Religion Poll

[Aubie16]

again like I said earlier regarding religion in general ...the bible was written an interpreted by man, man is fallible. I believe in my faith, I try to live according to its teachings as much as possible.  That includes not judging others including their beliefs.

Cool.

I appreciate everyone that is taking part in this thread. I can't believe we actually have a 5 page thread on the X without any hijacks, 2 year old arguments, or anything of that sort. Minor miracle. Maybe I SHOULD believe in a higher power, ha.

[Vandy Vol]

This is the way I see this argument.  

A. Your right and there is no God, there is nothing in the afterlife, when we die...thats it.

B. I am right and God exists, there is a heaven and a hell and we get to spend an eternity with those we love sitting on rainbows.

Either way YOU are phuked!

Assuming that the God in which you've chosen to believe is the correct God.  If you're incorrect (and due to the vast number of religions, the odds are against you), then you're in the same boat.

EDIT:  I see now where this has been asked by Aubie and responded to by a couple of people.  Nonetheless, I think that the statement is still valid.  Although most religions have their similarities, they are also often exclusive.  Sure, most believe that there is one God, but the identity of that deity differs.  The "rules" of that deity differ.  And you may choose to chalk this up to organized religion, but some religions even claim that no other religion is correct and that only X religion will be recognized as true worship of God, whose followers are the only one worthy of entering heaven.

[AUChizad]

I do....as well as dogs.

I do not believe religious zealots that use religion as a mask to kill each other do though.
and like GH2001 said I do not concern myself with them, I worry about getting my own self into heaven

So why are agnostics and atheists your only exception to this rule? Why is there a difference in Options B & C is what I'm asking.

...Who can separate reality from goofing around.  

Didn't answer the question, either.  

I'm not the only agnostic/atheist in this thread, let alone the entire world. I don't get your point. Furthermore, only one faction of those people are "right". Despite what most people here have suggested, the popular belief within all of these religions is that only "their" religion has any validity, and the rest is fairy tale nonsense...and other believers go to hell or its equivalent. At best, Christianity is "right", and that means 2/3 of the world were wrong and going to hell. Then there are many of those who believe that only their denomination is "right", so that makes even less people who are safe from the flames of hell, no matter what the truth is.

Beyond that, portions of the Bible were written hundreds of years after the events described took place.  

Take, for instance, the contention that certain Biblical figures were hundreds or thousands of years old.  It's possible -- likely even -- that they were just remembered as very, very old and someone with my flair for hyperbole said "that guy was 900 years old!"  That became part of the story and lived on.  

Maybe I'm wrong, but what you're supposed to get from the Bible (at least my opinion) is the overarching theme.  If you try to bury yourselves in the details you (again my opinion) become hopelessly lost.  I know people like that.  People who can spout it line for line and will try to shout you down if you attempt to make a rational argument against, say, the six days theory.  Six days by what measure?  Six Gregorian calendar days?  I don't think so.  That's limiting God.  

This I can understand. This I can agree with. But again, your view on this is the minority amongst Christians.

For example, even you would probably agree that one cannot be a Christian if they reject the idea of virgin birth. If they think Jesus Christ claiming to be the son of God is no different than David Koresh doing so, because they equally critical of things that take place in the present day as they are to the stories of the Bible (even the central one), then those people certainly cannot be considered Christians, can they? I guess it then becomes a matter of which parts of the Bible do you think are meant to be poetic fables with a moral, and which parts are meant to be taken literally. To me, it seems like it should be all or none, but that's just me.

[Godfather]

So why are agnostics and atheists your only exception to this rule? Why is there a difference in Options B & C is what I'm asking.

Maybe it is my misunderstanding, but if you don't believe in a higher power than I would assume you don't believe in heaven or hell.  If that's the case than why would you care about options B or C?

[AUTiger1]

In which case they were indoctrinated by members of their cultural environment at a later age. Indoctrination is not impossible at any age, only it is far easier to do so at a developmental age. Hence frenzies about tobacco companies advertising to children, etc. Either way, those cases are comparatively far far rarer, and even more rare is it that a person comes to a religion that is not the social norm amongst their peers.

I don't see how this disproves anything I said at all. Not everyone is susceptible to being indoctrinated. It is in some people's nature not to blindly accept what they are told, but rather ask questions. These questions may very well lead them away from the beliefs of their parents.

All I am saying is that not all people come to their decisions of what they choose to believe by "dogmatic brainwashing instilled at birth" i.e. I believe it b/c my parents believe it and by god that is they only way.   Weather it be Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, The flying Spaghetti Monster....etc....etc....etc, some come to their own conclusions by researching, asking questions and taking the time to study over things.

