Conversion to religion
Discussion
AJL308 said:
BigLion said:
AJL308 said:
battered said:
Derek Smith said:
. Having your body messed with was seen as bad whereas having your mind twisted was not.
Nice display of your prejudices there. All religion is twisting people's minds, is it? Very well reasoned.What is rational about some bloke building a massive boat which was able to hold two of every creature on earth because said deity got pissed with everyone and decided to murder them?
What is remotely rational about wanting to murder people because they do a drawing of the deity you worship?
God does not exist. Saying that it does IS irrational.
AJL308 said:
scenario8 said:
Loads of people find religion in adulthood. I would imagine tens of thousands in the UK alone are born again Christians. (I think it's called) The Alpha course is hugely popular and successful. Finding Islam in adulthood is hardly an un-heard of phenomenon either. I imagine other faiths receive late entrants in similar fashions, too.
But how many do so with no previous religious influence at all? Being a 'born again' christian means essentially going back to Christianity, I think?Yes, people find Islam in adulthood but, again, how many come to it from a completely non-religious upbringing?
A parade of friends have suddenly discovered themselves to be devoutly Christian, Jewish, Muslim and Wiccan, each individually at that strange tipping-point between adolescence and adulthood, and I rather hate seeing it. It's never lasted yet. I had a minimally-religious childhood, got a bit more religious as a teenager, subsided back to baseline within a few years, found some marginal comfort in faith when my daughter died last year, and remain I think at a level most people would probably regard as atheist, but which is ever so slightly more than that from where I sit. But it's comfort in tradition and routine and community far, far more than it is anything else, and I can't really tell if that's actually religion or not.
BigLion said:
AJL308 said:
BigLion said:
AJL308 said:
battered said:
Derek Smith said:
. Having your body messed with was seen as bad whereas having your mind twisted was not.
Nice display of your prejudices there. All religion is twisting people's minds, is it? Very well reasoned.What is rational about some bloke building a massive boat which was able to hold two of every creature on earth because said deity got pissed with everyone and decided to murder them?
What is remotely rational about wanting to murder people because they do a drawing of the deity you worship?
God does not exist. Saying that it does IS irrational.
Suggesting that something might be the case is entirely different from deciding that it is definitely true, based on no evidence what-so-ever, basing your entire life upon it and employing the tactic of mass murder against people who disagree with you.
gregs656 said:
Derek Smith said:
All religions require suspension of logic. They require that you believe for no reason. It is twisting a person's mind. They are lied to. There is no evidence of an afterlife so the person suggesting it as a reward is telling fibs.
It is ironic that you employ a classic logical fallacy with your last sentence, given that abandoning logic is apparently your primary criticism of religion. It is not a very good criticism in any case.As an adult I know a few people who have discovered a religion. My experience is that they were drawn primarily by the community and a similar set of values.
I am an atheist personally.
As I said, I'm not anti religious - people can believe what they want to, nothing I can say will deter them - but I am anti religion. I'd suggest misogyny, immorality, superiority would be near the top. Self protection is, I think, one of the main problems for each individual religion.
I think that the history of the 'great' religions should be taught in schools as a compulsory subject. With all the internal wranglings, the power struggles, the violence, the brutality. They should also indulge in reductio ad absurdum. Too easy perhaps.
I accept people are drawn by the community. In fact that is one of the arguments I use. In the same way as someone in, for instance, a car club will remain despite no longer having the particular make of car. It's just mates.
Conversion in adult life is hardly unknown. Saul/Paul goes for a walk to the big city and suddenly feels that his life has been wasted so starts writing letters. He, more than anyone else, invents christianity.
There was G. Bush, alcoholic waster reforms and praises Jesus. Now, despite the damage done to his brain and other faculties, he thinks he's cracked it at the age of 30.
But a religion must be tempting to anyone who believes they've wasted their life. They can be made to feel special without having to actually do anything. When someone is feeling the guilt from their actions, and that must go for everyone, to be told by some bloke that they will all be forgiven is very tempting. It is, in essence, what a psychiatrist does except by way of explanation of cause. It is then easier to forget the subjection of women, the criminal rejection of condoms for those with aids, the theft of money, much from those who have little to begin with.
