What a fascinating (and mostly civil) discussion, even though I've skimmed some of the more recent stuff.
I myself have been lots of things -- raised Catholic, born again Methodist for a while, Pagan of various stripes -- but for the last couple of decades have meandered far and wide through the territory of atheoagnosticism, with a healthy dose of wishing for/seeking meaning, and the occasional flirtation with Eastern hussy memes.
I definitively do not believe in any organized, Earthly religions. My personal beliefs seem far more important to some followers of those faiths than it is to me, and I have an instinctual mistrust of people who are trying to sell me something or otherwise win me over to their side/way of thinking. Their motives invariably have little or nothing to do with me and everything to do with themselves, typically vis a vis their covetous relationship with my money. (Yes, this goes for political beliefs as well)
I have, of late, come to feel that the great crisis facing the world is people caring just a little too much what everyone else believes/thinks/wants. The vast majority of us (i.e. people without any real power) have been to some degree or another convinced that Getting All Up In Everybody's Business is the single most important human endeavor, and just about everybody with real power has learned to manipulate that fact to very self-serving and nefarious ends.
As for the rest of my party, there's one other more or less atheist, two (mostly non-practicing, as far as I can tell) Jews, and one guy who I couldn't tell you, but he joins in the base, offensive, irreverant and iconoclastic humor that flies around our table week after week, along with the rest of us, so whatever his beliefs, they don't seem to be of any extremely devout or fundamental stripe.
I may have been converted to Loguism in this thread, though.
What empirical evidence? All I have is raith and Possably a well developed "God-detector" in my brain....I believe in something greater than myself; I just don't have faith in it - I have empirical evidence.
It doesn't take a genius to realize that the universe is freakin' big and I'm not the center of it. (It did take several geniuses to realize how big the Universe is and that it in fact has no center).
I dislike the assertion "There must be something more than this." The visible universe is 16 billion light year wide. On this little speck of dirt we like to call the Earth there are more things to see and do than anyone can possibly experience in one lifetime. And people have the gall to ask, "There must be something more than this?" There's just no pleasing some folks.
If there isn't any form of god or after-life, then there really isn't any "point" to our existence. If you take this logic to its conclusion, the "point" seems to be "to get as much out of this life as possible because it could be all over at any time." There also isn't any real incentive to be "good". It just seems to me that true Atheists should be very selfish and very self-centered. This is not the case, but I don't understand why.
I wanted to respond to this, because I've seen it (or variations on it) quite frequently.
If there's no afterlife, the only point to this existence is itself (as tautalogical as that sounds). The incentive to be "good" is the quality of life you get on this Earth. Sure, everyone could be very selfish and self centered, but the world would rapidly become unlivable. If you only get one go 'round, and that all you get, then it actually does make sense to try and make everybody around you as comfortable and prosperous as you want yourself to be, which is really what the "Golden Rule" is all about. Treat others the way you wish to be treated. We make our own heaven or hell right here and now.
Frankly, there's no shortage of believers in the world, and a not unremarkable portion of those believers are very selfish and self-centered, and look at what crap shape the world is in.
The facts are clear -- being religious (no matter what the faith) does not render anyone immune from being a jerk, scumbag murderer, polluter, rapist, thief or any other horrible thing. So just knowing (or thinking you know) the "Point" (or that there Isn't One) isn't enough to make you a good person (or a bad one, for that matter). The one thing has nothing to do with the other.
I hope this doesn't come across as flamey, it's certainly not meant to be. And maybe it's a little bit of topic drift. For both, I apologize. It's just a question I see a lot, and one that I think has an answer.
Here is a question about the afterlife.
I'm in a big engineering college so I in the past few months I have seen more kids killing themselves over classes to boost their grades. One buddy of mine got 4 hours of sleep ovr three days so that he could study more and get all his work checked and rechecked. I have seem drive and dedication in levels I did not even know existed. And these are just sacrifices to make grades.
Now what baffles me is that a large group of people believe in the eternal bliss of heaven in one form or another. This has been described to me as "an unimaginable paradise of love and peace for all of eternity." Now if the prize offered is awesome beyond all imagination, I would think that few people would risk jepordizing it for some petty earthly delights.
To help explain what it is I struggle with I feel it is neccessary to revisit the awesomeness of heaven.
1. Unfathomable bliss, this means this cannot be compared with even the highest moments of human joy. A lifetime of watching your children grow up happy and healthy, not even close. All the love and support of family and friends, barely worth mentioning. Four natural 20's rolled with an Epic level barbarian using full power attack and weilding a scythe and taking demagorgon down with one shot, not even in the ballpark.
2. Eternity, a concept that carries an enormity I doubt can be fully realized with the human consiousnes. The small speck our planet is in the universe is immesurably more signifigant that a humans life span against eternity. Keep in mind that this is an eternity of the above awesomeness too.
What I have never been able to understand is why anyone that believed in this would ever find a reason to risk it. If I believed in heaven I would not be in college. After all I'm here to make a living, ultimately I could be spending my breif time accomplishing more altruistic tasks then trying to secure a living. I would not even touch D&D.Maybe their is nothing wrong with it according to my faith, but why take chances? As fun as I find D&D I would not risk an eternity of joy for it.
I would be in third world countries delivering medicine to tuberculosis sufferers. This is just off the top of my head but I'm sure if my eternal salvation was on the line I could think of something even more self-sacrificial than that. My point is that no amount of personal happiness or even comfort during this infentesimal joke of a life span were given can compare to the prize awarded those who selflessly serve others.
