Not particularily religious.

[Marinantinel]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLTMmfa-Gd8

Are you testing me Satan?

[Ernie]

Yep, thats about right.

The last time I was in church, they threw water over me and called me names.:D

[Mr. Blocks]

Haha, where is this from? Can't be the peep show?

[Marinantinel]

I'm not sure.

[foundandlost1]

On the bright side...that was hilarious!

On the darker side, I too have met one-too-many of "them"!

It reminds me of one of George Carlin's quotes/pokes...

"Religion has convinced people that there’s an invisible man…living in the sky, who watches everything you do every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a list of ten specific things he doesn’t want you to do. And if you do any of these things, he will send you to a special place, of burning and fire and smoke and torture and anguish for you to live forever, and suffer and burn and scream until the end of time. But he loves you. He loves you and he needs money."

:p

[Mr. Blocks]

Nice, nice quote. I am Athiest myself and could probably go and find my favourite quotes.. but I've just biked about 8 miles and a childs bike because the car broke down. So I'm a little tired.

Perhaps god hates my ways :P

I went to Stafford yesterday, and saw a church sign "Man thinks, God directs". Which I got a little humour out of. Not so much because of what it says is stupid, but simply because I am constantly pinching myself to make sure I'm not dreaming that people still actually believe this stuff.

[Nobody]

Nice, nice quote. I am Athiest myself and could probably go and find my favourite quotes.. but I've just biked about 8 miles and a childs bike because the car broke down. So I'm a little tired.

Perhaps god hates my ways :P

I went to Stafford yesterday, and saw a church sign "Man thinks, God directs". Which I got a little humour out of. Not so much because of what it says is stupid, but simply because I am constantly pinching myself to make sure I'm not dreaming that people still actually believe this stuff.

I respect your beliefs, but would like to remind you:

What we believe is up to us and up to us alone. So make sure you don't step over that fine line between "Just-don't-believe-it" and "Blasphemy"...Sure it's up to you, but you'll be stepping on a bunch of peoples toes if you do.

Even I was an atheist not to long ago, until a certain person changed my ways. And even when I was an atheist, I never even dared to say something against god, because I was afraid I would upset others.

I'm sorry...it's actually none of my business...I guess I just wanted to let out, how I wish most people would handle beliefs and so on...

[Mr. Blocks]

I respect your beliefs, but would like to remind you:

What we believe is up to us and up to us alone. So make sure you don't step over that fine line between "Just-don't-believe-it" and "Blasphemy"...Sure it's up to you, but you'll be stepping on a bunch of peoples toes if you do.

Even I was an atheist not to long ago, until a certain person changed my ways. And even when I was an atheist, I never even dared to say something against god, because I was afraid I would upset others.

I'm sorry...it's actually none of my business...I guess I just wanted to let out, how I wish most people would handle beliefs and so on...

You are reminding me that I should watch what I say as to not upset people of religion? You do see that that is such an aging idea, where one is not suppose to question religion. The thing is, I believe we should question it, and be able to do so without someone stepping all over us saying what we aren't suppose to do. I don't see how that can be, I can say what I wish, and I don't really care who I upset with it. I have MY beliefs, it just so happens they aren't the same as your own. I don't say what I do with intent of offending, there is just little way to say things without them being offensive.

And to be honest, what you said really annoyed the hell out of me. It's your belief that I should "Be reminded of". I am opposite to the idea of religion, I do not need to be reminded of what I can and can not say just to suit the religious. You know, freedom of speech and all that?

"I never even dared to say something against god, because I was afraid I would upset others."

That quote was the most upsetting thing you dared say to me. SCARED? I mean, can you not see how controling the idea is? What makes religion so speacial that anyone dare to question it, or oppose it? Nothing makes it that speacial, and in my opinion nothing should ever be above question.

The only type of religious person I can respect is those that DO respect my own beliefs and CAN have a controled argument that involves a nice discussion about that idea of it all. I don't need to be told I should watch what I say. With that, you belittle me and everyone else that isn't religious.

To settle it, it is YOUR belief, not mine. I can say what I want, if people take offence then I won't be able to do much about it. But I refuse to be told that I can't word out MY beliefs.

You are insane for suggesting that to me, it would be offencive only I'm still quite suprised by it. I perhaps thing you didn't mean to cause offence, but do not say you respect my beliefs when you then say I shouldn't speak what my beliefs do "permit".

And also, I care not what you or anyone else believes. But please, don't you dare tell anyone what they shouldn't say. Being religious doesn't give you the right. and to be honest it is pretty much the only topic where people are "scared" to say anything "bad" about it. Which I think is pretty insane in itself.

I am not scared of what I say, I don't intentionally cause offence. But if I say does cause offence, then that's how it will be. It just so happens that a lot of what the religious do and say offends me, but I don't have the protection of "watch what you say, you'll be stepping on MY toes".

Say what you want, believe what you want. Again, don't claim you have respect for my beliefs when you can't bare to hear me speak against your own.

Also, with the quote of yours, you have successfully "upset" me with what you just said. But it's something I am used to so I won't make a massive deal of it. It's not just the religious that are able to be upset, so don't try and claim that it is. Your whole belief and ideal, the mention of it would be to me what it is for me to mention mine to you. Try and open up your mind and realise how the same thing can be for others as it is for you.

Again, I really detest what you said. Richard Dawkins made an excellent point on that subject. We shouldn't live in a world where religion is a taboo subject. We shouldn't live and believe we can't question it, since it has such an effect on us all.

EDIT: If you can, don't takew offence to anything I said, it is just something I feel so passionately about and I really dislike it when people tell me what I should and shouldn't do.

If you would like to talk about our beliefs (which I am fond of doing) to gain insight on how we both think, then let me know.

[Nobody]

You are reminding me that I should watch what I say as to not upset people of religion? You do see that that is such an aging idea, where one is not suppose to question religion. The thing is, I believe we should question it, and be able to do so without someone stepping all over us saying what we aren't suppose to do. I don't see how that can be, I can say what I wish, and I don't really care who I upset with it. I have MY beliefs, it just so happens they aren't the same as your own. I don't say what I do with intent of offending, there is just little way to say things without them being offensive.

And to be honest, what you said really annoyed the hell out of me. It's your belief that I should "Be reminded of". I am opposite to the idea of religion, I do not need to be reminded of what I can and can not say just to suit the religious. You know, freedom of speech and all that?

"I never even dared to say something against god, because I was afraid I would upset others."

That quote was the most upsetting thing you dared say to me. SCARED? I mean, can you not see how controling the idea is? What makes religion so speacial that anyone dare to question it, or oppose it? Nothing makes it that speacial, and in my opinion nothing should ever be above question.

The only type of religious person I can respect is those that DO respect my own beliefs and CAN have a controled argument that involves a nice discussion about that idea of it all. I don't need to be told I should watch what I say. With that, you belittle me and everyone else that isn't religious.

