What Do YOU Believe/ Not Believe? [Archive]

View Full Version : What Do YOU Believe/ Not Believe?

ashestoglory

June 1st 2006, 03:51 AM

shunyadragon

June 1st 2006, 08:46 AM

Because I've found that my motives are suspect whenever I try to discuss beliefs with people outside of the Christian faith, I have decided to start this thread. I have no intention of adopting any faith other than my own, but I am still interested in what others believe, or don't believe, and why. If you are not afraid to converse on this subject for fear of being proselytized, and might care to do some in depth proselytizing of your own, please post!

Any subject is open for discussion, as long as one's faith, or lack of it, is the standpoint from which discussion is launched. I won't tell you to shut up about your Taoism, if you don't tell me to knock of my Christianity! My goal in this is a greater understanding of world religions and, hopefully, to cultivate respect for each other in the process.

Thanks,

Ashes

Welcome to Tweb!

I am a Baha'i and basically believe that God exists as the source and creator of existence. I believe in the universal revelation as an evolving cyclic spiritual evolution throughout the history of existence, and the history of all humanity in time and place. Individual religions represent a limited fallible human view from the time and place they were revealed. The religions also become corrupted and burdened by culture over time.

The nature of ALL human knowledge and belief is relative and not absolute, because of the fallible nature of humanity. Science, as an evolving body of knowledge based on objective scientific methods, is the best understanding and source of knowledge for the nature of physical existence, but cannot prove or demonstrate the existence of God or the spiritual nature of existence.

Humanity is in the modern spiritual age beginning in the period ~1800 - 1870 centering on 1844. The revelation of the Baha'i Faith spiritual defines the new age we are in and the hope for the salvation of humanity.

ashestoglory

June 1st 2006, 09:18 PM

Welcome to Tweb!

Thank you! It's been interesting so far!

I am a Baha'i and basically believe that God exists as the source and creator of existence. I believe in the universal revelation as an evolving cyclic spiritual evolution throughout the history of existence, and the history of all humanity in time and place. Individual religions represent a limited fallible human view from the time and place they were revealed. The religions also become corrupted and burdened by culture over time.

Could you elaborate a bit more? Does your religion have any specific doctrines that it does adhere to, or is it this open on all fronts? Is it simply an "I'm okay; you're okay" mindset, or are there specific things that you would consider definite absolutes regarding morality or eternity?

I agree with this concept in that we are finite beings and I don't believe God CAN give us enormous revelations all at once, at least not in the scope of an historical standpoint. We seem to struggle with the big picture, which is why He's God, and we're not! Also, this concept is not so alien to me since Christianity is based upon Judaism, and its foundation is built upon what was established by God through that faith, in order to make it possible for mankind to see its need for redemption, and recognize its savior.

How does Baha'i view Jesus Christ, or the Trinity? What is your concept of God and do you perceive that will change? Do you attribute a personality or consciousness to God, or do you view Him as more of a force?

The nature of ALL human knowledge and belief is relative and not absolute, because of the fallible nature of humanity. Science, as an evolving body of knowledge based on objective scientific methods, is the best understanding and source of knowledge for the nature of physical existence, but cannot prove or demonstrate the existence of God or the spiritual nature of existence.

Well put. I don't know if you would agree that God is infallible, and therefore His nature would be both absolute and perfect, hence any revelation by Him would also be absolute and perfect unless distorted over time by fallible humanity.

Humanity is in the modern spiritual age beginning in the period ~1800 - 1870 centering on 1844. The revelation of the Baha'i Faith spiritual defines the new age we are in and the hope for the salvation of humanity.

Are there different ages of note in Baha'i? Was 1844 the year Baha'i is believed to have come into existence or awareness? Also, does your faith recognize the concept of sin, and if so, in what way, and since you've mentioned salvation, what do you believe humanity's need for salvation is, and how do you believe it will be saved?

I'll look forward to your reply! http://smilies.sofrayt.com/fsc/computer.gif

Oh, BTW, the link to the jade site was neat! Beautiful stuff.

Mark Little

June 2nd 2006, 04:27 AM

If you are not afraid to converse on this subject for fear of being proselytized, and might care to do some in depth proselytizing of your own, please post!Hi,
I don't believe in any kind of spiritualism at all. That is, in my view, the entire Universe is created and controlled by physical processes only. There is no intelligent creator or designer. I see no evidence that such beings exist or have existed, or need to exist.

I do not see my ignorance of the working of the Universe as anything but a lack of knowledge. That is, just because I cannot explain the Big Bang event does not mean that "God did it", it simply means I do not know how it happened. The "Because we don't know what happened, God must have done it" argument is especially weak as I can use it to argue that what we don't can prove that anything that we can imagine is causing it.

There are many people who do believe in the supernatural of some kind, and I do not doubt that such beliefs are genuinely held and they believe that they have had divine revelations or experiences. I have spoken with people who have had personal experiences with conflicting gods. It is clear that some or all of these people are wrong, so I don't find personal revelation convincing, although I'm sure it is to the people involved.

The problem that I see, from an observer's perspective is that many of these people hold conflicting and mutually exclusive view of the revelations. This, coupled with the lack of convincing evidence for the superanatural leads me to believe that such experiences are products of the human psyche, rather than a supernatural experience.

Now, as no one has ultimate knowledge, I could be wrong and accept the possibility that I am incorrect, but nothing I have seen to date provides any indication that I am.

There you go, that's what I believe.

ashestoglory

June 3rd 2006, 01:41 AM

Hi,
I don't believe in any kind of spiritualism at all. That is, in my view, the entire Universe is created and controlled by physical processes only. There is no intelligent creator or designer. I see no evidence that such beings exist or have existed, or need to exist.

I do not see my ignorance of the working of the Universe as anything but a lack of knowledge. That is, just because I cannot explain the Big Bang event does not mean that "God did it", it simply means I do not know how it happened. The "Because we don't know what happened, God must have done it" argument is especially weak as I can use it to argue that what we don't can prove that anything that we can imagine is causing it.

There are many people who do believe in the supernatural of some kind, and I do not doubt that such beliefs are genuinely held and they believe that they have had divine revelations or experiences. I have spoken with people who have had personal experiences with conflicting gods. It is clear that some or all of these people are wrong, so I don't find personal revelation convincing, although I'm sure it is to the people involved.

The problem that I see, from an observer's perspective is that many of these people hold conflicting and mutually exclusive view of the revelations. This, coupled with the lack of convincing evidence for the superanatural leads me to believe that such experiences are products of the human psyche, rather than a supernatural experience.

Now, as no one has ultimate knowledge, I could be wrong and accept the possibility that I am incorrect, but nothing I have seen to date provides any indication that I am.

There you go, that's what I believe.
Thanks for sharing, Mark. I know exactly what you mean, as I have seen examples of conflicting beliefs within Christianity.

I was reared in the Anglican faith, with all of its pomp and ritual. I ended up going off into the occult for a while, and although I believed in Jesus, didn't really understand fully what the difference between just believing in Him, or FOLLOWING Him was. I became a (bible believing) Christian when I was a teenager, and got into the Charismatic movement. I thoroughly believed and accepted more radical views of my faith and the supernatural side of it, embracing things like prophesy and the other gifts of the Holy Spirit as being for the present generation. It wasn't until I took note of the fact that my small church had an increasingly disproportionate ratio of prophets per capita, that I questioned the authenticity of those gifts.

I regularly hear Charismatic Christians talk about having dreams from God, or receiving a word from God. I have known two women who believe with all their hearts that it was the Lord who "told" them to marry men they hardly knew, and they did so. I've watched Benny Hinn (in person) as he blew into the audience so that God would supernaturally knock people over, and watched the people going over in their chairs, row by row, worried sick because I was in the last row, and feared the chair in front of me would fall on me and I'd be pinned to the wall! I saw the young couple in front of me flop over like it was on cue, with absolutely no reverence, surprise, or reaction. (But, not ON me! LOL!) It seemed like the entire audience was practically hypnotized. I knew it wasn't God, because I went there to be touched by God, and was open to Him, but had no experience of the sort.

Now, I go to another small church that does not make the supernatural its focus. It's focus is on God, not just what He does. It boggles my mind to see the conflict and false doctrine that bounces around in the church. It does not shock me when people say they don't see evidence of God. Christians are referred to as the body of Christ. If we can't represent Him accurately and stop bickering between ourselves, it's understandable that unbelievers wouldn't accept what we profess.

Despite the mess people make of things, it is my belief that God is Who He says He is, and is active in our lives. The main reason for me is that it ISN'T wishful thinking. If I could choose to believe anything I wanted, and had no conviction, logical or otherwise, to trust Christ as my Lord, I would choose to indulge whatever deires would suit my purposes. I wouldn't seek to follow something as restrictive as Christianity. I would want to excuse myself from it and seek out my own pleasure.

There's something inexplicable, but noticable, in a life that is totally committed. Faith isn't logical. It has no guarantee. If it did, it would cease to be faith. Those of us who have found faith, though, have no doubts as to whom the Lord is and that He is real.