The stats would tend to suggest that many more people are leaving religions in mid life than are joining.
People are weird. They are illogical. All religions are man-made. They are nonsense. However, if anyone wants to join up then I won't try to stop you. But religions are sophisticated. Their advertising has been honed over the years. Each convert is a sales person. The positive thing is that most religions are failing.
I resent my taxes going to institutions that do not conform to current moral standards. The deprecation of women, homosexuals and people of other religions is offensive. Yet their staff have a part in ruling this country.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
BigLion said:
I don't believe in Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism etc. but I believe there is a good chance a life form superior to us could have created the universe.
On what evidence do you base this belief?In 14bn years we have moved from a universe the size of a singularity to one that exists today - can you imagine how advanced we will be in a millenia or two or how about 10?
Now keep that as a benchmark - we have a concept of time, but that is only specific to our universe.
We need to have a start and end point to frame our discussions. However what if time was suspended, how advanced could a life form become?
Before our universe exploded out from the singularity, time did not exist. However it is scientifically accepted that before the universe matter is likely to have existed in some form.
If matter can exist in some form, then life could also exist in some form before our universe was started - such a life form would be outside the sphere of time and physical laws we hold true in our universe.
It is not beyond the relms of belief to therefore say life could have existed before our universe was created and equally we cannot be dismissive that such a life form (infinately more advanced than us) could create a universe.
Is there more than one of these life forms, who knows.
The next question would be why create the universe - again who knows, but it's the same question as asking why on earth a well fed rich westerner would risk life and death to reach the summit of everest. We have relatively complex desires etc. so why wouldn't a life firm beyond our universe not display something along those lines?
I've read up on many religion's and I don't personally think they stack up - however I read up a bit on Sikhism and that sounded better and more coherent than most (eg religion doesn't matter as God doesn't care if you're Christian, Muslim or Jew what God does care about is how you treat others...also that living in forests to reach God or do rituals are all bulls
t).HTH.
BigLion said:
I base a 'good chance' belief on scientific logic.
It's an interesting theory, but to be pedantic it's not scientific because it's not falsifiable, and it's not logic because it makes huge leaps to reach its conclusion, rather than follow a logical process.Multiverses, the Matrix theory etc. are all equally valid - as are pretty much any descriptions of the origins of Universe - but they're not scientific explanations.
I'm a fulltime and full-blown fundamentalist churchgoing bible reading praying Christian. (not 'militant' you'll be pleased to hear, as militancy has no place in Christianity). It's something I fully understand but much of it I can't explain. And faith doesn't necessarily involve the same type of understanding as logic, science or reason.
I WISH I could explain it, but I can't. If I could I would, honest! Because it's really very satisfying.
I WISH I could explain it, but I can't. If I could I would, honest! Because it's really very satisfying.
FlyingMeeces said:
I don't actually know any figures, but I suspect quite a few - the majority of young urban Brits have had a completely non-religious upbringing these days, I suspect, although I guess that depends a little on your definitions.
It's actually quite difficult to have a completely non-religious upbringing in the UK because of the bizarre, archaic requirement for all State schools (whether faith schools or not) to have a daily act of worship of a Christian nature.Even though a lot of schools pay no more than lip service to that requirement, it's hard to ignore it completely. And, as the Jesuits are supposed to have said, "Give me the child and I'll give you the man."
BigLion said:
Moonhawk said:
T5XARV said:
A dear friend of mine lost his father recently following a battle with cancer. He tells me that in his final months he had found God, and had gained much comfort in doing so.
This was a man who lived his entire life as an atheist.
I think that is what is known as "hedging your bets".This was a man who lived his entire life as an atheist.
Live your life free from the shackles of religious dogma - when you are at deaths door convert and confess your sins.....just in case.
What have you got to lose.
