Religious Beliefs

[BiCoastal Kid]

I have to say I'm with Laura on this. You can't really accept the person without also accepting their beliefs. Anything else is superficial and hence pointless. Why would you say you accept somebody if you were not also okay with their lifestyle. That's diluting to the strength of your own faith that you would willingly put on a facade of acceptance when in reality you are just tolerating.

 

Because then you completely dilute your own beliefs by watering down what you believe with what others believe.

 

No. Just because you accept what others believe does not mean you incorporate them into your own. You may still disagree with their beliefs, but you can accept them as just as valid.

 

See, since you've never truely tried this, you cant understand how to seperate the two. Such as premarital sex. Its part of alot of peoples lifestyles. I disagree with it. But if I go around just accepting it because alot of people do it, how am I practicing what I believe? How am I being different from everyone else if I just accept all the things I am supposed to view as wrong? and I become a hypocrite if I say its wrong, then go and do it. Just as I would also be a hypocrite to myself if I told everyone its "ok" but inside I viewed it as wrong. That path leads to Universalism where everything is "ok". A highly dangerous path.

 

First, I don't know how you got the authority to say that I've never tried something, but I'd appreciate it if you didn't.

 

How are you practicing your beliefs if you accept it? Well, just because you accept it doesn't mean you do it, right? Accepting is not the same as doing.

 

It doesn't make you a hypocrite if you tell them it's okay but disagree with it. It's okay by their beliefs but not yours. Nobody has any right to tell somebody if they are right or wrong. You have your own beliefs, they are just as valid as anybody else's. Thus, saying it's okay is more of a decree of passiveness towards their actions, it's not so much stating that you think it's good.

 

The only time it's okay for you to tell somebody else they are wrong is when their actions or beliefs affects somebody in an adverse way. If they aren't affecting you or anybody else, why should you care? That's just zealousness and it will come across offensive and could lead to even more argumentation, and from there it's a domino effect as you begin to "condemn" increasingly often.

 

But the catch to that is that Im not doing the condemning. But I still view it as wrong. Its when people seperate the two entities, then condemn that things get really sticky. Read the story in the Bible of the adulterer that no one condemns. Did Jesus say what she did was ok or that he accepted it? No. He mearly said that since the others were no more rightous than her, that they do not condemn - and neither does he. So go and turn from what wrong you did. Simple.

 

I don't understand how there is difference between telling somebody they're wrong and condemning them. Unless by condemning you mean sentencing to hell, then yeah there's a difference because you could never hope to have that power.

 

However, if by condemning you means telling somebody they're going to hell....

TheBannedKid - I find this popping up alot now, where its somehow wrong to believe others are wrong or going to hell. Why is your sister suddenly a bad person for believing someone is going to hell? If what she believes differs from a Jew, then wouldnt she obviously come to that conclusion? Im just perplexed as to why that voids her from trying to live a pure life.

 

Then that's pretty hypocritical, in my opinion.

 

And your statement that faith is not an action is proposterous. The very CORE of faith is action. The emotional part is far less a part of faith than action. The faith you speak of sounds like just emotional belief. Real faith is tested and acted upon.

 

For one, Knowledge is an essential part of faith. The story of Peter walking on the water - thats hardly emotional and purely action. If you NEVER test your faith, its not faith at all. Action is the core faith - without it, faith doesnt even exist.

 

We kind of agree on this. To me, the action involved in faith is simply living by your faith. Tests will come along the way, yes. However, actually having faith does not take effort. Practicing faith, yes; having it, no.

[Real]

Rock, heres the thing though. I can think that someone elses beliefs are invalid, but how I go about relaying that will completely shape the entire situation.

 

In Jesus life, I cant think of only a few instances where Jesus condemned in a way that is what you guys are talking about. Majority of the time, he did what Christians are called to do - love. Its the basis for following Jesus. Its also more dangerous than anything weve discussed here because it usually ends up making people examine themselves in ways that tend to upset them.

 

The difference for between condemning and telling someone they are wrong lies in the action. If you condemn someone, you cant show them much love. Condemnation is more of an act than simply saying, you are wrong. I do it on a daily basis at my work where I work with my employees to help them do things the correct way. I can tell them they are wrong and not change how I treat them. But if I full out condemn what they do, Im going to change myself because its the nature of condemning. Condemnation requires hate where telling someone they are wrong, does not.

