Why christianity?

The former.

 

very rarely does an educated adult come to their own conclusion on religion and choose which one they want to follow, or makes the most sense to them.

99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% are people who just had it pounded into their heads since before they were old enough to comprehend anything at all.

i wish it was a law that nobody was taught ANY religion untill they were a legal consenting adult and made the choice themselves.....but that will never happen because it would be the end of the collection plate.

religion is the oldest most effective way for people to be assembled and told what to do and think. its makes them all fear that they must serve something they cant see in order to insure the quality of their after life.

there is no higher authority that any of them EVER answer to or even receive any evidence of. they all believe it because thats what they have been told since they can remeber, by almost everyone they meet. they see how big religion is and how long it has been around. surely a lie or misconception could not be so vast and far reaching could it?

 

really? How so?

 

I understand what you are saying. However from my research of Buddhism, there really isn't a "God". In some sects, I guess being the Buddha is God.

 

I believe buddha's god status is more of a prophet status no?

 

I think that depends on which "sect" of buddhism you go by.

Buddha is more of a prophet status, however in a lot of them there isn't a status above Buddha.

Buddha is the status given to someone who is enlightened.

The way I understand it, to put it in Christian terms. Jesus becomes the Christ, and the teaches others to become Christ.

 

What is the Western understandings of Grace?

The only understanding I have is the sound is sweet and it can save a wretch like me.

EDIT:

I guess he could be a god-like figure. He isn't a creator.

 

i did not show any disrespect at all. thats an unwarranted defensive statement.
the number of people who believe in something does not equal any sort of proof.
i did not and dont claim to know what all those people thought and felt.

basically your entire response was an unecessary way for you to take a stand against what i said, while implying that i am "both arrogant and presumtive" for making a claim that i never actually made.

is that how this works? just make up something, cast a negative light on it and distance yourself from it? i feel like a monkey just threw feces at me scampered away into the forest

 

Eric,

As a staunch Atheist, i understand your stance about reason and logic and beliefs. I even understand the frustration you often feel, when it comes to getting your thoughts out there. However, in here, we try to be more respectful, simply because its polite and the right thing to do when having mature discussions about a topic as touchy as faith.

Your post was combative and judgmental. If that wasn't your intention, no problem, but I hope you can see how it could be taken that way. The more time you spend in here, you'll see this forum IS NOT really about defending or justifying ones beliefs, its more about sharing your thoughts and asking questions of others.

 

Outside of my wife wanting to marry me, this is probably the greatest compliment, I've ever received. Seriously, to be respected from someone on "the opposite side of the coin", is really just, well, wow. I hope you know the sentiment couldn't be more mutual. Thank you so much.

 

For me, this scenario screams out about the sheer individuality of the human experience. While human behaviors can be viewed similar to cooking recipes, the depth of our perceptions cannot. This is just further evidence that all faiths (or non-faiths) should have more of an open door policy than a knock on your door policy.

 

I have never understood staunch atheism. It always seemed to me the same as being religious. Even Richard Dawkins is agnostic. He has a scale from 1 to 6 where 1 believes in god and 6 believes in no god. He is a 5, where he puts it, he doesn't know if there is a god or not, however there probably isn't.

That made sense to me.

 

I was born and raised as a Catholic and through the years I drifted away from the Church and from God. All that changed recently as I went through some very difficult, very trying times. I ended up losing everything I had worked for and found myself pushed, actually dragged, kicking and screaming, into a new life. It was a time that was so full of Signs and Events that just fell into place in a manner that was too neat to be considered coincidence that it brought me back to my Faith. I've been attending Church regularly again and bringing myself back into my Faith and things have rapidly improved for me and life is getting back on track. One day I may write it all down and share it, the manner in which Events unfolded is (to me, at least) amazing.
But I still keep an eye on the LL.

 

To me it seems to be almost the same. That Atheists have to create a god to not believe in.

In a conversation on this board with an athiest and he told me I might as well believe in invisible purple unicorns. If they are invisible and phase how do I not know they are there? Of course them being invisible and purple might seem strange. However I honestly do not know if there are invisible things that I cannot see that phase through me.

I call myself agnostic because I do not know. I have my own beliefs, however still I do not know.

 

For me, staunch Atheism is about saying I don't allow for the possibility of a god to be in my moral structure.

