Religion Thread

[Thorgi Duke of Frisbee]

For the sake of full disclosure, I do think the whole militant atheism thing is a really high level of douchebaggery. I'm not out there actively trying to get people to give up their faith. I also really don't give a shit about the whole "Merry Christmas" thing or if some town puts up a nativity scene or whatever. There are bigger problems to worry about.

 

A lot of gay people I've talked to also don't like their media portrayal any more than straight people do. There are exceptions, but most of the time if a gay person is on tv he's either a magical pixie or a complete lunatic. It's practically the new blackface.

Yeah, think of it this way. I assume you've seen one episode of Big Bang Theory before, Battra. Notice how they act in a way that no one else, including yourself, acts? Does it kind of irritate you? Congratulations, now you know how LGBT people feel when someone makes a joke about "accidentally" finding a transsexual woman attractive or when a show portrays homosexuality leading to extraordinary fashion sense.

[Johnny]

As a Christian we do believe that acting on homosexuality is a sin. So is lying, taking the Lord's name in vain, etc.

 

I have talked to christians who do not believe this.

 

pop culture (which is dominated by gays)

 

wat?

 

and Christians like myself often feel like we're being attacked constantly. I've since given up watching most television (Cook's Country and America's Test Kitchen are the only shows I watch since Good Eats was cancelled) and I hardly ever go to the movies.

 

Having different opinions around you is not the same as being under attack.

 

When Kirk Cameron states his faith that he believes that homosexuality is wrong, he's "hate mongering." Tim Tebow can't actually be motivated by faith, he must be a grandstander.

 

Something can be motivated/justified by faith but still be hate mongering. Those are not mutually exclusive.

 

If you tell someone Merry Christmas, you're hateful to Jews and Atheists. Really?

 

Only crazy people think this.

 

When you hear this crap on a daily basis from the god of most people's living rooms whether it be in the form of Ned Flanders, Sheldon's mother etc. it's natural to want to push back.

 

Having different opinions around you do not entitle you to anything special. If your way of pushing back is simply presenting a differing opinion, then I guess that's fine. I'm not really sure what specifically you're referring to here.

 

I've met more tolerant Christians and more intolerant atheists than the other way around.

 

Most people I know are undecided, and it's the ones leaning towards religion that is most interested in trying to convince other people they are on the right track, and intolerant of the ones who disagree. But that's just as irrelevant as your anecdotal example.

 

I must say, when I hear you talk about tolerance, I don't think we agree on what the word means.

[Mister Jack]

I also don't really buy into this whole belief that being gay is such a bad thing because the Bible says ALL KINDS of crazy crap but most modern Christians just kinda gloss over the stuff that would be damned inconvenient in today's world. If that specific Bible passage had said "Don't be gay OR watch sports on Sunday" (I know this is a very silly example, but you get my point) then I kinda feel like this wouldn't even be a thing.

[TheMightyEthan]

If you want to think being gay is wrong go for it, whatever, that's your prerogative, but it's no different than believing that black people bear the mark of Cain: sure you're free to believe it, but if you go around saying so expect people to call you out on your hateful bullshit.

 

As far as the war on Christians goes: get the fuck over yourself. There's no war on Christians. What there is is people who disagree with you trying to assert their rights, and Christians bitching that it's infringing on their right to discriminate. That shit doesn't fly with race, it doesn't fly with gender, it doesn't fly with religion, and soon it won't fly with sexual orientation either. Fucking deal with it.

[MasterDex]

As a Christian we do believe that acting on homosexuality is a sin. So is lying, taking the Lord's name in vain, etc.

 

We believe that we are not perfect and are only justified by our faith in God. As a Christian we know that we are sinners and yet still strive to not sin. Just because you feel like stealing, or lusting after a woman who isn't your wife you shouldn't act on it. In the same way, Christians teach that you shouldn't act upon any gay feelings that you may have.

 

The Christian populace must be very proud to have you as their spokesperson.

Edited June 28, 2012 by MasterDex

[Connorrrr]

If you want to think being gay is wrong go for it, whatever, that's your prerogative, but it's no different than believing that black people bear the mark of Cain: sure you're free to believe it, but if you go around saying so expect people to call you out on your hateful bullshit.

 

As far as the war on Christians goes: get the fuck over yourself. There's no war on Christians. What there is is people who disagree with you trying to assert their rights, and Christians bitching that it's infringing on their right to discriminate. That shit doesn't fly with race, it doesn't fly with gender, it doesn't fly with religion, and soon it won't fly with sexual orientation either. Fucking deal with it.

