Kristie
Novel turned into BBC miniseries
"If a book is well written, I always find it too short."
Posts: 7,214
|
Post by Kristie on Jan 31, 2007 18:22:20 GMT -5
I'm really agnostic, but if I had to choose one, I was raised Christian and so that's my basic "belief system". But I'm so liberal it's hard to actually be Christian because they believe different things.
|
|
|
Post by Dominique on Feb 1, 2007 0:54:55 GMT -5
my boyfriend is incredibly anti-religious. Mention religion and he'll go into a rant about it. I'm disillusioned with religion but I can still see the good it can do, where as nowadays a lot of people just see the bad. I'm agnositc, I don't believe in anything right now, but I don't deny that there might be the existence of something or that I might decide to believe in a different varient of Christianity other than Roman Catholicism at a later date.
|
|
Kristie
Novel turned into BBC miniseries
"If a book is well written, I always find it too short."
Posts: 7,214
|
Post by Kristie on Feb 2, 2007 12:49:24 GMT -5
When Nick and I get married and have kids, I don't know if we'll take them to church or not. We're both pretty agnostic, and I can tell them the basic stories of Christianity. Nick's family is Lutheran and my family has been of an evangelical branch forever. I wouldn't mind either really, but if we do take them to church and it's the Lutheran church, they aren't getting baptized as infants. I don't believe in that practice because kids should know what baptism is about and choose if they want to do it or not. They can't do that as infants. I don't really know how the Lutherans would view that (prolly not well since they're practically Catholics), but that's how I've seen it in my church. I actually wasn't baptized in church. I had my uncle, a deacon at his church, baptize me in their pool when I was 13. Not formal, but it all means the same thing.
|
|
|
Post by Hanna on Feb 2, 2007 16:32:59 GMT -5
First of all, this is a great discussion! I love that everyone is able to respect each other despite different beliefs. Just a couple of things I though about while reading the previous posts. It is historically documented that Jesus walked this earth for about 2000 years ago, there's no denying his excistence, because of all the documents (religious and non-religious) written about him.
So the real question is not IF Jesus was, but WHO He was? Son of God and a Savior like Christians believe, a misunderstood prophet like the Muslims believe, a nice boy with good manners and great moral instincts, a wise man, a welldoer? Who was He? And to find the answer to that the most logical is to check what He himself said about it. And He said stuff like "I and the Father am one." or "I am the way, the truth and the life, no one comes to the Father if not through me."
Kind of big words, don't you think? Have you ever considered saying the same? I know that if I met someone who said something like this I would think he or she was crazy. Or just bluffing. And if Jesus was bluffing, then He must have been evil, people died for what He said, for believing Him. So who is Jesus? Crazy, a liar and a deciever, or is He the Son of God?
Wow, that was a long one, sorry! Hope you understood what I was trying to say:S
|
|
Kristie
Novel turned into BBC miniseries
"If a book is well written, I always find it too short."
Posts: 7,214
|
Post by Kristie on Feb 2, 2007 16:49:51 GMT -5
]In my World Civilizations class, we were talking about the era "before Christ" (like 2000BC-0). My history teacher and textbook kept mentioning the Hebrews and Jews and we know they existed. Archeology proves that some of the stuff in the Bible did happen, but the chronology was off a bit. And obviously people didn't live for hundreds of years, but there were certain Sumerian & Akkadian (those are the two first civilizations) kings that ruled for THOUSANDS of years, and it's obviously fictitious. There's no evidence to support lots of the Bible happenings, but there also isn't anything to refute it. The way I see it, eventually these civilizations began to write stories & fictional works, and so I have a hard time believing everything the Bible states. I never trust what I read 100%, including the Bible even if it's "perfect". I like what the Muslims say about the Bible, they think it was corrupted over time and the Qu'ran is the true version (the religions are actually very similar). I don't believe the Qu'ran very much more than the Bible, but I definitely am a more logical person and I always seem to want scientific proof that Jesus/God exists. I don't think I've ever experienced any miracles of any kind, so I don't know if God's there. I believe something's there, but I'm not sure what.
