Religion

[potterwolf]

The third reason may seem insultive, but it's not intended to be an insult. People of other religions tend to push their religion on other people. It's not all the time that it happens, but there's always a single person who tries to force their religion on someone by using peer pressure. I'm not a fan of people who do that to others. I don't know about you, but I tend to get insulted when a person preaches in the middle of a plaza and says that I worship their version of a "Satan" just because I don't believe. Who are you to tell that a "God" existed at one point and made the universe? It's time that you people let others believe in their own personal "Jesus" and if they choose to join you, then congrats. Don't force it on others, though. I mean, where's the dignity in that?

I agree with a lot of what you said, except for this part. Personally, I don't mind if people try to convert me. If they truly believe that I am going to hell, I appreciate their attempt to save my soul, I just think they're wrong, but I don't blame them for trying. In fact, I would be insulted if they didn't try. I mean really, you think I'm going to be tortured forever and you're just going to sit there and watch?

 

Not that many people have tried to convert me. But I wouldn't mind if they did. And I have a sneaking suspicion that they might try if they found out that I am an atheist. Anyway, I wouldn't mind people trying to convert me at all. I know it bugs some people, but I appreciate the sentiment. It's the thought that counts, right?

[philpot123]

Well, it's a liberal bias article. I don't expect them to take an objective stance. x) Just like I don't expect Conservative articles to be objective, either. Now, if it was supposed to be a piece set on convincing others and whatnot, then sure, it should have approached that a little better. But it's clearly an opinionated article, so likely the majority of the readers are those that already agree. ^^

 

 

 

 

Well, that wasn't always our motto. It's really just the crazy weirdos throwing the hissy fit. All of the other Christians really don't care, since that holiday has nothing to do with America anyways. The speech was supposed to be about giving thanks to the People, not to a deity, so I'm pretty sure us normal Americans, religious or not, really didn't care that he didn't say it. I'm glad he didn't though, because that would have pissed me off. Those people don't have any justification for being upset, especially when Obama already says "God bless America" in a bunch of his other speeches. Plus, he was not the only President to not say it in a Thanksgiving speech, and I didn't see them throwing a fit over that. I think it has more to do with blind backwards "nationalism" and their dislike for him than anything else, really.

True, but similar tones from a conservative bias are held up as "see look what those oppressive conservatives are like" while the liberal bias gets a pass on it? It just doesn't make sense in my mind. Similar to the time I posted the Ravi Zacharias video, I have a feeling if I posted a similarly toned article from a conservative stance that I would get a slew of "that's offensive" comments again.

 

 

As far as "In God we trust..." it's in our national anthem if you read past the first stanza...

[ShinyTomato]

The third reason may seem insultive, but it's not intended to be an insult. People of other religions tend to push their religion on other people. It's not all the time that it happens, but there's always a single person who tries to force their religion on someone by using peer pressure. I'm not a fan of people who do that to others. I don't know about you, but I tend to get insulted when a person preaches in the middle of a plaza and says that I worship their version of a "Satan" just because I don't believe. Who are you to tell that a "God" existed at one point and made the universe? It's time that you people let others believe in their own personal "Jesus" and if they choose to join you, then congrats. Don't force it on others, though. I mean, where's the dignity in that?

 

One of the many reasons, I as an agnostic, did not mind converting to Judaism. Not only do they not try to convert you, they actually actively discourage it (in most cases) and believe everyone gets to heaven almost no matter what, so there's no worrying over someone's immortal soul -- and Satan isn't a bad guy.

[prairiecrow]

The Morning Caffeina Ritual.

 

Loosely based on Wiccan ritual forms. I really enjoy being part of a religion that can laugh at itself.

[CatCreature]

The Morning Caffeina Ritual.

 

Loosely based on Wiccan ritual forms. I really enjoy being part of a religion that can laugh at itself.

Sounds like the morning ritual I have every morning at work.

 

Well, except for the 'bathrobes and fuzzy slippers' part.