Minnesota

June 3rd 2006, 02:28 AM

As an agnostic I'm a fence sitter, but I'm not sitting very squarely on it. So far, reason overwhelmingly comes down on the side of no god, and in particular the god of Christianity. Of course I could set aside the many problems that reason raises and simply rest in the comfort that faith affords, but such a capitulation isn't part of my character. Because the supernatural is just that, above nature and not subject to any kind of investigation, the most that can be claimed for it is entirely subjective, a rather unconvincing mode of persuasion. So it's extremely difficult to give most religious claims any credence, particularly when they are accompanied by outrageous demands, such as the acceptance of events that defy common sense. As for what I DO believe, it's all pretty much rooted in the reasonable and practical. There is no grand purpose to life, at least none that has peeked its nose out from under the covers of evidence. At the furthest reaches of my belief, the universe may be much stranger than we can imagine, and if it is indeed that strange, harboring dimensions that perhaps impinge on our own, maybe they are knowable and maybe not. But so far, except as a subject of cosmological speculation, none of it merits consideration.

lao tzu

June 3rd 2006, 03:07 AM

I won't tell you to shut up about your Taoism, if you don't tell me to knock of my Christianity!

Thanks,

Ashes Hee hee. Howdy, ashes, and my welcome as well.

The names we give to our positions regarding religion are inordinately nondescriptive. Is a mormon a christian? Is a shia a muslim? Majorities of christians or muslims would say no. I believe one's religion or lack thereof is something that exists independent of the words themselves.

I don't believe in gods, or in the supernatural. While it may seem contradictory, I do not disagree with your position that god is who he says he is. I'm sure we would differ greatly on what he says, however, or the relevance of the "he" pronoun, with its implication of a discrete nature.

I am what many would describe as a philosophical Taoist, though the distinction is somewhat lost on me. If your religion isn't reflected in your philosophy, how can it be your religion? And likewise, if your philosophy is not the source of your spiritual values, how can you call it your philosophy? I see religion as the expression of one's spiritual values. I do not identify spirituality with the supernatural, however. Faith, hope, and love are not supernatural to me.

I agree with these verses from the first poem of the Tao Te Ching. In a very real sense, they are what makes me the "taoist," small "t", if you would. It is pronounced in english as "d", or "dow-ist".
Nameless indeed is the source of creation,
But things have a mother and she has a name.
The source of creation, call it god or the tao, to me, is inherently indescribable, unreachable, impersonal, uncaring, impermanent ... nameless. It is the void that is. But it is continuous with the moment passed, the present moment, and the moment about to occur. It is the path, the way, the "Tao". Tao Te Ching (dow duh jing) translates literally as "way virtue book", or more naturally, "the way of life and its virtue", though you'll find it more commonly as The Way of Life (http://www.edepot.com/tao2.html). Of the many translations available at this link, I prefer the Blakney.

As ever, Jesse

ashestoglory

June 3rd 2006, 02:02 PM

Hi Jesse and Minnesota! Thanks for posting.

I think one reason I'm comfortable in my beliefs (well, maybe a couple of reasons,) is because Christianity as I perceive it, pulls no punches. It spells out what it believes very succinctly, and makes its stand, whether hardcore or not, and doesn't dillute itself for the purposes of appealling to the masses. The counterfeit versions, and there are many, and many who follow them, DO. Even though somewhat rigid and structural, the entire undercurrent of the faith is based on things that are uncommon, and difficult to be discerned, adding the element of dimensionality and eternality into the mix, which makes it far from boring. It takes a mind far greater than my own to comprehend it all, but it's fascinating, nonetheless.

I have known people of all personality types who find common ground in Christianity. However, I think that, also, is the reason for all of the denominations you see at work within the faith. When a Southern Baptist walks into a Pentecostal church, he soon leaves, very ruffled, bible under his arm and head held high. When a Pentecostal visits the Baptist's church, he simply dozes in the pew, and wakes wondering why these people don't have any fervor in their worship! If you asked the two to tell the most critical elements of their faith, they would probably believe about the same things. It's the working out of it where the differences seem to come in, and it's my opinion that most of that is human perception, personality, and even fear, and has little to do with God Himself. From what I'm hearing, this is also the case in other world views, since there seems to be different schools of thought in everything from tsaoism to satanism. Once again, this could be more human nature at work than God.

BTW, referencing God as "He" is more because of the nature and personality we see revealled through our scriptures and experiences with Him. He isn't flesh, so it's not genitalia we're considering, but rather, that to our minds, God is a Spirit Whom we can perceive to act more like a man does than a woman. The bible refers to Him as a He, and a Father, and Christ was born in the flesh as a man, so it is our concept of Him. If anything, the Holy Spirit would seem the more "feminine" of the Godhead, being that which adds sensitivity and intuitiveness, yet there is no scriptural reference to (Him) being perceived as such. It is probably more because we're finite and the structure of perception helps us to feel comfortable with God, than we EVER truly grasp Who or what He is.

It is because God has interacted with humanity and given revelation and shown compassion and a desire to care for us, that we attribute personality and "humanness," as it were, to Him. I'm afraid that in the end, we will see how off base and incomplete our revelation was, as we finally begin to unravel the mystery, or He unravels it for us.

I'm amazed at how easy it is for some to not believe one way or the other, or to not care. I also find it hard to conceive of the idea that evolution alone, apart from any Divine design would have resulted in the phenomenal balance of life we see before us. I'm not a scientist, though, so I could never debate this point. I DO disagree with some of the creationist beliefs that make no sense according to the geological record. This is not something I eat myself up inside over, though, as some seem to. I believe that when Jesus said He was the Truth, He meant it, and I don't fear the truth. God will be revealled in it, not the supression of it. Our attempts to define God only limit our revelation of Him. God defines Himself, and all He said was, "I Am that I Am."

Jesse, do you have definite beliefs as to a moral code in tsaoism? When do you believe God interacts (or DO you,) with humanity? How do you view the eternal nature of mankind, and what do you think tsaoism teaches regarding eternity, good and evil, etc.?

Minnesota, maybe you're the one I need to ask more about evolution! Hehehe.You're probably much more well educated than I on that point. Have you researched many religions, and what exactly would you expect to find in doing so? Just curious. :wink:

Minnesota

June 3rd 2006, 05:47 PM

I'm amazed at how easy it is for some to not believe one way or the other, or to not care.
Amazed because?

In one sense the agnostic position is easy because, while we demand more evidence than any religion or philosophy has yet offered, we don't find ourselves bound to some of the questionable aspects that often trouble the believer. On the other hand, the agnostic position is not all that easy because it was usually arrived at by a fair amount of investigation into religious claims. Speaking only from personal experience, every agnostic I've met and discussed religion with has shown a high degree of religious and philosophic understanding; often much more than many of the believers I've met. So, although it may appear we don't care, by the very nature of coming to the agnostic position we've had to do considerable caring.

I also find it hard to conceive of the idea that evolution alone, apart from any Divine design would have resulted in the phenomenal balance of life we see before us.
A very common position of believers who aren't familiar with evolution. You have a lot of company.

Minnesota, maybe you're the one I need to ask more about evolution! Hehehe.You're probably much more well educated than I on that point.

I have a pretty good grasp of evolution . . . and creationism, although others here on Tweb are more conversant with its details. But if you have any questions about evolution I'd be happy to help.

Have you researched many religions,

Principally Christianity, and to a fair degree, at least enough to satisfy myself that its shortcomings are sufficient to reject it.

what exactly would you expect to find in doing so?

To see what all the commotion was about. Unfortunately, the commotion is all about sustaining a sense of personal security.

ashestoglory

June 4th 2006, 02:08 AM

Amazed because?

In one sense the agnostic position is easy because, while we demand more evidence than any religion or philosophy has yet offered, we don't find ourselves bound to some of the questionable aspects that often trouble the believer. On the other hand, the agnostic position is not all that easy because it was usually arrived at by a fair amount of investigation into religious claims. Speaking only from personal experience, every agnostic I've met and discussed religion with has shown a high degree of religious and philosophic understanding; often much more than many of the believers I've met. So, although it may appear we don't care, by the very nature of coming to the agnostic position we've had to do considerable caring.

Most I've talked with at length have fallen into this category, too. The comment I made wasn't directed at people such as yourself. It was towards the many I've known who didn't seem to have any desire to seek or know. Being the type of person I am, that is unfathomable for me.

Generally, agnostics are often highly educated and scientific minded, logical thinkers who demand proof of virtually everything. I met a man on another site who knew much more about the history of Christianity than I did, but like most unbelievers, knew nothing of the heart of it. Every view was scrutinized under a microscope, rooting out fault and approaching matters of faith the way one would dissect a dead body!

The difference between us is possibly in the procedure. I approach my faith like surgery, presuming it is a living thing so as to be sure to not remove the wrong things or create an ugly scar when I close. An agnostic might do the same procedure like a medical examiner, considering the issue a dead corpse, weighing parts methodically, with no concern for the function, assuming it DOESN'T. What I consider faith, you probably see as gullibility. My experience has been different. I have proof, but it isn't the kind of proof you're looking for. It's the kind of proof I was looking for. I guess I started out from the position that God IS, not that He is not, and expecting Him to convince me of His existence.

A very common position of believers who aren't familiar with evolution. You have a lot of company.

Actually, I DO believe to some degree in evolution. I just believe that God was the originator of it. When I visit places like the Museum of Natural History in NY, and see the skeletal remains of a T-Rex, and have heard from multiple scientists that the geological record states how many millions of years have gone by since it lived based on sediment levels, etc., I can't understand how (or WHY) many Christians cling to the theory that the world is 6000 years old, when it is impossible for it to be so. God is in the truth, not a lie, and if there is any hope of "proving" Him, which to be honest, I doubt will ever happen simply because He requires faith of us, how could the perpetuation of a lie do so? Must people cling tenaciously to fallacies that have nothing really to do with faith in order to make what they believe work for them? The God I love and serve is not so small that He can be contained in a book, or a box, though He has made Himself small at times that we might know Him. WE are the small ones.