 

 

What scares me most is when a Christian may simply tell someone what they believe - which may include saying they dont agree with someones beliefs - and they dont change their lifestyle or how they treat that person, but the other reacts extremely negatively. I see it alot on internet boards especially.

 

Ive got one gay friend in particular who I think is awesome. He knows I dont agree with that, but Ive never treated him any different than any one else I know. I am fairly certain he doesnt think or treat me any different from anyone else he knows, and I would be saddened if I found out he did because it wouldnt make any sense.

 

 

If more Christians just went out and loved people, more people would ask them why because its just not normal these days. Hate rules the land so anyone whos just outwardly loves people is constantly asked why, why and why. I find that, as been said before, far too many think they need to take their beliefs to everyone elses face. Its just not effective.

 

 

Ill leave with this quote from a dcTalk song:

 

"The greatest single cause of atheism in the world today

Is Christians who acknowledge Jesus with their lips

Then walk out the door and deny him by their lifestyle.

That is what an unbelieving world simply finds unbelievable."

[waterviper]

I will accept everyone and anyone. You can even be a devil worshiper and are welcome to be my friend. Just dont go pushin the beliefs on me and everything will be ok.

[NoahTheBoa]

deleted my original post because after rereading it it seemed rude

[BiCoastal Kid]

Real

 

I think up until now there were just6 errors in communication. I agree that the best way to go about living is to "love" people. I call it respect, and hence it does bear certain differences in the way we go about it, but in essence I think we share that being nice is generally the best bet.

 

On condemning I think it's very hard to discern on religious topics. There's no way to tell somebody they are wrong about their beliefs without it coming across as hostile, and thus I personally think that telling somebody they are wrong about their believes is in essence the same as condemning them, to an extent.

 

But I think your statement about misunderstanding, on the internet and other, applies to all religions. It happens whenever people have differing views, yet have little respect for the views of others.

[krouvi]

I am Jewish but I am not religous at all.

 

I do believe in god and I think we all have the same god, However the differences in point of views make us different believing in doing this or doing that.

 

The basics are to be good in your heart and share some of that goodness with others. This is the core of everything.

[pagemaster_b]

I grew up as a Mormon. Most mainstream Christians don't think that Mormons are Christians despite the offical name of the Mormon church is "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints." I admit I rarely go to church these days, and my standards have certainly dropped off a little. I've never had qualms about any of the Mormon tenants or beliefs, but most of my problems have stemmed from the members. And my depression has made it more difficult. And of course, the military doesn't help any.

 

There are a lot of misconceptions and falsehoods about the Mormons, none of which is true. For some odd reason, people take offense because we believe in modern-day revelation, religious scriptures of people living on the American Continent between 600 BC and 400 AD, that the Godhead is made of three distinct individuals, and that God and Jesus Chirst have physical bodies just like you and me. I've been inside the temples and there are no blood sacrifices, no secret poligamy weddings, no digging up graves, no satanic rituals of any kind. And no, I am not brainwashed. If people took half an effort and look at our religion, they would know that all the anti-Mormon literature and propaganda is nothing but garbage. (There is a reason why the Mormon church is one of the fastest growing religions in the world.)

 

 

 

 

Anyways, this is one of my favorite internet stories about science and religion:

 

Essays

 

The following is supposedly an actual question given on a University of Washington chemistry mid-term. The answer by one student was so "profound" that the professor shared it with colleagues, via the Internet, which is, of course, why we now have the pleasure of enjoying it as well.

 

Bonus Question: Is Hell exothermic (gives off heat) or endothermic (absorbs heat)?

 

Most of the students wrote proofs of their beliefs using Boyle's Law (gas cools when it expands and heats when it is compressed) or some variant.

 

One student, however, wrote the following:

 

First, we need to know how the mass of Hell is changing in time. So we need to know the rate at which souls are moving into Hell and the rate at which they are leaving. I think that we can safely assume that once a soul gets to Hell, it will not leave. Therefore, no souls are leaving.

