REAL debate thread for RELIGION

[Nurvingiel]

Soy cheese? Well, I like tofu...

Maybe we're not ideologically similar after all. Though, you probably can't eat pizza at all since there's eggs and butter in the dough etc. etc.

Why don't we collective order a tofu and rice noodle stir-fry?

All this to prove Beor's point.

Aaaand getting back on topic now. (If you still want something to eat, come to the cafe! )

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

Just out of interest, what religions do
we have represented here?

for instance, am i the only Buddhist?

(nicely back on topic!)

[Mercutio]

Originally posted by Beruthiel's cat
I was brought up in the Lutheran church, which can't agree on anything with itself. There are many branches of Lutheranism, some as the result of national/ethnic differences (Swedes vs. Germans, etc), and some just because one group enterprets scripture one way (and that's how Luther would see it, by gum!) and another group sees it another way. Needless to say, my boyfriend finds this ludicrous. I find it hysterically funny.

Hysterically funny that different synods interpret things differently? It isn't just Christianity, specifically Protestantism, specifically Lutheranism, that disagrees within themselves. No two people are completely identical in reasoning and thought (as we can see here on the moot!). Other religions have divisions, based on different ideas, interpretations, etc. Why exactly do you find it funny? Do you think the Lutheran church should split up completely because of small differences? It is already divided up slightly among things such as the ELCA (Evangelical Lutheran Church in America) and Missouri Synod and Wisconsin Synod. However, they are all Lutheran. If you notice, on detailed forms to fill out that ask for your religion, sometimes they include choices such as these, that are more specific than a general denomination (I'm not sure why I wrote that last sentence!).

And I believe my religion is right, and naturally, it would follow that other religions are wrong (in a nice way ) . One of things I try to do is point out to others why I think my religion is right.

What religions (or which mooters) believe that they aren't the only right people out there? And how is that idea/belief formed or what is it based upon?

LCoU: I am a member of the ELCA. See above for what that stands for

[Ruinel]

Originally posted by brownjenkins
thanks Runiel

how's the pup?

Doing great. He fits in here like he's lived here all his life. As a matter of fact, the SPCA called today for the one month follow up call to see how he's doing. We had a long chat about how well he's doing here. Thanks for asking.

[Rían]

Originally posted by Ruinel
My compromise allows you to worship as your chosen religion allows you to, and does not force my (or anyone else's) religious laws upon you.

Let's see ... what was that cult that killed people with the Kool-Aid? Would you allow THAT religion to be practised? If you make broad statements like that, I will point out the problems with them. You need to add some modifiers to that statement, methinks

BTW, I think your statement is inaccurate. I think the only parts of religion you "allow" to be practised are those that either don't affect you personally (like me going to my church) or those things that are, in YOUR opinion, harmful to people/society and concern actual legal statues (like murder or stealing). Anything that falls outside of that, you put up a stink about

And just like you, I don't force YOU to go to church and I put up a stink about things that are, in MY opinion, harmful to people/society and concern actual legal statues, like homosexual marriage. Anything that falls outside of that, I put up a stink about

[Drgnslyer]

Originally posted by Beor
You cant have one religion, it wont work. You cant have a compromise either, too many different opinions. The spirituality does work, if you have faith. That is what most religions seem to be about, am i right? There is no quantifiable proof that any one religion is the right one, or even that any are right at all, so what are you trying to get at? People cant even agree on what to put on a pizza, so what is the point of unifying all religions? Pretty soon, you would have little breakoffs here and there, and it would all fall apart.

I'm not trying to say that we want to take all religions and merge them into one..sorry if it seems like I was saying that...however I would like to see the violence and discrimination between faith cut down quite a bit...think of how the world would be changed if there never was, or never would be a religious war.....I feel that we would be a much more diverse and stable society...again, just my opinion on that one.

Originally posted by Last Child of Ungoliant
Just out of interest, what religions do
we have represented here?

for instance, am i the only Buddhist?

(nicely back on topic!)

Well, myself as stated, I'm a Witch...