Heaven is the cosmic equivalent to asking someone to willingly stub their toe in order to enter a mansion where no pain or despair is even conceivable and every moment is orgasmic. This is worded to seem like an insane overexaggeration, but in fact the definition of heaven I was given as a child (see above) makes this not even comparable to the real deal.
But I do not see everyone that believes in heaven following this plan. In fact I have yet to meet one in my entire life. Yet I have seen massive personal sacrifice and suffering just in college to achieve something that amounts to far less than nothing when compared to eternal bliss. So I am inclined to think humans are capeable of huge sacrifice to attain what they want. They just do not appear to want heaven as much. In a test where the rules are vague and the prize is heaven I would think that more people would be sticking to the few rules they are sure work and do nothing else.
So to put this in question form. How does one cope with the amazing enormity of an eternal reward, the comparitively insignificant personal sacrifices to ensure it (or at the very lest get closer to deserving it) and not become a nun, preist, peace corp, or what have you?
It's something I've never been able to fathom (and no one I've asked has been able to answer) but I have come to respect the paizo community for it's insights and eagerly await your responses.
|
some pretty thought provoking stuff
You know man, thats a really good point. Why would you risk it? Especially, according to many religions, the alternative to eternal "heaven" - whatever form that might take - is ETERNAL damnation. Not just a few bad days, or even a twenty year stint in prison, but in hell (or whatever) forever.
You'd think, given all that, and given that a significant portion of the world's population are religious in one way or another, and many of those religions have broadly similar beliefs in regards to heavens and/or hells ... the world would be a much nicer place than it is (not to mention a much more boring place, but why would it matter when you're just preparing for eternal nice stuff to happen to you?).
|
|
I havent posted on this thread yet, for the main reason that I try to stay out of discussions on religion, and what religion my players are has had very little conscious impact on our game or relationships.
I could probably guess religious affiliations for a few of them, but for the most part its never been discussed.
I suppose I would describe myself as a "lapsed catholic". I think religion seems to work really well for some people in some situations and seems to cause a lot of problems in others. I dont think organised religion is for me. As for what I believe in - I don't really know, havent thought about it for a long time. God (or something) may or may not exist but it has little to no bearing on my life. I try to live my life as a good person (mostly), and I think that's all that's important.
So to put this in question form. How does one cope with the amazing enormity of an eternal reward, the comparitively insignificant personal sacrifices to ensure it (or at the very lest get closer to deserving it) and not become a nun, preist, peace corp, or what have you?
That is an interesting question and one that I've never heard before.
My guess would be that most people do not have a strong enough imagination to truly conjure up what a transcendent experience heaven would be, especially since when talking of heaven the idea seems to be "no matter what you can imagine, it's better than that."
If that's true, then it is literally impossible to comprehend the joy of heaven, and it makes sense that people cannot bring themselves to behave as if it truly exists; If you can't even concieve of it then how can you really tell yourself without doubt that it's a reality?
This is of course not an original notion - Marx called religion "the opiate of the masses" in the 19th century. But that is the main societal problem with religion - it discourages free-thinking and blind obedience. Most of the time it doesn't matter, as most people are basically nice with or without religion. But in the hands of the unscrupulous (and let's face it, there are lots of nasty people "of faith" out there who use religion as a screen for their own ambition, as well very nice atheists) it is a dangerous...
I would'nt consider Marx to be the best juxtapose to the flaws, faults and crimes of the religious down through the ages.
Lets look at who he influenced with his simple gospel of workers liberation - Lenin, Stalin, Pol pot, Mao etc. - All active advocits of athiesm. All brutally intolerent of religion. All willing to use any means - imprisonment,torture,murder - to promote their beliefs. All cultivated Cults of Personality demanding total subservience to the state and it's leaders.
I'll settle for the "Nasty" people banging on about heaven and hell, thanks...
|
I'll settle for the "Nasty" people banging on about heaven and hell, thanks...
Osama bin Laden is a great bloke, of course. Or Jim Jones. Or David Koresh.
I take your point - I'm hardly a Marxist, and this is about the only thing on which I agree with Marx. There are plenty of nice people who are religious too (the Church of England is fundamentally nice these days - wet and emasculated, but inoffensive). My point is less about how religious people are nasty, and Marxists are nice (as your roll call of rather unpleasant communists makes clear). But any system which does not encourage dissent (and most religions are dogmatic, as is communism) and allows unchecked power (most religious organisations of any sort are not democratic) can, if placed in a position of power, can (or basically, will) lead to oppression. Be it religious or communist, you are looking at dictatorship.
I remember a train journey where I got talking to a muslim teacher, in the immediate aftermath of the Iraq invasion. As a devout muslim, his take on the situation, based on people he had met in Iraq, was that people didn't want democracy but the "rule of God". What that appeared to mean in practice was rule a clique of religious figures, presumably without any form of accountability to the people they would be ruling. After all, they were interpreting the word of God so they could not be held accountable to Man, but only to Allah (presumably after they die, as is the usual get-out for these things). I pointed out that it would be presumptious for someone to say they knew the will of God infallibly - even if God is infallible, Man certainly isn't. Muslims don't even agree amongst themselves on the interpretation of the Koran. In those circumstances, was my position, democracy is the least worst form of government - it allows people choice and can remove bad/abusive government.
