Opinion Are You Religious? (Discussion about religion because why not!)

[TheRockInception]

I mean, at a certain point, you should read a comment comparing Jesus to Hitler and reach one of two conclusions.

1. It's baiting, and therefore a waste if time and energy to respond or get upset about it.

2. The person has reached that conclusion because they equate Jesus with God (as idea stated) or simply do not have a great deal of information about who Jesus was historically recorded to be.

Either way, there is no reason to get upset. It is insulting, and I can understand feeling upset. However, it would be better to stay on more constructive topics of discussion.

(If I'm wrong, which I may well be, and there is some elusive third option, I hope that this point will be expanded upon in more depth. Provided it is done respectfully. The argument "person = Hitler" gets tiring after awhile. It usually either elevates Hitler or hyper villainizes the other person. The only true equivalencies are of other dictators and reprehensible political leaders)

I did go into it believing it was baiting but you know, there are people in the world that genuinely believe the Earth is flat. Knowledge is power, and as such I have bestowed it. Or attempted to. I also kind of just did it for fun too.

 

[Hige]

T TheRockInception
Hey. Psssst.
Unless you've made a good, thorough study of ancient pagan religions and their social context, please don't fall into the ages-old trap of thinking Christianity was the only path preaching for people to be good and kind to others. That's a myth that doesn't always stand up to scrutiny.

Thanks.

It's a darn shame pagan religions get a bad wrap. Many of them would suprise modern men today with how progressive they could be.

 

[madame moiselle]

It's a darn shame pagan religions get a bad wrap. Many of them would suprise modern men today with how progressive they could be.

Can you give me an example of a progressive pagan religion?

 

[Hige]

Can you give me an example of a progressive pagan religion?

I mentioned it earlier in the topic, many pagan religions had concepts that christanity adopted way before christanity became a religion. Check around pages 2-3.

 

[ValkyrieRose]

Oh a subject i know a bit more about.

On the whole, Paganism is , at least now, about its free formity and variety of worship. Some things they about are things like taking nature with the upmost respect and being kind to those around you. In Wicca, those who practice it pay head to the times three rule. Basically stating that whatever you do, good or bad, is going to come back to you threefold. It's a common practice to give back to nature wherever possible, which is why some people consider Wicca to be a bunch of hippies. (i dont but i know a bunch of people that think that). The sting that a lot of people had and one of the Christianities main attacking points back in the day was that Pagans on a whole praticed magic. Even then, magic adhered to the three times rule as well so, int heory, if you tried to curse someone, you yourself was going to get cursed three times as hard. Wether they knew that i am unsure of, but on the whole Paganism was generally harmonious.

A draw about Wicca is that, from covens to single practitioners, you can generally worship however you want so long as you observe those two rules. General Acceptance is the existence ob both a God and Goddess, but you can see them however you want (i know someone that sees their goddess as Athena for instance) but even that is flexible, as some only worship the goddess. This is how i was taught by the person who introduced the religion to me as a whole, at any rate.

There were incidents in the past but, on the whole, it WASa generally peaceful religion, now reduced to a mere sliver of what it is. Few people come out and say what they are for fear of persecution, which still very much exists to this day. On that point, talking about it is rather quite refreshing

 

[Hall Kervean]

One issue I have is that we're conflicting in our perspectives. You think god gave us morality, and his absence is the absence of morality (from what I'm interpreting of your words.) I think man made up god and his morality, and therefore man can create its own morality as they already have.

Half and half.
God gave us consciousness, and then told us what is moral through His Word. After that, it is up to us.
He did not give us morality; he just told us what was objectively moral. It was up to us to have an identical personal set of morals.
Judges 21:25 And in those days, Israel has no king (guiding figure of morality and authority); and each man did what was right in their own eyes.

 

[CastoffCaptain]

It's a darn shame pagan religions get a bad wrap. Many of them would suprise modern men today with how progressive they could be.

We're all still human. There are idiots among us. But. I appreciate the sentiment and agree. Some of us are fairly good folk. heheheheheh.