Anyone else? *Wonders if he's the only witch in this thread*

[GrayMouser]

Originally posted by Valandil

GrayMouser, I'm not trying to ignore your post, I'm... pondering it. Frankly, I'm at a loss for how best to respond. It doesn't exactly shake my faith, but I'm not sure I can carry the ball on this one. Maybe Rian or Lief Erikson can do you justice... they seem a bit more clear-headed than I feel most times. If they don't, I'll keep thinking on it and give it a whirl later.

Take your time

I'm one of the slowest responders myself, which is why I've tried to limit my postings lately- it's not fair to other people to have someone oppose your position, then not reply to your comeback

[Rían]

No kidding! You STILL haven't read my PM from January! (hint - try the PM notification option - or do you just not like me anymore?! )

[Lief Erikson]

Wow, so many good posts here since I last posted! I'm excited to get responding .

[Lief Erikson]

Starting with GrayMouser's.

Originally posted by GrayMouser
Ah, the old (and long deflated) Trilemma- "mad, bad, or glad".

There have been plenty of figures throughout history who have claimed to be the Chosen One, without necessarily being "lunatics" in the certifiable sense.

Wouldn't someone know if they were omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent?

It's pretty clear from the description of Jesus' life that he was humble, yet you have to imagine him full of incredible arrogance, to make the claim that he has never sinned. Other inconsistencies than these two I expect would appear, if you say he thought he was God, but he was neither raving nor evil.

I don't see how other religions have any particular problem dealing with Jesus. To Jews, he's simply the most popular of many False Messiahs;

Which means they choose the option: he's bad. Something that doesn't seem to answer the problem of his permitting himself to be crucified. He was executed because he claimed to be God. If he knew he wasn't God, he probably wouldn't have allowed himself to be executed. In any case, the fact that they have an answer doesn't mean that they don't have a problem.

to Muslims he's a prophet whose life and teachings were distorted by followers corrupted with Hellenistic paganism.

The Muslims claim his teachings have come down to us largely innaccurately. I have yet to see evidence to support their claims about the innaccuracy of the Bible. It has been shown time and again to be an accurate historical source of information. But anyway, we can't really debate the position of the Muslims here, without knowing more about what evidence they possess concerning the innaccuracy of the Bible.

Hindus and Buddhists, when they think about him at all, regard him as a spiritual and ethical teacher like many thousands of others, who was unfortunately too mired in the limitations of his local traditions to see through the veils of Illusion and grasp the real Truth.

Exactly the same way that Christianity regards leading figures of other faiths- that is

That's probably correct. It also ignores the whole question, was he mad, bad, or God?

That same question doesn't exist for other humans that claimed to be deities. First of all, they gave no evidence to back up their claims, unlike Jesus. Second, they certainly weren't the type to be willing to die for the belief that they were a type of being that clearly they were not. The attributes of Yaweh are very, very supernatural.

[Lief Erikson]

Originally posted by brownjenkins
i understand that your intentions are good... but the idea that any one religion is "singular" is the very essence of why i find religious orthodoxy so problematic... no matter how reasonable you are, when you create an "us and them" trouble follows

Whether trouble follows or not has nothing to do with the question of whether or not it really is truth.

Originally posted by brownjenkins
that's probably the root of our difference... i do not think there is one "truth" to be found... and if there is, i think it somewhat presumptious for any one group to claim they know it...

Actually, it seems to me rather the reverse.

If you were walking with a group of people, and you all arrived at a fork in the road, suppose you were the only person who really knew which way was the correct way to your destination?

Everyone else might disagree with you, ignore your words. "No, we think it's this way."

"But I know it's this way!" you might say. "I've gone that way many times!"

"No, surely it's this way," they say, and they continue off that way.