I have a pretty good grasp of evolution . . . and creationism, although others here on Tweb are more conversant with its details. But if you have any questions about evolution I'd be happy to help.

I'm sure I will, thanks!

Principally Christianity, and to a fair degree, at least enough to satisfy myself that its shortcomings are sufficient to reject it.

This is when I blame the church, and myself as part of it, for its failings. If we were the representatives that Christ intended for us to be, more agnostics would see Him in us, and be drawn to Him instead of repelled. It is our rigidity (over the WRONG things,) and lack of love that cast the shadow of doubt on the name of Jesus.

To see what all the commotion was about. Unfortunately, the commotion is all about sustaining a sense of personal security.

Perhaps that is one reason, at least in the beginning, but most believers will probably tell you that as they come to be more aware of the Holy Spirit and His way of interacting in their lives, it becomes less and less about ourselves and more and more about Him. For me, it is no longer what He can do for me, it's what I can do for Him with the time I have left, and then for eternity. I don't focus on the what's in it for me stuff, anymore. That was secured 34 years ago. Unless I jump out of His hand willingly, He's not dropping me!

Ya' know, I'm lovin' this thread! Often people of other beliefs will not even converse with a Christian. I guess we can be a pretty opinionated, obnoxious lot! I think it's healthy to talk, though, and one can learn truth from anyone if it is, indeed, truth. I hope more will join in, and those who've posted will continue to chat. I'm very glad to get to know you! :teeth:

!Fluffy!

June 4th 2006, 04:53 AM

Welcome to tweb sister Ashes. Though I don't post often, I was intrigued by your opening post and the subsequent responses. There is so much to say, but for now I just want to concentrate on one aspect. You said:

This is when I blame the church, and myself as part of it, for its failings. If we were the representatives that Christ intended for us to be, more agnostics would see Him in us, and be drawn to Him instead of repelled. It is our rigidity (over the WRONG things,) and lack of love that cast the shadow of doubt on the name of Jesus.

So many of us feel the same way. Religion - fah! How many have been injured, turned away, turned off by "church"? How many people (I'm including believers and unbelievers) have vowed they will never set foot in one because of the rejection they felt there?

Organized religion - Jesus had little use for it. I believe it is doomed by its very nature. Heretical, I am. I would go so far as to say we are doomed if we fall into its snare, believing by merely sitting in a church once a week we are surely more (holy, sanctified, justified, fill in the blank) than those slackers who never show their faces except for Christmas and Easter...

I believe Christianity is alive and well; the brick and mortar church is in its death throes, perhaps. Many of us are asking questions: Why and how has the church failed our culture? How can we deal with so much divisiveness within, and with so many denominations on the battlefield? With so many problems, is it worth resurrecting a dead body...or must we find another way to come together? Could it be that our walk becomes more vital, less hypocritical, more honest and we become more dependent upon God and each other when we step out of the boat of organized religion into the deep waters of spiritual unity? Can the Holy Spirit work at all when we try to "organize" our walk?

I will go even further, and posit this question: Rather than blame the church, and us as a part of it, should we not seek to find God's will in this situation? Could it be we are missing the elephant in the room? Does God "need" us to do something to His church to make it better? If I were to take a poll, and find that 7 out of 10 people secretly or openly harbor grudges against or have grave misgivings regarding church in general, is that a coincidence? No. There is a reason for everything. There are no coincidences in God's kingdom. There is no error in His creation. His will though unfathomable at times, will always be done on earth as it is in Heaven, and this certainly includes His (invisible) church.

I believe God is moving us as a body of true believers in a direction away from the inside of buildings/institutions to the outside, the highways and byways, the chatrooms, Starbucks, the back decks and frontporches where real people come together and open their hearts to each other. Away from the complacency of the Sunday congregation to the immediacy of everyday life...24/7/365 just like Christ lived it.

I believe there will be a radical transformation in the body of true believers and their dependence upon organized religion, that at some point there are those like me who see it as a hindrance, a burden, a distraction from their relationship with God. If I am spending X amount of hours going to meetings, deciding how money is spent, and getting involved in the hierarchy, nuts and bolts of a brick and mortar organization, how many of those hours could I have spent doing the real work of the kingdom?

If I spend X amount of hours in groups studying Rick Warren materials, how many of those hours could God have been speaking directly to my heart while my head is bowed in prayer over His word?

I don't know, maybe I'm just lazy, crazy or both. I have had the privilege of hearing many excellent, inspirational, thought provoking sermons....which I could just as easily have heard in my car radio on my lunch hour or sitting on my back porch in the sun. Of course I would have missed the fellowship where afterwards, we all greet each other, chitchat briefly, get in our cars and bump into each other again at Denny's.

I have had the privilege of attending many thought provoking Bible studies too, but I get annoyed at the one or two "characters" who inevitably take up most of our time talking about themselves, or the pastor who uses the time to give us another hour of his sermon rather than teaching us what no one ever teaches... like Hebrew, or the history of the church, or how to actually study the bible.

Nope, I'm afraid I just don't understand church, or the flavors of organized religion as I've experienced them over the past half century. It's not relevant. My believer friends gather, and find our times together over meals or out on the patio to be more meaningful, productive, nurturing, Christ-centered and REAL than anything organized religion has to offer... and many of these Godly, powerful saints will never set foot inside a church again.

I go twice a month, but mostly for my dear husband's sake, he loves going to church and never misses. He gets tired of people asking him if I'm okay, or where is your lovely wife, or "is everything all right at home"....yes, these are the kinds of things that come out of the mouths of our churchy friends. Thinly veiled judgements full of sanctimonious concern, and really I don't even know these people. Do they think I may be practicing satan worship in my basement, if I don't show up every Sunday? What would happen if I sat out on the stoop and smoked a cigarette between Sunday School and worship service? God forbid, what if I showed them my tattoo? :teeth:

Sheesh, sorry for the vent. No wonder I don't post too often. Anyway this is a great thread, thanks for sharing.

Mark Little

June 4th 2006, 05:32 AM

Despite the mess people make of things, it is my belief that God is Who He says He is, and is active in our lives. The main reason for me is that it ISN'T wishful thinking. If I could choose to believe anything I wanted, and had no conviction, logical or otherwise, to trust Christ as my Lord, I would choose to indulge whatever deires would suit my purposes. I wouldn't seek to follow something as restrictive as Christianity. I would want to excuse myself from it and seek out my own pleasure.People who do that are sociopaths. Normal people, theist or otherwise, simply don't do what you appear to be thinking they do. They raise families, sacrifice for their children and so on. Life is essentially the same for believers and non-believers, there is no unbridled hedonism and raging excess lurking in every atheist's household. People, no matter what their religion, or no religion, are essentially the same.

There's something inexplicable, but noticable, in a life that is totally committed. Faith isn't logical. It has no guarantee. If it did, it would cease to be faith. Those of us who have found faith, though, have no doubts as to whom the Lord is and that He is real.
Fair enough, but don't be fooled into thinking that people who do not believe in your god may not have fully committed lives. More the point perhaps, they have those committements to family, friends and society without the belief that it will bring eternal life. It is simply the right thing to do. Perhaps that is an even bigger and more profound committment?

gharfish

June 4th 2006, 07:54 AM

"I hear ya," Mark. Believing as you do, why are you here of all places you could be--this web site in particular, I mean. What's the point in putting in so much time on something that you think so little of--a neither here nor there, when it comes to reality...

*brother*

It's the dead of the night shift, but I can't help but protest that I, garfish, don't believe half of what you're saying on this thread. That would be because you are so, so, here afterall, talking and debating and sharing--> about not caring ! ...about a subject (Christianity; let's be clear) that you'd have us believe is worthy only of your apathy.

Yet I see hundreds of posts that may tell a different story; totaled/taken all together coming across as maybe a real specific passion--a sustained effort to tell your side of the religion story: one that you do believe in. I don't see someone who is spiritually detached--no, not at all.

Tell this gal more ! You should give equal time to your heart. She has already put in alot of time with you, calling upon her's.

"Sociopaths" ?! Good grief. I hope I badly misunderstood that analogy...thingy.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

There are so many 'oh, I couldn't care less' atheists and agnostics around here that you can't turn around without bumping right into... two. One will be an ex-christian on a deconversion mission, and the other for some reason is all over Christianity like white on rice too.....but cool man, cool ...day after day after day after day ! They're there all right, combing the apologetics threads as if they meant something--alot to them, if the time and effort spent are to render the verdict.

Is it the thrill of the fight--just the love of spirited debate, and that's it--or are they like moths drawn to this one kind of flame, all trying to look like they're free and just floating around when in fact they are are flapping and batting at the same luring light bulb ??

Even the "scientists" are here for good reason. Part of that is to make fun of the YEC's, sure, but part of it is about that same thing (that same thing). There's talk about 'theists,' 'theists...'and their god,' but nobody is truly unaware of just where and (honestly) why they've parked themselves in this place. This particular place. This place known for being frequented heavily by whats ?! (starts with a "C.")

One minute the reformed seminary student, now totally committed to major independence--rather: sweet logic, is all about evolution or morally-charged politics. The next he's finds himself drawn to delve into some religio-philosophy, unawares, like a bird nearing a snare.

Suddenly he finds himself down deep into an apologetics hole where he struggles against the wiles of those Christians who not only want to debate, but--uugh--preach Jesus !!