 

You're my fucking hero right now.

 

Battra, I have nothing against Christians in the general sense. My Religious Education teacher was a Christian, and he was one of my favourite teachers back in school. Parts of my family are Christian, we get along very well.

 

What I do take issue with is Christian's who either follow their religion so blindly that they hate everything they're told to hate, or people who hide their misguided bigotry under the guise of following the good Lords words.

 

Going back to my RE teacher, he was incredibly understanding of other peoples views and opinions and indeed, sexuality. Being the loud-mouthed teenagers we were in high school, some people made the point that they did not believe in God, and he was totally fine with that. He was also totally fine with the fact that he was teaching a group of diverse young people, some of which were homosexual, myself included, and he never once let that change his attitude towards me. He was a fantastic man and, in my eyes, a model Christian. Respectful, polite, understanding.

 

There is no war on Christianity. There's a "war" (I use this in the very loosest sense) against bigotry. Unfortunately some people think their religion gives them the right to hold on to their misguided, frankly rather offensive views, and as Ethan very eloquently put, these barriers have just been broken down time and time again, and the homophobia barrier is no different.

[Thursday Next]

pop culture (which is dominated by gays)

 

wat?

 

 

Quite.

[Alex Heat]

Also, here's a friendly little hint; when you refer to the LGBT community as "the gays" in a derogatory manner like that, we're not offended so much as bemused. "Oh no, the gays are coming to spread their sparkles and cheer around and somehow infect our children with gaaay!"

 

I've got a gay friend who always laughs about this kind of thing. Sometimes he'll punctuate his sentences with '...because that's what the GAY AGENDA™ commands!'.

[P4: Gritty Reboot]

I've avoided this thread (as well as the Politics thread) for as long as possible, mainly because I like all you guys, and arguing on the internet often disintegrates into an exercise in futility before too long. I don't want to start flame wars, I don't want to argue in circles, and I don't want to stay up into the wee morning hours pounding on my keyboard at people that I always love discussing games with. Still, it's hard to avoid a thread that's constantly popping up under the "New Content" tab, especially one that's focused on a subject that has been close to me all my life--indeed, one I studied in college for several years.

 

As some of you may know, I'm a Christian, a Protestant to be exact, a Southern Baptist to be as precise as I care to be. My parents were Christians, which is where I learned the faith from. This is not to say that their faith defines me, but while some "convert" or find faith later in life as my wife and her family did, I grew up in a Christian household. I did wrestle with my faith throughout high school but emerged firmer in my convictions.

 

I'm not here to "defend religion" because frankly, many religions are awful, as are many incarnations of institutionalized Christianity. I'm not here to flame homosexuals (heh) because that's not what Jesus did or cared about primarily. I'm not here to push a "Christian right" agenda, because a faith for me is not political. I'm not here to argue anyone into the faith, because it can't be done. I would, however, like to share a little bit about what I believe and why, in an attempt to bring some understanding of the other side of the discussion. Correct me if I'm wrong but I do see that Yant, Battra, and Atom appear to share my theistic views, so just to be clear, I'm not trying to step on their toes or speak for them.

 

I believe in the existence of God. While I'm not here to write a thesis statement for my M. Div or anything, to me the cosmological argument, the moral argument, and the telelogical argument provide ample proof of His existence. As a disclaimer, I do not expect this to convert anybody, nor do I expect a college dropout's 15-minute summary of arguments used for God's existence for the past 700 years to be complete or unassailable.

 

First, the cosmological: our universe is built on causes and effects, a line of dominoes toppling if you will. The first domino to topple must have been toppled by an untoppled being who is by definition uncaused and resides outside the chain, outside the cause-and-effect system. The main atheistic rebuttal that I hear is that this simply pushes back the domino line by one, and leaves us asking, "Who caused God?" Yet this misunderstands the line of reasoning, and fallaciously implies that infinite causes are possible.

 

Second, the moral argument: the unquestionable fact of a universal set of morals--variations, yes, exceptions, yes, but the undeniable ubiquity of abstract concepts like "right" and "wrong" points to a giver of conscience. New Atheism claims morality evolved blindly for the sole purpose of human survival, yet this leaves us stranded in the uncomfortable position of admitting that no one morality is "righter" or "wronger" than another, only "more evolved" or "less evolved".