That's often how it feels when people write off absolute truth, and the finding of it, as impossible. Simply because it is outside their own experience, they make judgments upon what other people's experience is. Rather than it being the Christian, or the Muslim, who is being presumptuous, it seems more presumptuous to say "you're wrong", making assumptions about the other person's experience.

however, this is exactly what the various religions of the world do... and each and every one has it's "evidence" as to why it's to only real "truth"

So naturally we should lump them all together and say none of them is right, correct?

truth's should be self-evident to all, or they are simply not truths...

Huh? Just because in pre-history no one believed the earth went around the sun, does that mean it's not truth?

I really do not understand that argument.

With God it is the same as my example with the earth going around the sun. Maybe not everyone perceives it, but it is there. If it depended upon everyone perceiving it for it to exist, it could not exist. In other words, we are all controlled completely by our own perceptions, and there is nothing outside of our own perceptions. Our perceptions control everything. Right and wrong do not exist, as a matter of a fact, nothing exists unless I know it exists. Which is frankly ridiculous.

or at least not everyone's truths

Everyone cannot have their own truth. If you exchanged the word truth for the word belief, your statement, I think, would be quite accurate. The fact is, our own perceptions do not have such a great impact upon truth and reality. Truth exists independant of our own senses, even if everyone in the world has their senses telling them the wrong thing (for example, the sun). Spiritual reality doesn't have to be any different.

[Lief Erikson]

Ah, now to answer the excellent post by Dragonslayer .

Originally posted by Drgnslyer
Now be openminded as you look at this, this will be an angle on religion that many of you have never really looked at before...

In christianity you have god, the one, omnipresent, all powerful, and in laymans terms simply the guy at the top.

One level down you have the archangels, entities such as michael...and fallen archangels, such as Lucifer*satan or the devil*.

One level down from that you have the regular angels, and aparently when armageddon comes the soldiers of god.

Look at another religion like Witchcraft.*again, on the surface polar opposites, but when you break it down, very similar*

In witchcraft you have what is simply called 'the one'. This entity is beyond comprehension, and again is omipresent and all powerful...again in laymans terms, the guy at the top.

One level down in witchcraft you now have the goddess and the god.

*herein lies another...qualm i guess you could say...but i'll leave that for another post and stay on topic here*

The goddess is everpresent in the night, her main symbol is the moon.

The god is everpresent in the day, his main symbol is the sun.

Below that you have the elementals, much like angels they are powerful yet not commanding entities, and if need be, they would be the spiritual soldiers.

In all religions, regardless of which one, you have the god, you have demi-gods *or in christianity, archangels, simply a different name for the same thing* and you have powerful spiritual entities.

All religions? Sorry, that seems a little of a leap. Though I definitely wouldn't contest the fact that there are similarities between many religions. Buddhism and Hinduism, for example.

Like I said, it's a view that you have to keep yourself openminded to truly grasp, I realize that many people who firmly believe in their own religion and believe that any other religion is simply boiled down to herecy will see this as an unfounded comparism. So be it, this is simply my own observation... something that i have found to trancent all religions and has been a common link throughout all.

I know many religions are linked. For example, the polytheistic religion of the Romans was heavily influenced by the numerous other religions and beliefs that it came into contact with. There are reasons for some religions being similar. Also many pagans on islands who have been influenced by Catholicism have beliefs that smack of Christianity.

These kinds of links do exist, and there are reasons for them. I also strongly respect your desire to see the truth in all religions. I tend to agree with the teachings in many religions aside from Christianity, though not in their entire beliefs. There are aspects of Islam that I greatly admire, such as the emphasis upon justice that we Christians so often forget, to our cost. Other religions have other things they emphasize.

So I do certainly see there as being one truth, and I tend to agree with you that fragments of that truth can be caught in many religions (maybe all, but that seems still to me a bit of a leap). Often it is these glimmerings of the truth that cause the huge appeal to the religions to exist.

Originally posted by Insidious Rex
I dont think he was saying hes an active member of every world religion. I believe his point was that he feels that there is a thread of truth that joins ALL religions but that goes well beyond the specific details of the religions.

Originally posted by Drgnslyer
If I had the ability, I would instantly combine all religions into one true, and unified conciousness...