 

[CastoffCaptain]

I did go into it believing it was baiting but you know, there are people in the world that genuinely believe the Earth is flat. Knowledge is power, and as such I have bestowed it. Or attempted to. I also kind of just did it for fun too.

I know two Flat Earthers.
It hurts.
It hurts a lot.

 

[TheRockInception]

I know two Flat Earthers.
It hurts.
It hurts a lot.

It really does hurt to know with all the power of the internet and information at our fingertips, people believe stuff like this.

 

[CastoffCaptain]

It really does hurt to know with all the power of the internet and information at our fingertips, people believe stuff like this.

Even people who were supposed to believe the world was flat (I.e. Medieval, Renaissance) didn't. There's proof.

 

[Hall Kervean]

alchemy is real

 

[Bacon is fluffy]

The conversation sure maybe futile. What you are telling me is that unless there are physical results to something , even when that thing refers to non-physical aspects specifically it has no grounds. You're telling me you can label something as silly before even understanding it and still retain the validity of your being argument. And you are telling me that there being something we don't understand completely is enough to say the very attempt to understand it is silly.

If you asked me, that's what's silly.

I’m sorry, but yes, something needs to be empirically observable to have even a shred of validity. The Big Bang theory is just as silly as the concept of an all mighty god creator who gave us a separate undying entity that lies within us until our mortal coil ends.

Can you define understand then? What is it about Christianity that I don’t understand? Is it that I lack an encyclopedic knowledge? Is it because I find belief stupid itself? What is it about Christianity that I must understand before I can call it silly?

Or is it that you’re mad that I think it’s silly?

 

[Idea]

I’m sorry, but yes, something needs to be empirically observable to have even a shred of validity. The Big Bang theory is just as silly as the concept of an all mighty god creator who gave us a separate undying entity that lies within us until our mortal coil ends.

Can you define understand then? What is it about Christianity that I don’t understand? Is it that I lack an encyclopedic knowledge? Is it because I find belief stupid itself? What is it about Christianity that I must understand before I can call it silly?

Or is it that you’re mad that I think it’s silly?

Well, then that presents a divide between us that is not surpassable. That idea you just suggested pretty much shatters all knowledge, as all of it is based on assumptions that are intangible in nature. But it is a way of life, just not one compatible with discussions.

Well, what you should understand about it before you say it's silly, is what ti actually says. What is actually the thing , the core beliefs that make it Christianity, without which it is not Christianity , but some other belief that falls outside of it. Once you know those beliefs, which in the case of the catholic belief are in the [wait, I need to find what the word is in english] , then if you still find it silly and want to call it so, go ahead. But putting it on a box without even knowing that much, that just no.

 

[JayTee]

I’m sorry, but yes, something needs to be empirically observable to have even a shred of validity. The Big Bang theory is just as silly as the concept of an all mighty god creator who gave us a separate undying entity that lies within us until our mortal coil ends.

I'd like to point out that we do have evidence for the Big Bang theory, so it's a lot more likely than the universe being magically poofed in to existence.

 

[Bacon is fluffy]

Well, then that presents a divide between us that is not surpassable. That idea you just suggested pretty much shatters all knowledge, as all of it is based on assumptions that are intangible in nature. But it is a way of life, just not one compatible with discussions.

Well, what you should understand about it before you say it's silly, is what ti actually says. What is actually the thing , the core beliefs that make it Christianity, without which it is not Christianity , but some other belief that falls outside of it. Once you know those beliefs, which in the case of the catholic belief are in the [wait, I need to find what the word is in english] , then if you still find it silly and want to call it so, go ahead. But putting it on a box without even knowing that much, that just no.

I never intended on you agreeing with me. I was merely respondkng to a question.

Saying there are core Christian beliefs in a religion so fragmented is a bit silly, but I’ll humor you. What constitutes as core Christian beliefs? What sect counts as core Christian beliefs?

 

[Idea]

I never intended on you agreeing with me. I was merely respondkng to a question.

Saying there are core Christian beliefs in a religion so fragmented is a bit silly, but I’ll humor you. What constitutes as core Christian beliefs? What sect counts as core Christian beliefs?

Nor did I say those were your intentions. By what I said I didn't mean we couldn't agree, I meant it was kind of impossible to have a functional discussion to begin with.