 

Finally, the telelogical: those familiar with the intelligent design movement have heard the term "irreducible complexity", a concept that is at its heart a branch of this line of reasoning. We see design in the universe, ergo a designer. Atheists would have us believe the evolutionary debate is settled; however, this is far from the case. Though I am no expert in biology, micro- or otherwise, if I may point the open-minded to Uncommon Descent and Evolution News, they do a fine job of dismantling modern evolutionary research on a daily basis. It does you no good as an atheist to confront straw men instead of the forefront of ID research.

 

As for my more specific Christian beliefs, I do believe the Bible to be the Word of God. It is often misunderstood in modernity, ripped from context, and contorted to fit people's agendas. But I believe the facts it teaches: God created the world and mankind, mankind has fallen away from God, and God provided His Son as a sacrifice to cover the sins of His people once and for all, for those who would believe. Its hairier details are of course always up for debate as has been the case for the past couple of millennia.

 

Anyway, I don't particularly care whether you believe in God or not. I like all you guys and any difference of belief does nothing to change that. Hug it out?

[fuchikoma]

As some of you may know, I'm a Christian, a Protestant to be exact, a Southern Baptist to be as precise as I care to be. My parents were Christians, which is where I learned the faith from. This is not to say that their faith defines me, but while some "convert" or find faith later in life as my wife and her family did, I grew up in a Christian household. I did wrestle with my faith throughout high school but emerged firmer in my convictions.

 

I'm not here to "defend religion" because frankly, many religions are awful, as are many incarnations of institutionalized Christianity. I'm not here to flame homosexuals (heh) because that's not what Jesus did or cared about primarily. I'm not here to push a "Christian right" agenda, because a faith for me is not political. I'm not here to argue anyone into the faith, because it can't be done. I would, however, like to share a little bit about what I believe and why, in an attempt to bring some understanding of the other side of the discussion. Correct me if I'm wrong but I do see that Yant, Battra, and Atom appear to share my theistic views, so just to be clear, I'm not trying to step on their toes or speak for them.

 

That is exactly the kind of position I can respect, even if I may disagree about the particular conclusion in the context of my own life. I've never seen you try to proselytize, and really, didn't know what your religious beliefs were. You challenged your faith and rigorously examined it rather than simply following the crowd or a leader. Even now, you eloquently explain your position rather than fighting over who is right and wrong. I worked with a guy who had a similar philosophy and we'd have great in-depth religious vs atheist philosophical discussions between the guys in my office pretty regularly - I know that's one of the things you absolutely shouldn't do at work, but with this group it never really got heated or disrespectful - we were just trying to explore the others' standpoints.

 

First, the cosmological: our universe is built on causes and effects, a line of dominoes toppling if you will. The first domino to topple must have been toppled by an untoppled being who is by definition uncaused and resides outside the chain, outside the cause-and-effect system. The main atheistic rebuttal that I hear is that this simply pushes back the domino line by one, and leaves us asking, "Who caused God?" Yet this misunderstands the line of reasoning, and fallaciously implies that infinite causes are possible.

 

I'd like to offer an alternative atheist approach to this dilemma. Rather than asking what caused the first cause, I'm curious why it is more believable that an all-knowing all-powerful creator was more likely the first thing to exist, as opposed to the simplest possible forms of matter/energy (for instance, QGP)? If it does not require an intelligent will to create a being of unknowable complexity, then why does it require one to make something, rather than nothing?

 

Don't take this as a refutation, but rather as a good starting point for explaining my own beliefs: As for the possibility of infinite causes, I find that less implausible from my standpoint. I've considered the possibility of the beginning of time with this thought experiment: When did time begin? What was "zero time?" Beginning, like all verbs, is dependent on the substrate of time itself. With no time, nothing happens, even observation. For time to begin, there must be a "time before time" - and that is meaningless. Even the smallest increment before time would last for all eternity, as there could be no beginning and no end. So time must go back eternally - it just seems to be an inherent law of the universe. As for the age of existence - the universe, even before the assumed "big bang" or any other cause for its inception - try to imagine the passage of time without the existence of physical space. How does that even work? If nothing exists, can time be said to pass at all? We have even found that the rate of time's passage varies depending on the subject's relative position to concentrations of mass and energy, and even to its velocity (I should say "vector") relative to the observer. So it would seem that space and time are inextricable, leading one to conclude that if there has always been time, there has always been space.

 

As for how spacetime came to be, I don't know. I'm certainly not the greatest astrophysicist to ever exist (or *cough* one at all...) I think that, when it's hard to even accurately imagine day to day human life 500 years ago, it would be completely ridiculous for me to presume I deeply understand universal astrophysics an infinite amount of time - or even 13.75 billion years - ago.

