Yet Another Religion Thread

[Lazario]

It is your negative, angry world view which actually sounds like the most dangerous thing to me. I honestly hope you are okay.

Settle down there, Drama Duster.

If you understand anything about life, you have a Negative World View. That's all there is to it. Most of us with NWV-disorder find lots of things to focus on which make us smile, so don't pretend being like you is the only way to survive or anything. It simply isn't true.

[Disney Duster]

Lazario, I wasn't saying that's all you need, I was saying religion can help, but yes, I think you should use it and that it is the most important thing to you.

Dr Frankenollie, the reason it makes me sad is thinking I'm nothing more than just genes, chemicals, experiences which are so...well, like a robot almost. It's so limited. I believe there's more to human beings, it feels like there's more. I believe spiritual things like God and a soul are where I get amazing feelings and thoughts from. It makes me feel that's how life really must be, not any less. I can't think of it as less. You're telling me to think of it as less.

And you're also telling me what I'm doing is lying and making up God. You're being really cruel here, you have to stop. I am not lying. I have never been more than honest in my talks with you. You're just...what you're doing is not right or fair to me.

And as for the afterlife being "boring", the whole point is that you will have eternal happiness. Not things you think will make you happy, but the actual feeling of happiness, no boredom, all happiness, will be how you feel for the rest of your life. If God can do anything, he can do that. You really aren't up to trusting, much, are you?

And you still haven't said how such beliefs are dangerous.

And I don't know if I can keep debating with you even just philosophically. I got really messed up bad and depressed lately, and it all started with an aggresive atheist's talking to me about souls and life. I think it's bad for me. I find my talks with you to be very interesting and stilumating, too, and thanks for saying so about me, but I don't think I can do it anymore. I do hope your life, view, and emptiness get much better though.

[Super Aurora]

[Dr Frankenollie]

Dr Frankenollie, the reason it makes me sad is thinking I'm nothing more than just genes, chemicals, experiences which are so...well, like a robot almost. It's so limited. I believe there's more to human beings, it feels like there's more. I believe spiritual things like God and a soul are where I get amazing feelings and thoughts from. It makes me feel that's how life really must be, not any less. I can't think of it as less. You're telling me to think of it as less.

What's wrong with humans sometimes working in a mechanical, almost robot-like way? Aren't the details of that fascinating? We still don't know how everything to do with the brain and genes work, but these mysteries can be unravelled; comparatively, the mysteries that surround the possibility of God will perpetually be mysteries. I'm not telling you to think of life as less: the way science has proven the body to work is more fascinating and more complex than simply saying God wills it or that everything intrinsically you - your personality, your thoughts, your hopes, your dreams, your loves, etcetera - are just a magical, invisible thing called your soul. That is a simple, comforting answer.

And you're also telling me what I'm doing is lying and making up God. You're being really cruel here, you have to stop. I am not lying. I have never been more than honest in my talks with you. You're just...what you're doing is not right or fair to me.

NO! You completely misunderstood what I was saying. When I said that you made yourself believe, I meant that you did it on more of a subconscious level; you are lying in a se sense, even if you don't realise it. You want a afterlife so much, that you tell yourself: "Well, there must be one!" You make yourself believe in one because the desire is so strong. You're deluded.

And as for the afterlife being "boring", the whole point is that you will have eternal happiness. Not things you think will make you happy, but the actual feeling of happiness, no boredom, all happiness, will be how you feel for the rest of your life. If God can do anything, he can do that. You really aren't up to trusting, much, are you?

Do you want to know a secret? Happiness is derived from the old Norse word 'hap', which simply means 'luck.' Happiness originally meant to have good fortune; later, it evolved to mean being a virtuous. My point is that the modern idea of happiness is something intangible - that's why there are so many 'goths' and 'emos.' Moreover, science has shown that you can't feel happiness for too long. (You can thank Cracked.com for this information). Sorry, but I think the afterlife is often said to be a place of happiness isn't due to genuine belief, but because the likes of priests used it as an appealing reward to manipulate people to do as they were told.

And you still haven't said how such beliefs are dangerous.

I (sort of) did. Even if we ignore the fact that religion is responsible for wars, the 'witch' trials, child marriages, child sacrifices, discrimination etcetera and just focus on pure, simple monotheism, you still have potential for danger and unhappiness for the believer. As I've said, believing that some Big Brother-esque deity is always watching you restricts you from what you're doing and could frighten you. Atheism is liberating and allows freedom.

[Disney Duster]

I have explained why I think your wrong on such points as these too many times.

I only have one thing left to explain. Even though science does say we're complicated, it isn't the same things as believing in a soul being so amazing and complicated we can't understand it, and it's also better because we believe all of our soul is ours and can't be found (quite the same) in other people.

Oh, and I will add that scientists can only see endorfins and chemicals and stuff that are just what our body goes through physically when it comes to happiness but that's not all happiness is, if there can be a soul there can be happiness within the soul forever.