Where man fails now and throughout most of time is the ignoring of science.  There has never been any reason why science and religion/faith have to be mutually exclusive yet they are treated as such by most.

A man with much more intelligence than I once said. "Science without Religion is lame, Religion without Science is blind and whoever undertakes to set himself up as the judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods.

I tend to agree with him.  Some things just cannot be explained no matter how much science is thrown at it.  Could it be the Providence of a supreme being?  In my mind it very well could be. 

No one can prove the existence of God, gods or a supreme beings the same as no one can disprove the existence of God, gods or supreme beings. If one can prove it either way without a shadow of a doubt and cold hard facts we would have seen it already.  Either way you have to have faith in your thinking and reasoning skills to believe in the existence or nonexistence.

I know what I believe and I accept the facts that not everyone has the same beliefs as I do.  To call it dogmatic brainwashing from birth is offensive to me as I am not a lemming.  It took me many years to come to my own conclusions. 

[wesfau2]

I know what I believe and I accept the facts that not everyone has the same beliefs as I do.  To call it dogmatic brainwashing from birth is offensive to me as I am not a lemming.  It took me many years to come to my own conclusions. 

Would you have still ended up a Christian had you been born in Syria?

In other words, were all religions afforded equal consideration during your process or only those that were readily available to you?

I think (correct me if I'm wrong) that this is what Chad is saying:  The seeds for your particular religious paradigm are planted by the family and social network that you are born into and very few people venture beyond that.

We've heard testimonials from people born into an environment of a particular religion.  These people questioned the faith that they were born into, but have not communicated their exploration of other religions.

[AUChizad]

...Who can separate reality from goofing around. 

Didn't answer the question, either. 

I'm not the only agnostic/atheist in this thread, let alone the entire world. I don't get your point. Furthermore, only one faction of those people are "right". Despite what most people here have suggested, the popular belief within all of these religions is that only "their" religion has any validity, and the rest is fairy tale nonsense...and other believers go to hell or its equivalent. At best, Christianity is "right", and that means 2/3 of the world were wrong and going to hell. Then there are many of those who believe that only their denomination is "right", so that makes even less people who are safe from the flames of hell, no matter what the truth is.

Because everyone loves a good pie chart...


Only Christians and Muslims are more popular than "nonreligious" people. And even those are divided into sects whose ideologies are at odds with each other. Of course in fairness, "nonreligious" is segmented as well.

[AUTiger1]

Cool.

I appreciate everyone that is taking part in this thread. I can't believe we actually have a 5 page thread on the X without any hijacks, 2 year old arguments, or anything of that sort. Minor miracle. Maybe I SHOULD believe in a higher power, ha.

By making this statement I have to ask, are you agnostic or atheists?  Maybe I am misunderstanding the difference here, but I always thought an agnostic neither believes nor denies the existence or non existence of a deity and an atheists chooses to deny the existence of a deity outright.  

[AUChizad]

By making this statement I have to ask, are you agnostic or atheists?  Maybe I am misunderstanding the difference here, but I always thought an agnostic neither believes nor denies the existence or non existence of a deity and an atheists chooses to deny the existence of a deity outright.  

There are hypothetically "hard atheists" that believe they are 100% positive that there does not exist a God. You are very unlikely to encounter these types of people.

Then there are "soft atheists" who are much more prevalent, who believe that it is far less likely that a God exists than that one does.

Then there are agnostics, which believe the absence or presence of a God are equally likely. 50/50.

[Tiger Wench]

Interesting thing about Chad's pie chart - most all of the smallest religious sects (Jews, Buddists, Chinese traditional, African/primarl traditional) have all been persecuted to the point of nearly extinction at many points in history, including modern times. Some of that persecution has been at the hands of secular leaders (example - the Chinese oppression of the Dhali Lama and many other religions they perceive as a threat to power) but others have been persecuted or "missionaried" out of existence (see every Catholic or Protestant missionary in Africa or South America).

Christians get put in between a rock and a hard place.  Have a deep conviction that yours is the One True Religion and go out and prosetlyize and convert the heathens, and be seen by others as arrogant and intolerant and self-righteous.  Or stay home, worry about your own relationship with God before you get all conversion happy on the ignorant natives in Bungobungo, and risk failing to follow the basic premise of Jesus's message - Go forth and teach others that man may only come to the Father through me.

