100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Please respect my religion . . . | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
this part bothers me:
My religion does not ask people to believe blindly and without scientific evidence in supernatural "saviors," "prophets" or "avatars" of a particular ethnicity or culture. science relies on evidence, religion relies on faith. to have proof would require no faith. even the religion described here would demand a certain amout of faith, only that faith is placed in a mind set rather than a god, prophet or savior with no evidence as to the right or wrong of its premise. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh boy, a post about religion at an "un-Godly" hour of the night. *rimshot please*
My take on religion is very simple: We're all guessing. There, I said it. Many of the religions that exist (or so far that I'm aware of) are based around trying to discover how we came to exist on the planet. And because humans are...well, humans, we all have different opinions and that leads to some interesting theories as to how everything we know of and don't know of came to be. This is where the word "Faith" comes in. Allow me to take the definition from Merriam Websters: Merriam Webster defines "Faith (noun)" with definition 2b as: firm belief for something in which there is no proof (2) complete trust). That definition pretty much sums up all forms of religion on the different ideas of how we got here. And as several posters in this thread have said, religion is often blamed for when people who are fanatics do things that put others in harms way simply because they believe that what they believe is right, and they believe it with every fiber of their being. I like to call these people psychopaths, because that is what they are; they have absolutely no conscience. Instead of blaming the religion, or even blaming the individual(s) who carried out the acts that put others in harms way (or worse) simply know that it takes someone who is mentally unstable to do something of that nature. That's the end of my post as I'll not get into the much more controversial modern religious happenings. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i think that the world would be a safer place without religious dogma that can be interpreted to do harm. thus i've no respect for any religion. i do respect the right for people to practice as they choose.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
this part bothers me: My religion does not ask people to believe blindly and without scientific evidence in supernatural "saviors," "prophets" or "avatars" of a particular ethnicity or culture. science relies on evidence, religion relies on faith. to have proof would require no faith. even the religion described here would demand a certain amout of faith, only that faith is placed in a mind set rather than a god, prophet or savior with no evidence as to the right or wrong of its premise. Science depends on faith on our part as well. Have you specifically redone the experiments to come to the conclusion on Scientific facts to verify their truth? If not, the "fact" scientists put out are taken on faith on a regular persons' behalf. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
this part bothers me: My religion does not ask people to believe blindly and without scientific evidence in supernatural "saviors," "prophets" or "avatars" of a particular ethnicity or culture. science relies on evidence, religion relies on faith. to have proof would require no faith. even the religion described here would demand a certain amout of faith, only that faith is placed in a mind set rather than a god, prophet or savior with no evidence as to the right or wrong of its premise. Science depends on faith on our part as well. Have you specifically redone the experiments to come to the conclusion on Scientific facts to verify their truth? If not, the "fact" scientists put out are taken on faith on a regular persons' behalf. science does not depend on faith whatsoever and scientists do not put out facts. scientists do not BELIEVE in a theory as the faithful BELIEVE in god. indeed the scientific method requires that science question every theory put forward by testing evidence that supports the theory to see if it produces repeatable and predictable results. religion does not allow for such testing, one because there is no evidence to be tested and two, because the faithful have been indoctrinated not to question god. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh boy, a post about religion at an "un-Godly" hour of the night. *rimshot please* My take on religion is very simple: We're all guessing. There, I said it. Many of the religions that exist (or so far that I'm aware of) are based around trying to discover how we came to exist on the planet. And because humans are...well, humans, we all have different opinions and that leads to some interesting theories as to how everything we know of and don't know of came to be. This is where the word "Faith" comes in. Allow me to take the definition from Merriam Websters: Merriam Webster defines "Faith (noun)" with definition 2b as: firm belief for something in which there is no proof (2) complete trust). That definition pretty much sums up all forms of religion on the different ideas of how we got here. And as several posters in this thread have said, religion is often blamed for when people who are fanatics do things that put others in harms way simply because they believe that what they believe is right, and they believe it with every fiber of their being. I like to call these people psychopaths, because that is what they are; they have absolutely no conscience. Instead of blaming the religion, or even blaming the individual(s) who carried out the acts that put others in harms way (or worse) simply know that it takes someone who is mentally unstable to do something of that nature. That's the end of my post as I'll not get into the much more controversial modern religious happenings. in psychology, a diagnosis of delusional is one who believes in a certain concept in spit of evidence to support an alternative concept. i'd say that applies to the god fearing. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i think that the world would be a safer place without religious dogma that can be interpreted to do harm. thus i've no respect for any religion. i do respect the right for people to practice as they choose. JR, you basically summed up why I believe in God, but intentionally choose not to have a religion. I have my own belief, and it does not exclude science. Nor does it deny anyone else's choice of worship. It's just what works for me, and it's simple. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
