Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

I am religious and believe in free will

71 (27.7%)

I am religious and do not believe in free will

10 (3.9%)

I am not religious and believe in free will

114 (44.5%)

I am not religious and do not believe in free will

61 (23.8%)

Total Members Voted: 251

[wierd]

Queueing:

The only reference I remember is in Revelations, meaning it is deeply couched in allegory, but the resurrected faithful attend court in the throneroom of heaven along with god, and are themselves luminous beings "like him."  It calls them a numberless multitude. So, rather than a queue, imagine something more like the shuffling masses of a comic con, or similar.

People come and go as they please, but it's reasonably easy to get to any particular "table" of interest.  There might be some local queueing, and the big guy might have a large number of fangirls complicating access,  but he is omnipresent, and if you want to petition him, it does not need to be in physical locality to the throne.

It's a different kind of existence; dont apply the limitations of the secular world on it.

[TD1]

Dwarfy must've made a typo. I think he meant

Doesn't hold up.

He's only in believers? Firstly, awfully convenient. Secondly, hardly the type of favouritism a father should show. Like only picking up the phone to certain kids.

Also, then you'd admit that the absolute, constant force in the universe is actually subjective dependent on place.

He's got the right angle on this...

[origamiscienceguy]

Favoritism? He loves everybody the same.

I'll use an analogy:
A father gives two sons gifts, but one doesn't accept the gift. Is it favoritism that one son didn't get the gift?

[Orange Wizard]

As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.

And the LORD said unto her, Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be stronger than the other people; and the elder shall serve the younger.

They shall build, but I will throw down; and they shall call them, The border of wickedness, and, The people against whom the LORD hath indignation for ever.

Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.

I could do this all day.

[Naryar]

Religion is weird to me.

Why do people need a whole mythology to go with their beliefs and philosophy ?

Mythologies tell volumes about the world and human nature, and all of them are fun and interesting to read about, but in the end they are simply stories. Not "this is the truth, accept it as face value".

As for the creation of the universe, I think the big-bang theory is almost less convincing that "a supreme being created it" thing.

If there is a creator, I think he either never intended to take an interest in human affairs, left, or doesn't really care anymore.

and yet i have tried religion, but I think I'm not done for religion. Too many assumptions that you have to believe without having tangible proof of it.

[MonkeyHead]

As for the creation of the universe, I think the big-bang theory is almost less convincing that "a supreme being created it" thing.

Apples and oranges.

Physics provides evidence to show that the universe is expanding, and was once in a hot dense state. The "big bang" explains observations - nothing more, nothing less. There is no real feasible or credible way to argue against the observations nor conclusions drawn from them. It says nothing about how or why said process occurred, resulting in a universe. Sure, a supreme being "could" have started it all off, but that is basically conjecture at best. The big bang does not preclude theism, nor even attempt to rule it out.

[TD1]

Favoritism? He loves everybody the same.

I'll use an analogy:
A father gives two sons gifts, but one doesn't accept the gift. Is it favoritism that one son didn't get the gift?

What II said.

Besides, it's more as if you've had something your entire life, and then some randomer claims he gave it to you. When you refuse to acknowledge this, he turns in spite from you and focuses on your malleable neighbour, who eventually caves and is now his "favourite"

[origamiscienceguy]

he still loves you just as much. As soon as you make the decision, he'll be ready. No matter what else you have done.

[TD1]

The randomer probably would make me his favourite were I to relent, but it's a false love. Love is unconditional. God has added conditions. At best, he seems sulky. At worst, malignant.

Also, let me add that even if some sort of rainbows and cotton candy god exist, I would not worship him. The act of creation is enough to demand no more than acknowledgment. Making the world as it is, with torture commonplace. Unbearable agony. Bereavement, death, dark, fights, ugliness, disease, parasites, etc. is enough to earn disgust.

The believer seems to be blinded, to  me, by imaginary light. God made a perfect world, and yet it's not. God loves us. See previous. Heaven exists. Yea, according to a book specifically designed to spread the religion.

[Frumple]

Uh. Yeah, love does not entail abandonment and torture if it's not reciprocated.

I mean, as amusing as an all powerful divine yandere is... it doesn't really work like that, y'know? That's something, but it's not love.

Which I guess is okay, sorta' -- religious language often shanghais normal language into meaning something entirely different when used in context of the religion. S'just good to make sure you're acknowledging and noting that fact when using the word by the different meaning.

[Orange Wizard]

There's a substantial amount of evidence to say that the God of the Bible does not, in fact, love everyone. Regardless of the definition you're using.

Like, those references I posted.

[Rolan7]

Another problem with religious language is all the translation.  Makes it hard to know the original meaning...  I think a lot of words in ancient languages don't translate well into English, because they describe concepts which have been abandoned or heavily evolved over the centuries.

But, as Orange Wizard pointed out, God hated and punished a lot of people.  Particularly in the old testament, where their sins included "not being his favored race" or "being of his favored race but asking a question".  God didn't wait for these people to ask his forgiveness, he destroyed them.

[TD1]

Edited my post to add maximum whinage.

Oh, also, even Jesus did violence against people we may assume he didn't love while he was smashing their stuff at temple

[Orange Wizard]

Another problem with religious language is all the translation.  Makes it hard to know the original meaning...  I think a lot of words in ancient languages don't translate well into English, because they describe concepts which have been abandoned or heavily evolved over the centuries.

Generally speaking, the word "love" in the Bible translates more as "brotherly love", or "loving kindness". Basically, generosity, kindness, and other nice things. It's got nothing to do with attraction or actually liking the person involved (though that said, Jesus is described as a friend to believers, so the two are not mutually exclusive.)

[Descan]

he still loves you just as much. As soon as you make the decision, he'll be ready. No matter what else you have done.

And so does Allah.

Gonna go on Hajj any time soon?

Also, considering a lot of (heavy, fanatic, right-wing) religious people say "I love you, that's why I'm trying to get you (LGBT, black people, immigrants, etc) classed as a lesser person!" I'd say religions definition of love in general is pretty warped.