An almighty, all knowing God would know your plan and treat you with the contempt you deserve for trying to deceive him and at the very least judge you how he would have judged you anyway if you hadn't tried to trick him. But for attempting to sneak past his defences he likely increase any penalty.
If he existed, which he doesn't.
lionelf said:
Logic fail.
An almighty, all knowing God would know your plan and treat you with the contempt you deserve for trying to deceive him and at the very least judge you how he would have judged you anyway if you hadn't tried to trick him. But for attempting to sneak past his defences he likely increase any penalty.
If he existed, which he doesn't.
You might like Matthew 20 vv 1-16. Deals with coming late to the party.An almighty, all knowing God would know your plan and treat you with the contempt you deserve for trying to deceive him and at the very least judge you how he would have judged you anyway if you hadn't tried to trick him. But for attempting to sneak past his defences he likely increase any penalty.
If he existed, which he doesn't.
As far as I can tell, I am quite incapable of faith; thus, presumably, to those of you who believe, I am hellbound. Yet you would also have me believe that I was created by your god, and that he knows everything about me and every decision that I must make; he or she must be a complete and utter kent.
If Diety exists....
And we as humans have been around for the best part of 250,000 years....
Why does him sending his son ( just one ) - to tell all of us to love him..... just 2000 ish years ago.
And the poor sods in Australia, Americas etc etc etc - dont get to hear about it for... oh another 14-1600 years.
Heck... He build this whole place in 1 day.
Really...
And we as humans have been around for the best part of 250,000 years....
Why does him sending his son ( just one ) - to tell all of us to love him..... just 2000 ish years ago.
And the poor sods in Australia, Americas etc etc etc - dont get to hear about it for... oh another 14-1600 years.
Heck... He build this whole place in 1 day.
Really...
Which is the religion that is correct in its teachings? According to Wiki: As of 2014, there are an estimated 4,200 different religions [in the world]
They can't all be right. Then again, do any of the religious believe that 4,199 are wrong? Evidently some do.
The odd thing is that there are a number of religions which consider their bible the inspired word of their god but even going by the same volume, they come up with vastly different interpretations. It is all rather confusing.
The major religions are businesses. They control, they dictate.
Most defenders of the faith are partial. They will argue one point, such as whether there was a census on or around the time that people reckon that their version of the saviour was born. Yet there is no similar suggestion about records of all the graves opening up at the time of the ascension? You'd think someone with a pen and a bit of paper would have been around.
So is the bible just guidelines or is it, so to speak, the bible? In the first case it is then the creation of man (surprise). In the second case it must all be true, even the bits that contradict one-another. So those who sit in the HoL and help pass laws are, to put it mildly, a bit odd to believe in either.
Much is mentioned of charity. Yet the western catholic church is very rich. This seems to me to go against what I know of its teachings. I'd much rather have the members of Medicines sans Frontiere ruling me.
The history of the church shows times of terrible crimes. Genocide, murder, rape and pillage is the norm. Most defenders would suggest that 'things' are different now and all that is in the past. OK, so we haven't had a crusade for some weeks now but what about the rape of children? That is bad enough but from a religious point of view, what about the cover-up? What about allowing these criminals to go about their despoilment of children after their crimes were known? What about the threats to the victims that if they spoke out they'd go to hell?
Religions are much as they have ever been.
In a little village in Kent we had a methodist vicar who was, to my mind, and the opinion was shared by many, a good man, with all that that entails. He dedicated his life to the welfare of others. It was an honour to know the bloke. My feeling is though that he'd have been just as dedicated if he'd been brought up in any religion. Or none.
They can't all be right. Then again, do any of the religious believe that 4,199 are wrong? Evidently some do.
The odd thing is that there are a number of religions which consider their bible the inspired word of their god but even going by the same volume, they come up with vastly different interpretations. It is all rather confusing.
The major religions are businesses. They control, they dictate.