To settle it, it is YOUR belief, not mine. I can say what I want, if people take offence then I won't be able to do much about it. But I refuse to be told that I can't word out MY beliefs.

You are insane for suggesting that to me, it would be offencive only I'm still quite suprised by it. I perhaps thing you didn't mean to cause offence, but do not say you respect my beliefs when you then say I shouldn't speak what my beliefs do "permit".

And also, I care not what you or anyone else believes. But please, don't you dare tell anyone what they shouldn't say. Being religious doesn't give you the right. and to be honest it is pretty much the only topic where people are "scared" to say anything "bad" about it. Which I think is pretty insane in itself.

I am not scared of what I say, I don't intentionally cause offence. But if I say does cause offence, then that's how it will be. It just so happens that a lot of what the religious do and say offends me, but I don't have the protection of "watch what you say, you'll be stepping on MY toes".

Say what you want, believe what you want. Again, don't claim you have respect for my beliefs when you can't bare to hear me speak against your own.

Also, with the quote of yours, you have successfully "upset" me with what you just said. But it's something I am used to so I won't make a massive deal of it. It's not just the religious that are able to be upset, so don't try and claim that it is. Your whole belief and ideal, the mention of it would be to me what it is for me to mention mine to you. Try and open up your mind and realise how the same thing can be for others as it is for you.

Again, I really detest what you said. Richard Dawkins made an excellent point on that subject. We shouldn't live in a world where religion is a taboo subject. We shouldn't live and believe we can't question it, since it has such an effect on us all.

EDIT: If you can, don't takew offence to anything I said, it is just something I feel so passionately about and I really dislike it when people tell me what I should and shouldn't do.

If you would like to talk about our beliefs (which I am fond of doing) to gain insight on how we both think, then let me know.


I'd like to begin with apologizing.

It seems I've worded my post in a way I should not have. I did by no means intend to tell you to 'keep your mouth shut'. I was actually just trying to pointing out, that I personally always tried being a little discrete with what I said, because I did not want to step on anyones toes (I've obviously failed at doing so). That you could be stepping on others feet doesn't matter to you is, like I said before, none of my business. And I regret that you thought I was trying to quiet you in some way.

I truely do respect your beliefs, for I have no proof of my own being 'right' or your being 'wrong'. For that matter, I respect all beliefs.

And for the record. I personally could care less for what you say about god or my beliefs. If you believe that I am insane, for being a religious person, then so be it. I can't change that and wouldn't really even care for trying.


Again, I offer the sincerest of apologies and hope that you accept it and realize, that I did not mean to upset you with what I said.

[Mr. Blocks]

I'd like to begin with apologizing.

It seems I've worded my post in a way I should not have. I did by no means intend to tell you to 'keep your mouth shut'. I was actually just trying to pointing out, that I personally always tried being a little discrete with what I said, because I did not want to step on anyones toes (I've obviously failed at doing so). That you could be stepping on others feet doesn't matter to you is, like I said before, none of my business. And I regret that you thought I was trying to quiet you in some way.

I truely do respect your beliefs, for I have no proof of my own being 'right' or your being 'wrong'. For that matter, I respect all beliefs.

And for the record. I personally could care less for what you say about god or my beliefs. If you believe that I am insane, for being a religious person, then so be it. I can't change that and wouldn't really even care for trying.

Again, I offer the sincerest of apologies and hope that you accept it and realize, that I did not mean to upset you with what I said.

I accept the apology.

I understand what you were trying to say, but even so I believe that we as human beings should be able to discuss everything and anything. I have heard the "Religion is a no go area" and I believe that is the wrong attitude to take. I would love for someone to provide evidence to say my beliefs are wrong, that is how open I am to the idea, I just live in belief that it won't happen from a religious source (unless a god appears or something drastic).

To say you are insane would be a bad way of wording it. I would say you were living in a delusion, in believing their is a go looking over you (if that is what you believe). It's sort of how we don't believe in witches anymore, but we used to believe in that so much that we'd kill people because of it. The same rule applies to this. If we don't, or "aren't allowed" to speak up about things then we shall not progress as a species.

I don't have anything against people that are religious in particular, I just find that they can say the oddest things that do really aggrovate me. The "You shall not speak ill of my religious, what right do you have" thing would be an example.

But yes, I don't care what you believe in, you are welcome to it. I just wish people whom are relgious would be more open about what they believe in.

For me, there would be nothing better that what I believe in now. I feel so lucky to be a live, and feel lucky that I will actually die one day. The chances of me being alive are incredible. I just think religious belittles the idea of the universe and what it actually is, and what it means to be a live.

My reply is perhaps jumbled, but hopefully you can make sense of it. To finish up, the reason I don't take the approach you do in "trying to not step on peoples toes" is because I believe it does more good to question things, than to let them be. Example being how women were once treated, they spoke up against it and now for that, I believe we live in a better world.

We should ask questions, and if we must step on toes, then it has to be done. It is what I believe.

I thank you for your kind reply, I say it is quite rare I get one such like yours on such a subject.

[Little Heather]

Perhaps god hates my ways :P

I went to Stafford yesterday, and saw a church sign "Man thinks, God directs". Which I got a little humour out of..

Perhaps there is a difference between questioning religion and poking fun at it. I am not religious in the slightest. Spiritual, yes but I personally disagree with organised religion for many reasons that I do not care to discuss here.

It's about respecting others' views laughing at them and saying they are wrong surely isn't the way forward. I agree that some of the things I have heard seem so unbelievable it's scary but for so many people religion is a life choice and by poking fun at these people you show yourself to be ignorant and bigoted.

[Funkadelichika]

Hmm I am debating whether or not to go into a lengthy reply on this one. I found that video rather humerous. I am not a christian. Nor would I count myself particularly religious. I was a christian at one point though so I do have a certain respect for those who believe. I have met many differen't types of christians who all have differen't prerequisites for getting into heaven etc. Some of them have been grossly intolerant, others have been amazingly friendly welcoming and understanding. I do have issues with the church. I do have issues with certain christian groups. I admit some christians don't know very much about what they are following. Some follow totally blindly by that I mean they don't even know the bible by which they are suppose to follow. Some though follow what they believe and have researched studied and asked questions. These one's I tend to respect. The ones who show their beliefs in their every day lives. Anyways I am not sure where I am going with this entirely but I think I said what I set out to say.

[Mr. Blocks]

Perhaps there is a difference between questioning religion and poking fun at it. I am not religious in the slightest. Spiritual, yes but I personally disagree with organised religion for many reasons that I do not care to discuss here.

It's about respecting others' views laughing at them and saying they are wrong surely isn't the way forward. I agree that some of the things I have heard seem so unbelievable it's scary but for so many people religion is a life choice and by poking fun at these people you show yourself to be ignorant and bigoted.

You choose to use insulting words against me because your upset at what I said. Which makes you the ignorant one, since you have no idea what it is I am saying right?

I understand what your saying, but do you honestly respect everything in the world? No? I don't either.

You can choose to get pissy because I don't respect certain things, but then you are showing a great lack of respect to me by saying that I'm ignorant (blah, blah).

