Your religious views and positions on matters such as God and the meaning of life?

[FredWolfLeonardo]

Originally Posted by Leonardo_thebest

We know there are more than two genders, as gender isn't as binary as we once thought. It's not the norm, if by norm you mean percentages of a population, but that doesn't mean it isn't normal, in that it's a biological possibility that doesn't indicate "crazy" as you put it.

In all seriousness though, may you please not bring the gender stuff into this thread and stick on-topic, please? This has been a great thread since its inception, and it would be a shame if it got shut down due to needless arguing.

[plastroncafe]

A little respect goes a long way.
Especially when one is attempting to keep a thread on topic.

[Leonardo_thebest]

I'm trying. I really am. Even when I agree with them, I'm wrong, apparently.

[FredWolfLeonardo]

Originally Posted by Leonardo_thebest

I'm trying. I really am. Even when I agree with them, I'm wrong, apparently.

Its ok, I hope we can have some good discussion here

Lets all agree to leave the arguements about gender in the other thread, refrain from personal attacks and talk about topics like God, religion and the meaning of life What faith were you raised with? Was religion ever important to you growing up? What standard of evidence would you accept if you ever were to become religious again? Lets hear from you

[Sumac]

Originally Posted by Redeemer

Wasn't trying to be dismissive, I just thought it was funny how small and insignificant you made the entire world

Well, in the grand scheme of things our world and our individual existences are insignificant.

For what if not just a tiny speck of sand our world, in a vast emptiness of Cosmos?

Originally Posted by Redeemer

The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. But I do understand your logic and thats why we call it faith. You always have to have faith in any religion or world view. As far as evolution I believe in micro-evolution/adaptation, but not macro-evolution.

I disagree.
First, if you don't have evidences, then why I or anyone should believe you?
And second, in case of religions it's not only about absence of evidence, but presence of multiple evidences that religion is a lie, from first word to the last.

And what are you understanding as a macro-evolution?

So you believe that one species can evolve into the other, similar one, but say you don't believe that frog can evolve into lizard or bacteria can evolve into more complicated organism?
Because, believing in one and discarding the other doesn't make any sense, since they are using essentially the same mechanisms at its core.

Originally Posted by FredWolfLeonardo

In all seriousness though, may you please not bring the gender stuff into this thread and stick on-topic, please? This has been a great thread since its inception, and it would be a shame if it got shut down due to needless arguing.

He is a rude troll, who plays victim.
He can't stop - otherwise who's gonna feed his hungry babbling mouth?

Answered for post of Leonrado The Troll here:
Link
Let's see how this fake progressive is interested in discussion.

[Leonardo_thebest]

Originally Posted by FredWolfLeonardo

Its ok, I hope we can have some good discussion here

Lets all agree to leave the arguements about gender in the other thread, refrain from personal attacks and talk about topics like God, religion and the meaning of life What faith were you raised with? Was religion ever important to you growing up? What standard of evidence would you accept if you ever were to become religious again? Lets hear from you

The meaning of life? it's like what's the meaning of hardwood, or what is the meaning of the sky. Why do people think their lives are significant? It's really funny to me.
I wasn't raised with faith, if that helps.

The standard of evidence is equally amusing; reminiscent of people chasing Bigfoot, or claiming the easter bunny really makes all those wonderful Cadbury eggs. I would argue its nonsense, and then the response is :

Originally Posted by FredWolfLeonardo

What standard of evidence would you accept if you ever were to become religious again?

It's a loaded question, putting the onus on me to defend my position.
So I'll return the favor: What gender is God? Not a long debate, a one-word answer will do.


Hey, Sumac, you can't use yourself as a citation. That's not how that works. go find evidence that you're correct from a peer-reviewed scientific paper, and use it to back up your claims.
Show me the science, and I'll be quiet.
Oh, and please argue that our difference of opinion makes me a Troll, because that's how you win arguments, right?
You're on the wrong side of the argument, but you will learn.

[FredWolfLeonardo]

I believe God is genderless.

Keep in mind when I say gender, I'm referring to the two biological sexes, each being required for reproduction. Since God does not reproduce in my faith, I would not say that he is Male or Female.

