The Reason I Don't Like Religion

[QuisUtDeus]

sorry just because you cant see anti matter doesnt mean it isnt there.

 

[Oli]

sorry just because you cant see anti matter doesnt mean it isnt there.

:roflmao:

And anti-matter isn't verifiable by other means?

 

[QuisUtDeus]

and neither is god?

 

[Oli]

and neither is god?

Which means - other than through the senses, which we know can lie to us?

 

[QuisUtDeus]

Yes they can lie to us granted. Just proving that not being able to feel the existence is just as invalid as being able to.

 

[Oli]

Yes they can lie to us granted. Just proving that not being able to feel the existence is just as invalid as being able to.

Nope - just showing that sensory perceptions shouldn't be accepted at face value.

 

[QuisUtDeus]

Ok this an example of gods divine intervention... OR just our senses lying to us. Check them out:

First the miracle
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fbhhqs3uuTU

Then the science
http://www.scientificexploration.org/jse/articles/pdf/15.2_pandarakalam.pdf

 

[Oli]

Ok this an example of gods divine intervention... OR just our senses lying to us. Check them out:

Hmmm god's divine intervention: here's the church's comment:

2 - On the basis of Church investigations of the events of Medjugorje, it cannot be determined that these events involve supernatural apparitions or revelations. This means that till now the Church has not accepted, neither as supernatural nor as Marian, any of the apparitions.

5 - As the local Bishop, I maintain that regarding the events of Medjugorje, on the basis of the investigations and experience gained thus far, throughout these last 25 years, the Church has not confirmed a single “apparition” as authentically being the Madonna. The fact that during these 25 years there has been talk of tens of thousands of “apparitions” does not contribute any authenticity to these events, which according to the words of our current Pope, who I encountered during an audience on 24 February this year, commented that at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith they always questioned how all these “apparitions” could be considered authentic for the Catholic faithful.

http://te-deum.blogspot.com/2006/07/homily-of-bishop-ratko-peric-of.html
The church itself doesn't even think they're "holy visions".

Then the science

Science?
Of a miracle? Which by definition, is beyond science?
Hmmm, the scientists couldn't even be bothered to find out that:

They particularly do not seem to be authentic when it is known beforehand that these so-called “apparitions” will occur:

To one of the “seers” on the 18th of March every year, but along with this she will also receive an “apparition” on the 2nd of each month, with “messages” which you can expect, according to the established procedures;

The second will receive an apparition on every day of the year, and if this were not enough, an added special “apparition” on the 25th of each month along with a type of press release, which once again you can foresee and expect;

The third will receive an “apparition” on the 25th of December, on Christmas day, along with a message similar to the ones already mentioned;

The fourth will receive an “apparition” on the 8th of September every year along with a specific message;

The remaining two will receive the same, every day along with “messages” that can be anticipated since they are variations on the same theme. This fact and the flood of so-called apparitions, messages, secrets and signs, do not strengthen the faith, but rather further convince us that in all of this there is nothing neither authentic nor established as truthful.

Same source.
In this case I'd say nope, it's not the senses lying, it's the people involved.

 

[Nutter]

The reason why I, personally, don't like religion is very simple. Religious people don't question what they are told. Why do religious people do that?

Having said that, I've known religious people who question their religion so that they can learn more about it. Those are the smarter ones.

Obviously the original post reflects patent disingenuity and/or outright dishonesty. This "Yonescoh" asserts, on one hand, that, and I quote, "Religious people don't question what they are told," and then, on the other hand, this "Yonescoh" yammers, "I've known religious people who question their religion ... "

So apparently, based on this "Yonescoh" character's own testimony, there are indeed religious people who question what they are told.

But of course, the record reflects that the reason this "Yonescoh" doesn't like religion "is very simple. Religious people don't question what they are told."

Obviously this "Yonescoh" mocks himself, which, in this case, is like shooting fish in a barrel.

 

[one_raven]

:roflmao:

And anti-matter isn't verifiable by other means?

No, actually it can't - as far as I'm aware.

 

[QuisUtDeus]

Hmmm god's divine intervention: here's the church's comment:



http://te-deum.blogspot.com/2006/07/homily-of-bishop-ratko-peric-of.html
The church itself doesn't even think they're "holy visions".



Science?
Of a miracle? Which by definition, is beyond science?
Hmmm, the scientists couldn't even be bothered to find out that:


Same source.
In this case I'd say nope, it's not the senses lying, it's the people involved.

That quote is pretty out of date check the link:

http://www.scientificexploration.org/jse/articles/pdf/15.2_pandarakalam.pdf

 

[Oli]

Checked it referred to it (hence my comment about "scientists").
You mean the Vatican has reversed its opinion?

