Please stop

[Daahan]

There have been subtle movements toward making religion more modern.

The best example I can think of is Reformed Judaism (as opposed to Orthodox-Judaisim)

[djzombie]

There have been subtle movements toward making religion more modern. The best example I can think of is Reformed Judaism (as opposed to Orthodox-Judaisim)

and of course

[Shaede]

Athiesm is a religon.

no, it isn't. i'm a deist and deism is not a religion either.

Religion: Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.

You're a deist? Then you believe that a God or supernatural force created the universe, then chose not to interfere with it anymore. How is this not a religion, even by your definition?

Also, I noticed you're attempting to disprove something I said using Dictionary.com.

If you would look again, you'd notice that there are 3 other definitions listed under religion. I'm sure you'll find Atheism fits under at least one. Also note that if you scroll down, it lists Atheism as a religion specifically.

[Sparky]

alot of the laws we have today were based on religion (laws about : murder/theft/fraud, etc).

lots of societies that existed before organized religion understood that murder was not okay.

This comment is true depending on your definition of "Organized" Religion. If you could please give me your definition of "Organized" Religion and an example of a group that doesnt have one in one way or another. (I am really interested in your thoughts ... I am not trying to "Call u out" or anything)

[Carbon]

Dammit Shaede, where do you live? We need to get together and hang out some time.

[djzombie]

I claim page 4 in the name of my wall 'o text.

The Dark Tower: The Gunslinger[/u] by Stephen King]
The universe (he said) is the Great All, and offers a paradox too great for the finite mind to grasp. As the living brain cannot conceive of a non-living brain - although it may think it can - the finite mind cannot grasp the infinite.

The prosaic fact of the universe's existence alone defeats both the pragmatic and the romantic. There was a time, yet a hundred generations before the world moved on, when mankind had achieved enough technical and scientific prowess to chip a few splinters from the great stone pillar of reality. Even so, the false light of science (knowledge, if you like) shone in only a few developed countries. One company (or cabal) led the way in this regard: North Central Positronics, it called itself. Yet, despite a tremendous increase in available facts, there were remarkably few insights.

"Gunslinger, our many-times-great grandfathers conquered the-disease-which-rots, which they called cancer, almost conquered aging, walked on the moon - "

"I don't believe that," the gunslinger said flatly.

To this, the man in black merely smiled and answered, "You needn't. Yet it was so. They made or discovered a hundred other marvelous baubles. But this wealth of infomation produced little or no insight. There were no great odes written to the wonders of artificial insemination - having babies from frozen mansperm - or to the cars that ran on power of the sun. Few if any seemed to have grasped the truest principle of reality: new knowledge leads to yet more awesome mysteries. Greater physiological knowledge of the brain makes the existence of the soul less possible yet more probable by the nature of the search. Do you see? Of course you don't. You've reached the limits of your ability to comprehend. But nevermind - that's beside the point."

"What is the point then?"

"The greatest mystery the universe offers is not life but size. Size encompasses life, and the Tower encompasses size. The child, who is most at home with wonder, says: Daddy, what is above the sky? And the father says: The darkness of space. The child: What is beyond space? The father: The galaxy. The child: Beyond the galaxy? The father: Another galaxy. The child: Beyond the other galaxies? The father: No one knows.

"You see? Size defeats us. For the fish, the lake in which he lives is the universe. What does the fish think when he is jerked up by the mouth through the silver limits of existence and into a new universe where the air drowns him and the light is blue madness? Where huge bipeds with no gills stuff it into a suffocating box abd cover it with wet weeds to die?

"Or one might take the tip of the pencil and magnify it. One reaches the point where a stunning realization strikes home: The pencil tip is not solid; it is composed of atoms which whirl and revolve like a trillion demon planets. What seems solid to us is actually only a loose net held together by gravity. Viewed at their actual size, the distances between these atoms might become league, gulfs, aeons. The atoms themselves are composed of nuclei and revolving protons and electrons. One may step down further to subatomic particles. And then to what? Tachyons? Nothing? Of course not. Everything in the universe denies nothing; to suggest an ending is the one absurdity.

"If you fell outward to the limit of the universe, would you find a board fence and signs reading DEAD END? No. You might find something hard and rounded, as the chick must see the egg from the inside. And if you should peck through the shell (or find a door), what great and torrential light might shine through your opening at the end of space? Might you look through and discover our entire universe is but part of one atom on a blade of grass? Might you be forced to think that by burning a twig you incinerate an eternity of eternities? That existence rises not to one infinite but to an infinity of them?

