Religion Discussion

[AppleChrisp]

I understand why they claim that but, sadly, ISIS are Muslims. They just are. I totally understand the desire to distance atrocities from a group someone belongs to or wants to defend, but it's just a fact that they are motivated by religious beliefs and not, as often claimed, solely by political beliefs. Politically motivated violence is usually pragmatic, and ISIS is acting in a way that makes no sense from a pragmatic perspective.

The group is essentially forcing its own destruction, which doesn't make sense unless, like the Branch Davidians on a smaller scale, they actually believe what they're doing.

Since I'm not an expert, the media source I'm basing my opinion on: What ISIS Really Wants, from The Atlantic.

The sad truth is that ISIS are probably more adherent to Islam than other Muslims. There is a saying, I'm not sure where I heard it, but it's something like "The world would be a better place is more Christians were more like Jesus, but thank God most Muslims aren't like Muhammad."

 

[DuskEngine]

Politically motivated violence is usually pragmatic, and ISIS is acting in a way that makes no sense from a pragmatic perspective.

Their aims strike me as highly rational within the context of their ideology- they want to draw the world further into a clash of civilizations narrative that will encourage more Muslims to be marginalized into extremism. Opinions like @AppleChrisp 's are to their benefit. That's why they're so violent and, more importantly, why they broadcast it so much.

sidenote-That Atlantic piece is fantastic and I think it's the first honest look at ISIS' relation to Islam I've seen. It's the sort of thing I was talking about in the Sad Puppies thread when I defended it as a publication.

So yeah, Muslims in North America probably aren't going to go around freely killing infidels because they are outnumbered here and dont have a choice.

but they've already taken the presidency

 

[c-no]

I did mention in an old religion thread in that I follow Christianity. To be clear, I used to be a baptist until going non-denominational. I had the spergy born-again experience back in my early teens ( I feel that could also be compounded by puberty and actually learning about the outside world in terms of different ideas and such). Now, I pretty much mellowed out with the religious sperging. Pretty much just believe that Jesus died for my sins and that the Bible is the Word of God. Granted, the book has its problems but I feel that lies with how people translate and/or interperet the passages. As much as how I feel I may be obligated towards same-sex marriage and different belifs, I may as well say this: for homosexual marriage, if the couple loves each other and is prepared for future troubles and such as a spouses, let them marry. For people of different beliefs and afterlifes, I feel that they should make the choice themselves in what to believe in. If they wanted to come to Christ or away from Christ, let it be their own choice.

As far as my view on other religions, I feel mostly apatheistic. I don't really care if one was Muslim, pagan, atheist, or Bhuddist. As long as they are kind or neutral towards me and others, I won't mind (though I can admit that they could be fooling me in regards to the fact that one could simply put up a facade in public) Really, I do hope this thread doesn't get dragged down into some flamewar or such if a disagreement broke out into some internet fight over who is right in their beliefs about their own religion or other religions.

 

[Durable Mike Malloy]

I had never heard of "mental reservation" before so I did a quick Google search … it looks like that isn't derived from the Bible but from a philosopher in the Middle Ages or something. So you can't compare this to something like taqiyya which is rooted in the Quran.

Wait wait wait. How did you never hear of mentalis restrictio before? This is perhaps the most raw and poignant moral theology ever debated within the Catholic church. It's inspired - and been inspired by - some of the noblest acts in Church history, and also been used to justify some of the most despicable. I'm surprised you would dismiss it so flippantly.

 

[Holdek]

I'm not even sure what point you were trying to make about...the crusades etc., because I have never heard the Vatican do anything but condemn these acts.

You mean except when it was waging them?

 

[Dalish]

Wait wait wait. How did you never hear of mentalis restrictio before? This is perhaps the most raw and poignant moral theology ever debated within the Catholic church. It's inspired - and been inspired by - some of the noblest acts in Church history, and also been used to justify some of the most despicable. I'm surprised you would dismiss it so flippantly.

as an aside, this is how the catholic church (officially, i might add) managed to deny and keep cases of sexual abuse by priests secret from their congregants.

 

[exball]

How is that an "opinion"? Just because the crusaders thought differently doesn't mean there isn't an objective answer.

crusaders thought differently

Like, 80% of Crusaders didn't even really believe all that much in a holy war. It was just a chance for some looting and a free ride to heaven if you died. The main reason Urban even called the First Crusade to Constantinople was just to get knights to stop raping and killing European peasants by getting them to rape and kill Muslim peasants instead.