this part bothers me: My religion does not ask people to believe blindly and without scientific evidence in supernatural "saviors," "prophets" or "avatars" of a particular ethnicity or culture. science relies on evidence, religion relies on faith. to have proof would require no faith. even the religion described here would demand a certain amout of faith, only that faith is placed in a mind set rather than a god, prophet or savior with no evidence as to the right or wrong of its premise. Science depends on faith on our part as well. Have you specifically redone the experiments to come to the conclusion on Scientific facts to verify their truth? If not, the "fact" scientists put out are taken on faith on a regular persons' behalf. science does not depend on faith whatsoever and scientists do not put out facts. scientists do not BELIEVE in a theory as the faithful BELIEVE in god. indeed the scientific method requires that science question every theory put forward by testing evidence that supports the theory to see if it produces repeatable and predictable results. religion does not allow for such testing, one because there is no evidence to be tested and two, because the faithful have been indoctrinated not to question god. "Science" itself does not depend on faith. But you believing the science is true is on faith, unless of course again you have repeated the experiment(s). one because there is no evidence to be tested and two, because the faithful have been indoctrinated not to question god. 1. There is much evidence, just gotta look. 2. Not true. We don't question God because we know it to be true. In school, while being taught by teachers, did you question what the teachers taught you? If not, why not? How do you know it to be true? Because they tell you it is? That's a bit on the side of blind faith there. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jesus doesn't want blind fools following Him.
He ONLY wants people with faith to believe .... whose eyes have been opened and Now they can see. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One can be Religious
Without having Relationship...... One can have Relationship Without being Religious.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Peter_Pan69
on
Tue 12/20/11 05:16 AM
|
|
Oh boy, a post about religion at an "un-Godly" hour of the night. *rimshot please* My take on religion is very simple: We're all guessing. There, I said it. Many of the religions that exist (or so far that I'm aware of) are based around trying to discover how we came to exist on the planet. And because humans are...well, humans, we all have different opinions and that leads to some interesting theories as to how everything we know of and don't know of came to be. This is where the word "Faith" comes in. Allow me to take the definition from Merriam Websters: Merriam Webster defines "Faith (noun)" with definition 2b as: firm belief for something in which there is no proof (2) complete trust). That definition pretty much sums up all forms of religion on the different ideas of how we got here. And as several posters in this thread have said, religion is often blamed for when people who are fanatics do things that put others in harms way simply because they believe that what they believe is right, and they believe it with every fiber of their being. I like to call these people psychopaths, because that is what they are; they have absolutely no conscience. Instead of blaming the religion, or even blaming the individual(s) who carried out the acts that put others in harms way (or worse) simply know that it takes someone who is mentally unstable to do something of that nature. That's the end of my post as I'll not get into the much more controversial modern religious happenings. in psychology, a diagnosis of delusional is one who believes in a certain concept in spit of evidence to support an alternative concept. i'd say that applies to the god fearing. Here's a "concept" jr posted (bolded for emphasis) science does not depend on faith whatsoever and scientists do not put out facts. scientists do not BELIEVE in a theory as the faithful BELIEVE in god. indeed the scientific method requires that science question every theory put forward by testing evidence that supports the theory to see if it produces repeatable and predictable results. religion does not allow for such testing, one because there is no evidence to be tested and two, because the faithful have been indoctrinated not to question god. Now we have a conundrum... jr, has expressed his opinion that he has no beliefs yet he posted the words above. Will jr deny believing the words he wrote? He has also stated that he doesn't "waste his time" learning about "God". Sooooo, Ima jus gunna call bullchit! on that statement and offer my "proof". 1 Thessalonians 5:21 King James Version (KJV) 21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
insangel
on
Tue 12/20/11 05:29 AM
|
|
respect...allowing others to believe and have their faith without judging them for it or trying to convert them to your religion ..EVERYONE deserves FREEDOM of religion...