|
|
|
Post by Hanna on Feb 2, 2007 18:37:48 GMT -5
That's a very typical "problem." (Totally the wrong word, but I hope you get what I mean:)) But for the New Testament texts they are pretty well documented because of the Roman rule (the events are stated in documents outside the Bible) which all makes it more reliable. For the Old Testament the discussion is more difficult, because it was handed down orally for so many generations before written down. I don't really know to much about it, so I should be careful with what I say now, but I guess that's where the faith steps in and takes over? Extremely bad answer, I'm afraid;)
|
|
|
Post by Dominique on Feb 3, 2007 8:40:10 GMT -5
I wasn't sure whether to post this here, in the Margaret Atwood thread, or in favourite quotes... but I decided here. I watched a video this evening where Margaret Atwood was being interviewed with Bill Moyers as a series of sessions on writer's talking about religion. As she spoke I felt, as is usual with Atwood to me, that she summed up what I think/feel about religion quite nicely. I think one of the reasons why I like her so much, apart from her literary talent is that she often seems to be on my wavelength (in of course a way where she remains more talented and intellegent. Anyway here are a few of the quotes I feel hold true to how I feel (or can relate to but am not entirely sure about in the case of the first quote) about religion. As always in saying this I don't mean to offend anyone and I am completely open and unjudging of anyone of a different belief system to me. Atwood: I was raised a strict agnostic Moyers: Not an athiest? Atwood: Absolutely no I'm not an athiest. Athiesm is a religion. Moyers: It's dogmatic? Atwood: It's absolutely dogmatic. Moyers: How is it a religion? Atwood: It's a religion because it makes an absolute stand on something that cannot be proven Moyers: There is no God? Atwood: You can't prove that. A strict agnostic says that you cannot pronounce as knowledge something you cannot demonstrate. You can't hold test experiments and repeat them on whether or not God exists. (I'm not strictly athiest, to be honest I haven't entirely decided what I am. But I think this is a very interesting view on athiesm and it holds a bit true to me, but in a non-judgemental harsh kind of way, more just in how a feel about labelling myself an athiest kind of way. Perhaps this can be linked to some kind of inner Catholic conditioning where I feel as if when I totally reject religion and God I will be struck down by lightning Or perhaps it's linked the the human need to believe in something greater and that stops me from completely ruling something out. Lol that's the funny thing I know I feel that there could be something more but I'm not sure a believe in an organised religion, but I totally acknowledge that could be some way my brain is wired to believe that ) Moyers: If you could design a new human being, as an improvement on the current model, would you eliminate the hunger for god? Atwood: I could not eliminate the hunger for God without eliminating language. I might however eliminate the desire to use God as a weapon. In other words if I could I would confine the hunger for God to the personal realm, so that it would not become something that people would use to bash other people with." "Blake Heuston used to say that there was god, which was the real god, and then there was this other person called noba daddy, which is the false picture of god that humans create for themselves. The false picture of god seems to be one that a lot of people believe in. Instead of believing in the living spirit they believe in a tyrannical angry person who's going to squash you, basically. So they believe in a series of rules and restrictions imposed by the noba daddy because they have a desire for rules and restrictions." Here is the interview split into three parts on youtube if anyone is interested. She talks a lot about the history of religion and human behaviour in the interview, and there are parts people who are religious would be interested in, such the question of if Jesus existed why didn't he write anything and Atwood's possible answers for that. www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMrz_ivl8jowww.youtube.com/watch?v=QmVD7XcRb6Ywww.youtube.com/watch?v=TPDt73n7HD0Atwood is very objective in that she looks at both athiesm and religion with a critical eye and I think that's what makes this interview so interesting and thought provoking to me.
|
|
|
Post by Dominique on Feb 3, 2007 9:01:25 GMT -5
wow I think that might just have been my longest post ever!
|
|
Isa
Administrator
Posts: 6,995
|
Post by Isa on Feb 3, 2007 10:14:02 GMT -5
But a great post! I agree with you, I like Atwood's definition of atheism - I know a lot of atheists and their firm belief that God doesn't exist and their intolerance of people who believe in him truly is like a religion - it annoys me that they're so close-minded and absolutely not willing to even think about the fact they might be wrong, just like very religious people often do.
|
|
|
Post by gilmoreren on Feb 3, 2007 14:08:21 GMT -5
But a great post! I agree with you, I like Atwood's definition of atheism - I know a lot of atheists and their firm belief that God doesn't exist and their intolerance of people who believe in him truly is like a religion - it annoys me that they're so close-minded and absolutely not willing to even think about the fact they might be wrong, just like very religious people often do. You're so right Jefie. As a Christian I have faced prejudice and mocking from atheists that was totally uncalled for, especially as I have never judged them for their religious stance. I believe in understanding other people's points of view, especially when they differ from your own
|
|
|
Post by Hanna on Feb 3, 2007 15:58:54 GMT -5
I agree with you Gilmoreren! Disrespect, fear and prejudice between religions has been and still is the reason to many worldwide conflicts. And I believe we find examples of that in all religions, including Atheism (never sure if to call it a religion)
|
|
Lu
Administrator
Posts: 5,469
|
Post by Lu on Feb 3, 2007 16:42:29 GMT -5
I agree with Atwood definition of Atheism. I'm a Christian and, as Ren, I believe in understanding and respecting the point of view of other people, that's a very very important thing!
|
|
Kristie
Novel turned into BBC miniseries
"If a book is well written, I always find it too short."
Posts: 7,214
|
Post by Kristie on Feb 3, 2007 16:47:11 GMT -5
I don't judge religions, but I really don't like that very religious people act so unlike the god they follow. I'm sure I've posted this somewhere on the boards, but Gandhi said "I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." I hate that really religions Christians are so against things like homosexuality for example. Even if there are instances in the Bible where it's mentioned wrong, isn't the whole Bible really about treating people well and loving them unconditionally, no matter what? What a contradiction...
|
|
|
Post by Dominique on Feb 3, 2007 17:21:33 GMT -5
But a great post! I agree with you, I like Atwood's definition of atheism - I know a lot of atheists and their firm belief that God doesn't exist and their intolerance of people who believe in him truly is like a religion - it annoys me that they're so close-minded and absolutely not willing to even think about the fact they might be wrong, just like very religious people often do. that's exactly what I think. They criticise organised religion for trying to force their views on other people and for not being able to prove God exists, but you can't prove they don't exist either which is a bit hypocritical,
|
|
|
Post by Dominique on Feb 3, 2007 17:23:32 GMT -5
I agree Kristie, and there are so many contradictions in the bible. One of the many reasons of the decline of Christianity on the census in this country.
|
|