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

[hector13]

I think that might fall under agnostic theism, as that’s kind of where I’m at.

I have a very firm belief that organised religion is one of the most horrible things humanity has come up with, but I suppose I like the idea of a higher being.

Then again I was raised Catholic so that’s probably where the latter part of that came from, as it’s certainly where the former did heh.

[EuchreJack]

What about somebody who believes that a higher being is there, but does not believe in them (Does not believe they deserve any respect or worship)?

Actually, that isn't Agnostic, as far as I can tell.  Agnostic accepts that there is no way to know either way.

Belief means one has faith.  Faith does not imply respect nor worship.  Frankly, I'd lump you in with most atheists I have heard talking over the years, but that isn't actually true atheism either.

I self-identify as Lazy Christian.  I believe in God and Jesus, but can't be bothered to go to church, read my bible, or do the religiously stuff.
I believe other religions are in fact mostly centered in belief towards the same being(s), but structured in different ways.

If it helps, most religious activities, again according to my own beliefs, are not actually for the benefit of the Divine.  Higher beings...are well Higher than us.  They don't need us to do certain things for their sake.  Religious activities are much like academic pursuits, it is to reaffirm and refine one's own faith.  I am a Christian because that was the religion I was indoctrinated, the teachings that I know.  God would be perfectly happy if I were a Muslim, a Jew, a Buddist, a Hindu, or even an Atheist.  God can work around us, if not through us, if They are indeed Divine.

I think that might fall under agnostic theism, as that’s kind of where I’m at.

I have a very firm belief that organised religion is one of the most horrible things humanity has come up with, but I suppose I like the idea of a higher being.

Then again I was raised Catholic so that’s probably where the latter part of that came from, as it’s certainly where the former did heh.

Read your Bible, its the great gift of Protestantism.  Jesus was quite critical towards the Pharisees, the religious leaders of His time.  He didn't much care for them either.  And of course, fast forward to the time when Catholics become predominant, and they're full of Pharisees.  Heh, it might be the reason that Protestants never really did get around to organizing themselves, although they encounter the same issues on the local level.

[MaxTheFox]

I suppose by that definition I am agnostic. Jesus Himself didn't appear before me so how would I know for sure? I do honestly believe but I don't claim to have proof.

[EuchreJack]

I suppose by that definition I am agnostic. Jesus Himself didn't appear before me so how would I know for sure? I do honestly believe but I don't claim to have proof.

Yeah, the definition of agnostic as a person that does not know for sure and acknowledges they can never know for sure actually sounds like the basis for very strong faith in whatever religion a person favors. 

Although I think agnostic might have more in its definition.  However, unlike A-theist where most religious folks are Theists and thus every knows what they opposed, the Gnostics all were killed or died off over 1700 years ago.  A-Gnostics don't have a large organized and sortied group to clearly define themselves against.  Overall, if you feel agnostic, it's not like the Gnostics will argue with you about it.

[Frumple]

Pharisee types seem to spontaneously generate the moment a church actually organizes, tbh. I'd fake bet ten nonexistent witchbucks christ laid some kind of eternal curse on religious buildings with those purported table flippings, such that to build and organize around them causes something in you to start to rot.

... closest thing I've seen to avoiding that curse stateaide is a fair amount of black churches, and other minority ones. My off the cuff guess it's actually the music, or good music helps ward off the blight or something. Explains why it's so prevalent in evangelical ones, their music trends hard towards kinda' shit even for gospel

It is one of the things that strikes me pretty often, though. Christian scripture wise, Jesus did not exactly spend much on-screen time in pews or behind pulpits, y'know? Some of the church appearances were pretty aggressive! But they mostly just weren't involved. Folks claiming to believe in the critter and wanting to follows their ways sure don't spend much time actually... doing... what Jesus did. Very little wandering around in hobo clothes like the fellow was basically described as doing, etc. Kinda' makes you wonder.

Mind, that's fairly common for the laity at a minimum among most religions in the world, but still. It's sometimes astounding how little the practice of worship resembles the practices ascribed to the figure the folks involved claim to be worshipping. It's a sort of, "What ass are you people pulling all this shit out of" dealio...

[EuchreJack]

Go back and watch Season One of Luke Cage on Netflix!  Black churches immune my ass.

I think it mainly is the fact that the more organized, the more corrupt.  Larger means more corruption. It's organizations that tend towards corruption.
But Organization is Power, and Power is Influence, and Influence leads to Conversion.  It's probably why Jesus tolerated the Pharisees as much as he did.

Remember that among Martin Luther's Big Demands for the Catholics was that people actually have access to the actual religious text and clergy that actually read the text.
Easy to fool people when they don't even know what is going on.

[Frumple]

Words mean things, yo'. I didn't use the word immune or imply all because I didn't mean immune or all, nor was I trying to communicate them, c'mon now. Nevermind that TV shows are not, in fact, reality, ha. Since I apparently need to stop joking quite as much, what I've seen on the ground is that minority churches in general, at least stateside, seem to have fewer of the sort of the problems plaguing majority ones. The exact why is probably a dozen different things, and not, in fact, better music warding off a cursed laid on religious buildings by a holy figure flipping over a table. Just to make that clear

Luther, though... Luther was a sack of shit. Relevant to that demand in particular, the amount of folks literate at all during his lifetime and area ranged from around 5% to around 15%. It was an ask he would have been well aware would have little to no actual effect on the power of the clergy (and clearly doesn't to this day if you spend much or any time listening to big name preachers or any congregation influenced by them, ha), and given his own issues when it came to church corruption was likely a rhetorical bludgeon more than anything well intended.