I can do and say what I want about anything I do choose to. I won't be limited because a lot of people find the subject very taboo and "You shouldn't make fun of the church" - "But why old dear?" - "You just can't".

Being ignorant is far from what I actually am, but you wouldn't know because you don't understand where it is I am coming from. And if you did get it, you wouldn't be calling me ignorant.

I have questioned religion a great amount, there is no way forward with those with belief in something they might not even understand fully themselves. I am an honest person, and my being tells me it's ridiculous. If I find something funny, I will laugh at it. What is the problem, just what it is I am laughing at I shouldn't? Because of what it is? Do you not see how limiting that idea is?

Please do step off that high horse of yours. The world and opinions do not revolve around your own reality, I have my own, where religion is a joke. I can't respect something of which I find to be a joke. The world is a horrible place, I used to believe in respecting others beliefs, but it just so happens that my own belief is trodden on most of the time. Which I can respect. Have you not grown enough to realise what people are? That we do not all play the happy game where we all get on, some of us are downright opposites. And we will trash the ideas of another if we feel it is truth. I don't go out of my way to poke fun, but I did actually laugh at the sign because it shows (to me) how ignorant human beings can be.

If you wish to call me ignorant for thinking something is merely funny, then be that ignorant yourself to do so.

Honestly..

Hmm I am debating whether or not to go into a lengthy reply on this one. I found that video rather humerous. I am not a christian. Nor would I count myself particularly religious. I was a christian at one point though so I do have a certain respect for those who believe. I have met many differen't types of christians who all have differen't prerequisites for getting into heaven etc. Some of them have been grossly intolerant, others have been amazingly friendly welcoming and understanding. I do have issues with the church. I do have issues with certain christian groups. I admit some christians don't know very much about what they are following. Some follow totally blindly by that I mean they don't even know the bible by which they are suppose to follow. Some though follow what they believe and have researched studied and asked questions. These one's I tend to respect. The ones who show their beliefs in their every day lives. Anyways I am not sure where I am going with this entirely but I think I said what I set out to say.

I can understand this. I never was Christian, never believed it to be true. But I do have a mother whom is religious, and grandparents. Both of which I do express my own opinions. They take it, and will dissagree of course. It is only that kind of mentality with the religous that I can respect.

Again to add to the person above you, I do not care what people believe in, so long as it does not intrude on my own life. And IF I genuinly find something funny, I am not to laugh because it lacks respect? Honestly, that's the most ignorant thing I've heard or see today. Think about it, and you'll figure out why it's so ridiculous.

But as a whole, I'd choose to not respect anything religious. I don't think it's possible for me to respect something so far-fetched in this day and age. My own opinion should be respected, and not stepped on because of it's own lack of respect.

[Funkadelichika]

Morph Phoenix...I am having issues with quoting right now but anyways... I find it funny that you say that you do not care what others believe in and that you don't respect anything religious yet you then say your own opinion should be respected. I find your reasoning a little out there.

Your question And if I geniuinly find something funny, I am not to laugh because it lacks respect? Well if you want to excercise some self control and not hurt someone who may find it offensive then yeah don't laugh. How would you feel if you were in a room and a video was being shown. Now you find this video to be extremly offensive and not funny at all to you and you tell the other people watching this. But they react in a manner something like this..."I don't care about you. What I find funny is funny. What do you matter? We all find it funny so who cares about your opinion? Respect that we don't respect you you bigot. Your ignorant."

I guess it all depends on how you want others to view you. If you don't care then go ahead laugh it up. I am not saying you can't share your opinion that religion is bogus I am just saying there is no need to be so callous about it with people. Please don't call me ignorant either.

You can go ahead and not respect anything religious I understand. Tell people you dislike their religion but there is a respectfull way to tell people you disrespect what they are following. Whether you choose that way is your choice obviously. Your a very interesting individual to talk with by the way. :)

[Introspective]

Loved the video, it was a hilarious. Thank you for the post :)

Now to Morph,

"I just live in belief that it won't happen from a religious source (unless a god appears or something drastic)."

It appears your "scientific" mind is not quite as pure as you would like yourself to believe. Truth can and does come from many sources, you have mentally blocked out one of those areas as "detestable". But you are as religious as the next. Your religion is yourself, your mind, and your inflated ego. And frankly you are offensive. And since offending is ok with you, I'll unbridle my tongue.

"I would say you were living in a delusion, in believing their is a go looking over you (if that is what you believe). It's sort of how we don't believe in witches anymore, but we used to believe in that so much that we'd kill people because of it. The same rule applies to this."

And I would say you are wise in your own conceit. What because those "religions" disagree with YOUR RELIGION. They are deluded??? Go back to Philosophy and God discussion young man, take your medicine. I have already addressed your ignorance there.

[pagan1]

Religion is a wonderful joke,a magnificent set of table manners for an overcrowded world with limited resources where everyone is jostling at the table to get scraps to eat.It allows us to have a common purpose and goal in the same way that racism and nationalism do.I don't think religion has anything to do with God,and if it does then this God must be very small and unworthy of respect.

Religion is a political machine,using the enticement of forgiveness for slavery,genocide and any other big or small indiscretion as a way to allow one group of people to de-humanise another.Religion is a fantasy world of secret friends,a place of refuge for the vast majority of us who came from dysfunctional families and need a projected surrogate mother and father to love us the way we know we should of been loved.

Religion is the means to try and kill God.To fit a scary and incomprehensible universe into a book,or a belief or some other straitjacket of ideas.A means through magic words and secret handshakes to control and manipulate God.Someone who loves God would never ask for eternal life because when you really love someone you are not concerned with trying to manipulate trivial gifts out of them,someone who loves God would forget their own ego and see God in everyone and everything else.

If there is such a thing as God,and if for some unknown reason this God had some interest in me,what might this God think:
"Oh pagan1 you silly little f*ckwit I don't give a shit if you believe in me or not,do you think I am a lightbulb that you can turn on or off with your mind?"

If God does exist then since we are only very fragile and insignificant creatures any ideas we have concerning such an issue must be taken with a pinch of salt.

What if the Big Bang was not an act of creation,but an act of flatulence and we are nothing more than the product of that divine wind,wouldn't it stand to reason that such a God would be more inclined to flush us than to take any interest in our pain and suffering?

So for a start anything we say or think concerning God will be of no consequence since it will be limited by a fatal flaw,and that flaw is us.

As self aware apes who through some accident of biology have had a sufficient increase in brain size to cross some threshold of consciousness and therefore develop some very rudimentary self awareness,we presume some special place in the Universe,scared of death,scared of our own shadow we try desperately to find the secret to eternal life,and the meaning of existence.

If God exists then this God would have no more concern for this human ape than it would for a bacteria.

Now religion on the other hand will tell us that we are made in God's image and that we are capable of enlightenment,and all the other sweet nothings that we want to hear,but that of course is only us whispering to ourselves.

So is this discussion about God or Religion?