 

[klystron]

The Bible doesn't get everything right. But you're correct, the most important thing to draw from it is to have a personal relationship with God. The purpose of the Creation story isn't to tell us historically what happened, but that God created us. Whether it be through the big bang, evolution, etc.

I think we should always continue to understand the purpose behind and the truth about our creation. I don't see anything wrong with that and I don't personally know any Christian who does, either. The simple fact is that we don't know, and for anyone to say "well God didn't create us" certainly has no way of basing that on anything other than personal belief.

I have to point out that your statement about IQ being fixed at birth is incorrect. That is a very old biological argument, and we have many studies demonstrating the plasticity of the brain and that IQ can be improved or lowered given certain factors. I would be happy to send you some studies on this matter if you like. Yes, an atheist is closed minded, but they are not the most unscientific - you are basing this off of the single concept of the big bang theory. Christians can be just as closed minded and more scientific, denying modern medicine, evolution, and adopting the early Biblical stories as scientific fact.

Yeah I'd love to read up on this. I always figured there'd probably be a change at some point as you get really old because the mind often diminishes with the body. I have done some googling of the subject and I find discussions on experiences changing the way people tackle certain problems and that therefore increases their IQ. However, it may just help them more efficiently perform on an IQ test. The test itself must be separated from what the person is actually capable of.

The reason Jesus came wasn't to better understand us - he created us! From Jesus we got to know a side of God that we couldn't have otherwise - we got to develop a personal relationship with him. We got to know the depth of his love for us, that he would ultimately die for us, no matter who you are, no matter what you've done. So we get to understand God as a merciful, kind, and loving God that we just didn't see in the Old Testament.

I don't necessarily hold a popular belief here. I've been taught in church that Jesus is like our lawyer -- our advocate in heaven. If we know Him then he will help God to understand why we belong there. Of course, I have never been in a trinity-centric branch of Christianity either. He didn't just die for us, but he suffered that we not have to. It's a truly inspiring story, and it makes me realize that I've never been able to come close to doing anything for others.

I'm a Latter-day Saint. My family heritage in this religion goes back seven generations (to the 1830s). Unlike most depictions of Mormons, I (and most of my Mormon friends) do not unquestioningly buy into every teaching of the religion. We believe in examining each idea on an individual basis through reason, scriptural study, and prayer. Ours is a religion of study - one is not supposed to accept all spiritual truth at once. Truth comes with time and effort.

When I moved to Utah (this is years ago, I no longer live there) everyone else in my office was LDS except for me and one other person. I talked at length with many people there about the faith, and even read the Book of Mormon. I asked about some of the controversies (like the Kinderhook plates, for example) as well as some things that were easier to talk about. Everyone engaged me in conversation and I learned a lot. One day though someone got mad at me and said "you just feel it in here" and pounded on his chest. I think that being open about your faith and wanting to share it with others is a good thing, as long as people really want to discuss it.

I also rarely discuss my views because they're very personal and I (sadly) do not have as thick a skin as I should. I got engaged to a woman of another faith last December, and her choice to marry me (as well as her choice to become a Mormon separate from our engagement) has set off a bit of a firestorm among her family. Her mother refuses to attend the ceremony (but, being a tacky bitch, wants to be at the reception) and her brother has stopped talking to her altogether. In light of all this, forgive me if I am overly sensitive in this discussion.[/spoiler]

I think referring to your future mother in law as a "tacky bitch" is not particularly Christian (I'm not one of those guys who don't call Mormons Christians) and will certainly not help her to come to respect the LDS faith. Be engaging and respectful. Above all, be at a higher level than her. Just my two cents.

 

[Zeorus]

I think referring to your future mother in law as a "tacky bitch" is not particularly Christian (I'm not one of those guys who don't call Mormons Christians) and will certainly not help her to come to respect the LDS faith. Be engaging and respectful. Above all, be at a higher level than her. Just my two cents.

This was written immediately after an encounter with her. I'm much more charitable when I've had time to breathe. The higher road has been my approach so far but my patience is thinning.

 

[AppleChrisp]

Wait wait wait. How did you never hear of mentalis restrictio before? This is perhaps the most raw and poignant moral theology ever debated within the Catholic church. It's inspired - and been inspired by - some of the noblest acts in Church history, and also been used to justify some of the most despicable. I'm surprised you would dismiss it so flippantly.