it's not thier religion i focus on..it's do they treat me with the same respect i give them..simple.......it seems hysterical to ask people to respect your beliefs when you dont respect others dont you think? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Science" itself does not depend on faith. But you believing the science is true is on faith, unless of course again you have repeated the experiment(s). but i don't BELIEVE that the science is true. in fact i don't believe anything and question everything as happens with the scientific method. every claim is tested over and over again when there is ample evidence to be tested. because a theory passed the latest series of tests does not mean i believe the therory. means i'm awaiting the next test, and the next, and the next. one because there is no evidence to be tested and two, because the faithful have been indoctrinated not to question god. e is much evidence, just gotta look. i'm always willing to look at SCIENTIFIC evidence so perhaps you can tell me where to look. but scripture will not do as that is mere testimony which is not consider SCIENTIFIC evidence. there's the rub cowboy. you say there's evidence and throw scripture on the table as such but i don't consider that evidence but simply someone's opinion. i've read all the scripture that you've thrown ont the table and simply don't see such things as genesis plausible. the big ban is plausible to me. highly plausible but that does not mean i accept is as a belief or true. 2. Not true. We don't question God because we know it to be true. In school, while being taught by teachers, did you question what the teachers taught you? If not, why not? How do you know it to be true? Because they tell you it is? That's a bit on the side of blind faith there. therein lies the difference between me and you. you don't question god and i've always question science and still do. you bet i questioned what teachers taught me. in fact i corrected a high school physics teacher on several occasions. blind faith is taking something as truth without any evidence to suggest it's true. now who has blind faith? me, who questions everything, believes nothing with no faith in anything? or you who never questions god? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i think that the world would be a safer place without religious dogma that can be interpreted to do harm. thus i've no respect for any religion. i do respect the right for people to practice as they choose. JR, you basically summed up why I believe in God, but intentionally choose not to have a religion. I have my own belief, and it does not exclude science. Nor does it deny anyone else's choice of worship. It's just what works for me, and it's simple. hey, if it works for you, great. i don't think any believe in itself is dangerouss. it's the dogma that i have trouble with especially the "believe precisely as i do or else" crap as happened during the crusades. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh boy, a post about religion at an "un-Godly" hour of the night. *rimshot please* My take on religion is very simple: We're all guessing. There, I said it. Many of the religions that exist (or so far that I'm aware of) are based around trying to discover how we came to exist on the planet. And because humans are...well, humans, we all have different opinions and that leads to some interesting theories as to how everything we know of and don't know of came to be. This is where the word "Faith" comes in. Allow me to take the definition from Merriam Websters: Merriam Webster defines "Faith (noun)" with definition 2b as: firm belief for something in which there is no proof (2) complete trust). That definition pretty much sums up all forms of religion on the different ideas of how we got here. And as several posters in this thread have said, religion is often blamed for when people who are fanatics do things that put others in harms way simply because they believe that what they believe is right, and they believe it with every fiber of their being. I like to call these people psychopaths, because that is what they are; they have absolutely no conscience. Instead of blaming the religion, or even blaming the individual(s) who carried out the acts that put others in harms way (or worse) simply know that it takes someone who is mentally unstable to do something of that nature. That's the end of my post as I'll not get into the much more controversial modern religious happenings. in psychology, a diagnosis of delusional is one who believes in a certain concept in spit of evidence to support an alternative concept. i'd say that applies to the god fearing. Here's a "concept" jr posted (bolded for emphasis) science does not depend on faith whatsoever and scientists do not put out facts. scientists do not BELIEVE in a theory as the faithful BELIEVE in god. indeed the scientific method requires that science question every theory put forward by testing evidence that supports the theory to see if it produces repeatable and predictable results. religion does not allow for such testing, one because there is no evidence to be tested and two, because the faithful have been indoctrinated not to question god. Now we have a conundrum... jr, has expressed his opinion that he has no beliefs yet he posted the words above. Will jr deny believing the words he wrote? He has also stated that he doesn't "waste his time" learning about "God". no, i don't BELIEVE that i posted the above words. as i experienced myself posting the words i KNOW that i posted them. there's a huge difference between "belief" and "knowledge." i can KNOW what i experience. i cannot KNOW anything that i don't experience including what i read in a bible or a book by stephen hawkings because i've experienced nothing that is written. i can see plausibility in what hawking writes but i find nothing plausible in the bible. Sooooo, Ima jus gunna call bullchit! on that statement and offer my "proof". 