Edited June 29, 2012 by fuchikoma

[MasterDex]

Second, the moral argument: the unquestionable fact of a universal set of morals--variations, yes, exceptions, yes, but the undeniable ubiquity of abstract concepts like "right" and "wrong" points to a giver of conscience. New Atheism claims morality evolved blindly for the sole purpose of human survival, yet this leaves us stranded in the uncomfortable position of admitting that no one morality is "righter" or "wronger" than another, only "more evolved" or "less evolved".

 

I don't think morality is there for the sole purpose of human survival or that no morality is more right or wrong than another. I believe that human morality is something that's just part of being alive and intelligent due to our interconnectedness. Let's take the unfortunate cow. Even the biggest beef eater in the world might consider that going into a field where a cow that would soon be slaughtered grazed and being cruel to it is morally apprehensive because as an intelligent being, they can appreciate the lowly bovine's situation.

 

Who's to say that morality is even a unique feature of being a human. If I pretend to cry like a dog, my dog will come to comfort me, perhaps recognising in herself that this thing that feeds her and walks her is feeling sad or hurt for some reason and through her own will decides that she wants me to feel better, because I'm nice to her and I make her feel better if she's feeling a bit down. In other words, perhaps it's just a consequence of intelligence, the consequence of being able to process empathy.

 

Don't take this as a refutation, but rather as a good starting point for explaining my own beliefs: As for the possibility of infinite causes, I find that less implausible from my standpoint. I've considered the possibility of the beginning of time with this thought experiment: When did time begin? What was "zero time?" Beginning, like all verbs, is dependent on the substrate of time itself. With no time, nothing happens, even observation. For time to begin, there must be a "time before time" - and that is meaningless. Even the smallest increment before time would last for all eternity, as there could be no beginning and no end. So time must go back eternally - it just seems to be an inherent law of the universe. As for the age of existence - the universe, even before the assumed "big bang" or any other cause for its inception - try to imagine the passage of time without the existence of physical space. How does that even work? If nothing exists, can time be said to pass at all? We have even found that the rate of time's passage varies depending on the subject's relative position to concentrations of mass and energy, and even to its velocity (I should say "vector") relative to the observer. So it would seem that space and time are inextricable, leading one to conclude that if there has always been time, there has always been space.

 

As for how spacetime came to be, I don't know. I'm certainly not the greatest astrophysicist to ever exist (or *cough* one at all...) I think that, when it's hard to even accurately imagine day to day human life 500 years ago, it would be completely ridiculous for me to presume I deeply understand universal astrophysics an infinite amount of time - or even 13.75 billion years - ago.

 

Duuuuuude! Far out!

 

Seriously though, I get where you're coming from Fuchikoma. I've often asked myself similar questions and while I have my own uneducated guesses, I've also got different leanings towards multiple ideas. For instance, on a recent Through the Wormhole, Morgan Freeman asked the question "Is the Universe alive?" and it got me thinking about how for all we know, the universe could all be part of some greater being on an entirely different scale, the planets, like atoms, just part of a greater whole.

 

I'm not saying that's the case - it would certainly open up a hell of a lot more questions than it would answer! - but I think it highlights the issue we face now between science and religion. We seem to have more answers for everything and then more questions.Like P4 talked about the domino's falling, I think there's a certain beautiful perfection to the universe around us, how the dominos all started toppling to create a fantastic chain of events that we can't even begin to comprehend. Some believe it's a sign of a greater creator or Gods, but I think that the concept of God, as we grow both scientifically and religiously as humans, will become much broader and harder to define to the point that our image of what a God is will change from being an omniscient, omnipotent, sentient being to something more vague and conceptual.

 

I'd also like to add that I really enjoyed reading both of your posts. I feel like I know you both a little bit better now.

Edited June 30, 2012 by MasterDex

[Strangelove]

I havent posted in this thread since it got started last year and we were all dickish about it, but there's some really good stuff in here.

Though ive noticed that its fluctuating between religion and personal beliefs. Then again, a religion can be a lot of things.

[Thorgi Duke of Frisbee]

I havent posted in this thread since it got started last year and we were all dickish about it, but there's some really good stuff in here.

Though ive noticed that its fluctuating between religion and personal beliefs. Then again, a religion can be a lot of things.

Yeah, my views have changed substantially since I started this thread. It's a little crazy looking back on it.

[Mister Jack]

You know, in spite of what I said before there is ONE religion that I cannot ever bring myself to even pretend I respect.