"Why, oh why, do they care so much about the god of the site, when I do...not ?" ("No, really, I don't !")

*and, that, is a legit lil' snit if ever there was one, straight from one sitting in our trenches all night*

!Fluffy!

June 4th 2006, 10:05 AM

ashestoglory

June 4th 2006, 03:41 PM

Welcome to tweb sister Ashes. Though I don't post often, I was intrigued by your opening post and the subsequent responses. There is so much to say, but for now I just want to concentrate on one aspect. You said:

So many of us feel the same way. Religion - fah! How many have been injured, turned away, turned off by "church"? How many people (I'm including believers and unbelievers) have vowed they will never set foot in one because of the rejection they felt there?

Organized religion - Jesus had little use for it. I believe it is doomed by its very nature. Heretical, I am. I would go so far as to say we are doomed if we fall into its snare, believing by merely sitting in a church once a week we are surely more (holy, sanctified, justified, fill in the blank) than those slackers who never show their faces except for Christmas and Easter...

I believe Christianity is alive and well; the brick and mortar church is in its death throes, perhaps. Many of us are asking questions: Why and how has the church failed our culture? How can we deal with so much divisiveness within, and with so many denominations on the battlefield? With so many problems, is it worth resurrecting a dead body...or must we find another way to come together? Could it be that our walk becomes more vital, less hypocritical, more honest and we become more dependent upon God and each other when we step out of the boat of organized religion into the deep waters of spiritual unity? Can the Holy Spirit work at all when we try to "organize" our walk?

I will go even further, and posit this question: Rather than blame the church, and us as a part of it, should we not seek to find God's will in this situation? Could it be we are missing the elephant in the room? Does God "need" us to do something to His church to make it better? If I were to take a poll, and find that 7 out of 10 people secretly or openly harbor grudges against or have grave misgivings regarding church in general, is that a coincidence? No. There is a reason for everything. There are no coincidences in God's kingdom. There is no error in His creation. His will though unfathomable at times, will always be done on earth as it is in Heaven, and this certainly includes His (invisible) church.

I believe God is moving us as a body of true believers in a direction away from the inside of buildings/institutions to the outside, the highways and byways, the chatrooms, Starbucks, the back decks and frontporches where real people come together and open their hearts to each other. Away from the complacency of the Sunday congregation to the immediacy of everyday life...24/7/365 just like Christ lived it.

I believe there will be a radical transformation in the body of true believers and their dependence upon organized religion, that at some point there are those like me who see it as a hindrance, a burden, a distraction from their relationship with God. If I am spending X amount of hours going to meetings, deciding how money is spent, and getting involved in the hierarchy, nuts and bolts of a brick and mortar organization, how many of those hours could I have spent doing the real work of the kingdom?

If I spend X amount of hours in groups studying Rick Warren materials, how many of those hours could God have been speaking directly to my heart while my head is bowed in prayer over His word?

I don't know, maybe I'm just lazy, crazy or both. I have had the privilege of hearing many excellent, inspirational, thought provoking sermons....which I could just as easily have heard in my car radio on my lunch hour or sitting on my back porch in the sun. Of course I would have missed the fellowship where afterwards, we all greet each other, chitchat briefly, get in our cars and bump into each other again at Denny's.

I have had the privilege of attending many thought provoking Bible studies too, but I get annoyed at the one or two "characters" who inevitably take up most of our time talking about themselves, or the pastor who uses the time to give us another hour of his sermon rather than teaching us what no one ever teaches... like Hebrew, or the history of the church, or how to actually study the bible.

Nope, I'm afraid I just don't understand church, or the flavors of organized religion as I've experienced them over the past half century. It's not relevant. My believer friends gather, and find our times together over meals or out on the patio to be more meaningful, productive, nurturing, Christ-centered and REAL than anything organized religion has to offer... and many of these Godly, powerful saints will never set foot inside a church again.

I go twice a month, but mostly for my dear husband's sake, he loves going to church and never misses. He gets tired of people asking him if I'm okay, or where is your lovely wife, or "is everything all right at home"....yes, these are the kinds of things that come out of the mouths of our churchy friends. Thinly veiled judgements full of sanctimonious concern, and really I don't even know these people. Do they think I may be practicing satan worship in my basement, if I don't show up every Sunday? What would happen if I sat out on the stoop and smoked a cigarette between Sunday School and worship service? God forbid, what if I showed them my tattoo? :teeth:

Sheesh, sorry for the vent. No wonder I don't post too often. Anyway this is a great thread, thanks for sharing.
Thank you so much, Moon Woman. You SHOULD share more! I think it's important that those who are skeptical about Christianity and the church need to know that many of us think differently than the mainstream, and that the mainstream probably never was Christ's intended plan for His church.

I feel there's a balance in this, though. Today, I went to church, knowing that I SHOULD want fellowship and teaching and worship more than an extra hour and a half of sleep. I recall the scriptures which deal with this, encouraging us not to forsake the assembling of ourselves together, as is the custom of some. Guess what the worship leader, filling in for the pastor, taught on? You guessed it, attendance with a heart of worship! I was convicted, as I am one of those who, like you, struggles sometimes with the churchiness and structure that in itself seems to put a wall up against the intimacy that was intended in the body of Christ.

Nonetheless, the bible does have references showing that Jesus' custom was to go to temple and study the scriptures with others. God ordained temples because, even then, I believe He knew that the majority of people needed some structure and accountibility in order to live the lives He called them to. Not everyone is the same, but the principle seems to be. If we fall out of fellowship, we can become deceived, arrogant, and bitter. (Of course the same can happen IN fellowship, but usually, if our hearts are in the right place, being open before others in the Lord helps to eradicate those tendencies.)

Now here's where I agree with you wholeheartedly: in bible days, the early church met in each others' homes and out of an unprovoked desire, spent as much time together as they could. They, unlike us, had a culture which lent itself to that lifestyle. People worked in their homes, taught their children in them, and everyone lived in close proximity and knew everyone else. Sure, some communities are still like that, but it's rare, for instance, in a larger city, to see people be able to get together so casually. Effort has to be made to do so, and it became the custom of the local church to have multiple opportunities for service and fellowship. Most churches meet several times a week, and offer care groups where intimacy is encouraged. Their hearts were in the right place, but somewhere along the line, things got very by rote, and the joy of obedience was replaced by the duty of it. It is often assumed by those who do what they've been taught is what you do if you serve God with your whole heart, that those who DON'T show up for every single function are somehow less spiritual or "on fire" than they are. Perhaps, in some cases, that's the truth. Often, it becomes an unfair judgment.

For several years, I had health problems which made it impossible for me to be as involved as I wanted to be. The church I was is was much more close knit and intimate than most, but even so, my often absences were viewed as rebellion and lukewarmness. No matter how I denied that fact, I was still perceived that way. I think part of that problem was the "get out in the fields and slave away" mentality that permeates the church, especially through younger believers. Those who can't are viewed with skepticism. It's the same with people who have ongoing problems, either spiritual, or emotional/psychological. Everyone is there to help for a short time. Then, there are a few committed people who keep trying to help over the long haul. Eventually, the ones who gave up after a few months convince the committed ones to dish out "tough love" and force the person to change on schedule. When they can't, they are often abandoned and left to fall away. The church has long been known to kill her wounded.

Once again, it rather boils down to the heart. Should we judge? Only to weigh a situation, not to pass sentence on it. Should we be accountable to each other? Yes, in love. Should we continue with the same sins and failings year in and year out and expect no one to confront us? No. They're not to throw stones, but they are supposed to hold us accountable and try to help. We are supposed to be sanctified that Christ might be glorified. If it doesn't ever move, it's probably dead! Faith that rests on its haunches and refuses to become conformed to the image of Christ IS dead. That can be said of both those who pass judgment from their ivory towers in the church, and those who pass judgment from the highways and byways! None of us are exempt.

The church's only job is to allow Jesus Christ to be seen through us. Our only "mission" is to become invisible that He might be seen. Not such an easy thing.

Minnesota

June 4th 2006, 04:03 PM

Actually, I DO believe to some degree in evolution. I just believe that God was the originator of it.
And their are many fervent supporters of evolution who also believe god was its originator. Because evolution is silent on the subject of god, it does not necessarily mitigate against him. There are many, many very devout Christian evolutionists out there.

This is when I blame the church, and myself as part of it, for its failings.
I would stop short of blaming yourself. You did not establish the theology and beliefs of Christianity, but are only one of its adherents and supporters.

If we were the representatives that Christ intended for us to be, more agnostics would see Him in us, and be drawn to Him instead of repelled.
I seriously doubt this. The demands that agnostics and atheists make on religious and supernatural assertions almost always slam the door on the appearance of believers as evidence. The happiness, serenity, joy, ecstasy, or whatever other positive benefit believers derive from their religion is simply not relevant to the evidentiary needs of the A or A.

It is our rigidity (over the WRONG things,) and lack of love that cast the shadow of doubt on the name of Jesus.
Not as far as the thoughtful A or A is concerned. Any doubt about Jesus goes far deeper than a believer's rigidity or lack of love.

I hope more will join in, and those who've posted will continue to chat. I'm very glad to get to know you!
Glad to know you too. It's nice to sometimes discuss rather than debate.

ashestoglory

June 4th 2006, 04:43 PM

People who do that are sociopaths.