"Perhaps you saw what place our universe plays in the scheme of things - as no more than an atom in a blade of grass. Could it be that everything we can perceive, from the microscopic virus to the distant Horsehead Nebula, is contained in one blade of grass that may have existed for only a single season in an alien time-flow? What if that blade should be cut off by a scythe? When it begins to die, would the rot seep into our universe and our own lives, turning everthing yellow and brown and desiccated? Perhaps it's already begun to happen. We say the world has moved on; maybe we really mean that it has begun to dry up.

"Think how small such a concept of things make us, gunslinger! If a God watches over it all, does He actually mete out justice for such a race of gnats among an infinitude of races of gnats? Does His eye see the sparrow fall when the sparrow is less than a speck of hydrogen floating disconnected in the depth of space? And if He does see... what must the nature of such a God be? Where does He live? How is it possible to live beyond infinity?

"Imagine the sand of the Mohaine Desert, which you crossed to find me, and imagine a trillion universes - not worlds by universes - encapsulated in each grain of that desert; and within each universe an infinity of others. We tower over these universes from our pitiful grass vantage point; with one swing of your boot you may knock a billion billion worlds flying off into darkness, a chain never to be completed.

"Size, gunslinger... size.

"Yet suppose further. Suppose that all worlds, all universes, met at a single nexus, a single pylon, a Tower. And within it, a stairway, perhaps rising to the Godhead itself. Would you dare climb to the top, gunslinger? Could it be that somewhere above all of endless reality, there exists a room?...

"You dare not."

And in the gunslinger's mind, those words echoed: You dare not.

[Kytele]

^

Probably one of the greatest series of books I've ever read.

[djzombie]

I'm on book 4 currently... wizard and glass. Great books thus far.

[layoneil]

You're a deist? Then you believe that a God or supernatural force created the universe, then chose not to interfere with it anymore. How is this not a religion, even by your definition?

actually, i don't believe that it did, i believe that it could and very likely did, i leave plenty of room that it didn't. but i can't be an atheist because i believe it's possible, so i'm closer to a deist than an atheist.

it's not a religion by my definition because

Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.

while i allow for the possibility that this supernatural force can do everything, he doesn't necessarily do it or want to do it. he doesn't do it all the time, maybe he's never interfered, maybe he has sometimes.

i also don't believe this supernatural power has any morals, good or bad.

and because i believe that this supernatural power is as capable of doing bad things as good things, i don't revere this power in anyway.

i believe if it wants to create a hurricane to screw people it will create a hurricane to screw people because it can, not because it has a desire to punish people.

and maybe i'm not even a true deist in the definition of deism. because i also allow that this supernatural power has/can have influence, just that it doesn't care.

i also believe that the world can continue to function with or without this influence.

If you would look again, you'd notice that there are 3 other definitions listed under religion. I'm sure you'll find Atheism fits under at least one.

1a) Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.

- nope, there's no supernatural power in atheism. true deism doesn't believe in the governance part.

1b) A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.

- can't exist without 1A.

2) The life or condition of a person in a religious order.

- define "religious"

3) A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.

- no such thing as spiritual leaders to a deist or atheist.

4) A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.

- There are simply no actions to pursue if you're a true deist or true atheist, you either have one of those beliefs or you don't. Anyone that pursues deism or atheism with "zeal or conscientious devotion" in anyway (including the desire for other people to think like them) is actually creating a Religion that needs another name.

i'm pretty sure the majority of people who label themselves deist or atheist don't actively pursue anything in the name of deism or atheism.

i pursue deism about as actively as i pursue my belief that honey mustard is the worse condiment i've ever tasted.

my belief in monogamy has nothing to do with deism, as does my belief and values on everything else. my pseudo-deism only allows that i can't be an atheist and that i think organized religion is a load of crap.

Also note that if you scroll down, it lists Atheism as a religion specifically.

dictionary.com isn't my bible. i believe the things in dictionary.com is written by humans and it can be wrong just like every other source of information compiled by humans.

If you could please give me your definition of "Organized" Religion

look up the word organized?

if you want a wordy answer, any and everything that believes in a higher power AND derives any other beliefs, values from their belief in this higher power AND identifies with other people with similar beliefs as a group.

i don't identify with other deist. i'd be more likely sit down and have a converation with another Pittsburgh Steelers fan than another deist. i'd be just as likely to talk about deism with an atheist/Christian as i would with another deist.

my deism is derived from my beliefs, my beliefs are not derived from my deism.

and an example of a group that doesnt have one in one way or another.

Communist China, murder is not okay in China and religion is outlawed.

[Septimus]

"Because morality does not come from religion, when an atheist does something it is because he/she knows it is the right thing to do, not because we expect a reward for our actions."

