Argue Religion Here

[~~Auriel~~]

Why is it that posts never stay on topic? If you want to argue with others about your religious beliefs....here's the fucking thread to do it in.

[Godslayer Jillian]

Religions suck.
Let's get back to the other threads.

[Jonathan]

Transhumanism seems like borderline religion, and it doesn't seem to suck very much. I kind of like the futurists' hopeful outlook.

The singularity is near.

[MegearaErotica]

I like the concept of religion in general. Most give people hope and something to look forward to. Most is the keyword in that sentence.

[Godslayer Jillian]

A mirage does not take away the thirst.

[KontanKarite]

The actions of people are faster than the actions of gods.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by ~~Auriel~~

Why is it that posts never stay on topic? If you want to argue with others about your religious beliefs....here's the fucking thread to do it in.

I was gone all day and just got home, and wanted to follow up what we were talking about in the other thread, so I'll just continue it here.

Christianity also says, "The wise man knows that he knows nothing." I believe in the questioning aspect of that and working it out for myself.
Like I said it is a blend...I don't believe in all aspects of Zen Buddhism, which is why it is so difficult to explain. I do believe in the concept of nirvana and reaching enlightenment through mediation.
Basically I believe certain things to be True, I can't categorize my belief in re-incarnation through Christianity, nor can I categorize my belief in "good" and "evil" through Zen. However, Zen is a little different than traditional Buddhism.

I wouldn't say Zen is very different from traditional Buddhism, because most schools in Mahayana are wildly different fom each other. However, "not good, not bad" is a very important part in Zen, without it, its hard to maintain the spirit of Zen, if you can at all, because thats dualistic thinking, which is the bane of the practitioner. What particular parts of Zen do you believe, other than nirvana?

I don't think that to believe in something very strongly is exactly the hinderance that Buddhism describes, but it depends on the individual. In order to achieve enlightenment, nirvana, oneness with the Creator, or to go to heaven you must be devoted and devotion in itself implies strong belief. Strong belief is does not have to be blinding, but it can be. So there is a lesson there. Strong beliefs should not cloud your perception of Truth and Reality, both of which aren't often kind.

In Zen (not sure if this is everyone), we say that three things are required for practice. Great Faith, Great Doubt, Great Determination. Great Faith is placed on yourself, that you can achieve it, Great Doubt, question question question, Great Determination, try try try and never stop. So a sort of faith is needed, I don't think most Zen Buddhists would put up with it if they didn't think it was eventually going to lead them somewhere XD But even the Dalai Lama says that you should keep your beliefs few, I do put a lot of views out but there's only a few things that I believe very strongly in. I mentioned the story about the Buddha's story about the father and the son he thought was dead, have you heard of that one? I read it in a book and couldn't come up with it with google (Buddha dead son father story doesn't work well XD), so if you need clarification with that I can type it out if you want.

It's not that I believe whatever is written. I was raised to question everything. I can't believe everything that is written in the Bible because it was written by men and memories of men. Both men (Buddha included) and memory are failable. It's the core underlying principles that are common through out the scriptures and the commonalities that exist in every religion that stand out to me. The Ten Commandments, The Ten Teachings of The Grandfather, The Golden Rule. MOST religions have these same concepts. Even the Norse God Odin was crucified and pierced by a spear, in the same manner as Jesus. In my lifetime, I have researched and evaluated various religions and found different concepts from various ones that fits with my own general idea of things. While those 3 religions are the ones that I can mostly describe as being close to what I believe, it's not something that can be easily described as it doesn't follow the norm of any existing religion. It is only comparable to those, and is largely based on Chrisitanity. In order for you to understand I would seriously have to write messages far longer than this one to explain each bit separately.

Okay, but may I ask, if you don't believe everything that is written, why believe that homosexuality is a sin, and not that its okay to sell your daughter as a slave?

I will agree that a lot of religions have parallel stories, the flood myth for example is very very common, so I never see a problem in blending and borrowing from different religions, but when they conflict I think that should be ironed out

[~~Auriel~~]