But he didn't really see it - he was a highly intelligent guy, but blinkered by dogma. He wasn't evil, so far as I could tell, and probably sincerely believed that what he was proposing was the best soultion for everyone. But he was proposing dictatorship. It doesn't take a genius to work out that his solution could result in horrific tyranny at least as bad as those of the communist line-up above. The problem isn't religion as such - it's lack of accountability.
|
But I do not see everyone that believes in heaven following this plan. In fact I have yet to meet one in my entire life. Yet I have seen massive personal sacrifice and suffering just in college to achieve something that amounts to far less than nothing when compared to eternal bliss. So I am inclined to think humans are capeable of huge sacrifice to attain what they want. They just do not appear to want heaven as much. In a test where the rules are vague and the prize is heaven I would think that more people would be sticking to the few rules they are sure work and do nothing else.
Sexi -- really interesting and very good points. Biblically speaking, I might be able to clarify a couple of things...
First of all, the Bible is quite clear on what it takes to get into Heaven. It might not make sense to some, but the "path to Heaven" or whatever you want to call it is very clearly laid out. There are other things in the Bible that are less so, but not as far as the requirements to get into Heaven.
Second, no where in the Bible does it say that a "good" person will make it to Heaven. There is no score card. So, as far as the Bible is concerned, carrying medicine to needy people won't get you to Heaven. It is still important and a great thing to do, but ultimately it doesn't make a difference between Heaven and Hell.
Of course, if you don't believe in the Bible, then none of this really matters.
I didn't get into specifics, because I don't see this as the place. I just wanted to clarify a couple of misconceptions. I am truly sorry that no one had been able to give you a good answer.
I am truly sorry that no one had been able to give you a good answer.
Oddly enough this is the only truely consistant answer I ever get.
True enough though, I was raised Catholic so I am aware of the prerequisites for access to heaven. I also agree that this is not the place to discuss the particulars. Those things are simply differences of faith and rarely lead to any casual conversation.
Note: Yes Saern this is really me. I'm just being uncharacteristically civil cause I like these people.
2nd Note: uncharacteristically is a freakin massive word!
I suppose I was operating more on the suggestions that self sacrifice helped.
"It is easier to pass a camel through the eye of a needle than a rich man to enter the gates of heaven"-That kind of thing.
If even this is unhelpful towards heaven my default reply is activated at the very least get closer to deserving it.
Sexi, I'd offer up this bit...someone truly focused on being a Christian (i.e. Christ-like) doesn't do "good" to get into Heaven, out of a sense of obligation, out of fear of some cosmic-level Punisher, to get reward/recognition here on Earth, etc. This person does "good" because it helps bring Heaven to Earth, now, because it's in our nature to do so. We're not called to check off some huge list each day, waiting as piously as we can for death so we can get to Heaven. We're called to love God, our neighbor, and ourselves. That's it; do these three things and you're bringing Heaven here right now. Adherence to a bunch of legalistic mumbo-jumbo is exactly the reason Jesus railed against the "religious" of his time.
I don't delve into religious discussion often online (save in Religious forums, and then rarely) as it's often difficult to truly communicate Faith via text on a screen, but I did want to state an alternative to the common misconception that Christians have to follow some huge set of rules, and do so solely to get into Heaven. Anybody interested in further, deeper discussion, let me know and I'll be happy to engage in more dialogue.
Anybody interested in further, deeper discussion, let me know and I'll be happy to engage in more dialogue.
I'd be happy to. (I've got a lot more of those burning holes in my pocket).
But first, before anyone posts back, think about what it is you are asking.
Disscussion of religion is one of my personal favorite pastimes. Not a common hobby. It is nearly impossible to find people willing to share what they believe in a mature and open setting when they are face to face. Over the internet as you said we do not have access to body language or intonation. Some people just stating their beleifs will be unpleasant for others. Their explainations will look like attacks. IF this continues their will be hurt feelings and arguments breaking out in what I have come to know as the most insightful and treasured group of people I have never met. Not to mention the only place I go to discuss a hobby I have come to love.
If a religious discussion does go any further. I will post my beliefs and arguments. I simply do not have it in my nature to avoid such debates.
But I will not instigate it. I've come to regret what I have posted simply because at the time my underlying goal likely was to start a religious debate. For my selfishness I apologise, for your understanding I thank you.
So what I call for now, essentially, is the death of this thread. I believe Fatespinner has gotten satisfactory input for his question and we have gone above and far beyond the information asked of us.
Fatespinner asked for no flames. To continue now is to begin stacking a gasoline soaked bonfire. Make no mistake as mature and intellectual as I have found the posters here, there will eventually be a spark.
I should clarify...any further dialogue I have on this topic would be either via email, or in a forum appropriate to the discussion...
Well, that was half an evening well spent :)
I just went through the entire thread, and it's all really interesting. If anyone continues this discussion via e-mail, another thread, or another forum, please point me to it?
As for my own view: in my area in the Netherlands, religion is rare. Few people actually practice any faith. When I was young, I was Christian, but I've long since dropped that.
Currently, I don't follow any defined faith. There might be deities, there might not be. I don't know. Nor do I possess the amount of reasoning power to come to any meaningful answer to the question.
So I just try to make the most of my life. We give life our own purpose, and we all have another way to come to such a purpose. It is not within our power to see why people come to their purpose in life; thus it is futile to try and change the way they think: we can never truly understand them.
Everyone has their own way of thinking; if forcing your vision upon another is part of your life and it makes you happy; so be it. It just won't work for me.
You just can't make people change their mind. But you can help people change their mind, if they want it to be changed. The sharing of visions, beliefs, morals, everything.. it helps you on the path to becoming yourself. And being yourself is the best you can be. You will be happy with yourself, and if you are always yourself, you'll generally always be happy...
At least; that is how I experience it. If I try to be myself; I'm happy, regardless of what happens. If I'm not being myself, and don't have the power in me to change, I'm not happy.