[potterwolf]

True, but similar tones from a conservative bias are held up as "see look what those oppressive conservatives are like" while the liberal bias gets a pass on it? It just doesn't make sense in my mind. Similar to the time I posted the Ravi Zacharias video, I have a feeling if I posted a similarly toned article from a conservative stance that I would get a slew of "that's offensive" comments again.

 

 

As far as "In God we trust..." it's in our national anthem if you read past the first stanza...

True, you probably would. It's not fair. It's not right. But it's what happens when the majority of people in a group are liberal and have strong views. Nobody should be whining about being offended, and nobody should be posting anything purely intended to offend. We should just talk about the actual information in the articles and posts.

 

Personally I think that it was a good decision not to mention God in a the thanksgiving address/speech/thing. It would have been inappropriate. But that's my own opinion, not based on the liberal slant article.

 

I think we have to keep in mind that every author has a slant. Every person has a slant. Instead of focusing on the slants, why don't we talk about what people are actually saying? I know I've said this before, but it really bugs me. Who cares about all of this conservative/liberal offensive/nonoffensive business. Let's discuss actual issues.

[hazeh]

True, but similar tones from a conservative bias are held up as "see look what those oppressive conservatives are like" while the liberal bias gets a pass on it? It just doesn't make sense in my mind. Similar to the time I posted the Ravi Zacharias video, I have a feeling if I posted a similarly toned article from a conservative stance that I would get a slew of "that's offensive" comments again.

 

 

As far as "In God we trust..." it's in our national anthem if you read past the first stanza...

It's just an opinionated article that I found on the subject. The point was what was happening, not the author's way of going about it. It really has nothing to do with conservative or liberal bias.

 

 

And yes, I'm aware. But all this "In God we trust" stuff is fairly recent, and it does not apply to a good portion of American citizens. That's highly annoying to me. It's also in our money, in our pledge. It irks me to see it because it's very obviously referencing a single deity. If those parts were excluded, there would be no issue. People who throw fits over "God" missing from our national things are disrespectful and selfish.

 

Anyway.

^^; Why exactly did you point that out?

[Spinxo]

I agree with a lot of what you said, except for this part. Personally, I don't mind if people try to convert me. If they truly believe that I am going to hell, I appreciate their attempt to save my soul, I just think they're wrong, but I don't blame them for trying. In fact, I would be insulted if they didn't try. I mean really, you think I'm going to be tortured forever and you're just going to sit there and watch?

 

Not that many people have tried to convert me. But I wouldn't mind if they did. And I have a sneaking suspicion that they might try if they found out that I am an atheist. Anyway, I wouldn't mind people trying to convert me at all. I know it bugs some people, but I appreciate the sentiment. It's the thought that counts, right? 

Hm, I never really thought about it like that. You do make a valid point there, friend. At least they care about you enough to want to "convert" your soul to a safe place. It kinda gets annoying when the ignorant people do it, though.

Edited November 28, 2011 by Spinxo

[ShinyTomato]

Hm, I never really thought about it like that. You do make a valid point there, friend. At least they care about you enough to want to "convert" your soul to a safe place. It kinda gets annoying when the ignorant people do it, though.

Trust me, it's worse when the ignorant people offer to pay to sterilize you so you don't create anymore of your ethnicity, or refuse to treat you and your children in emergency situations because your soul is unsaveable.

 

(And no, I'm not bitter, it just puts the ones trying to convert you in perspective.)

[Spinxo]

Trust me, it's worse when the ignorant people offer to pay to sterilize you so you don't create anymore of your ethnicity, or refuse to treat you and your children in emergency situations because your soul is unsaveable.

 

(And no, I'm not bitter, it just puts the ones trying to convert you in perspective.)

Wow, I didn't realize that they were going that far with it. That is pretty horrible compared to people who think you'll go to Hell for not having the same belief.

[ZORAGON]

 

Hi everyone I'm a Jehovah Witness, I'm sure many of you have heard of us. If anyone has any questions about this religion I'll be happy to answer them

[ShinyTomato]

Wow, I didn't realize that they were going that far with it. That is pretty horrible compared to people who think you'll go to Hell for not having the same belief.

Which was sort of my point in mentioning it. It looks really bad to be annoyed about your faith by overzealous religious friends, but it's always worse somewhere for someone, even in the US.