If it is about Religion then I admit gossip and hearsay can be fun,and arguing about whose belief or non-belief is the biggest and the best does fill in time.

If it is about God then that is a another matter...

[Sciuroid]

pagan1, I have to say that I strongly disagree with you on the topic of religion. As a Christian, I can say with absolute conviction that I have seen prayers answered, and wonders being done in Christ's name. You seem to see religion as a collection of dogma, meant to limit and kill God. I would argue that the rejection of any limitations on your own personal belief constitutes an attempt to tame God, and to ensure that you can deal with him on your own terms. And for that matter, my experience of my own faith, at least -- I cannot speak for any others, I'm sorry to say -- has never been that it is bound within a book. I have personally experienced what I genuinely believe to be the presence of God, and I have seen others who reflected Christ in amazing and, above all, living ways. I have experienced God, in Christian terms, as a vibrant, active, and loving presence.

From the Christian standpoint, at least, eternal life isn't a handout that religious folk beg from God. It's the natural and logical extension of the reconciliation of the individual with God. It isn't something that one obtains; it is something that one is restored to. I recommend reading C.S. Lewis's The Great Divorce for more on this topic.

And as for this: "Someone who loves God would quite happily deny or question Gods existence,because when you love someone you reveal all of yourself and hold nothing back." Well, no. Not really. Questioning God's existence, I agree, is a natural step for an individual who loves truth, and I personally believe that God confirms himself in this case. But to deny God's existence as a matter of love for him is nonsensical. Even using the human conception of love: if I love another, do I pretend that they don't exist? Is it even possible that I love something that I don't believe exists? Of course not. It's a logical impossibility.

[Introspective]

Interesting post by pagan, and reply by Sciuroid; I enjoy an intelligent disagreement and discussion, what I do not appreciate is condescension for someone of opposing thought. I think we have allot to learn form each other, and no one, not me especially, and not anyone else is 100% correct on anything of a "divine" nature, but that’s part of the fun, not something to take or be offensive about. Thank you both for your posts, good food for thought :)

[pagan1]

Sciuroid very nice post I agree with everything you said except for:

"I would argue that the rejection of any limitations on your own personal belief constitutes an attempt to tame God, and to ensure that you can deal with him on your own terms."

My terms were terminated a long time ago,if I were able to have terms they would be:

1) That your sublime and very positive faith grow and find fulfillment in the presence of your vision of God for all eternity.
2) same as above...

Disagreeing with me is very reasonable,I disagree with myself most of the time.
Disagreeing strongly I would see as slightly excessive...
I am happy that you have had the experiences you have had.
I have edited the part where I say if one loves God one would have no hesitation to deny God,because it doesn't make sense...

I am not a Christian,or a Buddhist,or a Hindu,or a Muslim,I am a bag of bones...

O servant, where dost thou seek Me?
O servant, where dost thou seek Me?

Lo ! I am beside thee.

I am neither in temple nor in mosque:
I am neither in Kaaba nor in Kailash:

Neither am I in rites and ceremonies,
nor in Yoga and renunciation.

If thou art a true seeker, thou shalt at once see Me:
thou shalt meet Me in a moment of time.

Kabir says, ' O Sadhu ! God is the breath of all breath.'

- Kabir

[pagan1]

Interesting post by pagan, and reply by Sciuroid; I enjoy an intelligent disagreement and discussion, what I do not appreciate is condescension for someone of opposing thought. I think we have allot to learn form each other, and no one, not me especially, and not anyone else is 100% correct on anything of a "divine" nature, but that’s part of the fun, not something to take or be offensive about. Thank you both for your posts, good food for thought :)

Thankyou for your enlightened words...

I would hazard a guess though that the level of compassion,tolerance and understanding shown in your words would of come at a price,because I do not think you can get to heaven before having to go through hell...

[unbittentongue]

Sciuroid very nice post I agree with everything you said except for:

"I would argue that the rejection of any limitations on your own personal belief constitutes an attempt to tame God, and to ensure that you can deal with him on your own terms."

My terms were terminated a long time ago,if I were able to have terms they would be:

1) That your sublime and very positive faith grow and find fulfillment in the presence of your vision of God for all eternity.
2) same as above...

Disagreeing with me is very reasonable,I disagree with myself most of the time.
Disagreeing strongly I would see as slightly excessive...
I am happy that you have had the experiences you have had.
I have edited the part where I say if one loves God one would have no hesitation to deny God,because it doesn't make sense...

I am not a Christian,or a Buddhist,or a Hindu,or a Muslim,I am a bag of bones...

O servant, where dost thou seek Me?
O servant, where dost thou seek Me?

Lo ! I am beside thee.

I am neither in temple nor in mosque:
I am neither in Kaaba nor in Kailash:

Neither am I in rites and ceremonies,
nor in Yoga and renunciation.

If thou art a true seeker, thou shalt at once see Me:
thou shalt meet Me in a moment of time.

Kabir says, ' O Sadhu ! God is the breath of all breath.'

- Kabir

*hugs pagan1*:worthy: Nicely put.

[Sciuroid]

pagan1, I say that I disagree strongly because, quite simply, I do. And in this case, I must respectfully contend that it is not yours to set the extent to which I am allowed to find your statements offensive and/or inconsistent with what I have found to be true, or to which I am allowed to express my disagreement. After all, you are telling me that I am willingly taking part in an attempt to kill God. To the contrary, my belief in a) an objective reality and b) the basic premises of the Christian worldview dictates that I should desire death for myself before even a denial of God.

It seems to me that you have, in fact, set terms for your experience of God. You are determined not to find him in temple or mosque, in rites or ceremonies. Your worldview seems inherently antithetical to a concept of disciplined devotion to a truth greater than oneself. I say this because, from what I can tell, it limits God to the experience of the individual. To whit: I am to find eternal fulfillment before "[my] vision of God." This does not leave room for a God who is absolute and universal. And so, you have set terms. I recognize that I, too, have set terms. My terms are that I follow the path of greatest truth. When I have experienced true grace and the presence of holiness, it has always been in a Christian context. Thus, I find all weight on one side of the scales, and my choice becomes clear.

Hrm... I would say that I have found God in a church environment. If have found him in oil and ashes, in song and Scripture, in tears and trembling and time spent at the altar. I can't quantify it for you, of course, but I place my personal experience in balanced opposition to your vaguely Emersonian* quote.

*Emersonian in that you're lifting it from what appears to be the Hindu tradition, not in that I believe Emerson to have been the origin of this style of transcendental thought.

That said, I absolutely agree that there are situations in which mindless Christian dogma has cut people off from experiencing the living God. (Incidentally, I'm not putting a disclaimer there purely for the sake of convenience, and not as an attempt to project my presupposition onto you.) However, I have known many more people who are truly devoted, and have a faith that is powerful and alive. And pretty much across the board, these people recognize that doctine (not dogma) has a place in their faith. I follow in their beliefs largely because their example is compelling, their joy more pure than any other I know, and their impact on others and on the world around them overwhelmingly positive. This, of course, is built upon my personal presupposition that God exists, and that he is indeed the Christian God, etc. etc.