In addition to nirvana, I believe that all people have the potential to reach nirvana and what holds us back from that is ignorance.
Zen rejects the study of scriptures, this is not part of my belief. Scriptures of various kinds are there to teach, and I like to learn.
Zen rejects the idea of religious rites. This is circumstantial. If you consider the religious rite to be prayer or meditation, I concur. If it is eating wafers and drinking wine, or going to church because you HAVE to, being baptized, communion bar-mitzfah, etc. I reject that idea.
I do not believe in the Zen idea of rejecting devotional practices. Zen contradicts itself in this area as it's main purpose is meditation, which is a devotional practice when it comes to Zen.
I believe in the use of Koans (paradoxical puzzles or questions to overcome normal boundaries of logic).
I also practice Zazen (seated mediation, often combined with Christian prayer).
Also the belief in re-incarnation tends to be associated with this religion, which one can say contradicts the Christian belief of Heaven and Hell, but it is a perspective. I do believe God helps us achieve that nirvana through lifetimes of learning. Perhaps not all souls are re-incarnated immediately, but then are later, and some perhaps not at all. I think it is entirely individual to the soul and God's plan to teach that soul. And yes, I do believe He teaches us all, especially those that choose to deny Him. NT: Jesus would abandon 99 sheep for 1 that has strayed.

To answer your second question, my personal standpoint on homosexuality is this: God created man and woman. He created them to be a pair, and in that pair there is a balance and harmony (see Taoism). It is not up to me to decide what God says is sinful, but according to many religious teachings; it is. The consistency that I have seen in a variety of religions (Muslim, Judism, Christianity, Native Spirituality) consider it to be wrong and wrong in the same sense that incest is wrong. According to Jesus's teachings in the NT, "Judge not lest ye be judged," it is not for me, but I do not force my views on those who choose to live their lives the way they see fit. Neither do I tell them what they can and can't do. I do not look down on people who are homosexual, and I don't treat them differently than anyone else. I consider it a personal preference (based on conversations with gay friends), and it really is no different than choosing to drink Coke over Pepsi. My beliefs are mine alone, and they are personally practiced. Meaning again, I don't tell others what to believe or what is right or wrong.

So as you can see, I do have a degree of acceptance of homosexuality. On the topic of Prop 8 in California, I would not have cast a vote in favor of same-sex marriages based on my religious beliefs. My vote is my voice. There are plenty of other voices out there that could override mine.

As far as the selling of daughters into slavery bit? That's ridiculous! I think some of the Bible speaks of mistakes previously made that we should learn from, thus increasing our moral integrity.
That brings to mind a certain woman in history named Countess Elizabeth Bathory. She was a wealthy woman and held a lot of power in Hungary during her time. She constantly brought in Slovak peasant girls and tortured them and killed them at her will. Over 600 of them actually. There are stories that she ate their flesh, drank and bathed in their blood. (Dracula Was a Woman by Raymond McNally) The Slovak people at the time didn't feel that they had another choice. The overall concept of selling your own flesh and blood? Total ignorance. Anyone who believes in that should be kicked in the a$$ every hour on the hour. I believe that there is always a better way if you are willing to seek it out. Even during the hardest of times.

This was a wide and consistent practice for a long period of time in history. Similar to the variety of religions that are against homosexuality. What is the difference? Largely your upbringing, moral standpoint, and religious views. But basically, people didn't sell their children into slavery because God said that it was right and they should. They did it because they needed the money.

Now, as I wrote to Jillian in another thread. I have experienced more hatred in this forum because of my beliefs. More than what I experience everyday being gawf in an extremely non-gawf city. I don't ask anyone to abandon their values, but respect mine. Be mature and intelligent in your responses and for God's sake understand that a person believes in something for a reason. If I didn't want it called into question I wouldn't post it. But there is no need to act like an a$$hole about it.

[Godslayer Jillian]

Originally Posted by ~~Auriel~~

I have experienced more hatred in this forum because of my beliefs.

There's a difference between hate and ridicule.

[Necrophagist]

Auriel makes such retarded topics.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by ~~Auriel~~

In addition to nirvana, I believe that all people have the potential to reach nirvana and what holds us back from that is ignorance.
Zen rejects the study of scriptures, this is not part of my belief. Scriptures of various kinds are there to teach, and I like to learn.
Zen rejects the idea of religious rites. This is circumstantial. If you consider the religious rite to be prayer or meditation, I concur. If it is eating wafers and drinking wine, or going to church because you HAVE to, being baptized, communion bar-mitzfah, etc. I reject that idea.
I do not believe in the Zen idea of rejecting devotional practices. Zen contradicts itself in this area as it's main purpose is meditation, which is a devotional practice when it comes to Zen.
I believe in the use of Koans (paradoxical puzzles or questions to overcome normal boundaries of logic).
I also practice Zazen (seated mediation, often combined with Christian prayer).

Meditation is not devotional, an athiest can meditate if he wants. Its not a religious practice at all, nothing sacred about it. And the rejection of religious text isn't that you should read it, but you shouldn't cling to them.