[potterwolf]

Hm, I never really thought about it like that. You do make a valid point there, friend. At least they care about you enough to want to "convert" your soul to a safe place. It kinda gets annoying when the ignorant people do it, though.

Yes, I suppose listening to ignorant people wouldn't be very fun. But I've been itching to have a discussion with my religious friends, so I do wish they would bring the subject up. I haven't ever gotten the opportunity to have a religion discussion with somebody face-to-face.

 

I just recently asked my Mormon friends for a Book of Mormon which I plan to read and profusely take notes on. Maybe that'll start a conversation. I dunno.

[philpot123]

It's just an opinionated article that I found on the subject. The point was what was happening, not the author's way of going about it. It really has nothing to do with conservative or liberal bias.

 

 

And yes, I'm aware. But all this "In God we trust" stuff is fairly recent, and it does not apply to a good portion of American citizens. That's highly annoying to me. It's also in our money, in our pledge. It irks me to see it because it's very obviously referencing a single deity. If those parts were excluded, there would be no issue. People who throw fits over "God" missing from our national things are disrespectful and selfish.

 

Anyway.

^^; Why exactly did you point that out?

Well, it's not all that recent in light of the actual idea and phrase. The concept of our nation being subject to God is one that was held by even some of the least religious of our founding fathers (Benjamin Franklin constitutional convention speech comes to mind). And the national anthem was penned in 1814, adopted in 1931. So the idea and the phrase itself is not *horribly* recent, especially when compared to "under God" in the pledge. That was my point I guess.

 

 

I just recently asked my Mormon friends for a Book of Mormon which I plan to read and profusely take notes on. Maybe that'll start a conversation. I dunno.

 

It's a fun read, that's for sure. If you can, read an original "copy" rather than an updated modern one it's free in the Kindle bookstore, so you can read it on the computer.

[Xyzaq]

I'm reading the Bible - apparently the King James Version? I don't know, I know next-to-nothing on religion. I'm not planning to become Christian or Catholic, and I'm not saying you can't become such. I just don't plan too. It was free on my phone via the App Store, so hey, why not? I suppose it wouldn't be a bad idea. At least I'll understand when people start quoting the Bible at me?

 

This Bible-reading sparked another fuse in my brain - I'm going to try and go through a bunch of religion... er, books. Wish me luck!

[philpot123]

I'm reading the Bible - apparently the King James Version? I don't know, I know next-to-nothing on religion. I'm not planning to become Christian or Catholic, and I'm not saying you can't become such. I just don't plan too. It was free on my phone via the App Store, so hey, why not? I suppose it wouldn't be a bad idea. At least I'll understand when people start quoting the Bible at me?

 

This Bible-reading sparked another fuse in my brain - I'm going to try and go through a bunch of religion... er, books. Wish me luck!

Are you reading through, or are there specific things that interest you? If you want to understand the life and ministry of Jesus specifically, I'd recommend starting in John. I f you're reading purely for Biblical knowledge sake, have at it

[Xyzaq]

Are you reading through, or are there specific things that interest you? If you want to understand the life and ministry of Jesus specifically, I'd recommend starting in John. I f you're reading purely for Biblical knowledge sake, have at it

Just reading through, because I have no prior knowledge of Christianity.

 

Except that Christmas is Jesus' birthday and Easter is when he comes back from the dead.

 

And apparently Christmas isn't even actually his birthday? /confused

[philpot123]

Just reading through, because I have no prior knowledge of Christianity.

 

Except that Christmas is Jesus' birthday and Easter is when he comes back from the dead.

 

And apparently Christmas isn't even actually his birthday? /confused

Well, if you want knowledge of the fundamental teachings of Christianity, James would be a great place to start. But reading through works as well

 

 

It isn't. It's a "Christianized" version of a pagan holiday that is used to commemorate Jesus' birth yearly, just like Easter is a "Christianized" pagan holiday pirated for commemoration of the resurrection. Probably nowhere close to His actual birthday. Oh well

[Princess Artemis]

Just reading through, because I have no prior knowledge of Christianity.