That's the only thing I think I need to explain. The rest of what you said, I'll just have to say I disagree and think it's wrong.

[Dr Frankenollie]

I have explained why I think your wrong on such points as these too many times.

Then I bring them up again and elaborate on them because your explanations don't make sense to me.

I only have one thing left to explain. Even though science does say we're complicated, it isn't the same things as believing in a soul being so amazing and complicated we can't understand it, and it's also better because we believe all of our soul is ours and can't be found (quite the same) in other people.

Firstly, something being nice and appealing doesn't automatically mean that it's true. Secondly, even if we are all perhaps soulless, we all still have parts of us that can't be found in other people and are still unique.

Oh, and I will add that scientists can only see endorfins and chemicals and stuff that are just what our body goes through physically when it comes to happiness but that's not all happiness is, if there can be a soul there can be happiness within the soul forever.

Did you ignore some of the things I said about happiness? 'Happiness' doesn't really exist; all it has ever been defined as are luck, virtue and pleasure/joy, with the latter now being the dominant meaning and interpretation of it. That can fully be explained by endorphins (learn the correct spelling, pleasure) and chemicals.

[Disney Duster]

I still believe that happiness comes fromand/or at least is felt in the soul and is not just those endorphins and other things you said it is. Those things just have one part in happiness, maybe just the physical part felt in our bodies. So I disagree, once more.

[Dr Frankenollie]

I still believe that happiness comes fromand/or at least is felt in the soul and is not just those endorphins and other things you said it is. Those things just have one part in happiness, maybe just the physical part felt in our bodies. So I disagree, once more.

I know what I'm about to say will make absolutely no difference to you, but...there is no evidence for souls to exist. People's actions, behaviour and personality have proven to come from the brain and your genes, so at best the soul is just a copy of who you are, but there isn't the tiniest smidgen of evidence whatsoever to back up the ludricous concept.

[Disney Duster]

I believe there is more to human being than just their brain and genes no matter what any scientific evidence says. It feels so much like there's more, that's all the evidence I need, even though I know you and many people and all scientific people don't consider it real evidence. That's it.

[Dr Frankenollie]

I believe there is more to human being than just their brain and genes no matter what any scientific evidence says. It feels so much like there's more, that's all the evidence I need, even though I know you and many people and all scientific people don't consider it real evidence. That's it.

So you reject all rationality and science to continue having superstitious delusions? I give up.

[PeterPanfan]

I think it's semi-pathetic that either of you are trying to change the other's beliefs.

If Duster wants to "fill the emptiness in his soul" with God, then let him. It literally has nothing to do with you, Dr. Frank. As far as I know, you do not know him personally, and therefore are basing your attacks on his belief on nothing more than an online persona... on a Disney forum.

I find your naïvety frustrating, Frank. You keep insisting that Duster should give up his belief in God, but what for? Your only alternative is to follow your own belief, which (as you're making it out to be), is in nothing.

I agree with what Duster is saying in that belief in something, is important. Believing in nothing is a waste of a person's life. You don't have to believe in any kind of deity; you can believe in other people, maybe, or nature, filmmaking, whatever suits you best. Duster's beliefs are doing you no harm, so why bother?

[Dr Frankenollie]

I think it's semi-pathetic that either of you are trying to change the other's beliefs.

If Duster wants to "fill the emptiness in his soul" with God, then let him. It literally has nothing to do with you, Dr. Frank. As far as I know, you do not know him personally, and therefore are basing your attacks on his belief on nothing more than an online persona... on a Disney forum.

I find your naïvety frustrating, Frank. You keep insisting that Duster should give up his belief in God, but what for? Your only alternative is to follow your own belief, which (as you're making it out to be), is in nothing.

I agree with what Duster is saying in that belief in something, is important. Believing in nothing is a waste of a person's life. You don't have to believe in any kind of deity; you can believe in other people, maybe, or nature, filmmaking, whatever suits you best. Duster's beliefs are doing you no harm, so why bother?

When have I ever said I believe in absolutely nothing? I don't believe in any God, but that doesn't mean I also don't believe in altruism, my own form of ethics and have faith in people I know. I do have trust or confidence in certain things, I merely lack religious faith. But why is absolute nihilism a waste of a person's life? How are you able to judge when a person's life is fulfilled or a waste? Something like that is purely subjective, and up to the person it concerns, not you. I think a life is a waste if they have not had any pleasure or happiness in life and have done nothing for the rest of humanity. Nihilists can still have happiness and pleasure, and nihilists can still do something for the rest of humanity (probably by creating art, like poetry, literature, music, cinema, etc.)

Duster seemed happy continuing our debate, and I'm not 'attacking' his faith on any personal level, but because, as I've repeated many times, religion is dangerous, and a delusion. Most of all, I'm trying to make Duster more open-minded.