To answer your second question, my personal standpoint on homosexuality is this: God created man and woman. He created them to be a pair, and in that pair there is a balance and harmony (see Taoism). It is not up to me to decide what God says is sinful, but according to many religious teachings; it is. The consistency that I have seen in a variety of religions (Muslim, Judism, Christianity, Native Spirituality) consider it to be wrong and wrong in the same sense that incest is wrong. According to Jesus's teachings in the NT, "Judge not lest ye be judged," it is not for me, but I do not force my views on those who choose to live their lives the way they see fit. Neither do I tell them what they can and can't do. I do not look down on people who are homosexual, and I don't treat them differently than anyone else. I consider it a personal preference (based on conversations with gay friends), and it really is no different than choosing to drink Coke over Pepsi. My beliefs are mine alone, and they are personally practiced. Meaning again, I don't tell others what to believe or what is right or wrong.

God created Adam and Eve as a pair, but he also made other people, no word on how he paired them up, and there is text in Genesis on how women would consort with the "sons of God," which in folklore is usually interpreted as angels. Also in folklore, not in the Bible proper, was Adam's first wife, Lilith. God made Lilith out of dust, same as Adam. Because of that, Lilith knew she was Adam's equal, and refused to let him dominate her. She left the marriage, and eventually became a sort of evil spirit (she was barren, and wanted children, and when she tried to snatch them she ended up killing them, so she told Elijah all of her names, so people would post Lilith's names to protect their babies from her), and God created Eve out of Adam's rib, that way they were not equal. The fact that Eve was made from Adam's rib was a big argument as to why women are inferior to men and must be submissive. This is also a dominant theme in judeo-christian religions. So if homosexuality isn't natural and not what God intended, submissive wives is also what he intended.

And Taoism rejects dualistic thinking as well as Zen, actually it influenced Zen Buddhism very much. The Tao isn't a harmony of two opposites, its before opposites, when good arrives, so does bad. They do believe in dualistic energy existing in the world (yin and yang), but they only exist because the other exists, the Tao is their source, and it is neither.

As far as the selling of daughters into slavery bit? That's ridiculous! I think some of the Bible speaks of mistakes previously made that we should learn from, thus increasing our moral integrity.
That brings to mind a certain woman in history named Countess Elizabeth Bathory. She was a wealthy woman and held a lot of power in Hungary during her time. She constantly brought in Slovak peasant girls and tortured them and killed them at her will. Over 600 of them actually. There are stories that she ate their flesh, drank and bathed in their blood. (Dracula Was a Woman by Raymond McNally) The Slovak people at the time didn't feel that they had another choice. The overall concept of selling your own flesh and blood? Total ignorance. Anyone who believes in that should be kicked in the a$$ every hour on the hour. I believe that there is always a better way if you are willing to seek it out. Even during the hardest of times.

They didn't know she was a serial killer when they went to live with her, some of them went for the money as a regular maid work, others were low gentry women who were sent there to learn court etiquette, others were apparently abducted, once rumours spread about the murders, she was investigated, and because she was nobility they feared a execution and public trial would bring scandal, so she was locked up for the rest of her life. Over three hundred witnesses came forward with their accounts of family members missing and them seeing things that weren't quite right. Her servants were also tried and were killed on the spot. I'm not sure what she has to do with anything we're talking about though.

This was a wide and consistent practice for a long period of time in history. Similar to the variety of religions that are against homosexuality. What is the difference? Largely your upbringing, moral standpoint, and religious views. But basically, people didn't sell their children into slavery because God said that it was right and they should. They did it because they needed the money.

Which is funny because at the time, Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, and Persians thought homosexuality was a great idea! So if the Bible was wrong about slavery, why is it not wrong about homosexuality?

[JCC]

What's this thread going to come to?

Atheists: Religion is shit.
Religious: No it isn't!
Atheists: Oh yeah? Prove it!
Religious: ...

[Saya]

Originally Posted by JCC

What's this thread going to come to?

Atheists: Religion is shit.
Religious: No it isn't!
Atheists: Oh yeah? Prove it!
Religious: ...

Which I guess makes Zen the most honest religion ever:

A monk asked Un-Mun Zen Master, "What is Buddha?"

He replied, "Dry shit on the stick."

[$haDe]

Buddhism use logic.. good idea, bad convincing.

Christianity use love.. peaceful idea, worse convincing (especially to another religion)

Islam use ....I don't know.