Do you believes there are no falsehoods, in any of the religions? I think not- you said that the truth goes beyond the details of the religions. Where details do not correspond with reality, there is falsehood. I believe that all or most religions can show some aspect of the truth. Perhaps God speaks through those aspects to people, and help them come to know him. I do not know.

Originally posted by Drgnslyer
however different cultures have different interpretations on spirituality, and one consistent, perfect religious structure will not come around any time soon.

If you believe the Christian book of Revelation is from God, you'll just have to accept that it will never come about before the end of the world.


Why do you believe that Christianity in itself is not correct? In terms of the interpretation of Christians, that theirs is THE correct religion.

[Lief Erikson]

Now to answer the posts of Insidious Rex .

Originally posted by Insidious Rex
Im of the opinion that spirituality is something thats IN us as a species but that we cant really grasp it in a rational way so we lay a vail over the unseeable and embrace that covering as the Truth. When in fact its just an artificial man made covering on something invisible and profound. In essence religions are reflections of that unatainable spirituality that weve struggled with for the past 100,000 years or so. We desperately need to flesh out the unknown and tacking on lots of little details onto the unknown is how we make ourselves comfortable.

I acknowledge something very similar to this to be true. We all have souls (spirituality is something that's in us as a species), we need to fulfill our need for God (or spirituality, as you put it), and thus we do our best. Some of us fill it with other beliefs in gods, some of us try to fill it with material possessions and a busy life. Sometimes needing to "flesh out the unknown and tacking on lots of little details onto the unknown is how we make ourselves comfortable."

One point I disagree with you in is when you say spirituality is impossible to achieve. The fact is, mankind is an incomplete product. We are not yet fulfilled, not as we should be. We all need God, and need him to be a part of our lives. Where you look upon this as hopeless, because of your belief in god's being unconcerned and utterly otherly, others see that God is actually out there, ready to give people this fulfillment that they so desperately seek. As a matter of a fact, I believe he made that need within them, so that they would come to him.

Originally posted by Insidious Rex
the vail allows us to dress up what we cant see directly. In some cases the "dressing up" is simple and plain while in some cases its arnate and elaborate. some religions (or philosophies) treat it as symbolic and are in touch with the concept of the uncharted depth of spirituality while some religions are very rigid and have evolved to the point where the symbol has become the truth in the eyes of its followers. this can be dangerous of course because when the esoteric is defined as the Ultimate and the Only then all other interpretations of the esoteric are heresey. and this leads to conflict, intollerance and strife. Yes religions are different but when it comes down to it theres many underlying commonalities between them. And THIS is probably wear true spirituality lies. In that nether world beyond comprehension but still within our sensing.

I keep trying to understand what makes you believe that God is like that. Yes, to a massive extent God is unfathomable to us limited creatures. However, he is so great and mighty it seems presumptuous to say that he wouldn't be able to understand the creatures he has made, or care about them, and meet them where they are. You would be assuming a knowledge of his character, that it is uncaring for what he has wrought. This must have evidence and strong reason to support it, if it is to be believed (unless no other religion has better evidence).

It might also be presumptuous for us to say that he would certainly understand those creatures and meet them where they are. Unless we are one of those creatures, or have seen others that have been acted upon in this way, and know that he does truly meet them in the way you believe.

Originally posted by Insidious Rex
Well I guess you could put me in the lunatic camp. But I REALLY dont like that word. I think the best guess would be that he was a rare man with a gift. With many gifts in fact. The obvious ones like overwelming charisma and gargantuan empathy for his fellow man.

Yet this is not denying that he was a lunatic. Thinking he was God, but wrong. There are people in the time of Jesus who would agree with you. Yet these were contested by those who always referred to other aspects of him that make those statements impossible. For example, his miracles were used to back up that he was God. His frequently showing aspects that only a member of the Trinity could show also backs it up. For example, omnipresence and omniscience are shown by his prophesies and words telling how he saw events from history. "I saw you under the fig tree", "You had seven husbands, and the man you are with now is not your husband", "Jerusalem will be destroyed in this manner", "I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven", along with numerous other prophesies and declarations of his omniscience and omnipresence.