[pagan1]

Sciuroid...
I concede your right to disagree strongly,very magnanimous of me I know...

[pagan1]

then there was an angel
named unbittentongue
her radiance shone upon
everything and everyone

:)

Just a thought:
If your mind is big enough and open enough,there is just a chance the whole univese will fit in.The christians would joke with the buddhists,the atheists would be having polite conversations with the muslims,the hindus would be dancing up a storm,the party would go on forever,and everyone would be invited.This sounds a little bit like heaven to me...

[Sciuroid]

Actually, that metaphor was absolutely not meant to apply to narrow-mindedness. It was more a variant on "you can't take it with you." The idea was that in order to submit fully to Christ, one would have to recognize that one is no "bigger", in the terms of righteousness, than a thread. The rest of the camel has to be discarded.

Remember, Christians (and many other religions) believe in an absolute reality. We do have "narrow" minds in the sense that "our" reality does not, in our minds, leave room for other people's realities. But at the same time, your mind is narrow in that it does not see a spiritual reality larger than itself. The only mind that does not narrow itself is completely agnostic. And remember: presupposing the existence of an objective reality, it makes sense to "narrow" one's mind to conform with that reality. For the record: I believe that the only truly logically tenable position is agnosticism. It's impossible to prove using only logic and reason that one faith is true. The only reason I'm not an agnostic is that I have seen what I believe to be genuine evidence of the existence and nature of God, and I recognize that I cannot compel anyone to agree with me.

Your scenario of a great big party sounds very pretty. And, to an extent, it works. I mean, I believe that there's absolutely room in Christianity for dialogue between faiths. At the same time, though, I can't accept anyone else's religion as true in the way that I see mine as being true. And in the Christian worldview, at least, as with Judaism and (I believe, correct me if I'm wrong) Islam, the party wouldn't last forever. Sooner or later, the Day would come, and we're more accountable to God than to any spirit of humanism or interfaith fellowship.

[Yog]

At the same time, though, I can't accept anyone else's religion as true in the way that I see mine as being true. And in the Christian worldview, at least, as with Judaism and (I believe, correct me if I'm wrong) Islam, the party wouldn't last forever. Sooner or later, the Day would come, and we're more accountable to God than to any spirit of humanism or interfaith fellowship.

And this leads to:

O for a voice like thunder, and a tongue
To drown the throat of war! - When the senses
Are shaken, and the soul is driven to madness,
Who can stand? When the souls of the oppressed
Fight in the troubled air that rages, who can stand?
When the whirlwind of fury comes from the
Throne of God, when the frowns of his countenance
Drive the nations together, who can stand?
When Sin claps his broad wings over the battle,
And sails rejoicing in the flood of Death;
When souls are torn to everlasting fire,
And fiends of Hell rejoice upon the slain,
O who can stand? O who hath caused this?
O who can answer at the throne of God?
The Kings and Nobles of the Land have done it!
Hear it not, Heaven, thy Ministers have done it!

And when those days come, as they do so often, and we are driven to the fires of damnation by voices of disparate true believers, who does God favor? "Only the dead have seen the end of war," but have they also seen the end of religion? The existence of peace seems incongruous with the existence of religion.

[Sciuroid]

The war is never ours to bring. "Judge not, lest ye be judged." I take no pleasure in the prospect of a day of judgment. But I didn't sign on because it all sounded pretty. The belief that I am right - not because I am superior, because I'm not, but because I am lucky - should never lead to hostility or to hatred. That would be counter-productive, and contrary to the example of Christ. If I disagree with another, it must never be allowed to turn into contempt for him/her. I say this based not on personal conscience per se, but on the teachings of the Bible itself.

[pagan1]

Actually, that metaphor was absolutely not meant to apply to narrow-mindedness. It was more a variant on "you can't take it with you." The idea was that in order to submit fully to Christ, one would have to recognize that one is no "bigger", in the terms of righteousness, than a thread. The rest of the camel has to be discarded.

Remember, Christians (and many other religions) believe in an absolute reality. We do have "narrow" minds in the sense that "our" reality does not, in our minds, leave room for other people's realities. But at the same time, your mind is narrow in that it does not see a spiritual reality larger than itself. The only mind that does not narrow itself is completely agnostic. And remember: presupposing the existence of an objective reality, it makes sense to "narrow" one's mind to conform with that reality. For the record: I believe that the only truly logically tenable position is agnosticism. It's impossible to prove using only logic and reason that one faith is true. The only reason I'm not an agnostic is that I have seen what I believe to be genuine evidence of the existence and nature of God, and I recognize that I cannot compel anyone to agree with me.

Your scenario of a great big party sounds very pretty. And, to an extent, it works. I mean, I believe that there's absolutely room in Christianity for dialogue between faiths. At the same time, though, I can't accept anyone else's religion as true in the way that I see mine as being true. And in the Christian worldview, at least, as with Judaism and (I believe, correct me if I'm wrong) Islam, the party wouldn't last forever. Sooner or later, the Day would come, and we're more accountable to God than to any spirit of humanism or interfaith fellowship.

I am aware that the camel going through the eye of the needle has a different meaning...
I have edited my previous post,and I am actually grateful to you for pointing my error out to me.My inference as to the possible narrow mindedness of others was petty and uncalled for.I have enough trouble enquiring into the nature of my own mind,without either having the ability or wisdom to make any statement concerning anyone else's.

I think my party would be more messy than pretty,because the only way it could happen is if every one was about 3 years old,then I would sit back and observe and as Jesus advised perhaps learn something about how to enter the kingdom of heaven...

It is good to have all the answers,but personally I would prefer to have all the questions,since I find life more interesting that way...

I have nothing against religion really,I enjoy the atmosphere of the mosque,the synagogue,the buddhist and hindu temple,it is just that I wish someone would come and kick out the money lenders...

I think Jesus if he was an actual historical figure,would of been a wonderful man,so many of his words have a timeless power,and the lives of such indisputable historical persons as St.Francis are truly inspiring...


Lord, make me an instrument of your peace.
Where there is hatred, let me sow love;
where there is injury,pardon;
where there is doubt, faith;
where there is despair, hope;
where there is darkness, light;
and where there is sadness, joy.


O Divine Master, grant that I may not so much seek
to be consoled as to console;
to be understood as to understand;
to be loved as to love.
For it is in giving that we receive;
it is in pardoning that we are pardoned;
and it is in dying that we are born to eternal life. Amen

Prayer of Saint Francis of Assisi.

[Yog]

The war is never ours to bring. "Judge not, lest ye be judged." I take no pleasure in the prospect of a day of judgment. But I didn't sign on because it all sounded pretty. The belief that I am right - not because I am superior, because I'm not, but because I am lucky - should never lead to hostility or to hatred. That would be counter-productive, and contrary to the example of Christ. If I disagree with another, it must never be allowed to turn into contempt for him/her. I say this based not on personal conscience per se, but on the teachings of the Bible itself.