I am perpetually uncertain about everything; I don't know if we're brain in jars, I don't know whether ethics matter, I don't know if ethics could ever exist objectively, I don't whether I'm in the Matrix...I know nothing except for the fact that I know nothing besides this. And the most frightening thing is, I doubt anybody has the answers. We're all wandering around mindlessly and uncertainly. Religion is an appealing and understandable way to try and make sense of the nonsensical, horrific, wonderful and oddly beautiful chaos that is life, but religion is still intrinsically a load of improbable nonsense that costs people's lives and happiness. After going through stages of nihilism, solipsism and even Buddhism, I now want to help people, because even though I know the empathy and altruism are merely due to the selfish gene, I still feel empathy and I still want to help the many, many people around the world who are struggling. To me, religion is a dangerous virus slowing down scientific progress, putting up barriers between groups of people and leading to discrimination against minorities, so that's why I feel that Duster should reassess his beliefs, and why I want to 'cure', if you will, the people who are suffering from theistic faith. Yes, this isn't the best I can do in helping the world, yet I still see it as important.

[Disney Duster]

Thank you for defending me PeterPanfan, I also agree with a lot of what you said.

Dr Frankenollie, its so strange you think you being "good" and helpful is just a gene but you also think of it in a way like it's more than a gene. This is why I believe in more than just science you know. And once again, certain beliefs of religion are good on their own and don't do the bad things you say, that is only other parts of religion.

[Lazario]

I agree with whomever [was the first to] say this whole back and forth is pretty [boring]. But I do get why it's happening. Duster [may be] a perfectly sane individual but he has made a career on this board of speaking in tongues. The replies from people which look like their motivation is to challenge his faith are actually about challenging his reasoning. And not because they want a role in shaping his personal faith, because he chooses to communicate his beliefs in perhaps the worst way possible. Making it impossible for people who aren't him to wrap their heads around the concept of a person like him.

Also, the public thing has something to do with it. The reason I occasionally tackle a person's opinion on a movie, show, or music artist anymore is because I don't want that statement to be the one people think represents any semblance of the majority. 'Least not until I've defined that majority as making this decision based on either a hasty prejudgment (if the majority seems to disagree with me) or careful consideration (if they seem to agree).

Of course, there's also the Chik-Fil-A dimension, isn't there? The: give them enough rope and they'll hang themselves. Nobody really wants to be reading the blahblahblah-ings of someone whose advice comes from a place of extreme inexperience or lack of knowledge.

[CJ]

I think it is time for certain parties to take a step back. This thread is drifting dangerously close to becoming a breeding ground for personal attacks. I will close the thread, when I feel it has started to cross the line into the personal pettiness that has plagued all of the previous religion threads. To keep that from happening, I will am issuing the following guidelines for this thread:

1. Be respectful of the beliefs of other forum members. You don't have to agree with their beliefs, but do not make personal attacks against them because of their beliefs.

2. Don't try to convert anyone to your beliefs. I know this one is hard for some people. Let's be honest here, everyone has their own personal beliefs and they are not likely to change them based on anything you type out on a forum. In other words, they are not going to suddenly "see the light" and come around to your personal way of thinking. Frankly trying to convert others seems to be where all of the religious threads started their decent into the point of no return.

3. No personal attacks of any kind. I shouldn't have to put this one in, but it seems to be a necessary reminder for any religious discussion.

Everyone is welcome to have a mature discussion on the pros, cons, differences, similarities, definitions, and any other part of any religion that I may have missed. I personally don't care what you discuss, as long as you follow the guidelines.

For those of you bored by the Christianity discussion, by all means discuss something else. There are plenty of other religions out there to discuss, you don't have to discuss Christianity all the time.

[Lazario]

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/4sKzPBu2M8A" frameborder="0"></iframe>

[Siren]

Probably be better off asking this on a parenting forum, but those are some crazy mofos.

So I think of this now and then.

I have heard people say they put God before all else. Even their own family. What does that mean? I'm Wiccan, but never once would I put my religion or deities before my family, especially my kids. If my kids are say, sick on Samhain, and I am unable to fulfill my duties to have ritual then, because I am tending to my children, I don't think twice. No guilt. I believe my goddess and god understand.

But I have heard Christians say, you should put God above all others, including your own family. So if God came down and told you to kill your kids...do you? If he says, leave your children and spread the word of God, do you? Maybe I am taking the whole, "God before all others" too literal. Years ago, I remember when I was going to a Christian church as a teen and one of the other teens said they would do whatever God commanded when I mentioned these scenarios....kinda scary.
If my god and goddess came and told me to kill my kids or leave them...I'd find another religion, or none at all personally.

[Dragonlion]

So if God came down and told you to kill your kids...do you?

I believe that is what the Bible says. I mean, there was that time when God told Abraham to sacrifice Issac and Abraham totally didn't question it and almost did it until an angel had to come down and tell him that it was only a test. So, I think that makes the answer very clear.

[carolinakid]

I also think God should come first. Isn't that the first commandment?

[Disney Duster]

The question is when you put God first is this God you believe in one that would ever tell you to do something like that? For most people it would probably be no. You don't have to believe in every thing in the Bible, even the Abraham and his son story.