What Religion do you Follow???

[Anomander]

Hmm, this discussion is still going on, and some people are preaching science even more vehemently than any religious preacher (Circle V, your "regilex drug theory" can also be applied to science. I suggest we BAN SCIENCE because of it's effect on people!)

[HumanePain]

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

Byebye religious wars.
Bybye bombing abortion clinics.
Bybye nationalism.
Byebye creationism debates.
Byebye to publicly displayed religious-based discrimination (e.g. gay bashing)
Byebye Mithras.

A bit naive about human nature, I must say.

There will still be wars.
There will still be domestic bombings by lunatics (the tax building in Oklahoma City for example).
There will still be nationalism.
There will still be debates about origins. (you should read some of the arguments in the world of math or in the world of physics regarding the validity of string theory!)
There will still be discrimination.
You win on Mithras!

[Metabolik]

Um...i haven't really thought about religion much, it doesn't really matter to me...i'll believe any religion when i see un-deniable proof.

[Splintered]

I'm an Atheist.
Why?
Just because.

[Metabolik]

I was also thinking about atheism...but i thought i may as well not bother with the entire subject.

[Umbrellacake]

Deism. Blah blah ten characters.

[HumanePain]

Originally Posted by Circle V

... You don't need to let your beliefs go completely-- just hold them at arm's length and give them a cold inspection.

Best compromise I have read in this thread, to which I solemly agree.

[KontanKarite]

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

It wouldn't bring the worst out of us if it weren't that society is based on those unbased beliefs.
I don't know about the others, but if society was ruled by atheists, I wouldn't mind people believing in a god. The bottom line is that at least society and its government wouldn't be subject to an arbitrary deity.
Byebye religious wars.
Bybye bombing abortion clinics.
Bybye nationalism.
Byebye creationism debates.
Byebye to publicly displayed religious-based discrimination (e.g. gay bashing)
Byebye Mithras.

This is why I don't believe when someone says "It isn't your problem."
Every person's belief comes into play with relevant decisions in the external world. Who the hell would accept gay marriage if it was against his beliefs?
It ultimately affects anyone.
Arguing that 'It isn't [our] problem' has the basic tone of 'it's just one piece of trash' for a statement.

Those are social and political ideals though. When I think of someone who has beliefs, I look at myself and realize... I have beliefs that are mine. I don't and shouldn't expect others to believe in a deity such as I do. It is their choice and it doesn't make them any less stupid or bad.

The extremists... there's something wrong with them. Something profoundly fucked up in their hearts and minds. I don't condone their actions because 99.9% of the time, they do the very thing their good books tell them not to do.

[Amarantha]

I'm a Buddhist.

[orionedarnell]

Resurrection proofs - Is there historical evidence?

Christianity has many extraordinary claims but they all rest on one event, the

resurrection of our Lord. If this event did not come to pass, Christianity is

of no use. 1 Corinthians 15:14 says, "And if Christ has not been raised, our

preaching is useless and so is your faith."

The Christians of the early Church agreed with the Apostle Paul's statement.

The Church would have come to nothing had the resurrection been discredited.

Yet when the Church was experiencing growth, the Romans did not debunk the

resurrection. There were certainly a plethora of hostile witnesses to the

events of the Gospels, but not a single Roman came forward to expose supposed

fallacies. Many Roman critics attacked the philosophy of Christianity, but they

were unable to attack its historical accuracy, as they were witness to the

events of the New Testament. The Church could not have grown in Jerusalem if

Jesus' own generation (who had Him put to death) could have immediately exposed

the resurrection as lies.

The resurrection is not a lie. Christ died. Roman soldiers were experts at

execution. They plunged a spear into Christ's side, and resultant blood and

water flowed through the wound. This was recorded in the gospels, however they

did not understand the medical connotations as we do today. The fluid was

flowing from the pericardium and Christ could not have survived.

Many historians readily accept the writings of Plato, Aristotle, Thucydides,

and Caesar. Plato wrote between 427-347 B.C., with our earliest copies of his

works dating from the 900s (1200 year span), of which 7 copies have survived.

Aristotle wrote between 384-322 B.C., and his earliest works are dated from the

1100s (1400 year span), with 49 surviving copies. Thucydides wrote around 460-

400 B.C.; our copies of his works are from the 900s (1300 year span), with 8

copies in existence. Caesar's life was chronicled from 100-44 B.C. Our earliest

copies of the chronicles of Julius Caesar date from the 900s (1000 years) and

we have 10 surviving copies.

The New Testament, on the other hand, was written between 40-100 AD and our

earliest copies of the New Testament manuscripts are from the 130s (less than

100 years) and we have 5000 Greek copies, 10,000 Latin copies and 9300 copies

in other languages.