As I've said before, faith and fact are very near opposites and must be kept that way. I do not know it to be fact that there is a god or isn't one. I have no faith that there is a god, however. If factual proof of a god ever came to light, no ones faith would be relevant anymore because it would be a fact.

Anything and everything is possible, that doesn't mean all things are probable. Most of us, don't walk around on land all day, wearing a life jacket. Though drowning is fairly common in the world, we don't plan on a life jacket if we aren't near water. That's being an Atheist to me. Being agnostic, IMO, means you at least have a life jacket in your trunk or backpack, just in case.

 

Our opinions are different in what being agnostic means.

Maybe I am wrong, however it seems to me that your perspective makes sense if I use the term, "Christian Athiest" and "Christian Agnostic".

I have never been a Christian in any way shape or form, which gives me a different perspective.

To me, atheism means there is no god and there is no creator. Life, the universe and everything happened for no reason and when we die there is nothing.

Which to me is a lot of knowledge that they cannot know. Which to me is very unscientific.

To me, agnostic is the acknowledgment of the fact that they do not know. There are various degrees of agnosticism. I do like Dawkins agnostic scale.

I would be around a 2 or a 3. I am agnostic in the sense where I have no clue if there is a god. I do believe there is something, however I have zero belief in the Christian ideal of God. I do not believe in original sin. I do not believe in hell. I do not see myself having a life jacket on so I do not upset the Christian ideal of god.

 

First of all, I'm not talking about Christianity.

I'm using the term "god" (lower case "g" and all) to encompass any concept of a higher power or higher "reason" for everything being what it is.

I said anything is possible, just not probable, and because of that I don't allow for "god" in my faith. Not allowing for a "god" in your faith, is Atheism. As far as an Atheist's faith is concerned, there is no "god".

Its possible I may drown tomorrow, not probable, so I won't be wearing a life jacket, and life jackets are very uncomfortable. An agnostic is someone who says I don't know for sure that I could drown tomorrow, so why not keep a life jacket handy, and knowing its there brings me comfort. A believer says I may drown, I may not, it depends on whatever higher power may decree, so I'll wear the life jacket whenever I can, but that's ok, because it brings me warmth and comfort.

 

You are one of the few athiests I have talked to that acknowledge that atheism is a faith.

Using your anology, I can see some agnostics who keep a life jacket handy and some who do not.

Your anology might not be talking about Christianity, however it seems to be coming from a Christianity/Monothesistic/One God who towers over us perspective. Or at least Western which is pretty much the sam ething.

I may drown tomorrow and I may not. I may be comforted by my beliefs and I may not. I see myself as wanting to carry a life jacket because it makes sense. What if I decide to go white water rafting

 

I think most Atheists, like most believers, misunderstand the simple concepts of facts and faith. It is my humble opinion, that one cannot know what one believes or knows unless, one understands the words "fact" and "faith".

I think my analogy seems to be coming from western religion, because well, we're in the west and those are obviously the most prevalent religions. For your edification, I don't believe or have faith in: god, gods, powers, energies, spirits, lights, shakras (sp), the supernatural, higher meanings, higher reasons, higher states of consciousness, et all. I sum that up by saying I don't believe in "god", because I'm lazy.

 

If they are concepts then they do not exist so there is nothing to understand.

 

Well, my experience is different from yours by 180 degrees, I was raised in anything but a church environment, yet Christianity rings true to me.

And that was the key, "Truth", Scripture rang true to me on both a personal and experimental level, I tested the precepts of Christianity for myself, I also looked into the wisdom that was offered in view of Eastern "religions" though that is a bit of a misnomer, Buddhism is not a "religion" per se, it is more a philosophy that one implements as best as one can with no maxims to so to speak.


That and to me, Budhisms' cycle of birth, life, death, I found to be incredibly oppressive intellectually speaking, is this world and this life soo sweat as to be worth a virtual never ending cycle of wash, rinse, repeat? Yet Buddhism proposes that very thing, not a one act play, but a never ending play with the cycle of suffering, deceit, greed, violence continuing in perpetuity.

Now for myself, I have no problem with Atheism or Buddhism or Paganism or what have you, in fact I enjoy the entire thought process that goes into that line of thinking as long as...it is well thought out..for myself I pity a Christian that does not understand the foundation of the Faith, I find everyone else intellectually stimulating..

 

Unless you attain a Buddha mind. Then none of that matters.