Perhaps I should've been a bit more succinct....obviously! I'm not talking about slitting the throat of anyone who gets in my way! I simply mean that a belief system that won't let me do what other people in society think nothing of doing, (having sex without marriage, even experimenting with same sex encounters, living together, harboring pride that isn't dealt with, feeling justified in anger, telling "white" lies, keeping ALL my hard-earned money for myself or my family, dressing a LITTLE provocatively like everyone else, and a myriad of other things from petty to important, but all very COMMON in our society,) is restrictive by the world's standards, and there must be a very good reason why I, being somewhat of a free-wheeling type, would sacrifice my personal "rights" to put my will under subjection to this strict God I serve!

Why must agnostics always adopt an all or nothing attitude that says "if you think this is so, then you can't possibly think THAT is such!" There are shades and highlights allowed in having faith. No one who believes in Christ is exactly the same as everyone else, although it might appear that way to you. We enter at one stage and (hopefully) progress to another. Our perception of God changes and grows as our relationship with him deepens, and our love strengthens. We have to admit errors in judgment and change to conform to that image we model ourselves after, and since we are finite, it's a process, an evolution, so to speak. It's a sad thing that many come to a place of comfort and choose to stay there. It's the abrasion that polishes us to beauty, not the oxidation.

Normal people, theist or otherwise, simply don't do what you appear to be thinking they do. They raise families, sacrifice for their children and so on. Life is essentially the same for believers and non-believers, there is no unbridled hedonism and raging excess lurking in every atheist's household. People, no matter what their religion, or no religion, are essentially the same.

True. I'm not saying that my human nature is different than yours, or that you're a hedonistic mess just because you don't follow Christ. I AM saying that we are CAPABLE of all sorts of wickedness, and that my faith forbids the allowance of it. What you might not perceive as wickedness, I would, simply because the standards I try to live by (note that I said TRY,) are tough and limit my actions. Could I take it upon myself to limit my own actions even if I chose not to believe in Jesus? Certainly, to some extent. I know unbelievers who live more decently than I ever have! MOST people would not, though. Just like most would not go the extreme of becoming Ted Bundy, most would not become Billy Graham, either. The majority of people would remain somewhere, perhaps a little left of center, in their comfort zones, tolerating things that my faith tells me to avoid.

Case in point: Look around you next time you're at the mall. What are the 15 year old girls wearing? What are they doing? Around here, they dress like trollups and act like them, too. Who buys their clothes? Who is legally responsible for them? Why do they tolerated it? EVERYONE'S doing it. It's socially acceptible. Next time you're in line at the convenience store, notice when someone gets handed back too much change. Do they give it back? Maybe. Probably not. After all, they're being overcharged. When the teller gives out a pen to fill in the deposit slip, does Marianne give the pen back? It's little things like that that can tell the conscience level and the subtle differences. Christians are held to a higher standard. Perhaps you live like that, but most people will fudge a little.

Fair enough, but don't be fooled into thinking that people who do not believe in your god may not have fully committed lives. More the point perhaps, they have those committements to family, friends and society without the belief that it will bring eternal life. It is simply the right thing to do. Perhaps that is an even bigger and more profound committment?

History shows a pretty clear depiction of just how "right" people choose to live when left to themselves. Slavery, war, sexual perversion, adultery, tyranny, anarchy...these are the eventual outcomes of nations that set God aside. Empire after empire, nation upon nation, all have crumbled in on themselves from the decay of decadence.

Perhaps you believe that people are basically good. Most do. I do not. Were this true, you would not have to teach your 2 year old not to rebel! You wouldn't have to correct an innocent babe like that; they would convict YOU of your evil ways! However, little Stevie stands in a doorway, fist clenched, railing as he screams "NO!" to your commands. Little Stevie gets either a swat on the fanny or a timeout, depending upon your child-rearing techniques, and learns quickly that big people win fights. If Stevie were inherently GOOD, you wouldn't have to battle the little darling! People have a sin nature which causes depravity to varying degrees.

last night, I fell asleep watching tv. When I woke up, a show called "Cheaters" was on. On this program, a person who suspects their loved one of infidelity, contacts Cheaters staff and their P.I.'s go to work filming the cheater to find out the truth, revealling the details to the poor cheated on person. The first woman's lover was suspect, and they filmed HER making love to another woman. Her lesbian lover was devastated, and confronted her, ready to end it. The betrayor, pleading, convinced the woman in the end to stay together, stating that she loved her but cheated because their sex life was so boring.

The next case, was a young woman whose live in boyfriend was "working late" every night, but still calling her Sweetie, and telling her he missed her. She was stuck home with her infant child. Sure enough, he had a woman on the side and was taking her to restaurants and movies, and was confronted at a ball game where he blamed his girlfriend for "not changing" and having an infant. He walked away, arm in arm with his new girlfriend.

People are good at rationalizing just about anything they want to in order to act selfishly. They might provide for their children because they love them, but cheat on their kids' mom because she's gained a few pounds. No, they're not Charles Manson, but they are still in sin, and in most cases, totally unaware or worse, unconcerned.

Mark Little

June 4th 2006, 05:39 PM

Minnesota

June 4th 2006, 05:43 PM

Why must agnostics always adopt an all or nothing attitude that says "if you think this is so, then you can't possibly think THAT is such!"

Actually, they don't. A & A have just as diverse attitudes as do believers. And if you're speaking to Mark Little's comment about hedonists, those pretty much fitting the description you gave, they would at least be a type of incipient sociopath.

Mark Little

June 4th 2006, 06:11 PM

Perhaps I should've been a bit more succinct....obviously! I'm not talking about slitting the throat of anyone who gets in my way! I simply mean that a belief system that won't let me do what other people in society think nothing of doing, (having sex without marriage, even experimenting with same sex encounters, living together, harboring pride that isn't dealt with, feeling justified in anger, telling "white" lies, keeping ALL my hard-earned money for myself or my family, dressing a LITTLE provocatively like everyone else, and a myriad of other things from petty to important, but all very COMMON in our society,) is restrictive by the world's standards, and there must be a very good reason why I, being somewhat of a free-wheeling type, would sacrifice my personal "rights" to put my will under subjection to this strict God I serve!Since the mjaority of the population are Christian, if one belives what people say, atheists are a small percentage of the population. I thing we would all agree on that. Yes? So, perhaps you may like to consider who these people you are talking about are.

Why must agnostics always adopt an all or nothing attitude that says "if you think this is so, then you can't possibly think THAT is such!" Yet, it would appear that you think the reverse is true. Why do you appear to think that if one is an atheist that you automatically do not have constraints about sexual behaviour, cheating' lying and not helping people? Why ask me to accept a position that you do not appear to accept yourself?

There are shades and highlights allowed in having faith. No one who believes in Christ is exactly the same as everyone else, although it might appear that way to you. We enter at one stage and (hopefully) progress to another. Our perception of God changes and grows as our relationship with him deepens, and our love strengthens. We have to admit errors in judgment and change to conform to that image we model ourselves after, and since we are finite, it's a process, an evolution, so to speak. It's a sad thing that many come to a place of comfort and choose to stay there. It's the abrasion that polishes us to beauty, not the oxidation.I have no doubt that it true. Do you believe the same of others? Are you willing to accept what you wish me to accept?

True. I'm not saying that my human nature is different than yours, or that you're a hedonistic mess just because you don't follow Christ. I AM saying that we are CAPABLE of all sorts of wickedness, and that my faith forbids the allowance of it. What you might not perceive as wickedness, I would, simply because the standards I try to live by (note that I said TRY,) are tough and limit my actions. Could I take it upon myself to limit my own actions even if I chose not to believe in Jesus? Certainly, to some extent. I know unbelievers who live more decently than I ever have! MOST people would not, though. Just like most would not go the extreme of becoming Ted Bundy, most would not become Billy Graham, either. The majority of people would remain somewhere, perhaps a little left of center, in their comfort zones, tolerating things that my faith tells me to avoid.This is a two way street. What you may tolerate, in the name of your religion, may be uncomfortable to others.

Case in point: Look around you next time you're at the mall. What are the 15 year old girls wearing? What are they doing? Around here, they dress like trollups and act like them, too. Who buys their clothes? Who is legally responsible for them? Why do they tolerated it? EVERYONE'S doing it. It's socially acceptible. Next time you're in line at the convenience store, notice when someone gets handed back too much change. Do they give it back? Maybe. Probably not. After all, they're being overcharged. When the teller gives out a pen to fill in the deposit slip, does Marianne give the pen back? It's little things like that that can tell the conscience level and the subtle differences. Christians are held to a higher standard. Perhaps you live like that, but most people will fudge a little. As I pointed out, most people are Christians by their own description, so you judge them primarliy. This makes your argument less than convincing. Are you perhaps suggesting that they aren't "real" Christians and you are? This seems to be what you are saying, but I may be mistaken.

History shows a pretty clear depiction of just how "right" people choose to live when left to themselves. Slavery, war, sexual perversion, adultery, tyranny, anarchy...these are the eventual outcomes of nations that set God aside. Empire after empire, nation upon nation, all have crumbled in on themselves from the decay of decadence.Show me a "Christian" nation that has not had all of the above? Human nature is human nature.