My own choice is more like the last.  My main job is to worry about my own soul.  My other job is to take my kids to church and Sunday School where they can learn the tenets of my faith and the basic morals and values that our society adheres to for the most part (I don't care what you are - The Ten Commandments are pretty simplistic and basic and would apply to any religion).  I give my kids the foundation during the time they are young and impressionable, and then hope that they will continue in that path when they get older.  The basic foundation is the same for all so I don't call it indoctrination - I would not be upset if they chose one day to belong to some other congregation - but I don't think my 6 year old is at a point now where she can choose to be one versus the other for a rational reason.  Her father and I are Methodist so she goes to a Methodist church.  Period.  

"Train up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not depart from it."  I don't interpret that to mean "Train up a child as a Methodist/Baptist/Catholic/Presbyterian" but rather to teach them the way to go to be a moral person with values and good character.  

Bottom line, I believe in the Message, not the earthly messenger.

[Aubie16]

By making this statement I have to ask, are you agnostic or atheists?  Maybe I am misunderstanding the difference here, but I always thought an agnostic neither believes nor denies the existence or non existence of a deity and an atheists chooses to deny the existence of a deity outright.  

I am an agnostic in the fact that I have no idea whether god exists or not. I'm not going to deny the existence of god, just like I am not going to say that he certainly exists. I don't have a clue.

Maybe it is my misunderstanding, but if you don't believe in a higher power than I would assume you don't believe in heaven or hell.  If that's the case than why would you care about options B or C?

I believe that IF there is an "all knowing, all loving" god, like many religions claim, surely he won't send 2/3rd's of the world to hell for not believing in the correct religion. I have no idea which religion is right, or if any of them are right.

If there is a god, I would like to think that I will get into heaven by living a good life and adhering to the golden rule, and other basic rules of humanity.

[AUTiger1]

Would you have still ended up a Christian had you been born in Syria?

In other words, were all religions afforded equal consideration during your process or only those that were readily available to you?

I think (correct me if I'm wrong) that this is what Chad is saying:  The seeds for your particular religious paradigm are planted by the family and social network that you are born into and very few people venture beyond that.

We've heard testimonials from people born into an environment of a particular religion.  These people questioned the faith that they were born into, but have not communicated their exploration of other religions.

Who said I was a Christian? 

To try and answer your question, if I were born in Syria I would probably claim to be Muslim and still just live my life how I want to live my life. Then again, I might be like 10% to 15% of the population and be a Christian b/c some missionary helped me to explore another option.  I just can't honestly answer that question b/c I was not put in that situation.   

[wesfau2]

If there is a god, I would like to think that I will get into heaven by living a good life and adhering to the golden rule, and other basic rules of humanity.

This is the crux of most religions.  The details and players get mixed up, but the basic message remains the same.

Religion was very useful as a system of societal control: don't kill, don't steal, be nice to your neighbors.

Somewhere along the way, men learned to profit and subjugate with it.

[AUChizad]

I believe that IF there is an "all knowing, all loving" god, like many religions claim, surely he won't send 2/3rd's of the world to hell for not believing in the correct religion. I have no idea which religion is right, or if any of them are right.

If there is a god, I would like to think that I will get into heaven by living a good life and adhering to the golden rule, and other basic rules of humanity.

This also begs the question that if there is a God in the most basic sense, as in an intelligent design, does that necessarily mean there is a heaven and hell? To me, the concept of a good place you go when you're good and a bad place you go when you're bad, that was previously believed to be in the sky and below the earth's crust until that was proven to be scientifically impossible, and is now believed to be some other dimension outside of this universe, is a little Santa Clausish.

This reminds me of the movie "The Invention of Lying". Has anyone seen this? Basically, they live in an alternate universe where everyone always tells the truth, because the concept of lying just hasn't ever occurred to them. So the main character's mother falls ill and tells him she's afraid for her life to end and there to be nothing. He comforts her by telling her that what actually happens when you die is you go to a magical place where you no longer feel pain, you're young again, and everyone you've ever known and loved is there. The doctors overhear this and are shocked, wanting to know more. Everyone wants to know how he knows about this magical place, and he's forced to make up more and more. For example, when asked how one makes it to the magical place he says "There's an invisible man...in the sky...he watches over everything we do and say at all times..." etc.

[wesfau2]

Who said I was a Christian?  

If you're not, then you didn't answer the poll.

To try and answer your question, if I were born in Syria I would probably claim to be Muslim and still just live my life how I want to live my life. Then again, I might be like 10% to 15% of the population and be a Christian b/c some missionary helped me to explore another option.  I just can't honestly answer that question b/c I was not put in that situation.    

The point is that I don't believe Chad was intending "indoctrination" in a pejorative sense.  Only that most people will accept the religion of their childhood or reject religion entirely.  There doesn't appear to be a lot of religion-jumping.