Yeah, I've never heard of it before. Looks like I have something new to research!

You mean except when it was waging them?

Obviously.

Like, 80% of Crusaders didn't even really believe all that much in a holy war. It was just a chance for some looting and a free ride to heaven if you died.

Glad you understand.

I think we should always continue to understand the purpose behind and the truth about our creation. I don't see anything wrong with that and I don't personally know any Christian who does, either. The simple fact is that we don't know, and for anyone to say "well God didn't create us" certainly has no way of basing that on anything other than personal belief.

I agree with everything you said here. Not sure if you think I am disagreeing with you on these points.

Yeah I'd love to read up on this. I always figured there'd probably be a change at some point as you get really old because the mind often diminishes with the body. I have done some googling of the subject and I find discussions on experiences changing the way people tackle certain problems and that therefore increases their IQ. However, it may just help them more efficiently perform on an IQ test. The test itself must be separated from what the person is actually capable of.

Well I was looking into the effects of marijuana on adolescent brain development and a common finding is that marijuana use during adolescence reduces their IQ. I will try to scrounge up some general articles and send them to you in a PM some time in the next couple days if you're interested.

I don't necessarily hold a popular belief here. I've been taught in church that Jesus is like our lawyer -- our advocate in heaven. If we know Him then he will help God to understand why we belong there. Of course, I have never been in a trinity-centric branch of Christianity either. He didn't just die for us, but he suffered that we not have to. It's a truly inspiring story, and it makes me realize that I've never been able to come close to doing anything for others.

Well in Catholicism we do believe in the Trinity so our understanding of Jesus sounds quite different from yours.

 

[AppleChrisp]

So, for example, I thought about going to Krispy Kreme this morning, but I realized it was just Satan tempting me. Jesus wants me to eat Raisin Bran instead. Diabetes is not part of God's plan for my life.

Damn what kind of fucked up cult did you grow up in lol

I totally understand where you're coming from, though. My family is VERY devout and hardcore Catholic, and I clash with them about a lot of things. I don't believe that God just condemns people to hell willy nilly. I studied Aquinas a long time ago and I learned something from him that changed the way I see a lot of things. He talked about how ultimately, everyone pursues what they think is good. It might not be what is objectively good, but they pursue what they believe is good. He said that there is no such thing as pursuing something we see as bad. So then you have to wonder: if God is merciful, kind, and understanding, why would He condemn people for pursuing false goods if they have a good will? I think it's a lot more complicated than Catholics or other Christians want to admit. No one has the answer to who is going to heaven or who is going to hell except God. Loving God isn't supposed to be about blindly following rules, which is where the church is still getting too wrapped up. Aquinas' philosophy also included epistemology where he discussed both divine inspiration and a natural capacity. Even if you don't believe everything he has to say, you might find it an interesting read nonetheless.

 

[Dudeofteenage]

I'm an atheist. My parents were both atheists, as were all of my grandparents, and most of my great-grandparents (I think my father's father's family were religious). My great-grandmother was a poorly educated, menially employed working class atheist. When I was young my grandmother told me about how here mother would take charity from the Salvation Army or other religious groups and then tell her daughter that, while it was OK to accept their help, she should never presume that that meant she had to accept their ideas.

This has always made the "atheists as detached intellectuals" stereotype seem rather hollow to me - although it describes some people, I don't think it's particularly representative of atheism as a whole.

I also don't draw any distinction between various religions as groups, or particular interpretations of those groups. Neopagans and Buddhists are just as uninteresting to me as Christians or Muslims. And while I would certainly say that a member of ISIS is more likely to be a bad person than, say, Nafez Assaily, neither is a bad Muslim, because there's no innate truth to Islamic teachings and thus no yardstick you can justificably measure them against. It would be very self-serving to say that Muslims who agree with me are "good Muslims". And the same goes for Christians, Buddhists, etc etc.

Finally, since there's people here saying there's something innately wrong with Islam, I'll agree that there's probably more "bad" Muslims than there are "bad" Christians, but in both cases we're talking about tiny groups, and this really has more to do with the relative poverty of most of the Muslim world (yes I know about Dubai, but it's an outlier) than some hidden awfulness buried in Islam. If you went back a thousand years to the Islamic Golden Age, you'd find the tables were switched. (And yes, I know that those Islamic Golden Age states had their moments of pretty reprehensible violence, but that has more to do with them being undemocratic medieval states, albeit prosperous and stable ones.)

No one has the answer to who is going to heaven or who is going to hell except God.

You should check out Calvinism.

 

[Picklechu]

I love me some Jesus. I don't love me some church.

 

[Teddy]

My church has definitely become a shadow of what it once was. I know more people who go to church sorely to "socialize" (hookup) than to learn about the Lord. Sad.

 

[Van Darkholme]

None. I actually left my church two months ago, long overdue.
I was baptized and confirmed though (protestant). Fun fact: they make you pay tax for your church "membership" in this country.

 

[Konstantinos]

Only through the power of Xenu and Tom Cruise can we hope to achieve enlightenment.

 

[Alex Krycek]

Even though someone in this thread is already pretty halal I'll say that I have a few of Muslim friends and some Muslim family members and all are extremely moderate. I'm Orthodox, I'm open to other faiths but ultimately I think of religion as a verb, not a noun. Aspects of Zoroastrianism, Tengriism, Alevism, etc appeal to me, but I'm ultimately content to attend Liturgy on Sunday morning and enjoy my religious community at large while having my own relationship with the divine. Might also add that I still go to a Theravada Meditation center on certain Saturdays for Dhama Talks and Yiquandao has interested me a bunch lately. Cao Dai would be cool and more culturally relevant to me minus the vegetarianism, but they have a lot of Saints that are odd - Victor Hugo is a Saint in Cao Dai for example.

 

[Ariel]

I'm Christian enough to pray. However I think everybody should be allowed to believe what they want.

 

[PantsOfDesire]

I'd agree with @Null - labels are problematic. These are pretty complex positions, and no single label does them any justice. If anything, people leap to conclusions. For example, identify as an atheist and don't be surprised when people assume this is an assertion that there are no gods, when in reality most people I've encountered would simply lack belief. People hear "Christian", and relate it to whatever experience they've had with Christianity, which really can't describe an incredibly diverse collection of belief systems.

I don't know that there are no gods but I certainly haven't seen anything that'd lead me to a belief in gods. I don't much care what others believe unless it's causing problems or being used in support of an argument, in which case the belief is open to the same kind of criticism as any other evidence presented. .i.e. if you claim that you should go first in line, and cite your daughter's beauty as the reason for this, then don't get upset if people critique her beauty. No need to be a dick out it, but we also shouldn't be afraid to appropriately tear someone a new arse when necessary.

Rambling on about group dynamics and how things turn to shit:

Spoiler

What's most important is for people to have exposure to viewpoints other than their own, as that's how we humanise these positions and maybe reach a level of understanding. Same applies to race, gender, and sexual orientation. It's also important in helping us understand that these aren't just amorphous blobs that think in unison - there are individuals, often positions are more nuanced than the noisy representatives would suggest. I mostly avoid atheist groups online because of the SJW infestation.

It's an unfortunate reality that most groups formed with some degree of protest in mind will, as they grow, morph in to something quite removed from the original intention. It's feature creep and/or people using it as a vehicle for their baseless celebrity and hitherto unrelated agendas. Hi, PZ! We see this in atheism, feminism, and gay rights. Echo chambers form, and the group must change to suit the wishes of the newcomers who want to "progress" the movement. Best thing is to either maintain control, and fight to keep your group as it was intended to be, or just spend more time talking with people of opposing viewpoints who are also amendable to rational and interesting conversation. Christians have the same problem, so let's just keep talking and try to ignore the nut job wings of our respective camps.

tl;dr atheist. SJWs ruin everything.

 

[Red_Rager]

When it comes to atheism, I just consider myself as taking the default position that their are no gods where a theist or a deist takes the default position that god(s) exist. The term atheist has a lot of baggage attached to it thinks to these neckbeards hopping on it and acting so smug around "ignorant" christians. I am also not a devil worshipper, how can I worship something that I do not acknowledge exists? If not believing in God makes me a devil worshipper, then the devil sure doesn't require much effort from me to worship him.

One thing to note is there are religions out there that do not require a belief in a God so it is possible to be an atheist and religious. http://atheism.about.com/od/atheismquestions/p/AtheistReligion.htm

I don't see how one's belief or lack of belief has anything to do with one's character. There are good Christians but there are also bad Christians. There are good atheists but there are also bad atheists. Any doctrine, whether religious or political, can be twisted to be used as justification to commit atrocities. Ideologies are powerful forces that brings people together to do great things for good or for evil.