return to tranceaddict TranceAddict Forums Archive > Main Forums > Chill Out Room

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 
Were religions made (pg. 2)
View this Thread in Original format
Moral Hazard
quote:
Originally posted by Azia
I almost wish I had a strong belief in something, because then maybe I wouldn't have so many questions


I have a strong belief, I still have questions. Having faith should not be the end of one's religious explorations. Faith needs to be challenged, questioned, and explored as that will lead to a deeper understanding and closer connection with one's god(s). Alternatively, deciding to not have faith should also be only the start of one's exploration of life's questions.
asfdz
quote:
Originally posted by Moral Hazard
I have a strong belief, I still have questions. Having faith should not be the end of one's religious explorations. Faith needs to be challenged, questioned, and explored as that will lead to a deeper understanding and closer connection with one's god(s). Alternatively, deciding to not have faith should also be only the start of one's exploration of life's questions.


very good post.....

and I agree
Floorfiller
quote:
Originally posted by Moral Hazard
Faith needs to be challenged, questioned, and explored as that will lead to a deeper understanding


see that is the key to the puzzle right there. i think any intelligent person would agree with that. i have nothing against anyone that has a religious view that came about and continues to be scrutinized by this logic. it's people that are against that questioning that i can't stand. how can you believe something to be true if you have never taken the time to challenge it?
UWM
quote:
Originally posted by Vlad
You cant talk about religion with just regular ole people, because they cant give you answers, they are within their own box. You have to talk to people who actually know the writings and who can explain the stuff to you. If you cant disect it literally and figuratively, than youre blind to alot of things.


So does this mean that nobody should be entitled to contribute to a discussion on any given topic if they aren't thoroughly versed in the intricacies and specifics of said topic?
Arbiter
quote:
Originally posted by Azia
A friend was saying how they can't believe anyone who doesn't go to church/follows a faith....how they're life must be so empty. But who's to say what "empty" is

I almost wish I had a strong belief in something, because then maybe I wouldn't have so many questions....but there's no way I'm going to follow a certain group of people (when I don't truly believe), once again for comfort and to feel like I know where we're all going, no question. It seems so pathetic.


Consider this:

If you believe in an immortal soul or spirit that will exist eternally, then what meaning is there in the 70 or 80 years that comprises your life span? After all, that time represents only an infinitesimal fraction of your existence.

On the other hand, if you believe that human beings are purely biological creatures, and that when you die, everything about you will cease to exist, then your lifespan represents the totality of your existence.

Now, from which viewpoint, do you think life can best be appreciated? In which situation is the motivation to make the most of every minute of every day stronger?
Subey
The first question that you have to tackle before you enter the arena of religion is does it reflect the divine or not.

If no. You will partake in logic in Realm A. It's a generally cold, sterile mechanical realm because its very hostile to true love.

If yes, then the most important philosophical question you should answer is "Does the divine influence how it is perceived?" which will immediately lead to "What does the divine gain by wearing different masks to different people?"

Then you can start working at what is behind the mask, rather than running around like a zealot screaming "I see the true face of God"
Moral Hazard
quote:
Originally posted by Floorfiller
see that is the key to the puzzle right there. i think any intelligent person would agree with that. i have nothing against anyone that has a religious view that came about and continues to be scrutinized by this logic. it's people that are against that questioning that i can't stand. how can you believe something to be true if you have never taken the time to challenge it?


Not everyone has the intellectual capacity or (more likely) the will to closely examine their own faith let alone others. Those people just comfort themselves in the faith that whatever they hear on friday, Saturday, or Sunday (depending on faith) is correct because those that teach the faith must know. These are the people that will defend every bit of what they believe to be true even if it doesn't make sense to anyone (themselves included) and/or cannot be substantiated in any way. These are most certainly not the persons one should discuss religion with. Interestingly, over my long journey to find answers to my own questions I found that the the people most open to a frank discussion of faith and most readilly accepting of the faillings of faith are the priests, ministers, rabbis, brahmans, etc. It seems the more one knows about one's faith the more one accepts that it is not perfect.
Vlad
quote:
Originally posted by UWM
So does this mean that nobody should be entitled to contribute to a discussion on any given topic if they aren't thoroughly versed in the intricacies and specifics of said topic?



You can discuss it, challenge it in your own abilities with other people... but to really challenge the words of the bible, you need to talk to people who are well versed, people that live their lives studying the laws of god.

In the jewish religion, its a sin to accept the written words of the bible literally, because they mean nothing - you cant do anything with it. There is a written bible (the torah) and an oral bible (the talmud) and when reading and studying, you have to read both because the torah has the literal words, and the talmud has the explanations of what everything means.

Its like someone who has absolutely no concept of computers, goes out, buys a computer... and doesnt get a manual on how to use it.
CranberryJuice
i think yea one religion's goals (and im speaking about religion in general) is to comfort people and reassure them ....all through the centuries religion was for to some whole population the only reason which could make them accept their miserable lives .....religion was basically what kept them alive and im thinking about harsh living condition during the 19th century in europe and the birth of working class .....but then religion is an excellent to pretext to make accept to hundred of people something which isnt acceptable
jdat
Religion was established to classify determine identify and make use of divine belief and thought.
Religion in itself is not a divine creation as too much of it is shaped and determined by mankind and not guided by the divine.

One can argue about the legitimacy of religion and it's definitions as established by men but if Jesus and various other beings viewed as divine truly had a supernatural power or control they certainly were not the ones that made religion what it is today.

Others also say that religion is the root of all evil, the thorn in humanities side, the source of all wars but I beg to differ.
It is too easy to classify something as a holy war when you do not take the complete picture in mind.
Is it a war to spread religious belief, or is it a war to regain a patch of land and use religion, the divine, or whatever form as a means of justification to an end?

Oversimplification has it's good and bad values but when something cannot be explained because we are not properly equiped where do we go? What do we call the other? What defines the devine?

Synchronicity
Q - Were religions made?

A - http://www.geocities.com/thewitchescircle/biggg.htm
aquila
What really bakes my noodle is that even if this universe was created by a divine being, there are so many different types of religions/beliefs. So really, one must be correct and the others must either be made up bull or gross derivations or reversals of the truth. Question is, which one is right?


I'll take my chances with Christianity :D
CLICK TO RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 
Privacy Statement