 

[Yonescoh]

Other than the contradiction in what you just said may i point out:

Read what I said to Adstar:

I'm not a one-dimensional being. I know that people are not all the same.

 

[Yonescoh]

Obviously the original post reflects patent disingenuity and/or outright dishonesty. This "Yonescoh" asserts, on one hand, that, and I quote, "Religious people don't question what they are told," and then, on the other hand, this "Yonescoh" yammers, "I've known religious people who question their religion ... "

So apparently, based on this "Yonescoh" character's own testimony, there are indeed religious people who question what they are told.

But of course, the record reflects that the reason this "Yonescoh" doesn't like religion "is very simple. Religious people don't question what they are told."

Obviously this "Yonescoh" mocks himself, which, in this case, is like shooting fish in a barrel.

Again, read what I said to Adstar:

I'm not a one-dimensional being. I know that people are not all the same.

 

[jk1]

The reason why I, personally, don't like religion is very simple. Religious people don't question what they are told. Why do religious people do that?

Having said that, I've known religious people who question their religion so that they can learn more about it. Those are the smarter ones.

The following is taken from an email from the head pastor at my United Methodist Church:
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is very preliminary but I can tell you what I had in mind when I put down the theme for that Sunday. There is an area of religion that is so exciting we can hardly stand it. When we come to know it is permissible to ask questions; when we realize other people are asking the same questions; when we uncover the underlying logic of faith and we know we don’t have to believe in things that are too incredible to believe then we can wake up to something real.

I am looking to establish the idea that we have permission to take our minds and use them – in the name of God – as a faithful witness to Christ.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This is what is going on at some churches. The postmodern era is not being ignored in my faith. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater and miss a real connection with the power I call God because of religion, even if it is sometimes tedious.

I value the dialog.

 

[Yonescoh]

The following is taken from an email from the head pastor at my United Methodist Church:
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is very preliminary but I can tell you what I had in mind when I put down the theme for that Sunday. There is an area of religion that is so exciting we can hardly stand it. When we come to know it is permissible to ask questions; when we realize other people are asking the same questions; when we uncover the underlying logic of faith and we know we don’t have to believe in things that are too incredible to believe then we can wake up to something real.

I am looking to establish the idea that we have permission to take our minds and use them – in the name of God – as a faithful witness to Christ.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This is what is going on at some churches. The postmodern era is not being ignored in my faith.

I'm glad to see that. I hope that is a growing trend.

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater and miss a real connection with the power I call God because of religion, even if it is sometimes tedious.

Religion is a set of dogmas, doctrines and rituals based on illogical ideas. Spiritualism is a different story. What your priest was teaching there was spiritualism- not religion.

I value the dialog.

So do I.

 

[jk1]

So you don't think it is religion he was preaching, because he is talking about being a faithful witness to Christ and using God-given intellect?

 

[one_raven]

Religion is a set of dogmas, doctrines and rituals based on illogical ideas. Spiritualism is a different story. What your priest was teaching there was spiritualism- not religion.

I agree, though they are not all necessarily based on illogical ideas.

In a recent discussion here, I said, essentially:

In order to accept the entire doctrine and set of dogmatic laws of any religion ceated by anyone but yourself, you must necessarily become an apologist in definding the "reason" of said doctrine.

The reason I don't belong to any religion is that to claim to be an adherent, if you do not accept the entirety of the religion, part and parcel, you are a hypocrite.
To fully accept the entire religion, part and parcel, you must justify the reasoning (to yourself and/or others), thereby becoming an apologist for the teachings.

Whether you are a strict adherent of a religion, falsely claim to be a strict adherent or disregard pieces and parts of a religion and claim to be a follower none the less, you are being dishonest with yourself and others.
Religion necessarily makes people dishonest.

Belief in God, may not make people dishonest (non-belief certainly doesn't) but codification and canonization certainly does.

 

[Tht1Gy!]

The reason why I, personally, don't like religion is very simple. Religious people don't question what they are told. Why do religious people do that?

Having said that, I've known religious people who question their religion so that they can learn more about it. Those are the smarter ones.

I get this*. I suppose my brain just puts in the word "Most" as in: "Most religious people..."
Why you all bustin' his chops? Make the leap, Yo?

... Why do religious people do that?

Cuz authority don't like to be challenged, ya know?. And, um, It gets, um, twitchy, ya know, and does things like: Throw you in a dungeon, or burn you at the stake, or calls you an enemy combatant, etc.



*I'm not saying that I agree, or disagree, just, I understand.