Athiesm is a religon. Also, religion is not simply seeking a reward for your actions, that is a common misconception perpetuated by people who do not understand what religion means, like the Psuedochristian cult that is dominant in America.

It is hard to stretch any definition of Atheism to be a religion. (Although I have known a few "devout" atheists who would preach the word of Darwin back at people who tried to preach to them.) It is not a religion because it lacks the spiritual and/or worship aspects of a religious belief system. And I was not saying that people use religion to simply seeking rewards, but that in a situation like the one I described (where no one would ever know about the money) a moral atheist does the right thing only because it is right. Although religions teach morals, morality is holly independent of religion.

I like what merper said, people use organized religion as an excuse to not bother to develop their own relationship with whatever the Divine may be.

This is very true, and definatly a fault of organised religion. But, just because something has fault in it does not mean it is completely bad. A lot of good has come from organised religion, but people don't tend to make headlines about or focus on the positive events in life.

Well, things like the Inquisition, the Crusades, the Salem Witch Trials, and even our current terrorism woes tend to be headline grabbing events. Organized religion may do some good, but it also does bad things. Very bad things. Like tell people to not use condoms or other forms of birth control which helps to spread over population and STDs. Or promote intolerance by lobbying for and supporting initiatives like prohibiting adoption by same sex couples. (Because there are never enough kids in foster care.)

I just cannot imagine that a deity would want people to feel obligated to go to a building for at least an hour a week to be bored out of their minds listening to what someone else things about said deity- I would imagine that he/she/it/they would much rather that people come up with their own understanding of the cosmos through personal reflection, reading of sacred texts, meditation, or what have you.

One should most definatly find your own understanding of the world around you, I completely agree, but sometimes it's nice to have the input of others to open your mind to areas you might overlook yourself. Religion is ultimately the journey of the self, but that doesn't mean others can't help you along the way. In fact, it's often shown in mythology that without such help you would never find the ultimate boon, as the person or thing that shows you the path is often what you least suspect.

How many people who go to church every week (translation: Christmas and Easter) go there because they want to improve their spiritual understanding? Instead, how many go there because they feel it is their obligation because organized religions have told them that god keeps attendance? Others can help you along the way, but that comes with debate and discussion while being actively involved, not from having someone standing at a podium telling you that the things a bunch of people decided hundreds of years ago is infallible. While others may help you find a path, the task of going on the journey is up to you, and it never ends.

[Banigaru]

Religion picks up where science leaves off, and VV. However it really is a losing battle for regilion, the nature of science to progress and to always doubt and to push fowards no holds barred sometimes, is too much for religion that preys on some human weakness to not have to be bothered to think, it is meerly a convinience. I grew up going to church every sunday and while I do have to appreciate the positive moral backround that going to sunday school can instill in someone, It probably could have been accomplished in any other way.

that excerpt from that steven king book was awesome, and another good read, is Dan Brown's Angel's & Demons.

[Byrd]

I claim page 4 in the name of my wall 'o text.

The Dark Tower: The Gunslinger[/u] by Stephen King]

That's extremely strange that you should post that today. I just finished book 7 about 10 hours ago. Fantastic series of books. Now that I've read the whole thing, I want to go back and read them again, to see all the stuff I've missed. I do plan on re-reading the first chapter of so of book 1, see how much foreshadowing there is. I would be perfectly happy to discuss the books if there is enough interest.

EDIT: Spoiler removed for those on book 4 or before.

[Septimus]

You're a deist? Then you believe that a God or supernatural force created the universe, then chose not to interfere with it anymore. How is this not a religion, even by your definition?

actually, i don't believe that it did, i believe that it could and very likely did, i leave plenty of room that it didn't. but i can't be an atheist because i believe it's possible, so i'm closer to a deist than an atheist.

Sounds like you are closer to empirical agnosticism than deism.

[Banigaru]

agnostic agnostic !
or the agnostic fundamentalists!

[layoneil]

Sounds like you are closer to empirical agnosticism than deism.

these both seem to fit:

Agnostic theism—the view of those who do not claim to know God's existence, but still believe in his existence. (See Knowledge Vs Beliefs) Whether this is truly agnosticism is disputed. It may also imply the belief that although there is something that resembles (or would at least appear to us as) a god (or gods,) there remains doubt over their true nature, motives, or the validity of the claim to be 'God' rather than superior, supernatural being(s).

Agnostic spiritualism—the view that there may or may not be a god (or gods,) while maintaining a general personal belief in a spiritual aspect of reality, particularly without distinct religious basis, or adherence to any established doctrine or dogma.