Perhaps you believe that people are basically good. Most do. I do not. Were this true, you would not have to teach your 2 year old not to rebel!You are joking I hope.
You wouldn't have to correct an innocent babe like that; they would convict YOU of your evil ways! However, little Stevie stands in a doorway, fist clenched, railing as he screams "NO!" to your commands. Little Stevie gets either a swat on the fanny or a timeout, depending upon your child-rearing techniques, and learns quickly that big people win fights. If Stevie were inherently GOOD, you wouldn't have to battle the little darling! People have a sin nature which causes depravity to varying degrees.Wow! Now I'm gobsmacked over that one. A child learns by testing the environment, to see what is acceptable and what is not acceptable. It is ignorance, not an evil nature. I have an uncomfortable view of you seeing your child as a minature "Dameon" - Not sure of the name, whatever that kid in the Omen movie is.
Even a puppy needs to be trained and it tests its boundaries to see what is acceptable and what is not. Surely you don't see animals are having an inherent evil nature as well, do you? Maybe you do?

last night, I fell asleep watching tv. When I woke up, a show called "Cheaters" was on. On this program, a person who suspects their loved one of infidelity, contacts Cheaters staff and their P.I.'s go to work filming the cheater to find out the truth, revealling the details to the poor cheated on person. The first woman's lover was suspect, and they filmed HER making love to another woman. Her lesbian lover was devastated, and confronted her, ready to end it. The betrayor, pleading, convinced the woman in the end to stay together, stating that she loved her but cheated because their sex life was so boring.Again, I return to the percentage of the population that call tehmselves Christian. If only atheists, but every atheist watched a TV program, it would not have enough ratings to be worth making. Consider who you are judging.

As I said before, you are primarily judging other Christians and so your argument that Christians are held to a higher standard are unconvincing.

ashestoglory

June 4th 2006, 11:00 PM

Since the mjaority of the population are Christian, if one belives what people say, atheists are a small percentage of the population. I thing we would all agree on that. Yes? So, perhaps you may like to consider who these people you are talking about are.

Perhaps someone else would like to take this one? Yes? NO. The majority of the population is NOT, emphatically NOT, Christian. That is not by my standards, but by biblical ones. The majority of the population has a modification of traditional Judeo-Christian values, but has never accepted Christ as the bible specifies one should. If this were not so, the bible itself would not say "narrow is the path and few there be that find it." Huge droves of the general populus will never believe as the bible says one must to be saved.

Why do you appear to think that if one is an atheist that you automatically do not have constraints about sexual behaviour, cheating' lying and not helping people?

When did I specify atheists? I don't believe I did. I also continued to elaborate on this. Look around you. Do you not see that it is now socially and politically acceptable for people to live together unmarried, have homosexual relationships, or multiple sexual partners? Even the discussions you might have with other members of this site should make that perfectly clear.

As for cheating, it is commonplace. People DO lie all the time. I was raised to believe that little, white lies were harmless. My family was full of people who accepted the psuedo-Christianity that keeps one looking decent, but doesn't ever become "fanatical." Most people I know will say things like "tell him I'm not here," when they don't want to take a phone call. Tell me, do you admit to your wife that she looks fat in a dress when she asks you? Perhaps you do, but many men will say "oh, no, Dear. You look fine," just to keep peace or spare her feelings. Well, that's lying. So is cheating on taxes. For many people these things are not considered the "biggies" that send you to hell, so they tolerate them.

I wasn't referring to you, or atheists in particular, just the general population, which if you know the bible at all, you should be able to tell is not adopting true faith in Jesus Christ. If you tell me that you actually believe that most people are genuine Christians who follow the teachings of Christ, I think I'll have a good laugh! Either you want to believe that to consider those who DO give their lives to him frauds, or you are ignorant of the difference. Either way you are mistaken.

Another verse in the bible deals with those who will stand before God in the end, saying "Lord, Lord," recounting all the things they did that they thought earned them a place in heaven, and He will say to them "depart from Me ye who work iniquity; I never knew you." Many will think they are Christians when they did little to have even the slightest grasp on what that meant. Some people think they are "born" Christians, by virtue of the fact that their parents had some Christian values and went to church on Easter and Christmas. They are gentiles, not Christians. Christianity requires a set point in time where a person makes a conscious decision to give the reigns of their life over to God and invites Jesus Christ into their heart. It doesn't happen by osmosis, or because they are members of a church, or a club, or because their parents believe. A person isn't a Christian because he goes through the motions, attends church, or was christened as an infant. A Christian is a Christian because he places his life under the Lordship of Jesus Christ and surrenders his will to God.

I have no doubt that it true. Do you believe the same of others? Are you willing to accept what you wish me to accept?

Of course. Anyone can change and grow. I would hope most people would.

What do you consider the hallmarks of someone who is a true follower of Jesus Christ, Mark? Does that sound like the general population to you? Ask 95% of people you know who have some belief in God how they know whether they'll go to heaven or not, and they will most likely tell you it's by being a good person. They believe there's some giant measuring scale in the sky and that God weighs the deeds of your life. If you don't do the biggies, then there are automatically more rocks in the heaven pile. They also believe that people become angels when they die. Their whole concept of their faith is twisted away from biblical Christianity.

The bible is not, for the most part, a mysterious book. Its laws and commands are very simple. The requirements of the Christian faith are also simple. Still, ask the people you know who profess to be Christians if they've read the bible through even once. Most will not have done so. This is the handbook of the faith. It is the written word of God for us. True Christians have studied it willingly and often. I am not putting myself in some elite club. I just did my homework and learned what I was supposed to be believing. I realized after I read the bible and began to trust God, that I had been a gentile, not a Christian. I remember the moment in time when I made that decision.

[QUOTE=Mark Little] Show me a "Christian" nation that has not had all of the above? Human nature is human nature.

There are no "Christian nations." There are gentile nations with Christian leanings, but no nations that I know of that are governed by Christ, or biblical rule. Human nature IS human nature, and it will almost always oppose the spirit.

A child learns by testing the environment, to see what is acceptable and what is not acceptable. It is ignorance, not an evil nature.

Isn't it funny that the way they always seem to test is by rebellion and disobedience? Why don't they turn two and start yelling "YES!" Whenever you ask them to do something? If it were as you say, there should be an equal ratio. Children overwhelmingly assert their own will over parental authority. That nature rarely changes much as we age, either.

I have an uncomfortable view of you seeing your child as a minature "Dameon" - Not sure of the name, whatever that kid in the Omen movie is.

Now you're kidding, right? :wink:

Even a puppy needs to be trained and it tests its boundaries to see what is acceptable and what is not. Surely you don't see animals are having an inherent evil nature as well, do you? Maybe you do?

Animals are motivated by instinct. People are a bit higher up the food chain. I do not consider people animals. Animals do not willfully sin. They don't do evil deeds. They respond to stimuli. People ARE capable of evil. They CHOOSE their actions, and the choice is conscious, not simply a reaction.

Again, I return to the percentage of the population that call tehmselves Christian. If only atheists, but every atheist watched a TV program, it would not have enough ratings to be worth making. Consider who you are judging.

Who am I judging? If you make an observation, it's an observation, but if I do, I'm being judgmental? I haven't singled out atheists. I have referred to the common world views at large. Like I said, most of the population is not Christian, it is gentile.

As I said before, you are primarily judging other Christians and so your argument that Christians are held to a higher standard are unconvincing.

This is an asenine statement because you obviously have little concept of what is required of a person who accepts Jesus Christ as Lord. If you had, you would realize that I passed no such judgment on other Christians. That was a lame attempt at chalking up debate points in a thread that really wasn't set up for debate. This was intended to be a place where people could comfortably present their views openly without attack. As usual, Christian views are always targeted. It gets old. I have no problem with legitimate questions, or statements of your own faith, or lack of faith as the case may be, but I would like to get this thread back to some semblance of pleasant discourse. Minnesota and I have exchanged opinions and managed to keep things friendly although our views are as different as night and day. I would like it if we could do the same.

To that end, what brought you to the place where you rejected (I assume) all religions, and why? What were your experiences growing up? Were you raised in church or in any organized religion, or were you always removed from it? What is the main reason you consider yourself an atheist? Was it a comfortable decision for you to make, or did you struggle with disbelief?

Minnesota

June 4th 2006, 11:21 PM

The majority of the population has a modification of traditional Judeo-Christian values, but has never accepted Christ as the bible specifies one should.

Well this isn't true either. Only about 33% of the world subscribes to Christianity, and I believe the rest would vehemently deny their values derive from Judeo-Christian sources.

Mark Little

June 5th 2006, 02:20 AM

Perhaps someone else would like to take this one? Yes? NO. The majority of the population is NOT, emphatically NOT, Christian. That is not by my standards, but by biblical ones. The majority of the population has a modification of traditional Judeo-Christian values, but has never accepted Christ as the bible specifies one should. If this were not so, the bible itself would not say "narrow is the path and few there be that find it." Huge droves of the general populus will never believe as the bible says one must to be saved.Then we are tlaking about your personal beliefs, not what I would see as the general Christian beliefs. I'm not really in a position to know what those beliefs actually are.

Anyway. My Apologies, I somehow accidently swapped into the area from apologetics - and I think I made that mistake obvious in another response. Oh well. Life's like that. If you make a mistake, then you have to admit the error and move on.

shunyadragon

June 5th 2006, 08:38 AM

Could you elaborate a bit more? Does your religion have any specific doctrines that it does adhere to, or is it this open on all fronts? Is it simply an "I'm okay; you're okay" mindset, or are there specific things that you would consider definite absolutes regarding morality or eternity?

Yes, the Baha'i Faith has Spiritual Laws to adhere to, and many of these laws have become the standards of morality and law since 1844. No it is not open on all fronts and 'I'm okay, you're okay is not part of Baha'i belief and more the naive beliefs of mythical New Age foolishness. What would be considered doctrines of belief related to the nature of God and existence, are simpler than most churches and religions.