Hindu use God's power.... good convincing, too bad it's not real..enough

Apa'rosh use harmony with nature... nice point, too bad we have global warming things.


I gave topics.
Now, let's argue!

[Albert Mond]

Originally Posted by $haDe

Buddhism use logic.. good idea, bad convincing.

Christianity use love.. peaceful idea, worse convincing (especially to another religion)

Islam use ....I don't know.

Hindu use God's power.... good convincing, too bad it's not real..enough

Apa'rosh use harmony with nature... nice point, too bad we have global warming things.


I gave topics.
Now, let's argue!

Can I have nudes of you?

[$haDe]

Did I remind Auriel that this thread's topic is metaphorically similar to the sign "Wage war here" infront of the battlefield?

[$haDe]

Originally Posted by Albert Mond

Can I have nudes of you?

Go ahead. There's nothing on
here..

[~~Auriel~~]

Originally Posted by Saya

Meditation is not devotional, an athiest can meditate if he wants. Its not a religious practice at all, nothing sacred about it. And the rejection of religious text isn't that you should read it, but you shouldn't cling to them.

Fair enough. I see where you're coming from. Then it would be logical to say that you don't think that Zen is a religion, so much as a practice? I've heard that argument before. People interpret it differently. There's nothing wrong with that.

Originally Posted by Saya

God created Adam and Eve as a pair, but he also made other people, no word on how he paired them up, and there is text in Genesis on how women would consort with the "sons of God," which in folklore is usually interpreted as angels. Also in folklore, not in the Bible proper, was Adam's first wife, Lilith. God made Lilith out of dust, same as Adam. Because of that, Lilith knew she was Adam's equal, and refused to let him dominate her. She left the marriage, and eventually became a sort of evil spirit (she was barren, and wanted children, and when she tried to snatch them she ended up killing them, so she told Elijah all of her names, so people would post Lilith's names to protect their babies from her), and God created Eve out of Adam's rib, that way they were not equal. The fact that Eve was made from Adam's rib was a big argument as to why women are inferior to men and must be submissive. This is also a dominant theme in judeo-christian religions. So if homosexuality isn't natural and not what God intended, submissive wives is also what he intended.

I am familiar with both the Apocrypha and Lilith. The Apocrypha is a collection of books that were intended to be in the bible, but were rejected. Here is a site that describes why:
http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/apocryph.htm
So I don't disagree with the myth of Lilith, but I don't believe that the myth is accurate enough in it's presentation. I think it's conception is and the "submissiveness" of Eve was something that men historically used to "keep their wives in check." Fortunately society has evolved further than this...but there still is a desire in most men to be "in control." And by this I mean, the one who asks the woman on the date, the one to make the first move, etc. That doesn't imply that women are inferior because they allow the man to do these things and I don't agree that there is an inferiority in the creation of womankind as far as the Bible is concerned. I think the concept is that Eve was created "from his side, to be at his side," which doesn't imply inferiority to me, so much as companionship. That it goes both ways. I think the point of the "submissiveness" that you speak of is not necessarily interpreted like, "she has to obey him." More like a balance of power within the relationship. Every relationship has this balance, and without it, the relationship wouldn't work. As an example: for me and my husband...I do the dishes and he takes out the trash. Fair exchange. I hate taking out the trash...he hates doing dishes.
Moreover there is current scientific study concerning "Mother Eve," which is a theory that all of mankind can be traced back to one mother. I remember watching it on the news back in 1999. It's based on mtDNA:
http://www.biblicalcreation.org.uk/o...gy/bcs023.html

Originally Posted by Saya

And Taoism rejects dualistic thinking as well as Zen, actually it influenced Zen Buddhism very much. The Tao isn't a harmony of two opposites, its before opposites, when good arrives, so does bad. They do believe in dualistic energy existing in the world (yin and yang), but they only exist because the other exists, the Tao is their source, and it is neither.

I'm not claiming to be a Taoist. In fact I think probably the only way to achieve a good and honest sense of the universe is to think dualistically. I'm claiming the belief that men and women are a balance, much like the yin and yang. And you can take that literally as good and bad, which it does represent. You can also take it figuratively and see that various harmonies exist within certain energies, which it also represents. That was all I meant by that.

Originally Posted by Saya

They didn't know she was a serial killer when they went to live with her, some of them went for the money as a regular maid work, others were low gentry women who were sent there to learn court etiquette, others were apparently abducted, once rumours spread about the murders, she was investigated, and because she was nobility they feared a execution and public trial would bring scandal, so she was locked up for the rest of her life. Over three hundred witnesses came forward with their accounts of family members missing and them seeing things that weren't quite right. Her servants were also tried and were killed on the spot. I'm not sure what she has to do with anything we're talking about though..