Of course, to be yourself, you'll have to make your own choices. Which again means you shouldn't force things upon people; that would make them like you, not like themself. It's a difficult process.
I don't know. It's really difficult to word your beliefs. I don't mean to be offensive, nor do I want people to think that my way is the only or best way. This is all from my experience, and it might work completely different for others. Like said before, I have not the power to understand the mind of others, so I am not in a position to judge...
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
First of all, the Bible is quite clear on what it takes to get into Heaven. It might not make sense to some, but the "path to Heaven" or whatever you want to call it is very clearly laid out. There are other things in the Bible that are less so, but not as far as the requirements to get into Heaven.Second, no where in the Bible does it say that a "good" person will make it to Heaven. There is no score card. So, as far as the Bible is concerned, carrying medicine to needy people won't get you to Heaven. It is still important and a great thing to do, but ultimately it doesn't make a difference between Heaven and Hell.
And this is the crux of my rejection. The bible lays out a path to getting to Heaven, and, as you say, being "good" is not sufficient. Which brings me to my question that no Christian has ever satisfactorily answered:
What if you've never heard of/been exposed to the bible? This is a slightly more academic question in our day and age, but there was a significant period of time in human history (say, 1500 years or so) where an entire hemisphere contained people who lived, grew old, and died without ever having seen the instructions contained in the bible to ensure their place in Heaven. Were they just screwed, and if so, how is that reconcilable with an all-knowing all-loving God? If they were capable of getting into heaven without knowing of the bible, doesn't that imply that there are alternate routes?
I just can't see how the one true path can be contained in a book which was not widely distributed for centuries and centuries.
Anybody interested in further, deeper discussion, let me know and I'll be happy to engage in more dialogue.
I would be interested in taking this elsewhere, as I am fascinated that this:
Sexi, I'd offer up this bit...someone truly focused on being a Christian (i.e. Christ-like) doesn't do "good" to get into Heaven, out of a sense of obligation, out of fear of some cosmic-level Punisher, to get reward/recognition here on Earth, etc. This person does "good" because it helps bring Heaven to Earth, now, because it's in our nature to do so.
is exactly what I was trying to say about atheism upthread. I think it's an important point that should be talked about by people from lots of different faiths (or not).
First of all, the Bible is quite clear on what it takes to get into Heaven. It might not make sense to some, but the "path to Heaven" or whatever you want to call it is very clearly laid out. There are other things in the Bible that are less so, but not as far as the requirements to get into Heaven.
Second, no where in the Bible does it say that a "good" person will make it to Heaven. There is no score card. So, as far as the Bible is concerned, carrying medicine to needy people won't get you to Heaven. It is still important and a great thing to do, but ultimately it doesn't make a difference between Heaven and Hell.
Actually,if you follow the "path to heaven" you ARE a good person. Following the 10 Commandments, or performing Mitzvot (the Jewish version of good deeds is a simple explanation) help you to be a better person and lead you down the "path to heaven" as you're all calling it. Mitzvot include things like charity (tzedakah), helping others and of course following the tennants of Judaism. If you do these things for their own sake, rather than for recognition, then you are on the way to being a better person.
I know this is based more on Judaism than any other religion stated here, but as a Jew I can only speak from my own experience. So there may be points in the New testament that contradict this, but I don't put much value on that stuff.
|
|
And behold, like a vision made of pasta, meatballs, and marinara sauce, the Flying Spaghetti Monster did bring unto me a vision of his word, his way, his Truth. Since that day, my blessings have been beyond number and I have known true peace and enlightenment.
In the beginning, there was but the Word,
And the Word was 'Arrrr!'(I think that's how it is; I haven't read the Gospel in a while.)
Sebastian, there's actually an answer to that one...but it involves delving into Natural Law and that'll definitely spark some debate.
Anybody know a particularly good forum to continue this discussion without clogging up Paizo with non-RP related jabber?
|
|
Actually,if you follow the "path to heaven" you ARE a good person.
Usually this logic is correct, but isn't a foregone conclusion.
Following the 10 Commandments, or performing Mitzvot (the Jewish version of good deeds is a simple explanation) help you to be a better person and lead you down the "path to heaven" as you're all calling it.
No. There is nothing that says that "following the 10 Commandments" will get you to Heaven or even "closer" to Heaven -- at least Biblically speaking. Again, I am not saying that it isn't a good idea to follow, but it really isn't part of the "equation" in question.
And Sebastian -- as erian_7 says, there is an answer, but it can be a rather hot topic. erian_7 -- if you find some way to do this, count me as an interested member.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Sebastian, there's actually an answer to that one...but it involves delving into Natural Law and that'll definitely spark some debate.
Anybody know a particularly good forum to continue this discussion without clogging up Paizo with non-RP related jabber?
I think if someone was going to be offended, they would've posted long before now. I'm familiar with the concept of Natural Law, but my understanding of most varieties of Christianity is that the central tenant is accepting Jesus Christ as the savior. I am at a loss as to how Natural Law can lead to an understanding or awareness of Jesus.
Hmm, perhaps a redirect so as not to bog down this thread. I'll start something over in the Off-topic Discussions forum...
|
|
Our group consists of:
1 Episcopalian (Diet Catholic)
1 Roman Catholic (Irish)
2 Roman Catholics (non-Irish)
1 born-again Pagan (Celtic)
1 Buddhist (he's weird--a vegan: he refuses to kill animals. I'm afraid that if I tell him he's killing plants, he'll stop eating)
And myself. I'm going to Hell. Most would consider me to be either Deist ('there's something there, but I don't know what it is') or Agnostic ('there could be something there...'), but I also subscribe to the Marilyn Manson philosophy: organized religion has caused most of the world's problems.