I don't believe Jesus is God, so I don't believe that God took on the form of a gendered individual either. Instead, I would describe God as a transcendant being on a dimension that humans are modelled after due to being created in his image, but in a way that makes God completely unlike any of his creation.

[Leonardo_thebest]

Originally Posted by FredWolfLeonardo

I believe God is genderless.

Your religion states God made people in their image.
You believe God is genderless.

See where I'm going with this?

Is God also omnipotent and omniscient? Is God fallable?

[Sumac]

Originally Posted by FredWolfLeonardo

I believe God is genderless.

Keep in mind when I say gender, I'm referring to the two biological sexes, each being required for reproduction. Since God does not reproduce in my faith, I would not say that he is Male or Female.

I don't believe Jesus is God, so I don't believe that God took on the form of a gendered individual either. Instead, I would describe God as a transcendant being on a dimension that humans are modelled after due to being created in his image, but in a way that makes God completely unlike any of his creation.

But according to your book he made Adam in his image and then made Eve from Adam's rib.
Though, according to other version there was Lilith...

In general, I am not really sure how do you approach religion?

I thought that religious people believe must believe in everything which is written in their "holy books", because they are the words of their deities, which mean you can not just pick and choose stuff that you like from them and discard everything else.
Even, though, that is exactly what organized Church and various reformators were doing with religions throughout the human history.

Originally Posted by Leonardo_thebest

Hey, Sumac, you can't use yourself as a citation. That's not how that works. go find evidence that you're correct from a peer-reviewed scientific paper, and use it to back up your claims.
Show me the science, and I'll be quiet.
Oh, and please argue that our difference of opinion makes me a Troll, because that's how you win arguments, right?
You're on the wrong side of the argument, but you will learn.

I put link to a thread, not as citation. A very lousy attempt at trolling, honey.

Also, I won't change my mind, because, I won't accept claims of psychologically or genetic challenged people for something that they can not be.
Much as I won't accept claims of some psychos that they can fly, breath underwater or eat metal.

[Leonardo_thebest]

Originally Posted by Sumac

I put link to a thread, not as citation. A very lousy attempt at trolling, honey.

Also, I won't change my mind, because, I won't accept claims of psychologically or genetic challenged people for something that they can not be.
Much as I won't accept claims of some psychos that they can fly, breath underwater or eat metal.

So, like I said, support your claim. It's all just opinion on your part. It's okay, you'll learn.

[MsMarvelDuckie]

I have a feeling, a belief if you will, that this thread is about to implode on itself from you teo. I'd like to post my thoughts before it does, but that would probably just help it along. Suffice to say, Sumac never did answer my questions earlier, but I'm not surprised. Dedlecting questions by replying with circular arguments that basically say nothing is pretty much Sumac's schtick at this point.

As for the rest, my beliefs and religious upbringing and history were posted several pages back. I am a converted Wiccan, from a moderately Church of Christ family. The reason I switched is that for me, nature-based religion peaks to my inner nature child far more than some book written by men hundreds of years ago about a temperamental father figure who keeps demonstrating his "love" by punishing his followers for the same transgresion (that dang tree they plundered) over and over. I prefer Mother Earth as an impartial and non-judgememtal parent who simply stands back and lets us learn from our own mistakes. We stand or fall on our own choices.

For qhat it is worth, I have seen all the proof I ever need for my deities, when they have repeatedly answered my call for aid when I needed it, in some cases spectacularly so.

[newfan]

Originally Posted by MsMarvelDuckie

For qhat it is worth, I have seen all the proof I ever need for my deities, when they have repeatedly answered my call for aid when I needed it, in some cases spectacularly so.

This is just it, it only needs to be proof enough for the people who want to follow it and we are all free to decide what feels right or makes sense to us.
Don't get me wrong, I find debates and looking at various views interesting, just a shame it sometimes escalates in to ridicule and attacks rather than discussion but this topic can do that.

[plastroncafe]

That's kind of the trick about faith though, isn't it?
Beliefs sans proof.

