationship with Him (or Her). From my point-of-view, humans made God in their image, rather than the other way round. So, um, go with whichever "image" makes you more comfortable, I guess?

LOL thats not the point... what i have been trying to get across is that i believe that the spiritual force that most refer to as "god" should NEVER be called anything that refers it to being human.... by doing that you are lessening such spirituality into the only term you find recognizable which is a human... which is DEFINITELY not what it is.... because that would be contradicting SOOOOO much of what is known as "christianity".

oh and i guess i never really answered this thread's question after all this

well right now i am not entirely sure... personally i am against organized religion in general but i guess if i had to choose.... the closest religion i guess i am to is Unitarian Universalism

Originally Posted by Shirozoku

Am i the only pastafarian here?

That's right, FSM owns bad...plus that our god has bigger balls than your gods...meatballs, that is...

LOLOLOLOL all hail the flying spaghetti monster!!!!!!!!!!!

yeah.... my friend is a pastafarian too XD

ahhh omg this just made me day

ahhh by the way if you wanna see just how ignorant christians can sometimes be and why i mostly dislike them.... or if you just want a REALLY good laugh go read the hate mail at venganza.com.... its just SO nice and peaceful... i just love it

[teachopvutru]

Originally Posted by Girl_who_cried_gnome

ahhh by the way if you wanna see just how ignorant christians can sometimes be and why i mostly dislike them.... or if you just want a REALLY good laugh go read the hate mail at venganza.com.... its just SO nice and peaceful... i just love it

Do you mean www.venganza.org? It's the site about Church of Flying Spaghetti Monster, but I believe that's one you mean. The link you have up there is actually a site to a nsfw webcam chat or something like that (I just checked).

And please use the edit button =.=;;

[Thentus]

Originally Posted by Girl_who_cried_gnome

ahhh by the way if you wanna see just how ignorant christians can sometimes be and why i mostly dislike them.... or if you just want a REALLY good laugh go read the hate mail at venganza.com.... its just SO nice and peaceful... i just love it

...well if there are so many of them some of them are BOUND to be like that. There are also some intelligent ones, varied things of course.

In that case, since there are a lot after all, than I can safely assume they are PARTIALLY responsible for ALMOST everything that happens in our world. Thank you undefined terms . Which really since there is a variation, there are different situations and some which have more power than others. Probably right now, religious people alone(this is not including the effect of religion itself, which is much bigger) are responsible for nearly everything going on. Amazing.

[Dxon]

Alright people. Listen to the awesome guy explaining ALL faith. Pat Condell.

He is totally right! And you know it.

He tells you people the truth. No discussions.

[Vexx]

well, there's no discussion because its Youtube --- he can be all output without having his reasoning challenged and having to defend it
But Pat Condell and George Carlin (an American satirist/comic) share a lot of traits and opinions -- though over the years I think Carlin has just gotten bitter whereas Condell has been able to stay actively on the offensive.

But I'm in substantial agreement with his well-articulated views about such malarkey as "religious insensitivity" (pointing out the emperor's lack of clothing) and allowing the extremist behavior of any religion to get a free pass from secular civility.

[ChainLegacy]

Originally Posted by Dxon

I bet he DID exist. Just take the bible.. HAS to be written by someone!

And then people will say:
"Yeah. By those apostols of Jesus. (or whatever.. His apprentices dammit! )"

That's crap.

Take scientology for an instance..
Some dude wrote a good book and people started this scientology religion thing. I bet that happened with the bible too!

The Bible isn't 'religion'. Religion existed LONG before Christianity; it existed over a hundred thousand years before civilization (and writing, so no holy book). I'm not defending the validity of religion (I'm agnostic), I'm simply saying it is very ingrained in human culture - it is a 'cultural universal' that existed in the first humans.