However, I've read Dante's Inferno, and the circle I'm probably going to isn't that bad (it's the first one, Limbo: the nonbelievers). Actually, most of Hell doesn't sound that bad.
But if I talk in the theater, I'll go to the special hell...
-Mr. Shiny
|
|
The giant octopi-squid thingy asleep in a dead city beneath the waves of the Atlantic...I figure he/it's just as worthy of my worship/adoration as any other god/idea.;)
Ïa, ïa! Cthulhu Fhtaghn! Ïa fhtaghn nhagh Cthulhu! Ïa, ïa Cthulhu!
Ph’nglui mglw’nafh Cthulhu R’lyeh wgah’nagl fhtaghn!Ïa-R’lyeh! Cthulhu fhtaghn! Ïa! Ïa!
... and by the way, it's the PACIFIC Ocean.
However, I've read Dante's Inferno...
Me too. I always found it fascinating that Dante considered the betrayal of trust the most grievous sin, one that I can wholeheartedly agree with.
Disscussion of religion is one of my personal favorite pastimes.
Me too.
I wrote an answer to Sebastian's question, but I've deleted it so I can revise it a little and then post it in erian-7's other thread.
Hmm, I think the Off-Topic forum ate my post...I'll give it a bit (since I've got to head home now) and if so I'll retype everything.
Man, that was a lot of typing to lose! And I even though I copied it to the clipboard for safe-keeping, but alas, no... :^(
EDIT: I found it, but it says I posted over an hour ago (I guess that's when I clicked the New Post button...)
Join in the conversation at:
Well first off I tend to go to Belief.net to discuss such things, or I go to Yahoo! Answers to their religion section. The people aren't nearly the same caliber, but it is interesting.
As for our group, I'm LDS (Mormon) though I've got my hand on the doorhandle for a number of reasons and am seriously considering throwing my hands up and ditching the whole thing. I'd love to get in on the religous discussions. Most of the people I talk to around here really can't take me shaking their bridge if you get me *sigh*. I'd love an outlet--maybe even some insight. I've always been a loyalist, willing to drop a knee and kiss the ring--but I just can't really buy it anymore.
The rest of the group consists of 5 more LDS folks (but a lot healthier in faith than I am) and 2 former Protestants (though one of them never comes over anymore).
3 Christians (1 Southern Baptist, 1 Methodist, 1 Church of Christ,) 2 Agnostics (1 raised Southern Baptist me, 1 raised Catholic) and a Pagan.
We tend to try and not talk about religion at the game table. It’s happened, things got heated and the Southern Baptist, the Church of Christ, and the Pagan started arguing. They all 3 ended up pissed. The other three of us decided to get some drinks.
Fizz
No offense, but if you threw the words "walked into a bar" into that...
No offense, but if you threw the words "walked into a bar" into that...3 Christians (1 Southern Baptist, 1 Methodist, 1 Church of Christ,) 2 Agnostics (1 raised Southern Baptist me, 1 raised Catholic) and a Pagan.
We tend to try and not talk about religion at the game table. It’s happened, things got heated and the Southern Baptist, the Church of Christ, and the Pagan started arguing. They all 3 ended up pissed. The other three of us decided to get some drinks.
Fizz
I forget where i heard this, but...
A rabbi, a priest and a lama walk into a bar. The barkeeper says: "Is this some sort of a joke?"
Quick question, what is the diff between atheist and agnostics? I didn't know their was a very wide gap.
The last time I was in a religious debate. I went in claiming to be an atheist. Then some lady asked me to prove god did not exist and I told her that it was impossible, as is proving his/her/it's existance.
She then told me I was an agnostic, not an atheist. So I said O.K. and that is what I've considered myself since. So, what the hell am I? I'm definitely not trying to be PC. Not that I fully understand how claiming agnostisism is PC over atheism if anyone would elaborate on that.
What am I? Somebody tell me!!! :P
Man, why do you all go and start one of the best threads ever while I'm on vacation? But, I've read it all!
First, I noticed a lot of what I'm going to call "dictionaryism" earlier in the thread. "This is a religion because it conforms to X, Y, and Z. That's not a religion because of points A, B, and C." While I accept the validity of such definitions (I have an extremely analytical mind), I also don't throw out such things from a discussion of general "religion," as they do apply, in my mind, due to the way humans behave when engaging in them, and their sociological impacts.
Now, I want to throw out two statements which are completely from my own experience, based in nothing else, and are in no way reflections of my views of people on the boards here (other events in my life caused the formation of these ideas in my mind):
1. I've only met a few pagans, but those that I have met often seem to be yuppy-ish (some are far worse, but I take that as a reflection on the person, not the religion; details are irrelevant). A lot of it seems to be, "I'll show mom and dad, I'll show everyone that I'm different!" Sometimes it's not even as pronounced, but it is often a form of rebellion, which I consider a poor basis for subscription to a faith.
Again, I trust the vast majority of posters on this board, purely from their quality of thought, that they have thought about their decision to join the religion more deeply than this, but there does seem to be a large segment of the population of the religion that operates in this fashion, in my experience.
2. Many athiest seem to have just given up too quickly. Many either are rebelling, as above, or they had a bad experience in a church somewhere and decided to throw the whole thing out. I can have a crappy car, but I don't reject the use of automobiles or the concept that machines can provide superior transportation.
I don't feel angered by atheists (unless they try to be militant about it, but then again, it's the militarism that angers me, not the atheism); I regard Carl Sagan as about as close to a saint as I think I am capable of regarding someone, and as far as I know, he was atheist.