[Sparky]

Communist China, murder is not okay in China and religion is outlawed.

First, Communism is a Political Party and an Economic Theory. Just because tha party in power forbids religion doesnt mean it doesnt and hasnt existed.

Second, As i recall from my history classes, China has not always been a communist regime. If you trace back China's history u will eventually find some type of religion. I am guessing this idea that murder was wrong was in place many years before Communism took hold.

[Shaede]

actually, i don't believe that it did, i believe that it could and very likely did, i leave plenty of room that it didn't. but i can't be an atheist because i believe it's possible, so i'm closer to a deist than an atheist.

A deist is a person who believes in a deity. If you do not believe in one, or are unsure, then you might not be a deist. As said above, you sound like you're leaning more towards agnosticism.

while i allow for the possibility that this supernatural force can do everything, he doesn't necessarily do it or want to do it. he doesn't do it all the time, maybe he's never interfered, maybe he has sometimes.

i also don't believe this supernatural power has any morals, good or bad.

and because i believe that this supernatural power is as capable of doing bad things as good things, i don't revere this power in anyway.

i believe if it wants to create a hurricane to screw people it will create a hurricane to screw people because it can, not because it has a desire to punish people.

and maybe i'm not even a true deist in the definition of deism. because i also allow that this supernatural power has/can have influence, just that it doesn't care.

i also believe that the world can continue to function with or without this influence.

Unless you can give me scientific evidence to support these beliefs, I'd be tempted to call you religious.

3) A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.

- no such thing as spiritual leaders to a deist or atheist.

I'm beginning to wonder if you know what deism is.

4) A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.

- There are simply no actions to pursue if you're a true deist or true atheist, you either have one of those beliefs or you don't. Anyone that pursues deism or atheism with "zeal or conscientious devotion" in anyway (including the desire for other people to think like them) is actually creating a Religion that needs another name.

So you're saying that an Athiest does not actively pursue a cause, princible, or activity with zeal or devotion? It sounds like it takes a significant amount of faith to specifically believe something does not exist without any evidence one way or the other. The pursuit of this faith, as I would see it, is rather zealous. Also, it might take a sort of devotion to put into practice.

dictionary.com isn't my bible. i believe the things in dictionary.com is written by humans and it can be wrong just like every other source of information compiled by humans.

Then don't use it to attempt to disprove me.

my deism is derived from my beliefs, my beliefs are not derived from my deism.

Then why call it deism? It only confuses people.

It is hard to stretch any definition of Atheism to be a religion. (Although I have known a few "devout" atheists who would preach the word of Darwin back at people who tried to preach to them.) It is not a religion because it lacks the spiritual and/or worship aspects of a religious belief system.

But it's still a faith. It has the same philisophical, socialogical, and spiritual implications of any religion. It still tries to explain something that it logically cannot explain, even if it is to merely explain it away.

How many people who go to church every week (translation: Christmas and Easter) go there because they want to improve their spiritual understanding? Instead, how many go there because they feel it is their obligation because organized religions have told them that god keeps attendance? Others can help you along the way, but that comes with debate and discussion while being actively involved, not from having someone standing at a podium telling you that the things a bunch of people decided hundreds of years ago is infallible. While others may help you find a path, the task of going on the journey is up to you, and it never ends.

I think you're confusing intent with actuality. The intent is for another person or people to open your mind to the enlightenment of the religion. In actuality, religion has been perverted in our society to a shell of it's former self, where people are caught up merely in symbols, secondary interpretation, or mindless following. As much as people like to say they think for themselves, you'll often find that they don't even think at all.

Everyone needs a guide, but ultimately the journey is for you alone to make in the end. Of that, you are correct.

[Amarok]

I claim page 4 in the name of my wall 'o text.

The Dark Tower: The Gunslinger[/u] by Stephen King]

That's extremely strange that you should post that today. I just finished book 7 about 10 hours ago. Fantastic series of books. Now that I've read the whole thing, I want to go back and read them again, to see all the stuff I've missed. I do plan on re-reading the first chapter of so of book 1, see how much foreshadowing there is. I would be perfectly happy to discuss the books if there is enough interest.

EDIT: Spoiler removed for those on book 4 or before.

One of the best series of books I've ever read.

I'm on book 4 currently... wizard and glass. Great books thus far.

This was by far my favorite book in the series. I love Susan Delgado.

[Chumm]

It sounds like it takes a significant amount of faith to specifically believe something does not exist without any evidence one way or the other.

The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence!

[rahvin]

quick question which so far no one has been able to answer :D


If god was an all loving entity, why would he allow children to be born with defects?


I just want to stir the pot a bit