That's a fair response. If all "true believers" had a similar outlook then this world might be a tolerable place to live. All too often however, devotion breeds intolerance, intolerance creates segregation, segregation instills dehumanization, and the dehumanized are the first to be slaughtered.

[Sciuroid]

I would blame the people for that, rather than the faith. Religion, whether or not you believe that it's divinely inspired, is essentially run by humans. As Gary Haugen puts it, God has a plan for the world, and it's us. Let me, then, just say that contempt for or the dehumanization of another flies in the face of the teachings of Christianity.

pagan1, I am sorry that your experience of more conventional religious settings has been marred so by the proverbial money-lenders. I count myself blessed never to have faced that kind of corruption.

The basis of Christ's child image is the concept of absolute dependence and trust. Things like hedonism and unfettered id would belong more in the realm of 1 Corinthians 13:11.

[pagan1]

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not Omnipotent.
Is he able but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is God both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?
-Epicurus

[Sciuroid]

Well, Christian theology says that god is omnipotent, and does not desire for evil to exist, however, if he overrides man's sin in outright interventionism, it destroys free will. Think of it like this: an automaton cannot replace a true friend, sibling, or child. It will do everything that you want it to, but you know that there's no depth to its obedience, and any affection it may profess is empty programming. If you have a friend or brother or daughter of flesh and blood, there is a possibility that he or she will turn away from you, no matter how good you are to him/her. But it is the only way that the relationship can have true love. And if you coerce love from another, then you are trying to turn them into an automaton; the choice is no longer truly theirs.

[Little Heather]

Sorry for breaking the flow of this descussion but I haven't been on this thread for a while and I'd like to back and reply to something that Morph Phoenix said (pg 2)

First of all I would like to appologise for using insulting words, although I regret writing them your reply only confirmed my thoughts.

Second, you are right, you did upset me and I'm sure I'm not the only one. I can promise you that is not the reason I called you ignorant.

I find a lot of what you said quite belittling:
"you're upset at what I said", "you have no idea", "you don't know", "the world and opinions do not revolve around your reality"
If this is the way you talk to people in the real world you're going to have a tough time. Laughing at people and making them feel small does not make you any bigger or and more right, it makes them angry at you which is probably why your "belief is trodden on" it is not your beliefs but the way that you present them. This goes for everything, even religion.

You say that "the world is a horrible place"

I have been there, in that place where the world is so horrible that I couldn't bear to exist in it anymore.
I have been in the place where the word GOD repulsed me to the core.
You ask if I "have not grown enough to realise what people are" and I can honestly tell you that I know exactly what poeple are, people are the reason I still exist. People are the reason I can say the word GOD and not want to tear my heart out. Poeple are the reason that I have forgiven. People saved my life.

So go ahead tell me that I am being ridiculous, tell me that "there is no way forward for those with belief in something that they might not understand"
Do you fully understand the Large Hadron Collider and what they are doing with it? I don't but I do believe that they can do it. What about Quantum Leaps? What I'm trying to say is that religion gives a lot of people hope. So why does it bother you so much that they believe in it? You are going to offend a great deal of people with your words, and you don't care? That saddens me deeply.

Anyway, enough of my rambling, I hope you can share your views with us in a more mindful way in the future.

LH

[Yog]

Actually as long as God exists then there can be no free will anyway. Since God is omniscient God already knows everything everyone will ever do. In effect the existence of God necessitates the predetermination of every action of every particle and group of particles from the beginning to the end of time. Everything everyone will ever do, say, think, or feel is already predetermined by God. In essence it is impossible for man to choose to do that which God already knows man must do. The fact that you think you have a choice in the matter is irrelevant. God knows everything, and the sum total of your life experiences, choices, and actions are no exception.

[Funkadelichika]

Yog I would argue that whether or not God knows what will happen man still has a choice because man cannot see the future. To man there is choices there is free will. Just because God knows the end it doesn't mean man has no freewill. We choose everyday.

[Yog]

Actually, if God exists then our choice has already been made. We have no choice but to choose that which God knows we must. Even if we feel like we are making a free choice we are in actuality only choosing the choice God knows that we must. The decision has already been made, we just don't know it yet.

[Funkadelichika]

Wait are we talking of a specific choice or just choices in general... I think being up for a few days has hurt my noggin... :(

[Yog]

I think the following is as simply as it can be put, and it's not all that simple. You cannot choose to do other than that which God knows you must choose to do.

[Sciuroid]

Yog, there are two fallacies in your argument.

First, you are failing to distinguish between foreknowledge and predestination. Remember, the presupposition of the Christian worldview is that elements exist beyond the material universe, which are capable of influencing the material universe. In the case of humans, this is referred to as the mind, or the soul. It's basically similar to Platonic dualism. In any case, given this, knowing the position and velocity of every particle in the universe, and having infinite processing capacity, would not be sufficient to predict the future with absolute certainty, as the universe is not a closed system. This at least refutes the necessity of predestination, again presupposing the correctness of the Christian worldview (which is the only one relevant to this specific discussion, i.e. of whether free will is possible).

The second fallacy is that you are presupposing linear time. The theological consensus seems to be that God is independent of time as we know it. Part of God's eternal nature is that he exists wholly and equally in the past, present, and future, unbound by any of them. Tomorrow, assuming a reasonable amount of predictability, I am going to choose whether to call a friend and arrange to see them for lunch or not. Right now, being bound by time, I don't know which I'll choose. But after I make the decision, I cannot change it, free will or not. It will eventually be set in time. Thus, it's not that all decisions have been made for us, but that they will have been made by us. Thus, foreknowledge is a part of being an eternal entity. But it doesn't change the fact that we made the choice. God doesn't know what we must choose, but he knows what we will choose, barring his intervention. Remember, according to Christianity, humans are slave to sin. Without intervention, we will make choices that lead to separation from God, and therefore the death of the soul. God is the independent variable, the dynamic element that is capable of changing what was, what is, or what is to come.

Also, Funkadelichika is correct. Just because God knows what our decisions will have been, it doesn't mean that we do. We live as though we have free will. We are, therefore, accountable for the decisions that we make.

[Yog]

Key phrase, "we live as though we have freewill." In fact, we do not. No matter how bad you want it, if God exists then you can never choose to do other than that which God knows you must.

"God doesn't know what we must choose, but he knows what we will choose, barring his intervention." First, he does know what you must choose. You must choose that which God knows you will choose. If he interevenes then you choose according to his will. Either way your choice conforms to God, either his knowledge or his will.

Yes, God is independant of time. He must be. God cannot be bounded by the constraints of time. This doesn't mean that God does not understand the reality of humanity bounded by a linear constraint of time or whatever concept of time we actually are bounded by. At any rate, no matter how time works, our choices are bounded by God. His knowledge perfectly encapsulates our being, our choices.