His being sinless was a strong back-up. His disciples were with him for huge amounts of time, almost every part of his life, yet they became convinced that he was sinless. He asked "Which of you can convict me of sin?" and none could answer. Who else living on earth could that be said for?

I think his miracles continuing to exist today, and his sinless nature and person still being contacted by believers worldwide also helps to back up who he is .

[Lief Erikson]

Originally posted by Insidious Rex
But most importantly I think we could say he had some focus on his spirituality that most others lacked. Now I know yer sitting there saying OH MY GOD! OF COURSE HE DID! HES GOD! But work with me here... Im just saying how I interpret it. The more I learn about Jesus (and this applies to Muhammod too and some other singular individuals who were at the genisis of world religions) the more I see a common thread. If he had been born in pre history I believe he would have been a shaman like figure. He would have used his spiritual gift in what ever era he lived in.(well maybe not now. He might have become a politician now. or a talk show host...). Individuals in touch with their spirituality to a level that is somehow more then human have often be labled as insane through out history.

Muhammod I don't remember being insane. He claimed to be a prophet, but I don't know why you think he was insane, unless you think his visions were the influence of insanity.

Jesus Christ on the other hand claimed to be God, which is a far cry from claiming to be a prophet.

Shamans themselves were often though of as bad news in some ways but a necessary tool to have around. Their power and their dramatic difference from others spooked people and intimidated them but what "the common folk" beleived they could do made them invaluable parts of their cultures. for this reason they were usually found on the outskirts of settlements because people didnt want them too close but wanted them within reach nonetheless. Anyway I think the Jesus figure falls well within the boundries of the gifted spiritualist.

That doesn't really sound like Jesus, actually. I don't remember any occasions of people being intimidated by him, except his opponents, because of his incredible knowledge. The common folk also flocked to Jesus, they didn't shun him. The reason he didn't settle down is because he had to travel to so many different locations, to carry out his ministry.



You're making a broad claim, saying Jesus is a part of one eccentric, insane kind of person that is just like numerous others. First of all, you haven't identified the prototype you're comparing him to. Second of all, you're ignoring quite a lot of the evidence available that relates specifically to him (his sinlessness, his supernatural abilities, the prophesies directed to his coming, his utterly sane behavior, etc.).

Originally written in "The Case for Christ"
"Well, it's true that people with psychological difficulties will often claim to be somebody they're not," Collins replied as he clasped his hands behind his head. "They'll sometimes claim to be Jesus himself or the president of the United States or somoene else famous- like Lee Strobel," he quipped.

"However," he continued, "psychologists don't just look at what a person says. They'll go much deeper than that. They'll look at a person's emotions, because disturbed individuals frequently show inappropriate depression, or they might be vehemently angry, or perhaps they're plagued with anxiety. But look at Jesus: he never demonstrated inappropriate emotions. For instance, he cried at the death of his friend Lazarus-that's natural for an emotionally healthy individual."

Professor of psychology Collins, who has studied, taught and written about human behavior for thirty-five years, proceeded to speak of other types of mental illness, and show how Jesus was free of all of them.

"He was loving but didn't let his compassion immobilize him; he didn't have a bloated ego, even though he was often surroundd by adoring crowds; he maintained balance despite an often demanding lifestyle; he always knew what he was doing and where he was going; he cared deeply about people, including women and children, who weren't seen as being important back then; he was able to accept people while not merely winking at their sin; he responded to individuals based on where they were at and what they uniquely needed."

"So, Doctor-your diagnosis?" I asked.

"All in all, I just don't see signs that Jesus was suffering from any known mental illness," he concluded, adding with a smile, "He was much healthier than anyone else I know-including me!"

On what evidence, Insidious Rex, do you base your belief that Jesus was insane?