It may (and only may) have made a difference well after his death, but it's probably better not to give much credit to a bloodthirsty jackass's accident, heh.

[Eschar]

I suppose by that definition I am agnostic. Jesus Himself didn't appear before me so how would I know for sure? I do honestly believe but I don't claim to have proof.

Yeah, the definition of agnostic as a person that does not know for sure and acknowledges they can never know for sure actually sounds like the basis for very strong faith in whatever religion a person favors. 

Although I think agnostic might have more in its definition.  However, unlike A-theist where most religious folks are Theists and thus every knows what they opposed, the Gnostics all were killed or died off over 1700 years ago.  A-Gnostics don't have a large organized and sortied group to clearly define themselves against.  Overall, if you feel agnostic, it's not like the Gnostics will argue with you about it.

This is because there isn't any relationship, specifically not direct opposition, between "agnostic" and "Gnostic." Note the capital: Gnostic is a proper noun there, with particular meaning, a particular sect. Opposite of agnostic is gnostic, not Gnostic. It's a coincidence caused by two naming choices centuries apart. Agnosticism has nothing to do with Gnosticism, but with a category of gnostic stances.

Tdlr: "the Gnostics aren't going to argue with agnostics" is trivially true, but not relevant in the way Euchre is suggesting.

[EuchreJack]

I suppose by that definition I am agnostic. Jesus Himself didn't appear before me so how would I know for sure? I do honestly believe but I don't claim to have proof.

Yeah, the definition of agnostic as a person that does not know for sure and acknowledges they can never know for sure actually sounds like the basis for very strong faith in whatever religion a person favors. 

Although I think agnostic might have more in its definition.  However, unlike A-theist where most religious folks are Theists and thus every knows what they opposed, the Gnostics all were killed or died off over 1700 years ago.  A-Gnostics don't have a large organized and sortied group to clearly define themselves against.  Overall, if you feel agnostic, it's not like the Gnostics will argue with you about it.

This is because there isn't any relationship, specifically not direct opposition, between "agnostic" and "Gnostic." Note the capital: Gnostic is a proper noun there, with particular meaning, a particular sect. Opposite of agnostic is gnostic, not Gnostic. It's a coincidence caused by two naming choices centuries apart. Agnosticism has nothing to do with Gnosticism, but with a category of gnostic stances.

Tdlr: "the Gnostics aren't going to argue with agnostics" is trivially true, but not relevant in the way Euchre is suggesting.

oh.
I actually hadn't know that, sorry.

[TD1]

However, as a counterpoint to Dwarfy, there are some atheists who are as vocal and fervent in their belief as any theist, Richard Dawkins being a good example.

Oh, certainly there are atheists who aim, with fervency, to lead others away from theism. Whether that's a belief is questionable. My personal take is that it's proselytisation based off of empirical research. Dawkins, for instance, had some very interesting ideas concerning social Darwinism, even coining the term 'meme.' Not very pleasant, but not really a belief comparable to religious faith.

[Rolan7]

To use Russel's Teapot as an example:  I don't believe that there's a teapot floating around the sun.  That makes me ateapotist, even though I recognize it could exist and I can't disprove it.

In our reality I don't feel any particular need to "deconvert" teapot believers.  If I met one I'd probably just talk to them, find out the specifics of their belief out of curiosity, and basically just chat politely and move on.

But consider a different reality, one where coffee is taboo in almost every human culture.  Most of the divine teapots have been dismissed as myths, with some theories hanging on, but mostly everyone believes in a single teapot- though they disagree very violently about the specifics.  This monocup permeates every aspect of my local culture and art, to the extent that its absence is an obvious statement. 

Our leaders graciously allow us the legal right to drink water if we prefer - not that they'd ever touch the stuff, they all love tea and have public tea ceremonies to make sure they stay electable.  After heavy debate coffee is technically legal - though many states leave their anti-coffee laws on the books, just in case the federal government ever changes its mind.

I might... maybe... be curious as to what makes people believe in the teapot, and maybe even how to explain that there's no reason to do so.  And also wonder wtf is wrong with me that I don't like the taste of tea, when apparently everyone else does.  Is it because my parents gave me water as a child?  Or am I just... bad?  Do I even like coffee or am I just being weird for the sake of it?

[EuchreJack]

I actually quite like that.  It's really something to think about.
I can somewhat understand the coffee drinker's position.

[Egan_BW]

Clearly we should find this teapot, and smash it for the glory of unlimited refills for mankind.

[EuchreJack]

Clearly we should find this teapot, and smash it for the glory of unlimited refills for mankind.

Uh, I think that would instead deprive humanity of tea.  But I'm sure some would still advocate for the search-and-destroy mission.

[Egan_BW]

We study the shards left behind and make out own teapots ofc. Unlimited refills means unlimited refills.