"In any case, given this, knowing the position and velocity of every particle in the universe, and having infinite processing capacity, would not be sufficient to predict the future with absolute certainty, as the universe is not a closed system."

Nice attempt to incorporate Heisenberg's Uncertainty principle into the arguemnt of free will and God; however, the argument fails. This is true for man, but God is anything but. God is Omnsicient, he knows everything. Your argument assumes an imperfect God, a God that lacks a certain knowledge, a God that is ignorant of something. This is not God. God is perfect. God is omniscient.

It's a simple statement. You cannot choose to do other than that which God knows you must. It's nice to want a perfect and omniscient god who also allows for free will and choice of action, but in fact, it can't exist. The God you wish for is a paradox.

The simplest example of this is as follows:

You know with utmost certainty that when you arrive home that if you enter through the front door you will live, but if you enter through the back door your mom, wife, husband, will shoot and kill you. You choose to enter through the back door and are shot dead. Is this your fault or the killers? Clearly it is your fault because you held the knowledge of your own safety. Having the certainty of your own fate, you have chosen the path you wished for. The burden is on you; you had the knowledge. Now if you were God, and you knew everything that can possibly be, how can you blame anyone for making the choice you know they must make? The answer is simple, you cannot.

[pagan1]

Anyone got any thoughts on why the whole God vs. God vs. No-God thing is such an emotive issue?

Why the need to proselytize?
Wouldn't a more reasonable response to non-belief be " Great,more pudding and cake at the pearly gate,for me " than " believe what I believe or else I will confound your mind with fear."

Does an absolute monster,a serial killer who eats babies three times a day,and doesn't brush his teeth,who at the time of death finds Jesus,wholly embraces the Christian faith and even has an attack of indigestion to prove his belief,go to heaven?

Does an atheist,an absolute saint who helps little old ladies cross the road etc. and does no harm to anyone,who decides that he doesn't want anything to do with Christianity,regards Jesus in the same way as Mahatma Ghandi and Martin Luther King,and feels the same amount of deep sadness for the crucifixion of Jesus as for all the other thousands upon thousands who were crucified or burnt at the stake,go to hell?

[Sciuroid]

Yog - I don't really have an answer to that. I'll think about it, though.

pagan1 - re: proselytization - Selfishness isn't really a big thing in Christianity. The reason that we feel the need to talk to other people about it is based on the belief in an absolute reality. Christians generally believe that humans, on their own, will choose separation from God. You may have heard this referred to as hell. And then there's what Jesus said about "no one comes to the Father except through me." So, the question becomes: if you had the opportunity to at least open the door for someone to go from hell to heaven, would you pass that up because it might be a little awkward?

For the other two questions... well, I refer you to C.S. Lewis's "The Great Divorce," which gives what I believe to be a very coherent view of the afterlife. The short answer is, when Christ is removed from the equation, the "perfect saint" is no closer to getting into heaven than is the unhygienic fellow you first described. Both are separated by an infinite distance from God in their failure to be truly perfect and holy. The conversion of the latter is the important factor because it constitutes an admission of imperfection, a recognition that the only way to truly live is to surrender to the only one who can completely purify him. The man of good deeds is nonetheless burdened by sin. The only real difference is that he hasn't recognized it.

The race does not go to the swift; sin will always have it outrun. It goes to the person who recognizes that he needs to hitch a ride in that car.

[Yog]

If you do come up with a coherent arguemnt to freedom and God then it will be a groundbreaking paper in the world of philosophy. It has been discussed and battered around for over 100 years. The argument, in it's infant stages, has been around since Descarte. The ultimately defining notions exist in the works of Neitzsche and Sartre. It is the argument of existentialism. If God exists, then man cannot be held ultimately responsible for man's actions. This is why the existentialists rejected the notion of God. The existentialists would argue that only if God does not exist can man be held responsible for their actions and thus can the social contracts inherint in society inherintly have any fuction. At best, if God exists, then freedom is an iffy proposition and at worst, it cannot exist at all. Perhaps your best argument at this point would be to say that you will have to take it on a faith assumption.

I would say that the only other way this could work would be to give up Omniscience which also means giving up perfection and omnipotence. This tends to be a completely unasthetic proposition and vastly increases the complications in the arguments concerning a divine being. Considering that freedom has become the great call of man since the late 19th century, then a solution would be greatly heralded. Good luck with your thinking on that.

[Sciuroid]

All I can say is, if the realm of a human knowledge and understanding fits here:

( )

then the realm of God's would be something more like...

[ * ( ) * ]

*insert infinite space here

[pagan1]

Yog - I don't really have an answer to that. I'll think about it, though.

pagan1 - re: proselytization - Selfishness isn't really a big thing in Christianity. The reason that we feel the need to talk to other people about it is based on the belief in an absolute reality. Christians generally believe that humans, on their own, will choose separation from God. You may have heard this referred to as hell. And then there's what Jesus said about "no one comes to the Father except through me." So, the question becomes: if you had the opportunity to at least open the door for someone to go from hell to heaven, would you pass that up because it might be a little awkward?

For the other two questions... well, I refer you to C.S. Lewis's "The Great Divorce," which gives what I believe to be a very coherent view of the afterlife. The short answer is, when Christ is removed from the equation, the "perfect saint" is no closer to getting into heaven than is the unhygienic fellow you first described. Both are separated by an infinite distance from God in their failure to be truly perfect and holy. The conversion of the latter is the important factor because it constitutes an admission of imperfection, a recognition that the only way to truly live is to surrender to the only one who can completely purify him. The man of good deeds is nonetheless burdened by sin. The only real difference is that he hasn't recognized it.

The race does not go to the swift; sin will always have it outrun. It goes to the person who recognizes that he needs to hitch a ride in that car.

Thankyou for the very clear and well written response to my questions.
I apologise for descending into the realm of sarcasm in my other post...

[Mr. Blocks]

Morph Phoenix...I am having issues with quoting right now but anyways... I find it funny that you say that you do not care what others believe in and that you don't respect anything religious yet you then say your own opinion should be respected. I find your reasoning a little out there.

I wasn't being entirely serious. I was poking at how people require respect and believe it should be given, and then when my view lacks respect that automatically means I shouldn't be given respect back?

I don't actually need the respect of people here, I won't get it because of my views which are enough to perhaps hurt people, I don't know.


Your question And if I geniuinly find something funny, I am not to laugh because it lacks respect? Well if you want to excercise some self control and not hurt someone who may find it offensive then yeah don't laugh. How would you feel if you were in a room and a video was being shown. Now you find this video to be extremly offensive and not funny at all to you and you tell the other people watching this. But they react in a manner something like this..."I don't care about you. What I find funny is funny. What do you matter? We all find it funny so who cares about your opinion? Respect that we don't respect you you bigot. Your ignorant."


If this were in public, then I wouldn't laugh and be as cruel as to do that. I have my self control when I feel it's needed. I don't feel it's needed on a forum. This would be the only place you could say what you thought and people would have to hear it and respond. In public people are just impossible to talk to a lot of the time.