I agree with this concept in that we are finite beings and I don't believe God CAN give us enormous revelations all at once, at least not in the scope of an historical standpoint. We seem to struggle with the big picture, which is why He's God, and we're not! Also, this concept is not so alien to me since Christianity is based upon Judaism, and its foundation is built upon what was established by God through that faith, in order to make it possible for mankind to see its need for redemption, and recognize its savior.

Agreed, except the concept of redemption, revelation, and salvation has more universal meaning in the Baha'i Faith then Judeo/Christian beliefs.

How does Baha'i view Jesus Christ, or the Trinity? What is your concept of God and do you perceive that will change? Do you attribute a personality or consciousness to God, or do you view Him as more of a force?

Jesus Christ is a messiah of one age and place in history, and a part of more universal cyclic evolving progressive revelation for all humanity.

God does not change, human awareness of God changes over time, as happens in the Bible. Ancient worldviews of God were dominated by natrualism and anthropomorphic beliefs. Today the human view of God reflects a more universal concept were the nature of God reflects the nature of existence in a greater reference of time and place than ancient religions.

Well put. I don't know if you would agree that God is infallible, and therefore His nature would be both absolute and perfect, hence any revelation by Him would also be absolute and perfect unless distorted over time by fallible humanity.

God cannot be defined as 'more like a force'. The absolute nature of revelation, God and existence cannot be known from the human perspective.

Are there different ages of note in Baha'i? Was 1844 the year Baha'i is believed to have come into existence or awareness? Also, does your faith recognize the concept of sin, and if so, in what way, and since you've mentioned salvation, what do you believe humanity's need for salvation is, and how do you believe it will be saved?

Each messiah represents the beginning of a new age of creation, revelation and evolution of the vasteness of the human journey in time and place.

Sin is the disobedience and rejection of God's will in favor of human desires and egocentric motives.

I give more explanation in the future, but creation, revelation, and salvation are universal aspects of not only the human journey, but the nature of existence.

More in the next post.

lao tzu

June 5th 2006, 03:23 PM

Hiya, Ashes,

Most christian denominations seem to think most other christian denominations are counterfeit. That fits so well with what I find when I study the history of religions, ever blending and changing, diverging and turning on the words of the latest wise man. In our age, the abrahamic traditions of christianity and islam hold a bare majority among humans, though I don't imagine they'll survive any better than their predecessors. The west will not forever dominate humanity.

http://adherents.com/images/rel_pie.gif

__________

You can't assign a gender to your god-concept without first making it anthropomorphic, and you can't make it anthropomorphic without making it personal, and you can't make it personal without giving it a directed nature to interact. I don't see the Tao as directed. Rather it is a path without a builder.

I see most of the theistic traditions as accretions on the sense of loss of parents which occurs naturally as we age. From gone, they turn to still there but unseen, and from unseen to always present. It is really a small stretch to identify revered ancestors with tutelary deities and to grant them those abilities most wished for in a protector. The seeds of monotheism were planted in just such a field.

Taoism does not follow that road. Rather than an identification of preceptors, it chooses anonymity, and that makes all the difference. Without a personal aspect to obscure the principles, the principles themselves take center stage. Let me make an attempt to answer your questions, now.

Please keep in mind that "Tao" translates as "Way".

Jesse, do you have definite beliefs as to a moral code in [taoism]? There is nothing comparable to the ten commandments or the Levitical laws in taoism, if that's what you're asking, because there is no law-giver. Instead, there is a description of life and virtue which acts as nothing more than a mandala with which to see your actions in context.

When do you believe God interacts (or DO you,) with humanity? I don't.
Man conforms to the earth;
The earth conforms to the sky;
The sky conforms to the Way;
The Way conforms to its own nature.Humanity interacts with the natural world, but the Way is not the natural world.
Something there is, whose veiled creation was
Before the earth or sky began to be;
So silent, so aloof and so alone,
It changes not, nor fails, but touches all:
Conceive it as the mother of the world.This is a call to conceive, to recognize, to see clearly that which is by knowing what cannot ever be known. It is a call to balance. Humanity is not somehow more a part of this natural universe than anything else. Without the universe, we do not exist, and can never find a useful purpose.
Thirty spokes will converge
In the hub of a wheel;
But the use of the cart
Will depend on the part
Of the hub that is void.
...

So advantage is had
From whatever is there;
But usefulness rises
From whatever is not.
How do you view the eternal nature of mankind, and what do you think [taoism] teaches regarding eternity, good and evil, etc.? There is no eternal nature of mankind. A half-million generations ago, our ancestors had yet to diverge from the branch of life that became modern-day chimpanzees. A half-million generations from now, our descendants, if any, will not recognize us as the same species. The Way that transcends the universe is indifferent to these changes, only our egos wish for immortality.
Cultivate the Way yourself,
and your Virtue will be genuine.

Cultivate it in the home,
and its Virtue will overflow.

Cultivate it in the village,
and the village will endure.

Cultivate it in the realm,
and the realm will flourish.

Cultivate it in the world,
and Virtue will be universal. As ever, Jesse

* All citations taken from the Blakney translation of Tao Te Ching. Inner truths of Taoism are given as an example, your experiences may vary.

mentored1

June 5th 2006, 07:08 PM

Well met Ashes...

My compliments on your respectful replies and willingness for open discourse!

Any subject is open for discussion, as long as one's faith, or lack of it, is the standpoint from which discussion is launched. I won't tell you to shut up about your Taoism, if you don't tell me to knock of my Christianity! My goal in this is a greater understanding of world religions and, hopefully, to cultivate respect for each other in the process.

I'm agnostic... From my perspective I see no reason to dismiss the possibility of God nor do I see reason to accept the existence of God. I haven't found anything in scientific research that can demonstrate God's existence or non-existence: only discoveries that some people believe points to God's existence and other people believe points to God's non-existence. Pointing to something can help us reach conclusions and consider things further but pointing isn't the thing itself.

I was a Bible-believing Christian for some years - even taught a few Bible studies - but after a prolonged search through science, history, mythology, theology, and just about anything I could understand and digest I realized how vast human ignorance was. We are capable of building incredible edifices on top of outrageously flimsy foundations and living in them until they are toppled and turn to dust.

Nonetheless I do have a deep appreciation for spiritual beliefs. It is an inseparable part of being human. The stream of symbolic consciousness that is wedded to religion forms one side of the human "coin" - there is something vast involved with contemplating mysteries. I've seen in daily life where people of profound faith reach past their own suffering and desires - whether that power exists in an unseen deity or the unseen recesses of the mind remains a mystery to me...

Take care

ashestoglory

June 5th 2006, 11:08 PM

Well met Ashes...

My compliments on your respectful replies and willingness for open discourse!

I'm agnostic... From my perspective I see no reason to dismiss the possibility of God nor do I see reason to accept the existence of God. I haven't found anything in scientific research that can demonstrate God's existence or non-existence: only discoveries that some people believe points to God's existence and other people believe points to God's non-existence. Pointing to something can help us reach conclusions and consider things further but pointing isn't the thing itself.

I was a Bible-believing Christian for some years - even taught a few Bible studies - but after a prolonged search through science, history, mythology, theology, and just about anything I could understand and digest I realized how vast human ignorance was. We are capable of building incredible edifices on top of outrageously flimsy foundations and living in them until they are toppled and turn to dust.

Nonetheless I do have a deep appreciation for spiritual beliefs. It is an inseparable part of being human. The stream of symbolic consciousness that is wedded to religion forms one side of the human "coin" - there is something vast involved with contemplating mysteries. I've seen in daily life where people of profound faith reach past their own suffering and desires - whether that power exists in an unseen deity or the unseen recesses of the mind remains a mystery to me...

Take care
Wow! Pretty interesting thoughts, Guys! It's a lot for a simplistic Christian such as myself to digest.

Thanks for joining in, mentored1, and thanks also for the compliment. I think the worst thing I could be would be a Christian who could care less about what other people thought. This has never been the case. I find that I learn a lot about my perceptions of God and my own faith by pondering the beliefs of others. Even when those others DON'T really believe much of anything, the questions they pose cause me to seek my Lord more, and to reflect more deeply and be more open to God changing me in the ways I need changing.

Many of you are terrifically bright. I would speculate that you have IQ's well above my own. When I was young, I was very smart, but I seem to have had some "slippage" from disuse! Dust and rust; what can I say? Hehehe. I enjoy the repartee because it's like an oil can to a corroded, middle-aged brain! I like to learn. This seems to be a good way to do it. I would ask that you all please be a bit less nebulous, (especially about the tao, Jesse!) as I'm rather a concrete thinker, and I'm having a bit of a hard time wrapping my dendrites around some of this stuff! I'm not dumb, but go ahead and pretend I am. When it clicks, we can get back to normal!

Minnesota, I thought I should've said "western" religious beliefs, but like a dummy, assumed you'd know what I meant. My apologies.

Mark, I can only speak from my own vantage point, but I would wager that the basic concepts of Christianity hold across most denominations, that being, belief in a Triune Godhead, the birth of Jesus to Mary, a virgin, His sacrificial death on the cross to redeem us of our sins, His resurrection from the dead, His ascension to heaven, and His impending return to earth as King of Kings, leading to the final judgment. It is the working out of our faith where Christians get into 95% of their squabbles. There are also some fringe sects, which have altered the bible or added to it to justify some odd claims and beliefs. Some of these people might be considered technically Christian, but often, when you probe beneath the surface, there is either a doctrine of works, or one which lessens the status of Jesus to man but not God, which is in opposition to the beliefs of the church since the beginning.