Most defenders of the faith are partial. They will argue one point, such as whether there was a census on or around the time that people reckon that their version of the saviour was born. Yet there is no similar suggestion about records of all the graves opening up at the time of the ascension? You'd think someone with a pen and a bit of paper would have been around.
So is the bible just guidelines or is it, so to speak, the bible? In the first case it is then the creation of man (surprise). In the second case it must all be true, even the bits that contradict one-another. So those who sit in the HoL and help pass laws are, to put it mildly, a bit odd to believe in either.
Much is mentioned of charity. Yet the western catholic church is very rich. This seems to me to go against what I know of its teachings. I'd much rather have the members of Medicines sans Frontiere ruling me.
The history of the church shows times of terrible crimes. Genocide, murder, rape and pillage is the norm. Most defenders would suggest that 'things' are different now and all that is in the past. OK, so we haven't had a crusade for some weeks now but what about the rape of children? That is bad enough but from a religious point of view, what about the cover-up? What about allowing these criminals to go about their despoilment of children after their crimes were known? What about the threats to the victims that if they spoke out they'd go to hell?
Religions are much as they have ever been.
In a little village in Kent we had a methodist vicar who was, to my mind, and the opinion was shared by many, a good man, with all that that entails. He dedicated his life to the welfare of others. It was an honour to know the bloke. My feeling is though that he'd have been just as dedicated if he'd been brought up in any religion. Or none.
Troubleatmill said:
If Diety exists....
And we as humans have been around for the best part of 250,000 years....
Why does him sending his son ( just one ) - to tell all of us to love him..... just 2000 ish years ago.
And the poor sods in Australia, Americas etc etc etc - dont get to hear about it for... oh another 14-1600 years.
Heck... He build this whole place in 1 day.
Really...
Just the main structure. It was another 3 days to get the lighting, plumbing and landscaping done and 6 by the time he'd created life.And we as humans have been around for the best part of 250,000 years....
Why does him sending his son ( just one ) - to tell all of us to love him..... just 2000 ish years ago.
And the poor sods in Australia, Americas etc etc etc - dont get to hear about it for... oh another 14-1600 years.
Heck... He build this whole place in 1 day.
Really...
Derek Smith said:
There was a report, some years ago now, about conversions to a religion in adulthood compared to those who were brought up in a religion.
Fanaticism is more common in the former. Can't remember the figures.
Adult conversion included 'born again' types.
Some conversion were by way of the religious groups who go out to attract the lonely youngsters and those just arriving in a new town, perhaps running away.
We used to move on the blokes hanging around for obvious specific purposes but the religious we left alone. I felt it odd to be that discriminating. Either way you were buggered.
You could go up to a kid who had been approached by those who were after youngsters for sexual purposes and tell them what the future would hold but never did it for the religious lot. Having your body messed with was seen as bad whereas having your mind twisted was not.
Fanaticism is more common in the former. Can't remember the figures.
Adult conversion included 'born again' types.
Some conversion were by way of the religious groups who go out to attract the lonely youngsters and those just arriving in a new town, perhaps running away.
We used to move on the blokes hanging around for obvious specific purposes but the religious we left alone. I felt it odd to be that discriminating. Either way you were buggered.
You could go up to a kid who had been approached by those who were after youngsters for sexual purposes and tell them what the future would hold but never did it for the religious lot. Having your body messed with was seen as bad whereas having your mind twisted was not.
Einion Yrth said:
As far as I can tell, I am quite incapable of faith; thus, presumably, to those of you who believe, I am hellbound. Yet you would also have me believe that I was created by your god, and that he knows everything about me and every decision that I must make; he or she must be a complete and utter kent.
Your presumptions are exactly that and they are your own problem.I'm trying to work out if you are addressing anyone in particular or if it's simply rhetoric. I assume it's rhetoric or a general statement about people outside of this discussion because you'll struggle to find anyone of faith on here who will confirm your prejudices for you.
Have you ever considered that perhaps it's you, whose opinion and perception about the way of life of others is so unnecessarily negative, who is actually guilty of the type of judgemental attitude that you accuse others of?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff