Religion What's your religion ?

[Lina Inverse]

I am no religious person, I would say that I am my own God....as some in this forum have noticed I believe in existentialist philosophy (free will, and responsible for own actions).

That's pretty good, actually!

 

[Fantt]

I was born and raised a Methodist christian in a pretty liberal church. I once considered converting to catholicism (the girl I was chasing was Catholic and I thought it would help - didn't). I've been through a pretty hardcore atheist phase - until I realized it was pretty silly to have a strong conviction to not have a conviction.

Nowadays, I don't like to label myself as much of anything, although I very much like the Zen Buddhist teachings and the teachings of the original Awakened One.

As far as Fake Religions go, I'm a hard-core Discordian. Hail Eris! All Hail Discordia! (run away! run away!)

 

[smig]

I like multi-god systems because you can hedge your bets, and also blame someone for your problems. Your boat capsized? Blame Poseidon! Really hot and sunny? Sacrifice a bull to Zeus and get him to restrain Apollo a little. Also, multi god systems explain why horrible things happen to good people - Athene was just having a bad hair day, baby.
PS It's funny how extinct religions like the Greek polytheistic religion are viewed as 'primitive' and 'unsophisticated' compared to monotheistic religions, like Christianity, etc. The Olympian religion is quaint too, somehow unbelievable and invalid because nobody believes in it now. Makes you wonder how much fashion has to do with religion, hey? (Check out how quickly the Roman Empire converted)

 

[Miss_apollo7]

I like multi-god systems because you can hedge your bets, and also blame someone for your problems. Your boat capsized? Blame Poseidon! Really hot and sunny? Sacrifice a bull to Zeus and get him to restrain Apollo a little. Also, multi god systems explain why horrible things happen to good people - Athene was just having a bad hair day, baby.
PS It's funny how extinct religions like the Greek polytheistic religion are viewed as 'primitive' and 'unsophisticated' compared to monotheistic religions, like Christianity, etc. The Olympian religion is quaint too, somehow unbelievable and invalid because nobody believes in it now. Makes you wonder how much fashion has to do with religion, hey? (Check out how quickly the Roman Empire converted)

You would just "blend in" with the ancient Greeks (and ancient Romans too if you just changed the names into the Roman "versions.") For example:

Zeus= Jupiter
Nike= Victoria
Eros= Amor
:balloon:

 

[No-name]

One of my favorite churches is Church of the Blind Chihuahua: www.dogchurch.org

Check it out.

 

[chimeraspirit]

What religion am I?

I was raised a southern baptist. I lived in Europe for several years and actually became a Buddhist after much soul searching.

 

[Silverbackman]

LOL, it looks like I am the only Deist here. I would say I am about 90% Deist, and 10% Agnostic.

Why I chose to be deist is because I think all religions are kind of on crap. They have many holes in them. God does exist, and if you study physics a lot you will know why but I highly doubt he really interferes with out lives, no matter how much we want him/her too.

 

[Do My Dishes]

Christian protestant

 

[phantasmagoria]

Religion interests me, how people can live their entire lives driven by the rules of someone that may never have existed... It's a powererful thing that's started wars, changed millions of lives... So I'm not messing about with it, I'm not just gonna find something and settle... I believe there must have been something that started it all off, may it be god or something purely scientific.

Agnostic.

 

[Mycernius]

Thought I'd finally post here. If you haven't guessed yet by some of my posts, I am firm non-believer. Religion fasinates me. How people can say they are not supersitious and then believe in a God, which to me is superstition. Quite willing to dismiss dragons and elfs etc, but in the same breathe believe absolutely in angels and demons. I am always willing to learn about various beliefs, just don't expect me to take them at face value.

 

[isayhello]

No religion.

 

[stalky]

agnostic, but sometimes i could be atheist - but its not problem, agnosticism does not exclude possibility of not existing any god
i think i couldn't be deist - what for the god exist if he/she/it doesn't play any important role in our lives?

 

[geist_seig]

eh, just a simple wiccan..

 

[Mycernius]

eh, just a simple wiccan..

I did a show, backstage with a Wiccan. She converted her mother

 

[Shooter452]

Who says?

What does it take to make a Christian ?

I suppose that to be considered as Christian, one must at least believe in the Bible and the Holy Trinity. That is :

- believe that God made the world in 7 days
- Adam and Eve were made by God and are the first human on earth, who look like us today (by the way, what was their skin colour and language ?)
- believe that the Sun goes round the Earth, and the Earth is the center of the universe
- believe that God is a man (he is called the "father", not the "mother")
- believe in miracles
- believe that Jesus was human and God
...

Those who don't believe even one of these things are not real Christians.

Who says so? How is it that someone other than myself defines my faith? My faith. That is kind of a personal thing, isn't it?

Besides, not all of those points are entirely undefensible. Let us examine just one, for the sake of argument. Like "believe that God made the world in 7 days." Absurd? Well, maybe...maybe not. Apply the Inherit the Wind solution. How long was the first three days? The sun was not created until the fourth day, so the basic method of measuring time--the movement of the sun--was absent. Could've been 24 hour days. Could have been more or less. The first three days were of indeteminate length, so they could have been six hundred million years. No one can say.

Now that is a long work-week.

I think it is arrogantly pretentious for anyone to determine the measure of a person's belief by subjective standards like the acceptance of a literal interpretation of scripture...any scripture. This is particularly true when someone else defines the terms.

Many scriptural scholars--persons versed in Anthropology, Archeology as well as scriptrure--believe that the Book of Genesis is not to be taken literally. They consider themselves as knowledgable Christians. How does one discount them?

These limit stakes are unacceptable. I reject them and I still consider myself a Roman Catholic. Then again, many "Christians" say that Catholics are not "real Christians" anyway.

Curiousity satisfied?

 

[Ma Cherie]

You know, after reading something these post I just remembered something that I learned when I was still going to church. What I have learned is that people don't seem to realize that it's not about religion, it's more about the relationship you have God. (And I think someone pointed this out before on this thread). That's only if you believe in God, of course. So, even though I have no religious affiliation, I believe in God, I believe in a higher being. And Mac, you listed what it takes to be a Christain, but those aren't the things I have learned. So, I guess I'm Paneism and Deism. I know this will sound odd to everyone who doesn't belive in religion, but the reason that it's more about having a relationship with God is what happened to Adam and Eve. They disobeyed God and therefore ruining the relationship with him. Well, I'm not going to further into what I've learned, and I hope I didn't offend anyone. :sorry:

 

[Revenant]

What does it take to make a Christian ?

I suppose that to be considered as Christian, one must at least believe in the Bible and the Holy Trinity. That is :

- believe that God made the world in 7 days
- Adam and Eve were made by God and are the first human on earth, who look like us today (by the way, what was their skin colour and language ?)
- believe that the Sun goes round the Earth, and the Earth is the center of the universe
- believe that God is a man (he is called the "father", not the "mother")
- believe in miracles
- believe that Jesus was human and God
...

Those who don't believe even one of these things are not real Christians. I find it a bit easy to adapt the Bible and change the doctrine everytime science proves it to be wrong. During the first 1500 years of Christianity, every Christian believed firmly in thee things (other were burnt alive). You cannot change the most fundamental believes of a religion without destroying it.

May I ask, who among those who call themselves Christian believe in all of the above ?

I don't see the reason for that argument. Buddhism has some very incorrect ideas in it's texts, to which the Dalai Lama has said, Buddhism must take all new information, and change accordingly.

But like all religions, the point was never scientific. Was the earth created in 6 human days, or was that story simplified to make it easier to orally pass the story on from one generation to the next, before it was put down on paper?

What of the passage that says one day to God is like a thousand years to man? Does that actually mean that one day to God is exactly the same as a thousand years to man? Or is that just trying to get across the relativity of time in relation to God and man?

It is telling, that in one culture long ago, people counted fourteen pigs as, one pig, two pigs, three pigs, and ummm...hey!! many pigs. People had little use for such large numbers, and so a thousand may have just been directed at the people of that time.

Adam and Eve must be like us? That sounds like a very Christian right's idea, and I would contend that they have their priorities straight.

As I define Christians, all they have to do, is believe God created the world, believe and love God, and sincerely ask forgiveness for those acts that they have done that go against the law of love, and they will go onto eternal life with the one they love. What is the law of love? Understanding that everyone wants true happiness. I would say, things that promote true happiness for the self, and for others, is living according to the law of love, while things that cause suffering, or simply observing someone suffering when it is one's power to end the suffering, is going against the law of love.

To get lost in defending the literal translation of the Bible, is to lose the true message of the Bible.

 

[No-name]

Rev, you make some wonderful points which I applaud. Especially about biblical interpretation, science, and communication.

It seems to me far more complex than it looks- when the Bible says, "Let Us make man and woman in Our image." does it actually mean that God has two genders, or neither?

Also there is no description of Adam and Eve, so how would you assume they looked like anyone?

I don't really see how a heliocentric solar system conflicts with the Bible, I think Christendom got over that a couple of centuries ago.

I think most people belive in miracles.

 

[Tsuyoiko]

I think most people belive in miracles.

It depends how you define 'miracle'. If you define it like this site as

an event which violates at least one law of nature

then I don't believe in them. But if you define it like this site

An event that appears inexplicable by the laws of nature and so is held to be supernatural in origin or an act of God

then I remain open-minded.

 

[Rich303]

I'm not sure what I believe in.
I was raised as a christian and I think I have quite good morals, but I'm not religious now. I think (or hope) there is probably something greater than us,but I don't believe in organised religion, not western anyway.
I think too many western religious people are hypocritical, and use religion when it suits them. (sorry Christians,Catholics etc)
My dad has drifted in and out of christianity and is often very judgemetal and critical of others. In the past his 'belief' has given him a self-imposed moral highground, but I don't think he is a better person than me.

Once (I think I was 21 at the time),he 'caught' me cuddling my girlfriend in the lounge and accused me of 'desecrating' the sofa that he and mum have to sit on - all in front of my girlfriend.
OK, she was in her nightie at the time, but I think this is a slight over-reaction. Especially when at a recent meal (in a restaurant!),he starts talking about sex with my mum. This is the last thing I want to hear,especially when I'm eating!
He always had a problem with my girlfriend's mum, because she allowed me and my girl to sleep together - and there was nothing he could do about it!
Sometimes I wonder if he just doesn't like people having more fun than him.

He also had a problem with my girl's mum being a single parent(even though she was living in fear of the father for a number of years), and sometimes pointed out to me that her grandparents lived in the 'rough' area of their village.

Don't get me wrong,my dad is OK, but his moralistic ways have not helped our relationship over the years - and it has put me of religion.