[FredWolfLeonardo]

Originally Posted by plastroncafe

That's kind of the trick about faith though, isn't it?
Beliefs sans proof.

From a religious perspective (atleast mine), faith does not mean to believe in the existence in a deity whom you are unsure even exists. In the theological framework of the Abrahamic faiths, every single human is absolutely aware of and knows of God's existence innately. Faith merely means to put your trust in God and to make him the sole authority in all matters of life, believing that he is the key to your eternal happiness and the meaning of your existence.

[plastroncafe]

Originally Posted by FredWolfLeonardo

From a religious perspective (atleast mine), faith does not mean to believe in the existence in a deity whom you are unsure even exists. In the theological framework of the Abrahamic faiths, every single human is absolutely aware of and knows of God's existence innately. Faith merely means to put your trust in God and to make him the sole authority in all matters of life, believing that he is the key to your eternal happiness and the meaning of your existence.

Yeah, that's kind of why I left.

[Sumac]

Originally Posted by FredWolfLeonardo

From a religious perspective (atleast mine), faith does not mean to believe in the existence in a deity whom you are unsure even exists. In the theological framework of the Abrahamic faiths, every single human is absolutely aware of and knows of God's existence innately. Faith merely means to put your trust in God and to make him the sole authority in all matters of life, believing that he is the key to your eternal happiness and the meaning of your existence.

Ugh...This logic is what decidedly repulses me about religions.
The fact that its books and followers, believe that all humans, regardless of their origins somehow believers by default, is rather disturbing.

Originally Posted by MsMarvelDuckie

I have a feeling, a belief if you will, that this thread is about to implode on itself from you teo. I'd like to post my thoughts before it does, but that would probably just help it along. Suffice to say, Sumac never did answer my questions earlier, but I'm not surprised. Dedlecting questions by replying with circular arguments that basically say nothing is pretty much Sumac's schtick at this point.

I have answered your question.
The fact that you didn't noticed or didn't like the answer or could not comprehend it - is not my problem.
Stop with cheap baiting, please.

Originally Posted by Leonardo_thebest

So, like I said, support your claim. It's all just opinion on your part. It's okay, you'll learn.

Dream on.

[FredWolfLeonardo]

Originally Posted by Sumac

Ugh...This logic is what decidedly repulses me about religions.
The fact that its books and followers, believe that all humans, regardless of their origins somehow believers by default, is rather disturbing.

Not believers by default, but "know" that God exists by default and have the choice to believe and have faith in him (and be eternally happy as a result) or not believe in him (by having faith in something else which does not bring eternal happiness, aka idolatry).

[Leonardo_thebest]

Originally Posted by FredWolfLeonardo

In the theological framework of the Abrahamic faiths, every single human is absolutely aware of and knows of God's existence innately. Faith merely means to put your trust in God and to make him the sole authority in all matters of life, believing that he is the key to your eternal happiness and the meaning of your existence.

That's the saddest thing I could possibly imagine. Believing that the key to my happiness lies outside of myself.

It sounds like slavery. It sounds like Hell.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by FredWolfLeonardo

From a religious perspective (atleast mine), faith does not mean to believe in the existence in a deity whom you are unsure even exists. In the theological framework of the Abrahamic faiths, every single human is absolutely aware of and knows of God's existence innately. Faith merely means to put your trust in God and to make him the sole authority in all matters of life, believing that he is the key to your eternal happiness and the meaning of your existence.

Yikes... and I mean yikes.

[Sumac]

Originally Posted by FredWolfLeonardo

Not believers by default, but "know" that God exists by default and have the choice to believe and have faith in him (and be eternally happy as a result) or not believe in him (by having faith in something else which does not bring eternal happiness, aka idolatry).

Sounds like authoritarian ********.
"Believe in our glorious leader and be happy, oppose him - and be destroyed!"
Where have I seen it before? Hm...

Also, for religion that insists that "love is for everyone", it's like complete opposite of love. More like rape.

Though, any ideology, no matter how peaceful it proclaim itself, is about giving love only to select few - either zealots or richmen. Everyone else might go **** themselves and be burned at stakes, tortured or exterminated. Because, they don't believe, therefore they don't deserve love.