1 Thessalonians 5:21 King James Version (KJV) 21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. i understand you see scripture as proof. i see it as mere unsubstantiated testimony. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
respect...allowing others to believe and have their faith without judging them for it or trying to convert them to your religion ..EVERYONE deserves FREEDOM of religion... it's not thier religion i focus on..it's do they treat me with the same respect i give them..simple.......it seems hysterical to ask people to respect your beliefs when you dont respect others dont you think? well said. if all beliefs are to be respected then islamic extremisim and the kkk must be respected. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Peter_Pan69
on
Thu 12/22/11 11:30 AM
|
|
Oh boy, a post about religion at an "un-Godly" hour of the night. *rimshot please* My take on religion is very simple: We're all guessing. There, I said it. Many of the religions that exist (or so far that I'm aware of) are based around trying to discover how we came to exist on the planet. And because humans are...well, humans, we all have different opinions and that leads to some interesting theories as to how everything we know of and don't know of came to be. This is where the word "Faith" comes in. Allow me to take the definition from Merriam Websters: Merriam Webster defines "Faith (noun)" with definition 2b as: firm belief for something in which there is no proof (2) complete trust). That definition pretty much sums up all forms of religion on the different ideas of how we got here. And as several posters in this thread have said, religion is often blamed for when people who are fanatics do things that put others in harms way simply because they believe that what they believe is right, and they believe it with every fiber of their being. I like to call these people psychopaths, because that is what they are; they have absolutely no conscience. Instead of blaming the religion, or even blaming the individual(s) who carried out the acts that put others in harms way (or worse) simply know that it takes someone who is mentally unstable to do something of that nature. That's the end of my post as I'll not get into the much more controversial modern religious happenings. in psychology, a diagnosis of delusional is one who believes in a certain concept in spit of evidence to support an alternative concept. i'd say that applies to the god fearing. Here's a "concept" jr posted (bolded for emphasis) science does not depend on faith whatsoever and scientists do not put out facts. scientists do not BELIEVE in a theory as the faithful BELIEVE in god. indeed the scientific method requires that science question every theory put forward by testing evidence that supports the theory to see if it produces repeatable and predictable results. religion does not allow for such testing, one because there is no evidence to be tested and two, because the faithful have been indoctrinated not to question god. Now we have a conundrum... jr, has expressed his opinion that he has no beliefs yet he posted the words above. Will jr deny believing the words he wrote? He has also stated that he doesn't "waste his time" learning about "God". no, i don't BELIEVE that i posted the above words. as i experienced myself posting the words i KNOW that i posted them. there's a huge difference between "belief" and "knowledge." i can KNOW what i experience. i cannot KNOW anything that i don't experience including what i read in a bible or a book by stephen hawkings because i've experienced nothing that is written. i can see plausibility in what hawking writes but i find nothing plausible in the bible. I'm not sure if this is some sort of deflection tactic or if you just misunderstood the question? I said "Will jr deny believing the words he wrote?", not "Will jr deny believing he wrote the words?" In other words, do you assert that the bolded statement is true? Sooooo, Ima jus gunna call bullchit! on that statement and offer my "proof". 1 Thessalonians 5:21 King James Version (KJV) 21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. i understand you see scripture as proof. i see it as mere unsubstantiated testimony. And what "proof" do you offer for the above bolded words? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh boy, a post about religion at an "un-Godly" hour of the night. *rimshot please* My take on religion is very simple: We're all guessing. There, I said it. Many of the religions that exist (or so far that I'm aware of) are based around trying to discover how we came to exist on the planet. And because humans are...well, humans, we all have different opinions and that leads to some interesting theories as to how everything we know of and don't know of came to be. This is where the word "Faith" comes in. Allow me to take the definition from Merriam Websters: Merriam Webster defines "Faith (noun)" with definition 2b as: firm belief for something in which there is no proof (2) complete trust). That definition pretty much sums up all forms of religion on the different ideas of how we got here. And as several posters in this thread have said, religion is often blamed for when people who are fanatics do things that put others in harms way simply because they believe that what they believe is right, and they believe it with every fiber of their being. I like to call these people psychopaths, because that is what they are; they have absolutely no conscience. Instead of blaming the religion, or even blaming the individual(s) who carried out the acts that put others in harms way (or worse) simply know that it takes someone who is mentally unstable to do something of that nature. That's the end of my post as I'll not get into the much more controversial modern religious happenings. in psychology, a diagnosis of delusional is one who believes in a certain concept in spit of evidence to support an alternative concept. i'd say that applies to the god fearing. Here's a "concept" jr posted (bolded for emphasis) science does not depend on faith whatsoever and scientists do not put out facts. scientists do not BELIEVE in a theory as the faithful BELIEVE in god. indeed the scientific method requires that science question every theory put forward by testing evidence that supports the theory to see if it produces repeatable and predictable results. religion does not allow for such testing, one because there is no evidence to be tested and two, because the faithful have been indoctrinated not to question god. Now we have a conundrum... jr, has expressed his opinion that he has no beliefs yet he posted the words above. Will jr deny believing the words he wrote? He has also stated that he doesn't "waste his time" learning about "God". no, i don't BELIEVE that i posted the above words. as i experienced myself posting the words i KNOW that i posted them. there's a huge difference between "belief" and "knowledge." i can KNOW what i experience. i cannot KNOW anything that i don't experience including what i read in a bible or a book by stephen hawkings because i've experienced nothing that is written. i can see plausibility in what hawking writes but i find nothing plausible in the bible. I'm not sure if this is some sort of deflection tactic or if you just misunderstood the question? I said "Will jr deny believing the words he wrote?", not "Will jr deny believing he wrote the words?" In other words, do you assert that the bolded statement is true? Sooooo, Ima jus gunna call bullchit! on that statement and offer my "proof". 1 Thessalonians 5:21 King James Version (KJV) 21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. i understand you see scripture as proof. i see it as mere unsubstantiated testimony. And what "proof" do you offer for the above bolded words? Well, it's been a week and jr has no proof of his concept whatsoever. It looks like "Bullchit!" was the correct call. We can also add delusional to the list according to jr's definition. "in psychology, a diagnosis of delusional is one who believes in a certain concept in spit of evidence to support an alternative concept. i'd say that applies to jrbogie." It is delusional to dismiss personal as well as written testimony out of fear of being perceived as wrong in public. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
to clarify some previous postings
(DSM-IV-TR).[1] It defines delusions as false beliefs based on incorrect inference about external reality that persist despite the evidence to the contrary and these beliefs are not ordinarily accepted by other members of the person's culture or subculture. On the other end of the spectrum, making a distinction between a delusion and an overvalued idea is important, the latter representing an unreasonable belief that is not firmly held.[1] Additionally, personal beliefs should be evaluated with great respect to complexity of cultural and religious differences: some cultures have widely accepted beliefs that may be considered delusional in other cultures. RESPECT: a : to consider worthy of high regard : esteem b : to refrain from interfering with <please respect their privacy> 2: to have reference to I dont think religious people are delusional , unless within their belief is something that is contrary to external reality (like if they believe their spaghetti is their creator,,,,) I do respect others, as posted by someone else, without necessarily sharing respect for what they believe or for their opinion not all opinions or beliefs deserve high regard, and not all beliefs or opinions(when they manifest in actions) should be left uninterfered with,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't respect your religion. I do respect your right to believe what ever you want.
That is your business. |
|
|
|
|