The point was to answer your question about homosexuality vs. selling daughters into slavery and the like. People sold their daughters into horrendous conditions- no they didn't know and they had no way of knowing- but that they did it for money not for religious reasons.

Originally Posted by Saya

Which is funny because at the time, Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, and Persians thought homosexuality was a great idea! So if the Bible was wrong about slavery, why is it not wrong about homosexuality?

I'm pretty sure I answered that already. Continuing to ask me the same question isn't going to produce different results.
When I was a teenager, and I would say to my late Father- "But my friends are doing it..." He would say, "If you're friends stuck their heads in a toilet and flushed, would you?" Just because others thought it was a great idea, doesn't mean that EVERYONE has to.
If you want to talk about other aspects of religion, that's cool...but I think the discussion on my stance on homosexuality has been made clear and run it's course.

[~~Auriel~~]

Originally Posted by JCC

What's this thread going to come to?

Atheists: Religion is shit.
Religious: No it isn't!
Atheists: Oh yeah? Prove it!
Religious: ...

Pretty much. The point in starting this thread was because there was far too much religious discussion going on in a thread about State Laws and Proposals.
I honestly wasn't going to participate. The only reason I've posted anything so far is because Saya called my beliefs into question and she addresses them with some amount of respect; understanding that I believe things for a reason and asked me what that reason is. Furthermore, she's not being a complete dick to me about them....in fact, my ignore list has grown extensively in the last couple of days due to this. I don't deserve to be ridiculed because my beliefs don't "gel" with someone else's or that person has something against Christians or Christianity. Oddly enough, these are the same people who cuss me out for being "intolerant," which, if they were really paying attention they would see that isn't the case.
My beliefs are defined by me for me. Because I express them doesn't mean I'm some evangelical a$$hole trying to "save the masses."

[PortraitOfSanity]

It was a debate about a proposition that was based on religious grounds. If you can't see how a religious debate is relevant to that, you're really just ignoring the facts. Much like when you say you get "hatred" on here for your religion.

[viscus]

Religion is all emotional. You either feel the existence of the supernatural, or you don't. I don't, but I have no problem with those that do so long as their belief isn't causing them to violate others. I'm not a fan of proselytism either.

[~~Auriel~~]

Originally Posted by $haDe

Did I remind Auriel that this thread's topic is metaphorically similar to the sign "Wage war here" infront of the battlefield?

Lol, no you don't need to remind me. There seems to be a lot of people in this forum who delight in tearing apart each other's beliefs...in threads that have nothing or little to do with religion. Which is why I tend to prefer goth.net over this forum. I don't have to weed through pages of bullshit to get to an ACTUAL post about the topic.

I am simply providing the battleground.

[~~Auriel~~]

Originally Posted by PortraitOfSanity

It was a debate about a proposition that was based on religious grounds. If you can't see how a religious debate is relevant to that, you're really just ignoring the facts. Much like when you say you get "hatred" on here for your religion.

See post #19. Prop 8 was the only state prop/law that I mentioned as having anything to do with religious beliefs. But rather than staying on course, it became all about religion.

If you want to debate religion...start a thread about debating religion...it's not brain surgery.

Furthermore, you don't have to act like a prick because you don't agree with me. As previously stated elsewhere- hiding behind a computer screen doesn't make your balls any bigger. And that's not directed at you POS, just those that feel a need to present themselves as ingrates...and there is "hatred" towards me because of my beliefs. Which is obvious from various posts.

[$haDe]

Originally Posted by ~~Auriel~~

Lol, no you don't need to remind me. There seems to be a lot of people in this forum who delight in tearing apart each other's beliefs...in threads that have nothing or little to do with religion. Which is why I tend to prefer goth.net over this forum. I don't have to weed through pages of bullshit to get to an ACTUAL post about the topic.

I am simply providing the battleground.

Fair enough. But remember this - If this thread is not left deserted, then, it'll reflected how the chaotic era should be like.

You can't have a World War that every country fight in Japan.

One thread is too small for every topic of arguing.

[Albert Mond]

Originally Posted by $haDe

Fair enough. But remember this - If this thread is not left deserted, then, it'll reflected how the chaotic era should be like.

You can't have a World War that every country fight in Japan.

One thread is too small for every topic of arguing.

You can if Japan pisses everybody off.