[Lief Erikson]

Now, about three hours after I started writing and at 1:30 AM in the morning, I am done responding to all of your extremely excellent posts. It's been quite a while since I got into some serious Entmoot debating, and the memory of how much I always loved it is flooding back . I greatly enjoyed such intelligent discussion here. Thanks!

~Lief

[Lief Erikson]

Originally posted by Last Child of Ungoliant
Just out of interest, what religions do
we have represented here?

for instance, am i the only Buddhist?

(nicely back on topic!)

Last Child of Ungoliant (shivers in fear) could you please inform us what the Buddhist view of Jesus is? Do you believe him to have been a good ethical teacher? Would you believe him to have been insane, in his claims to be the Son of God? Or right, or evil?

[Radagast The Brown]

Originally posted by Last Child of Ungoliant
Just out of interest, what religions do
we have represented here?

for instance, am i the only Buddhist?

(nicely back on topic!)

I'm Jewish. Not religious or something... I look pretty much like a regular western guy, I think. (no that thing you put on head if you're religious that JD knows how it's called in Englsih for me)

I don't eat ham, I think it's disguasting (probably my education).

btw Lief - your name on entmoot is the name of the Viking man that discovered Americam right?

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

Originally posted by Drgnslyer

Well, myself as stated, I'm a Witch...

Anyone else? *Wonders if he's the only witch in this thread*

my mu knows a witch named Big Owl, in Devon, UK
I can't remember what his real name is though, he is the leader
of his coven, don't remember what you call that though

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

Originally posted by Lief Erikson
Last Child of Ungoliant (shivers in fear) could you please inform us what the Buddhist view of Jesus is? Do you believe him to have been a good ethical teacher? Would you believe him to have been insane, in his claims to be the Son of God? Or right, or evil?

we believe that he was a man who found his enlightenment
or at least what Nirvana meant for him
he must have been a good and ethical person, for so much good
did he say, however, as we do not have a god as such, we do not believe him to be a son of god

[Beruthiel's cat]

Originally posted by Mercutio
Hysterically funny that different synods interpret things differently? It isn't just Christianity, specifically Protestantism, specifically Lutheranism, that disagrees within themselves. No two people are completely identical in reasoning and thought (as we can see here on the moot!). Other religions have divisions, based on different ideas, interpretations, etc. Why exactly do you find it funny? Do you think the Lutheran church should split up completely because of small differences? It is already divided up slightly among things such as the ELCA (Evangelical Lutheran Church in America) and Missouri Synod and Wisconsin Synod. However, they are all Lutheran. If you notice, on detailed forms to fill out that ask for your religion, sometimes they include choices such as these, that are more specific than a general denomination (I'm not sure why I wrote that last sentence!).

And I believe my religion is right, and naturally, it would follow that other religions are wrong (in a nice way ) . One of things I try to do is point out to others why I think my religion is right.

What religions (or which mooters) believe that they aren't the only right people out there? And how is that idea/belief formed or what is it based upon?

In response, Mercutio, I think it would be great if Lutherans could find common ground upon which to unite, but we know this isn't going to happen. One of my best friends is right now studying pre-ministry in the ELCA. She was raised Roman Catholic, but left the church as a teen because she felt it was not ministering to her and her needs on a personal level and the Lutheran church welcomed her and encouraged her in her faith. The problem she faces now is that her social philosopies are more conservative than those held by the ELCA and mesh more with the Missouri Synod. But in the LCMS they won't allow female pastors. She's between a rock and a hard place, in a sense. I'm the opposite, having been brought up LCMS (even attended a good Lutheran college) and having a social philosphy more in tune with ELCA.

It's just a shame that we can't agree. But it's funny because it just illustrates the differences that we face in this crazy, mixed-up, out of tune world we live in. People are always going to sweat the small stuff, which draws attention away from the really big things that keep people divided. Human nature is not changing any time soon, no matter which religions we choose to follow.

We must take the best parts of our systems of belief and make them work for us. We must not force our beliefs on others or denigrate those who don't hold the beliefs we have. (Isn't this type of philosophy what is causing many of the problems in the world today?)