The New Testament stands alone in historical accuracy. It is the greatest of

the resurrection proofs. The gospels themselves are the most reliable

historical books in existence. However there are secular sources to confirm the

gospels' claims. Josephus, a prominent Jewish historian, corroborated the

prophecies, miracles, and crucifixion of Jesus. Tacitus, a Roman historian,

goes as far as to say, "Christus…suffered the extreme penalty during the reign

of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilate, and a most

mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only

in Judea. . .but even in Rome." (Tacitus, Annals 15.44 as quoted in Case for

Christ)

Scholars assert that when Tacitus says Jesus, "checked for the moment" it

indicates Jesus' death, and, "again broke out" refers to the resurrection.

The Bible also says the Earth went dark for three days. This is supported in

the writings of Thallus, a mid-eastern historian, who noted the darkness, which

was parallel with the time of the crucifixion. Phlegon also wrote about a great

earthquake and the greatest eclipse in the 202nd Olympiad, which is the year

A.D. 33.

Also, after Jesus' resurrection He appeared to over 500 people. It has been

very well documented and is more proof of His resurrection and why would the

christians of those days be willing to die for something they knew it was not

true.

These miraculous historical events mysteriously come together and are explained

in the Bible. There is undoubtedly an abundance of resurrection proofs to

confirm the claims of the resurrection. We don't have to take a blind leap of

faith, to follow assorted stories from a 2000-year-old book. We can accept the

most significant event in history, which coincidentally is the most well

documented event in history.

[NegativeBabylon]

I have no religion, Just a bible and a few other books about other religions. I read them though and take what they all have to offer. I would also attend any gathering of any belief if asked.

[Drake Dun]

Eat shit and die, Orion. You didn't win any tasty soul-morsels for Jesus with that cut-and-paste spray of diarrhea last time, nor did you show any interest in responding when we casually cut it to shreds. Why should things be any different this time?

Hey, it's okay. Don't take my negativity to heart. The Good Word says that you will be persecuted for telling the truth. So see, if I persecute you, you're right. And if I agree with you, well then of course, you're right. See how that works?

Free your mind.

Drake

[orionedarnell]

Originally Posted by Drake Dun

Eat shit and die, Orion. You didn't win any tasty soul-morsels for Jesus with that cut-and-paste spray of diarrhea last time, nor did you show any interest in responding when we casually cut it to shreds. Why should things be any different this time?

Hey, it's okay. Don't take my negativity to heart. The Good Word says that you will be persecuted for telling the truth. So see, if I persecute you, you're right. And if I agree with you, well then of course, you're right. See how that works?

Free your mind.

Drake

At least you admit I am right. That is a start. (I know you were being sarcastic). But I am right and the tearing apart of what I said. Not much. Pretty weak counter but it is OK because no matter what I write you won't believe. I could be God and you still would not believe. That is what is truly sad. I could be giving undeniable truth yet you and so many others on this site and other sites still would not believe. I pray one day you will come to know Jesus as your saviour. I pray for others on this site as well.

[Evander]

Originally Posted by orionedarnell

At least you admit I am right. That is a start. (I know you were being sarcastic). But I am right and the tearing apart of what I said. Not much. Pretty weak counter but it is OK because no matter what I write you won't believe. I could be God and you still would not believe. That is what is truly sad. I could be giving undeniable truth yet you and so many others on this site and other sites still would not believe. I pray one day you will come to know Jesus as your saviour. I pray for others on this site as well.

Hmm... and I could be God and you would now be a blasphemer. But that's OK, because despite how I contact you, you still won't believe. That is what is truly sad.


Poor defense. Keep trying, buddy.

[Godslayer Jillian]

Well, there's no real weight to what you said anyway.
I have heard and read that argument many times, and it's not a very strong one.
It's an argument directed to atheists, challenging atheist mentality, by naming a time without virtually any atheist.
You say that if Jesus' miracles hadn't been true, someone would have figured it out. You say that 'Many Roman critics attacked the philosophy of Christianity, but they were unable to attack its historical accuracy', and that is not true. They weren't unable; they just didn't.
Read some Plato. The whole manner of Western thought was not based on evidence until at least after the Renaissance.
Those were mentally primitive times. Almost no one in those times doubted the supernatural. There was nothing divinely special to them about miracles; maybe superhuman, but not 'oh my god i just saw a ****ing messiah rawr!'.
All religions have their miracles. All the followers of those religions had no trouble in believing in them.
In a time where magic and oracles were common, people don't question actions: they question premises.

The argument of not being able to deny Jesus' miracles would only hold up with 17th century minds or later.

[Evander]

Hmm, I never saw a "miracle" or "unexplained occurence" as a justifier of any sort of faith of that type. It's not that it's unexplained, it just has yet to be explained. Thus, it's much more probable for such to occur (the "supernatural) than for there to be a God behind it (much less for said God to exist).


Miracle just seems like a fancy term for "the currently unexplained but not entirely improbable"... or in other cases, solely "the improbable".

/endmy2cents


Oh, right JESUS' miracles. Well, that's a different story. [I need to learn to read...]

[raineofblood]

I'm just going to address the question at hand. What religion do you follow.