However, I somehow feel that these people are limiting themselves, and for that reason I actually am a bit sad for many of them.
Please don't eviscerate me, Sebastian.
As mentioned before, atheists can indeed be incredibly moral people; again, Carl Sagan. What angers me more are moral relativists, who try to postulate that there is no good or evil; it's all just actions, and societal interpretations. I once asked such a person if they thought that killing babies in the street and drinking their blood would be a inherently bad thing, and they said "no."
I view that mentality to be more dangerous than not having a "heaven" to try and get to. You want to shoot society in the foot? There's how. What reason do I have to not slit your throat and take everything you've got, then?
Sorry, I'm getting impassioned and ranty, and this isn't the place (it's amazingly serene!).
I want to thank Erian_7, also, for pointing out that the "point" is not to accomplish some checklist to get to heaven. There are too many people who go through their lives attempting this, and miss the whole "point" while they're at it. Unfortunately, it seems more people are concerned with avoiding Hell than achieving Heaven.
Now, one can decry religion as the opiate (sp?) of the masses and the cause of the crusades. Religion caused the crusades; it aslo gave us Mother Teresa. Some of the best people I've ever known in my life were devoutly Christian; some, I think I should wash my hands every time I touch them, and they still go to church.
Subscription, at least overtly, to a relgion, doesn't mean anything, and expunging it from society or basing a society on it isn't inherently a good or bad idea (I say that the later isn't a bad idea as an absolutist statement; I realize that it's actually just begging for trouble). But, the reason that it's just begging for trouble is fundamental human flaw. Religion can increase the chances for fanaticism and give it a focus for some people, but the fact of the matter is that it can and will exist with or without religion, and fantacism is the true danger.
There are economists in this world who are as dedicated to their all-mighty dollar as any suicide-bomber is to achieving heaven, and to tell the truth, I'm not sure the economists isn't capable of dealing just as much damage. I have to subscribe to the Wall Street Journal for my Economics class; I saw and article where Pfizer is reporting very little growth and sales over several quarters. Their response? 10,000 layoffs. Ten thousand.
Now, I didn't delve into the article overly much, and perhaps I'm being overly naive and young and impassioned, but that strikes me as wrong. There are 10,000 people, an entire community's worth, that will loose their jobs, because one of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world isn't making as much money as they'd like to.
That sucks. And religion had nothing to do with it.
I admire people who have true faith and draw what I really consider to be "holy" strength from it, even though I choose to reject the Biblical God. I dread like no other thing the fanatic, for such a person is beyond reason, and any attempt to pull them from fanaticism will simply be dismissed as "devil talk" or whatever other excuse their leaders have given them to resist reason.
As for me?
I'm spiritual, but I also completely agree with Sebastian that there are too many people who simply through that term around. I hope that also lends credence to my earlier qualifications about not believing all pagans and atheists are like my previous descriptions.
I say that I am a deeply spiritual person because I truly do feel it. In the rhythms of music, in the grandeur of the Colorado Rockies (from which I just returned), in an elegant thesis, in a beautiful piece of literature, in the smile of a child, in the love of a person's heart for another... there is an energy and some type of Truth in that which I feel a deep connection with.
I also find physics and the laws of nature and science to be deeply spiritual; science and religion are not incompatible. It deeply galls me when I read humanities and history books and come across the Medieval notion that this world is somehow “flawed,” “excrementary.” This world, this “plane,” as it were, is built upon laws from which there is no deviation, there can be no violation. It is impossible to break the laws of physics; any possible case has a clause for its resolution.
If there is any imperfection, that is humankind’s doing.
I’m rambling, but that’s all my faith is. It’s definitely there, and very strong, but I place it in no one thing or concept, other than possibly “science” and “goodness” and “life” in general. I’m always learning, accepting new thoughts, revising my theories, and growing as a spiritual person, and I can honestly say that I am extremely satisfied with my life and who I am as an individual and human being, and I really could not ask for any more (well, I could, but that would be in bad taste!).
There’s my contribution to this thread.
Also, while I conceed that starting a new thread to discuss specific theories and elements of philosophy may be a good idea, I don't see any reason to "kill" this thread; if there was going to be a problem, it already would have occured, and I immensely enjoy the discussion here. It's sort of an anti-rant thread of civility and reason. :)
What empirical evidence? All I have is raith and Possably a well developed "God-detector" in my brain....I believe in something greater than myself; I just don't have faith in it - I have empirical evidence.
It doesn't take a genius to realize that the universe is freakin' big and I'm not the center of it. (It did take several geniuses to realize how big the Universe is and that it in fact has no center).
I dislike the assertion "There must be something more than this." The visible universe is 16 billion light year wide. On this little speck of dirt we like to call the Earth there are more things to see and do than anyone can possibly experience in one lifetime. And people have the gall to ask, "There must be something more than this?" There's just no pleasing some folks.
The Universe is big and maybe your not the center of it (unless of course the universe is infinite then you would be) and the visible universe maybe 16 billion light years, but that is not empirical evidence there is no divinity. I have heard the same argument used as "empirical" evidence that there is a divinity. I have no empirical evidence only my faith, without evidence one way or the other I can only fall back upon my faith.
Still, Where is the empirical evidence?