But actually, I will apologie to you. My actions and words weren't meant to offend nor hurt. I just have the idea that "things should be said and heard". But looking back it was perhaps quite vain of me to present what I did in the way I did. I need to concider people more than I do.

If you were to meet me in person, you'd probably think I was quite nice. As people often do. I concider people less when I'm on a forum. And for that I do apologize.

I guess it all depends on how you want others to view you. If you don't care then go ahead laugh it up. I am not saying you can't share your opinion that religion is bogus I am just saying there is no need to be so callous about it with people. Please don't call me ignorant either.

It does! I don't really care how people view me on here. I can be hated and not mind much at all. I guess I sometimes find the need to play a little devils advocate and go a little extreme just to see how people take it (not on here of course). I am fairly interested in how people think and how they deal with views that oppose their own.

I do agree though, I shouldn't be so harsh with the religious and my views. But I do wish that the religious would be kind enough to understand what it means to me when I'm constantly poked and told "your religious". If you want to read into that, I made a huge post on why Athiests are not religious.

I can't tell you how offensive being told I'm religious is to me. But still one guy continues to tell me I'm religious all the time. And that's ok right?

It's the same as me laughing at what I saw (an opinion it was funny to see) as it is for someone to constantly tell me I'm religious. But still it happens.


You can go ahead and not respect anything religious I understand. Tell people you dislike their religion but there is a respectfull way to tell people you disrespect what they are following. Whether you choose that way is your choice obviously. Your a very interesting individual to talk with by the way. :)


I can respect that people believe in whatever they want. But what it is that they do believe is not something I do respect. This goes from years of looking into the subject.

I will try and tone myself down abit, you know, since you were so nice.


It appears your "scientific" mind is not quite as pure as you would like yourself to believe. Truth can and does come from many sources, you have mentally blocked out one of those areas as "detestable". But you are as religious as the next. Your religion is yourself, your mind, and your inflated ego. And frankly you are offensive. And since offending is ok with you, I'll unbridle my tongue.

I have not mentally blocked anything out. I have looked into everything with an open mind. I have once concidered Christianity but I could not do it because I could not find enough truth for it to be aprt of my life. I have religious friends and family, I don't "detest" it nor them. Infact, I think it is you that has done the mental blocking. I have seen replies you made having quoted me, and I was dissapointed to see how the contrast between that one lovely post by you, compare to the replies you give to me.. quite vast.

Again you say I'm religious, which you have always done and you haven't once shown care for it's cause of offence. And you do so willingly accept the offended to lack the will to then offend you? Come on, honestly.

I detest people telling me what I am. Your ignorant beyong belief. I am of no religion. You wouldn't understand how that's possible. But it is the most ignorant and offensive thing any religious person could say to a non-believer-in-a-deity.

It's your opinion that I am, so don't announce it like it's fact. I have told you now why it is not a religion. If you fail to understand that then I will leave you be on the subject.


And I would say you are wise in your own conceit. What because those "religions" disagree with YOUR RELIGION. They are deluded??? Go back to Philosophy and God discussion young man, take your medicine. I have already addressed your ignorance there.

Again with the "you have a religion". You are perhaps the most ignorant person on this forum. You say things yet can not back them up with any real conviction. They all stem from your own thought and opinion.

If you want to see how ignorance is, then you must go and read my reply to your dodgey "tellings morph" off thread. Because honestly, anyone that believes "Evolution Theory" isn't true because it's a theory is showing ignorance with that whole statement. It shows you haven't looked into what I believe as much as I have done with what you do. So keep on with the tell me I'm ignorant. I mean, if that works for you then I'm more than happy to ignore you from now on :shhh:

I do believe your deluded sir, I can not help it. The amount of "wrongs" you have managed to type towards me has left me no choice but to believe that you are simply wrong on all accounts :P

[Mr. Blocks]

Remember, Christians (and many other religions) believe in an absolute reality. We do have "narrow" minds in the sense that "our" reality does not, in our minds, leave room for other people's realities. But at the same time, your mind is narrow in that it does not see a spiritual reality larger than itself. The only mind that does not narrow itself is completely agnostic. And remember: presupposing the existence of an objective reality, it makes sense to "narrow" one's mind to conform with that reality. For the record: I believe that the only truly logically tenable position is agnosticism. It's impossible to prove using only logic and reason that one faith is true. The only reason I'm not an agnostic is that I have seen what I believe to be genuine evidence of the existence and nature of God, and I recognize that I cannot compel anyone to agree with me.

Your scenario of a great big party sounds very pretty. And, to an extent, it works. I mean, I believe that there's absolutely room in Christianity for dialogue between faiths. At the same time, though, I can't accept anyone else's religion as true in the way that I see mine as being true. And in the Christian worldview, at least, as with Judaism and (I believe, correct me if I'm wrong) Islam, the party wouldn't last forever. Sooner or later, the Day would come, and we're more accountable to God than to any spirit of humanism or interfaith fellowship.

I just happened to glance up and in hope of your reply I quote you:


"The only mind that does not narrow itself is completely agnostic"


I will agree with that actually. I didn't understand what you meant right away, but on my second read I got it, and I would agree.

"I believe that the only truly logically tenable position is agnosticism"

But I do not agree with this. I don't understand why some are Agnostic. They sit on the fence unable to decide which to turn to. On one side we have:

- religion and faith.

On the other:

- Scientific evidence, theories, laws and fact.

I was agnostic at one point, but it was my logic that had me take that leap into science. So I don't see how it would be that being Agnostic would be the "only truly logical tenable position".

It's impossible to prove using only logic and reason that one faith is true

Of course, I don't think it will ever be posible to prove faith or religion to be true. I find a complete lack of solid evidence of any supernatural being at all, let alone being able to complete a solid peice of evidence to support the idea.

It's nice to note that you think it's impossible, but still will believe in something. I find that to be an errie kind of thought, and entirely based on faith. You believe your right, but could obviously be completely wrong. Much like not needing to know so long as you believe in in your heart? An idea that I can not grasp myself, though I have tried.

The only reason I'm not an agnostic is that I have seen what I believe to be genuine evidence of the existence and nature of God

May I ask what you have seen that accounts to their being a god?

we must look at our past to understand how human beings operate. Take the witch hunt, drowned in a superstitious time people would hunt people they "thought" were witches. What was the evidence? Boils, warts on their face and then to be put on trial.

And what an error they made? and for what? A simple belief without evidence has never been a good thing for us. And is why I can't find it within myself to accept anything without reason, logic, or fact.

I sometimes think it would be great if I did believe in god, it would be so conforting to know that when I die I will go to heaven and be with my family and friends, to know I have someone above me looking over me constantly.

And then there is my actual thought, to feel so lucky to even be given the chance to experience what it is like to be alive. The amount of things that had to happen for me to ever be here right now are outstanding. I feel lucky to be alive, and I feel lucky that I will one day be given the chance to die, because some aren't given the chance to live.

I find my view so much more rewarding. Each to their own.