The cannon, as established by the churches. Individual believers will fragment things further, but a church's core beliefs re the thing that unites those of that particular church, and the ones that need to be known before making a judgment on that rhuch's particular beliefs. I'll get you the exact list of the catholic 's in an air as soon as I can find that word

 

[Bacon is fluffy]

Nor did I say those were your intentions. By what I said I didn't mean we couldn't agree, I meant it was kind of impossible to have a functional discussion to begin with.

The cannon, as established by the churches. Individual believers will fragment things further, but a church's core beliefs re the thing that unites those of that particular church, and the ones that need to be known before making a judgment on that rhuch's particular beliefs. I'll get you the exact list of the catholic 's in an air as soon as I can find that word

But Lutheranism was in fact, a rebellion against the church. It was based on the idea that you can be a good Christian without the church and it’s guiding hand.

You obviously don’t know what you’re talking about if you would say I need to draw upon churches for core beliefs.

 

[Idea]

But Lutheranism was in fact, a rebellion against the church. It was based on the idea that you can be a good Christian without the church and it’s guiding hand.

You obviously don’t know what you’re talking about if you would say I need to draw upon churches for core beliefs.

.....

 

[Bacon is fluffy]

.....

Lutheranism - Wikipedia

Are these people not Christians if they believe that faith alone is all you need? You speak of core values, but there are none. Not even the church itself is a core value.

 

[Hall Kervean]

a church

the church

There's your miscommunication.

 

[Bacon is fluffy]

There's your miscommunication.

It’s not a miscommunication . Unless he’s specifically saying that Catholicism is core christian belief. Attending church is not core to all Christian belief. Which is exactly what I was asked to understand.

 

[Idea]

"A church" as in one of the branches of the christian religion. Luttheranism is a church. Is it "The" church? I don't think so but that's not the point here. I didn't say you have to take your core beliefs from the church nor did I say the church dictates the core beliefs of all of christianity. But I did say that it's not something you can get by looking at individuals, but in the churches they believe in, and I was gonna use the catholic church as an example give it is the one I believe in.

I appears to be named "The Nicene Creed" or "Apostle's creed" in english. Those beliefs are the beliefs that say "you believe in these, you are catholic".

 

[Rock And Roll Boy]

I pray every night before bed and go to church at least once a year, so yes.

 

[TheRockInception]

Nor did I say those were your intentions. By what I said I didn't mean we couldn't agree, I meant it was kind of impossible to have a functional discussion to begin with.

The cannon, as established by the churches. Individual believers will fragment things further, but a church's core beliefs re the thing that unites those of that particular church, and the ones that need to be known before making a judgment on that rhuch's particular beliefs. I'll get you the exact list of the catholic 's in an air as soon as I can find that word

Hint hint, the Apostle's creed.
Edit: Shieße, I didn't see you mentioned it already. Carry on and have fun.

 

[Hall Kervean]

It’s not a miscommunication . Unless he’s specifically saying that Catholicism is core christian belief. Attending church is not core to all Christian belief. Which is exactly what I was asked to understand.

No.
You implied that lutherism was fighting against the church.
There is no one church. Catholicism is a branch of Christianity. When people say "the church," they include all denominations. i.e. "the church today is supposed to be the light of the world and the salt of the earth" (one of them, unfortunately, is true, but not in the symbolic way it's meant). However, you implied that Lutherism was fighting against catholicism. A denomination that, at the time, was a very controlling one.
That was the misinterpretation.

And you're actually wrong.
Hebrews 10:25
...not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another; and all the more as you see the day drawing near.
Hebrews 13:7
Remember those who led you, who spoke the word of God to you; and considering the result of their conduct, imitate their faith.
1 Thessalonians 5:12-13
But we request of you, brethren, that you appreciate those who diligently labor among you, and have charge over you in the Lord and give you instruction, and that you esteem them very highly in love because of their work. Live in peace with one another.
Matthew 18:20
"For where two or three have gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst."
Basically, fellowship and teaching are important to the Lord. Church is [supposed to be] about ______ and _______.
Word bank:
Fellowship
Teaching