 

Scientology.

[deanb]

 

"An -ology? You join Scientology and you say you've failed. Get an -ology and you're a scientist!"

 

It's all I can think of when I hear of Scientology.

[MasterDex]

You know, in spite of what I said before there is ONE religion that I cannot ever bring myself to even pretend I respect.

 

Scientology.

 

I hear that. I was just reading a news story about how Katie Holmes thinks there are Scientology spies around her house and that the reason she wants to leave Cruise is supposedly that he wants their daughter to go deeper into the religion. I wonder if that scene in South Park had any bearing on her decision to leave.

[Strangelove]

But...they're scientists.

[Thursday Next]

You know, in spite of what I said before there is ONE religion that I cannot ever bring myself to even pretend I respect.

 

Scientology.

 

I find it no more ridiculous than any other religion. Slightly more insidious than some perhaps, though it is at least overt in its efforts to screw its congregation out of their money. I've also got to give them a bit of credit for targeting celebs. It's a genius system. Appeal to the egos of Hollywood stars who spend hundreds of thousands to look young by telling them that they are some sort of immortal superbeing who has forgotten how to live forever. If their "therapy" can help them remember how to be immortal, then they will be young and attractive and useful forever.

[TheFlyingGerbil]

well, Tom Cruise does look great for his age...

 

time to embrace our inner lizards?

[Mister Jack]

You know, in spite of what I said before there is ONE religion that I cannot ever bring myself to even pretend I respect.

 

Scientology.

 

I find it no more ridiculous than any other religion. Slightly more insidious than some perhaps, though it is at least overt in its efforts to screw its congregation out of their money. I've also got to give them a bit of credit for targeting celebs. It's a genius system. Appeal to the egos of Hollywood stars who spend hundreds of thousands to look young by telling them that they are some sort of immortal superbeing who has forgotten how to live forever. If their "therapy" can help them remember how to be immortal, then they will be young and attractive and useful forever.

 

I have to disagree with you there. I do agree that it's an ingenious scam, but even as an atheist I find the whole Xenu story way, WAY more ridiculous than just about everything in the bible, and that includes Revelations. I mean, if I have to explain why the idea that Jesus raised from the dead is less stupid than the idea that an evil alien overlord shipped billions of people to earth in DC-8s and dropped nukes on them before capturing their souls and forcing them to watch 3D brainwashing movies then I really don't know what more I can say.

Edited July 2, 2012 by Mister Jack

[TheRevanchist]

Let's not forget, Scientology is based upon a book by L Ron Hubbard, a science fiction writer and a person who was dellusiional about himself in the first place. Crazy understands crazy.

[Thursday Next]

You know, in spite of what I said before there is ONE religion that I cannot ever bring myself to even pretend I respect.

 

Scientology.

 

I find it no more ridiculous than any other religion. Slightly more insidious than some perhaps, though it is at least overt in its efforts to screw its congregation out of their money. I've also got to give them a bit of credit for targeting celebs. It's a genius system. Appeal to the egos of Hollywood stars who spend hundreds of thousands to look young by telling them that they are some sort of immortal superbeing who has forgotten how to live forever. If their "therapy" can help them remember how to be immortal, then they will be young and attractive and useful forever.

 

I have to disagree with you there. I do agree that it's an ingenious scam, but even as an atheist I find the whole Xenu story way, WAY more ridiculous than just about everything in the bible, and that includes Revelations. I mean, if I have to explain why the idea that Jesus raised from the dead is less stupid than the idea that an evil alien overlord shipped billions of people to earth in DC-8s and dropped nukes on them before capturing their souls and forcing them to watch 3D brainwashing movies then I really don't know what more I can say.

 

There's pretty much the same evidence for both. I find an evil alien overlord planting us here no more stupid than the concept that Eve was made out of a spare rib and that the entire population of the Earth came from one family interbreeding.

[Vecha]

I'm another Christian, Episcopal to be exact, and do not wish to change people's views. I think the world is a better place with Atheist and Theist alike. I feel faith isn't faith without some doubt. You do not grow unless you doubt, question yourself, and your God/s.

[TheMightyEthan]

Driving back home yesterday we passed a church with a sign that said "Don't judge others just because they sin differently than you." I thought it was a nice sentiment.

[Vecha]

Driving back home yesterday we passed a church with a sign that said "Don't judge others just because they sin differently than you." I thought it was a nice sentiment.

 

I really like that sentiment! One reason I'm not big on organized religion is alot of the "i'm better than you are" attitude some, not all, employ.