 

As for how many souls are entering Hell, let's look at the different religions that exist in the world today. Most of these religions state that if you are not a member of their religion, you will go to Hell. Since there is more than one of these religions and since people do not belong to more than one religion, we can project that all souls go to Hell.

 

With birth and death rates as they are, we can expect the number of souls in Hell to increase exponentially. Now, we look at the rate of change of the volume in Hell because Boyle's Law states that in order for the temperature and pressure in Hell to stay the same, the volume of Hell has to expand proportionately as souls are added.

 

This gives two possibilities:

 

1. If Hell is expanding at a slower rate than the rate at which souls enter Hell, then the temperature and pressure in Hell will increase until all Hell breaks loose.

 

2. If Hell is expanding at a rate faster than the increase of souls in Hell, then the temperature and pressure will drop until Hell freezes over.

 

So which is it?

 

If we accept the postulate given to me by Teresa during my Freshman year that, "it will be a cold day in Hell before I go out with you", and take into account the fact that I went out with her last night, then number 2 must be true, and thus I am sure that Hell is exothermic and has already

frozen over.

 

The corollary of this theory is that since Hell has frozen over, it follows

that it is not accepting any more souls and is therefore, extinct . . . leaving only Heaven, thereby proving the existence of a divine being which explains why, last night, Teresa kept shouting "Oh my God!"

 

THIS STUDENT RECEIVED THE ONLY "A."

[BiCoastal Kid]

I've been inside the temples and there are no blood sacrifices, no secret poligamy weddings, no digging up graves, no satanic rituals of any kind. And no, I am not brainwashed.

 

Maybe you are and all those things really DID happen!

[Real]

On condemning I think it's very hard to discern on religious topics. There's no way to tell somebody they are wrong about their beliefs without it coming across as hostile, and thus I personally think that telling somebody they are wrong about their believes is in essence the same as condemning them, to an extent.

 

No doubt its hard to do, but I could demonstrate (especially IRL) easily, almost on a daily basis. If you even look up the definition of condemn, the very first section is on judgement - passing judgement - the very passage I was using in my last post talked about that. I can disagree with someone and think they are wrong, but its different than passing judgement.

 

Because obviously you and alot of others would disagree with my beliefs which is expected. Its just when its taken to the action of condemnation, thats when its a problem and Ill be the first to tell ya - yea, its a problem within many Christian churches sadly.

 

But you cant fault the people who are in those churches and you cant even fault the ones who lead them. They a following a model that was put forth by a perfect person with the expectations of perfection. Impossible without the grace we are given. The second strike against it is the majority of people will corrupt any given system or belief.

 

No one here can claim they arent a hypocrite to something because we all trip up. I find that not only do alot of these "christians" need to get a grip, loosen up and start reading what Love really is, but the same can be said for the rest of the world who stands ready to pass judgement on any christian that trips - Ive been victim to that type of person many times already.

[thefitness]

I'm a Christian,I try not to stick to any "division" of Christianity.I've been to Baptist,Catholic,and Episcopalian churches I agree and disagree with some things in all the churches.That's why I just classify myself as Christian.

[sfmmFREAK]

Right now, i'm pretty grey on the idea of religion. I was brought up catholic, but at the moment, i guess you could classify me as Athiest.

[FlyingScooter]

i was born and raised Methodist. We're not supposed to drink, smoke, have premarital sex or dance.

 

I'm not a very good Methodist.

 

I guess i'm more spiritualistic than anything else.

[speedracer]

But you cant fault the people who are in those churches and you cant even fault the ones who lead them. They a following a model that was put forth by a perfect person with the expectations of perfection. Impossible without the grace we are given. The second strike against it is the majority of people will corrupt any given system or belief.

 

True I can't fault them for their belief, but I can absolutely fault them for unquestionably believing in a book written and re-written by man hundreds if not thousands of times over the centuries, picking and choosing only what they want out of it to validate their own personal agenda, all while unquestionably condeming anyone who doesn't agree with them. The below clip from West Wing best represents the hypocrisy:

 

http://youtube.com/watch?v=rHaVUjjH3EI

 

One thing to believe in a supreme being, quite another to base your entire life and belief system on a man-made book written by man. Why I also have no use for man-made organized religions.