Some denominations or branches of Christianity also value the experiences of man, and personal "revelations" as equal to or even more important than the bible. Most who accept the bible as the Word of God will question the validity of such experiences, and scrutinize them through the authority of the scriptures. Personally, I view any sect that can not hold up to this scrutiny to be false, however, I have known people who managed to come to Christ even through doctrinally unsound churches. It is, in the end, a pure faith and the heart of man that dictates where he stands before his Maker. It is not my place to judge, only to assess.

I was hoping that one member who is a satanist would join in. We had some strained conversations in another thread, but I was surprised to discover that satanism as Christians view it, is not the world view they hold. I wanted to learn a bit more about the variations. She mentioned LaVay, and Crowley.

Now here's one for Shunyadragon and taoist: are there differing versions or schools of thought in your faiths? If so, what would be considered the standard, or classic concept of what you believe, and what would be the differing view? Which do you accept? Also, when did you decide to follow your chosen paths? Did you believe something else before that? Did your parents adhere to any religious beliefs, or not?

Mentored1, first of all, what is your avatar? It's cool! I applaud the fact that you are keeping an open mind. Last year, I met a mathematician who said that he believed some in the scientific community were close to being able to prove the existence of God. To his mind, logical as it was, there was no doubt. Personally, I doubt there will ever be the kind of tangible proof many agnostics and atheists need (as Minnesota said,) to do this. The bible says the just shall live by faith, not by proof. It says faith IS the evidence. That's a hard thing to describe to someone who seeks only logic. I was at work when I spoke to this man and couldn't really probe to find out why he thought what he did. I'd hoped he would come back, but he never did. I still have no idea what he meant. Any takers on that one?

mentored1

June 6th 2006, 06:42 PM

Well met Ashes, pleasure to discourse with you again.

I think the worst thing I could be would be a Christian who could care less about what other people thought. This has never been the case. I find that I learn a lot about my perceptions of God and my own faith by pondering the beliefs of others. Even when those others DON'T really believe much of anything, the questions they pose cause me to seek my Lord more, and to reflect more deeply and be more open to God changing me in the ways I need changing.

One of the finest statements of personal faith I've read or heard in quite some time. You won't mind if I dismiss your self-effacing comments regarding an inferior IQ: you're just fine in that department. :thumb:

There's also a core of great wisdom in what you wrote herein. Everything that can or does affect someone's faith or lack thereof comes from what someone else believes or thinks. All information - be it scientific, theological, or otherwise - comes from people. Even if one believes in the inerrant, inspired Word of God it comes to us through man; and without man writing it down and sharing it with others we would have a profound lack of understanding regarding it. Listening and trying to understand as much as you can from others is, to me, one of the distinguising marks of wisdom.

Mentored1, first of all, what is your avatar? It's cool!

I did a search through the web for images that were labeled or pertained to the phrase 'deus ex machina' - that was the most intriguing one I found. And it captured a great many trains of thought that race through my mind. The illumination at the center of us (the soul, the consciousness, etc) is the seam between the light and the dark. Our soul joins these two things - we are aware of reality and can bring about wonder and horror through this awareness... :ponder:

Last year, I met a mathematician who said that he believed some in the scientific community were close to being able to prove the existence of God. To his mind, logical as it was, there was no doubt. Personally, I doubt there will ever be the kind of tangible proof many agnostics and atheists need (as Minnesota said,) to do this.

The bible says the just shall live by faith, not by proof. It says faith IS the evidence. That's a hard thing to describe to someone who seeks only logic.

As far as I can state this I'm certain there will never be such proof. God, in the spiritual sense that faith shows, is not a quantity. Man has and will continue to try and fit God into his increasingly mechanistic mindframe but God is not bound by human measure so human measure will always fail to find proof of God's existence or non-existence.

All the attempts with logic, the attempts to rationalize faith, or to use science to support creationism will fail in one very important point: the experience of faith. All the clever logical statements in the world cannot show to someone an awareness of the divine - nor can solid scientific evidence proving Biblical creationism give someone a sensation of eternity.

Perhaps this is a good thing in that it will drive more and more research and experimentation; but like all things it has a shadow to it and the result will be, as it always is, a mixture of good and evil. Some increase in their faith and others decrease. Or some just stare at the whole thing and scratch their head... :huh:

Take care, nice chatting with you

ashestoglory

June 6th 2006, 10:48 PM

Well met Ashes, pleasure to discourse with you again.

One of the finest statements of personal faith I've read or heard in quite some time. You won't mind if I dismiss your self-effacing comments regarding an inferior IQ: you're just fine in that department. :thumb:

There's also a core of great wisdom in what you wrote herein. Everything that can or does affect someone's faith or lack thereof comes from what someone else believes or thinks. All information - be it scientific, theological, or otherwise - comes from people. Even if one believes in the inerrant, inspired Word of God it comes to us through man; and without man writing it down and sharing it with others we would have a profound lack of understanding regarding it. Listening and trying to understand as much as you can from others is, to me, one of the distinguising marks of wisdom.

I did a search through the web for images that were labeled or pertained to the phrase 'deus ex machina' - that was the most intriguing one I found. And it captured a great many trains of thought that race through my mind. The illumination at the center of us (the soul, the consciousness, etc) is the seam between the light and the dark. Our soul joins these two things - we are aware of reality and can bring about wonder and horror through this awareness... :ponder:

As far as I can state this I'm certain there will never be such proof. God, in the spiritual sense that faith shows, is not a quantity. Man has and will continue to try and fit God into his increasingly mechanistic mindframe but God is not bound by human measure so human measure will always fail to find proof of God's existence or non-existence.

All the attempts with logic, the attempts to rationalize faith, or to use science to support creationism will fail in one very important point: the experience of faith. All the clever logical statements in the world cannot show to someone an awareness of the divine - nor can solid scientific evidence proving Biblical creationism give someone a sensation of eternity.

Perhaps this is a good thing in that it will drive more and more research and experimentation; but like all things it has a shadow to it and the result will be, as it always is, a mixture of good and evil. Some increase in their faith and others decrease. Or some just stare at the whole thing and scratch their head... :huh:

Take care, nice chatting with you
Thank you for your very kind words. You made me feel that someone here knows I'm not a bigot! Christians do get that rap. It's easy to be viewed with suspicion and accused of passing judgment when you are simply stating what you think, especially when your faith is as structured as Christianity. That's why I wanted a thread that wasn't geared that way- for ANYONE. I don't really consider myself wise, but I want to be.

I've enjoyed chatting with you, too!

Hey, topic aside for a sec...I have a Get Smilie program that doesn't seem to want to work here. I'm not very good with computers, so does anyone know what I need to do to get it to post here? I have Microsoft XP and I can't do a thing with it!!! haha!

Okay, back to the thread. I think it was Mark who commented on the differing views of Christian denoms. Today, a friend of mine gave me an article about a conference for pastors called "Together for the Gospel," which was in Louisville, KY April 26-28. Several of the men involved named in the article were : Albert Mohler, President of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary; John Piper, pastor for preaching at Bethlehem Baptist Church (Minneapolis, MN), and leader of Desiring God; Mark Dever, senior pastor of Capitol Hill Baptist Church (Washington DC) and executive director of 9Marks; R.C. Sproul, minister of preaching and teaching at St. Andrew's Chapel (Orlando, FL) and founder and chairman of Ligonier Ministries; Ligon Duncan, senior minister of First Presbyterian Church (Jackson, MS) and Moderator of the Presbyterian Church in America; John MacArthur, pastor-teacher of Grace Community Church (Sun Valley, CA) and President of the Master's Seminary; and C.J. Mahaney, senior pastor of Covenant Life Church (Gaithersburg, MD) and lead team member of Sovereign Grace Ministries.

This conference was monumental in modern day Christianity because it addressed the basic fundamentals of the faith and the agreement between the many divisions within the faith as to the critical beliefs and doctrines of the faith. Having been to both Sovereign Grace churches, which are non-denominational, and charismatic, believing in the gifts of the Holy Spirit, and many of the more main line denoms, which do not accept the charismatic movement, I can tell you that the expression of their faith is VERY different. Nonetheless, men like John MacArthur, who has a conservative radio show called "Grace to You," and who has written a book against the charismatic doctrines, called "Charismatic Chaos," are still in such agreement over the fundamentals of the faith that they have actually signed a declaration, "Affirmations and Denials," specifying in what areas they are in agreement, and in what areas they differ. The full text of this statement can be read at: www.togetherforthegospel.org.

My friend, who is charismatic, (I am not) told me a while ago that John MacArthur and C.J. Mahaney had struck up an unlikely friendship, putting aside their differences and looking for common ground. It has obviously mushroomed into much more than that, as a diverse spectrum of Christianity is realizing that the thing that binds all Christians together is the central core belief that Jesus Christ is Lord. I have not yet read this affirmation. my friend told me that it was pretty much unanimous on the core issues, though, which is why I disagree strongly with those outside the faith who insist that Christianity is subjective. It is not subjective on the doctrine of salvation, the Lordship of Christ, the Resurrection, and many other articles of faith which are intrinsic to the faith. It is only subjective in the expression of that faith, which allows for a broader spectrum of people to be able to worship God, since they can find a means to do so that does not enforce something they feel is opposed to their personality. At the core is the same belief, though some express it conservatively, as do Baptists, and some more fervently, as do Pentecostals.