...I'm baffled at the offending pagans thing. Was it the comment about spirituality? I'm one of those bad old atheists with a chip on my shoulder against Christianity (Jesus killed my dog). Pagans, as far as I know, don't have much of a dogma, rarely try and force belief-based subject matter down school children's throats, and generally leave me the hell alone. All in all, they're what I like to see in a religion.Well, your thing about spirituality was fairly insulting, yes, particularly because many pagans (in this technologically advanced information age) don't call themselves pagans so much as spiritual people. But in one of your first posts, you also said something along the lines of "all people are atheists about Thor and Apollo", which is a dig against pagans who literally believe in those deities.
...
Pagans don't try to ram thier religion down you throat because of 1500yrs of christian and muslim oppression. Hindus are pagan. Any Hindu gamers out there. Paganism is not a religion, but a catch all for polythiestic and animistic religions. I have been a part of some pagan rituals that would be nothing like those practiced in America or Europe. I do not know anyone who worships Thor or Apollo, but I know people who worship Lono and Hi'iaka, and they would be offended by a remark like "No one worships Lono or Hi'iaka." Every pagan I know could tell you the name of the deities they worship. It would baffle me for some one to say they are pagan but can't tell me the deities they worship. I think people who are spiritual but worship no divinity are probably animist. Anyway I think the point I wanted to make is that pagans are real, just because they are not apart of your experience.
P>S> Some pagan religions practice human sacrifice, so you should ask some questions about religious beliefs before you let the local pagans run the school.
1. I've only met a few pagans, but those that I have met often seem to be yuppy-ish (some are far worse, but I take that as a reflection on the person, not the religion; details are irrelevant). A lot of it seems to be, "I'll show mom and dad, I'll show everyone that I'm different!" Sometimes it's not even as pronounced, but it is often a form of rebellion, which I consider a poor basis for subscription to a faith.
Again, I trust the vast majority of posters on this board, purely from their quality of thought, that they have thought about their decision to join the religion more deeply than this, but there does seem to be a large segment of the population of the religion that operates in this fashion, in my experience.
In my experience, the pagans I know are serious and all older (I think young Christians minds lack the faith to commit to a pagan religion). These people, for the most part, were devote Catholics, Protestants, Mormons and Christian. They were taught old pagan ways by older family members. Then they were told "we don't do this any more" and "this is how we do it" and "this is a family secret so please don't tell any one."
Then they were told to go to church and sunday school and be good Christians. As they got older, they felt the need to pass on these old pagan ways. As they taught, they began to practice. As they began to practice, they realized the values within, felt right to them. Recently, in a public place at a symposium, two well respected elders announced they no longer practice Christianity, but exclusivily the old ways.So my experience is that older well respected people have said they are pagan. They do this not in rebellion but to show others that these practices shouldn't be shunned and remain hidden.
2. Many athiest seem to have just given up too quickly. Many either are rebelling, as above, or they had a bad experience in a church somewhere and decided to throw the whole thing out. I can have a crappy car, but I don't reject the use of automobiles or the concept that machines can provide superior transportation.
Again my experience is different. Most atheist I know rationalize away divinity, no proof, no God. Honestly, they can't feel the divine in a child's smile, a rainbow, a breaking wave. Atheists I know, can appreciate the beauty in such things as a childs smile and can be deeply emotionally moved as well, but don't feel the connectivness like you or I.
I would guess that my experience is also with older people than Saern.
Anyway thanks for sharing
People I have played with range from Christian (mostly Lutherans) of varying intensity to agnostics to atheists...and couple of pagans there too. I am a dedicated agnostic who believes in experience of sacred, does not believe in any organized religion but has found some relatable thoughts from Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, shamanistic traditions and so forth...
What separates me from atheist is that I consider myself religious person and I know gods exist, depending on definition. I don't believe in old bearded guy sitting on cloud but for example both gravity and George W. Bush affect everyday life of millions in very direct way and can be considered gods. I just don't see any reason to worship either of them...on the other hand, if omnipotent and omniscient being exists I matter little to it and thus can go on living like I would do anyway.
Gods exist but I ignore them.
|
|
Pagans don't try to ram thier religion down you throat because of 1500yrs of christian and muslim oppression. Hindus are pagan. Any Hindu gamers out there. Paganism is not a religion, but a catch all for polythiestic and animistic religions. I have been a part of some pagan rituals that would be nothing like those practiced in America or Europe. I do not know anyone who worships Thor or Apollo, but I know people who worship Lono and Hi'iaka, and they would be offended by a remark like "No one worships Lono or Hi'iaka." Every pagan I know could tell you the name of the deities they worship. It would baffle me for some one to say they are pagan but can't tell me the deities they worship. I think people who are spiritual but worship no divinity are probably animist. Anyway I think the point I wanted to make is that pagans are real, just because they are not apart of your experience.
The term pagan, as you describe it, is pretty slippery. What is it - belief in multiple gods? Personally, I would call a pagan a worshipper of the Graeco/Roman pantheon, since that would have been the "opposition" when Christianity was in its formative years. But that is my view only.
I disagree with this "1500 tears of oppression" stuff as well. Most "northern pagans", to coin a phrase, by which I mean the Wiccans and New Age druid types, are harkening back about 150 years or so to the 19th century, when interest in these matters became rekindled through archaeology and Romanticism. There is absolutely no evidence for any continuity of pagan worship from ancient times to modern times in Europe, it is highly likely that what they are practicing bears no resemblence to the actual practices when these were majority religions, and most of their adherents probably have a very inaccurate understanding of the past. Christianity effectively wiped out these religions, either by force (Charlemagne et al) or by choice (the conversion of Scandinavia) at least 1000 years ago.
I also think that lumping Hinduism in with these types is a bit insulting to Hindus. This has been a living, breathing religion with cultural and historic continuity for millenia, not some silly modern fringe cult. I have several Hindu friends who would not, I suspect, be happy with the comparison.