For what it's worth, as I don't know if you're starting at the beginning and going through or not...don't start at the beginning and go through to the end. Unless you are very determined, as parts of Numbers and Chronicles are really, really hard to read. Getting past the begots takes some effort.

 

My Christian family has 'celebrated' Christmas as just a family get together and gift giving day ever since I was little. I can't even remember how old I was when my dad started calling the Christmas tree the "Pagan pole", but it has been a long, long time. Holidays are what one makes of them though, and regardless of their history, a lot of Christians find Easter and Christmas to be very important remembrances.

 

(I'd rather find some way to celebrate Passover myself.)

[TikindiDragon]

 

Hi everyone I'm a Jehovah Witness, I'm sure many of you have heard of us. If anyone has any questions about this religion I'll be happy to answer them

Welcome. I've had some very interesting discussion with your brethren in my local area so I look forward to you taking part in our debates

[PlutoIsHades]

Personally, I think it's a matter of time until some religions are proven or disproven. What do I mean? Well, for example, let's take the ancient Greek religion(sorry, don't know if it's called anything else). They believed that Apollo pulled the sun across the sky in his chariot. Now, we know that the rotation of the Earth orbiting the sun causes the days and nights. Ancient Greeks believed that when Zeus was angry he'd throw thunderbolts at them. Nowadays, we have studied thunderstorms and know that's not the case.

I believe that eventually, most religions will either be proved right or wrong - scientifically. Yes, more religions will pop up, and then it'll start all over again.

[Princess Artemis]

Personally, I think it's a matter of time until some religions are proven or disproven. What do I mean? Well, for example, let's take the ancient Greek religion(sorry, don't know if it's called anything else). They believed that Apollo pulled the sun across the sky in his chariot. Now, we know that the rotation of the Earth orbiting the sun causes the days and nights. Ancient Greeks believed that when Zeus was angry he'd throw thunderbolts at them. Nowadays, we have studied thunderstorms and know that's not the case.

I believe that eventually, most religions will either be proved right or wrong - scientifically. Yes, more religions will pop up, and then it'll start all over again.

Has science proven that Apollo doesn't carry the Sun in his chariot? Tell me how science has proven this. The rotation of the Earth bears little effect on the movement of the Sun, and showing that the Earth spins does not show the spiritual causes of the Sun's movement.

[Kestra15]

Has science proven that Apollo doesn't carry the Sun in his chariot?  Tell me how science has proven this.  The rotation of the Earth bears little effect on the movement of the Sun, and showing that the Earth spins does not show the spiritual causes of the Sun's movement.

 

I see no chariot.

Edited November 29, 2011 by Kestra15

[Rosedamai]

 

I see no chariot.

Lol! Sorry, I just laughed out loud

 

But yes, I agree that many parts of our currently established religion would have to undergo revisions as they were made when we had a much lower understanding of how the world works. Maybe there will be a new religion in the future incorporating such finds and spiritual beliefs. Until then, I'm an atheist.

[JaziandCo]

Has science proven that Apollo doesn't carry the Sun in his chariot? Tell me how science has proven this. The rotation of the Earth bears little effect on the movement of the Sun, and showing that the Earth spins does not show the spiritual causes of the Sun's movement.

I like this statement a lot, because it sums up a good portion of my personal beliefs as well. Why does religion and science have to be seperate? The entire point of faith is that it's something that can't be proven, because it can't be seen/touched/smelled/heard on a physical level. So you can't see Apollo pulling the sun with his chariot, but that's a spiritual thing and maybe he is, we just don't have the capacity to see it. We have the scientific explination more or less down pat. But who knows for the spiritual explination.

 

Same thing with creationism vs evolution. Who said there can't be both? I don't see any part of the Bible that says God just wiggled his middle finger and POOF, the world happened. Maybe he used the Big Bang and the first "week" isn't really supposed to be days, but several thousand if not million years. That's plenty of room for evolution to happen. I'm not a part of any particular denomination, but most of the Christians in my area don't think the first week was truly just seven days as we know them. I'm not sure if other denominations have other beliefs, but around here we have mostly non-denom, Amish, and Mennonites floating around.