I used to be a christian of sorts. Similar to the way Crying describes herself as. But I'm a changed person through study of religion and my own personal philosophies. I no longer follow any religion. Calm down, you have not successfully turned me into an atheist Let me explain:

When one labels oneself as Muslim, Jewish, Christian, Hindu, whatever: one creates a narrow path for oneself. If you are a Christian, you follow what the Bible says, nothing else. Jewish: the Torah, Muslim: The Quran and so on so forth. By labeling yourself with one religion you are closing the doors on many ideals. It's not that easy to say "I'm a Muslim but I eat meat and drink wine" or "I'm a Christian and I don't believe that Jesus is the son of God and I believe in the teachings of Buddah just as much as those of Christ if not more." It's not just hard to say such things: it is almost impossible. But if you take off these labels: you can take in all the ideals, compose your own "religion" based on the right ideals, not what some book that has been altered over thousands of years is dictating.
I believe in a higher power. I believe in judgment. By who? Under what terms? I don't have specifics. Just do good: you will be judged good. Do wrong: You will be judged based on what you did. One thing I hate :

Jew: There is only one God
Muslim: There is only one God
Christian: There is only ONE God

Jew: The Muslim God, The Christian God are wrong
Muslim: The Jewish God, The Christian God are wrong
Christian: The Jewish God, The Muslim God are wrong.

Wait, I thought there was just one God?? What the fuck? 'Labeled Religion' , as I call it, is full of Hypocrisy. My own values which I pull out of both my own heart and other religions are not. And what's all this with Christian: " All non christians are hell bound" . It doesn't say that in the Bible! Same with the Torah and Quran. Does Not Say That. So if it was that way, wouldn't we ALL be hell bound?

I have a bad habit of ranting too much T_T"
I hope you got a gist of what I'm saying ^w^"

[ElectricMayhem]

My faith is similar to KontanKarite's. I think of myself as something of an "earthy Christian", and I'm interested in the mystical elements of Christianity.

[msr.iaidoka]

Greetings all,

Agnostic would probably be the best word to describe my beliefs. I have yet to find what fits me. I do find Shintou to be highly fascinating and have spent quite some time studying it. When I manage to visit Japan I will visit some of the shrines and, if I happen to experience anything resembling a "religious experience" then I suppose that would be a sign.


平和、

マット

[L'Oiseau Noir]

I'm a Christian.

I've always been raised in a Christian household, and have taken the time to read the Bible and memorize some of its scriptures. Though, in spite of my being a Christian, I am very open-minded and not the stereotypical "you're-going-to-hell-if-you-don't-follow-me" Christian, that so many people seemed to have associated with Christianity and those who choose to follow it.

My view of it is as simple as this: if you wish to accept God, then let it be so, but it's on your own volition and not by means of constant dictation from religious fanatics. It's up to that individual to accept God (or any deity for that matter), and not the duty of a church, even if they try to project it that way.

In the end, there really is no right way or wrong way to worship. You choose whatever religion you wish to pursue, and if that's your faith, then so be it.

[Graveyard.Crow]

Originally Posted by L'Oiseau Noir

I'm a Christian.

I've always been raised in a Christian household, and have taken the time to read the Bible and memorize some of its scriptures. Though, in spite of my being a Christian, I am very open-minded and not the stereotypical "you're-going-to-hell-if-you-don't-follow-me" Christian. My view of it is as simple as this: if you wish to accept God, then let it be so, but it's on your own volition and not by means of constant dictation from religious fanatics. It's up to that individual to accept God (or any deity for that matter), and not the duty of a church, even if they try to project it that way.

In the end, there really is no right way or wrong way to worship. You choose whatever religion you wish to pursue, and if that's your faith, then so be it.

Yay. That's awsome. Wish everyone felt that way.

[L'Oiseau Noir]

Originally Posted by Graveyard.Crow

Yay. That's awsome. Wish everyone felt that way.

As do I, but unfortunately many have been brainwashed into thinking Christianity is the way of the world. Thankfully, I'm not one of those close-minded people; if I was, I'd have missed out on meeting some very interesting people. Such as the individuals I've had the pleasure to talking with on this forum.

[Graveyard.Crow]

Well it honestly is kind of strange, because I actually meet people who sometimes even pretend to be open minded but then when it comes down to it they just kinda think "I'll be your friend but you're still going to hell"
Not saying that's you, I am saying that is OTHER people

[L'Oiseau Noir]

Originally Posted by Graveyard.Crow

Well it honestly is kind of strange, because I actually meet people who sometimes even pretend to be open minded but then when it comes down to it they just kinda think "I'll be your friend but you're still going to hell"
Not saying that's you, I am saying that is OTHER people

No, I completely understand! =)

I can assure you, though, I'm nothing like those individuals. I hate two-faced people as well--if you say or do something, then mean to do or say it. That's how I see things, you know?

Always lived by that, and I believe I will continue to. I'd never want to be narrow-minded anyway, and have all the interesting people go right over my head! That'd be tragic.

[Graveyard.Crow]

Umm I don't remember if I said it before, me is Pagan. No particular choice in an exact religion, just the category and I believe in all of them. Sue me.