Not to say there isn't "genuine" paganism, i.e. genuinely relating to a non-Christian or quasi-Christian culture, such as voodoo or maybe Polynesian custom. Your experience, as someone of Polynesian extraction, will be different to mine as your pre-Christian past is, while not exactly in living memory, certainly within a modern historical timeframe. For me, England converted to Christianity about 1500 years ago - genuine paganism was obliterated centuries ago.
However, I think that the "spiritual" feeling is beyond my experience, and I think Seb has a similr mindset. To me, it seems an excuse for woolly thinking - I like things parcelled out and explicable, not interconnected in nebulous ways. But I am sure for you it is a genuine take on the world which seems basically inexplicable to someone who hasn't "been there". Whether that is a cultural, psychological or spiritual bias - who knows?
|
|
What angers me more are moral relativists, who try to postulate that there is no good or evil.
Hmm - yes and no. It is important to have moral compass. But a lack of "flexibility" can have appalling consequences. I doubt George W is a moral relativist. And they aren't in Northern Ireland either. Some things are right (or wrong), but not that important.
|
|
Speaking as a situational moral relativist, people who believe in the existence of black and white in this world really tick me off - sometimes. I guess it depends on the situation.
Mark me down as a pagan. I can't be an agnostic because I'm virtually certain my existence transcends this pale chimp form. And if it doesn't, then my opinion on the subject really doesn't matter does it? I find the conclusions implicit in atheism to be philosophically sterile.
Could you call humanism a religion? Mark me down as a humanist-pagan.
Nevermind. I'll settle for being just Luke. I want my own category.
Christianity effectively wiped out these religions, either by force (Charlemagne et al) or by choice (the conversion of Scandinavia) at least 1000 years ago.
Actually, not completely, if you are willing to go to distant places...I do not know the situation in, say, Celtic areas (and indeed I think for example Druidic traditions have been cut and rekindled in 19th century...at least romantization of the original thing) but shamanistic traditions are still followed in Europe...mostly in tundra in northern Russia among local hunter-gatherer groups.
Also, even if Finland officially became Christian in 12th century the fact is that Christianity already had followers before and The Old Ways were not going anywhere, for a long time. Non-Christian rituals like spirit journeys of shamans or celebration of Bear's Wedding have been reported well into 19th century and even early 20th century (including photographs). Shamanistic traditions were usually very accepting and for example considered Jesus, Virgin Mary et al. to be powerful spirits useful in magic...resulting in strange synchretistic traditions (for the record, also era of witch hunts was somewhat different in Northern Europe than in rest of Europe...).These traditions are still very much around among many hunter-gatherer people living in what is nowadays Russia and many of them don't even consider they have any kind of religion...the Russians have religion (ie. Christian Orthodox church) and they have shamans.
My players consist of 2 non-practicing Catholics, 1 non-practicing Sikh and 2 Atheists.
As for me, I'm a Muslim. I think I'm the first on the board although I haven't been able to read all of it. Don't know any other Muslim players but they must be out there.
One devout catholic - uhm, me, one non practicing but religously educated Jew, one cradle (non practicing) catholic, one undenominational not going to church Christian, couple wiccans (married couple), one am not sure as he is something new all the time and might start his own church but is mostly pagan of some sort I think, one basically uninterested in any religion, another catholic fairly devout, one sorta Christian meaning I don't understand her belief system as the things she says are not in the bible, but we're not antagonistic or anything. And the last one i have no idea, would say he is not too concerned about such things.
So, we have a pretty diverse group; have had in the past for years a couple Indians from a local tribe who practiced their native religion and a Moslem and one guy from Jamacia that I never really undestood his relgion much but seemed very cultural, but we didnt talk about it much, kinda islander Christian sorta mojo.
Or group is pretty open about such things; but most of us won't let any declared Satanists in our houses or anywhere near us. I just ask the wiccan not to refer to themselves as witches in my presence (ie my house) as it is confusing and they are not witches as I would label a witch and it makes us all a lot happier. Did my best to avoid any toxic labels.
hmm if I said I was a Malthusian; would anyone know what I said; Thomas Malthus? Anyway, I have a classical education and most people consider me very well educated in my religion; I will do my best to field any question posed to me. I believe that Christians are their own worst enemy; many present their faith as a sword or challenge to all those around them driving droves of people away from God, not because of god, but because of the people who profess to know God, yet do not even know themselves; they are young in the faith and all blunder unknowningly doing great harm; hence my character icon to remind me to benevolance and try to do no harm, that I might see myself one way; other see me diffently. I seek to mend fences; not to burn bridges.
Actually,if you follow the "path to heaven" you ARE a good person.Usually this logic is correct, but isn't a foregone conclusion.
Following the 10 Commandments, or performing Mitzvot (the Jewish version of good deeds is a simple explanation) help you to be a better person and lead you down the "path to heaven" as you're all calling it.No. There is nothing that says that "following the 10 Commandments" will get you to Heaven or even "closer" to Heaven -- at least Biblically speaking. Again, I am not saying that it isn't a good idea to follow, but it really isn't part of the "equation" in question.
Technically speaking I am also not referring to the Christian Heaven. Jewish beliefs differ here dramatically, in htat there is no "heaven", but when the Messiah comes the Kingdom of Heaven will come to Earth. And so in Judaism, if you follow these with a good and selfless intention you will go on into "heaven".
hmm. i really am enjoying reading this discussion.
my groups consist of mainly various pagans, 4 mormons, and me (Asatru).