• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Filters

Samantha Rinne

Resident Genderfluid Writer/Artist
This one is a biggie. Far beyond the question of God or the afterlife is the importance of whether our reality is even the same. And even if it is, how much of it passes through a distorted filter of our perception. Is it even possible to convince another person of anything?

Today, I was discussing intelligent design in another thread. Pretty sure nobody saw the post despite it taking up alot of space (it got swallowed by the next page). I wrote this post:


I think there is something literally in place to keep people from seeing any sort of evidence contrary to their thinking. I mean, I had like a big long post about a page ago, and nobody even notices it.

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3

They didn't seem to see that either. The people involved were engaged in a two way conversation and literally shutting everything out.

What say you? Is it even possible to convince another person of anything in spirituality? Or does everything you say get distorted in such a way that you come across sounding crazy/stupid/wrong?
 

David T

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
This one is a biggie. Far beyond the question of God or the afterlife is the importance of whether our reality is even the same. And even if it is, how much of it passes through a distorted filter of our perception. Is it even possible to convince another person of anything?

Today, I was discussing intelligent design in another thread. Pretty sure nobody saw the post despite it taking up alot of space (it got swallowed by the next page). I wrote this post:




They didn't seem to see that either. The people involved were engaged in a two way conversation and literally shutting everything out.

What say you? Is it even possible to convince another person of anything in spirituality? Or does everything you say get distorted in such a way that you come across sounding crazy/stupid/wrong?
Oh you saw "normal"....

But why is that "normal" ? I suppose here I need to qualify normal and normal on spectrum is a bell curve...... One can say I believe x Someone else will disagree and say they believe Y, and someone else will disagree with x and y and say Z is true.
That would appear superficially to be valid in each perspective, and each perspective would " believe" their perspective is different from the others. But in reality all three perspectives are totally aligned in a singular mutual agreement "I believe".

So we don't have a dialog going on but a dialectic conversation all in agreement their crainium is objective they just disagree on the sematic details is all!!!!


I am all about nature, interpersonally, the type of conversation that you are alluding to is an intellectual debate about which lntellectual statement about nature is true!!! The intellect loves itself, and to be with itself and argue with itself. . that's why many atheists find affinity to religion!!!! Lol.

Me l, I am about experiences and dialoging about art and nature and our experiences. It's wierd but reasoned I don't live in an interpreted world so nature is home to me, it most certainly not a house to be debated about how it was built. I find that to be bad religion arguing with bad science is all. And "normal" Which bad is correct? Music at this point seems deeply reasoned to me..
 
Last edited:

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
This one is a biggie. Far beyond the question of God or the afterlife is the importance of whether our reality is even the same. And even if it is, how much of it passes through a distorted filter of our perception. Is it even possible to convince another person of anything?

Today, I was discussing intelligent design in another thread. Pretty sure nobody saw the post despite it taking up alot of space (it got swallowed by the next page). I wrote this post:




They didn't seem to see that either. The people involved were engaged in a two way conversation and literally shutting everything out.

What say you? Is it even possible to convince another person of anything in spirituality? Or does everything you say get distorted in such a way that you come across sounding crazy/stupid/wrong?

Its bias, ignorance, and to some degree insecurity of leaving their comfort zone into the worldview of another. I dont see how we can convince another (without some type of force) of anything in spirituality unless it relates to their faith. Try asking a JW to be open minded to how a satanist sees things. Ask a Catholic to understand marriage between two men or two women. Spirituality (which shapes our political views too) makes some people less empathetic.

If someone tries to convince me Thr Dharma is false, Id laugh to myself. If they said art is full of mess, Id be insulted. The difference is, depending on their tone, I can talk about it. Not many religious can even though opinions poses no threat to them.
 

Samantha Rinne

Resident Genderfluid Writer/Artist
Some stereotypes there.

A Christian in general, when they hear the world Satanist is going to assume this:
http://www.dpjs.co.uk/devil.html
Not this:
A Satanist on why everything you think you know about his religion is wrong

(Assuming they're telling the truth, of course)

On the other hand, there are plenty of open-minded individuals of all faiths. And for the record, most churches nowadays do accept gay members. There is a difference between accepting members, and accepting priests. There is also a difference between accepting priests who do it in their private life, and being told they MUST hire openly gay priests or perform weddings (this basically tore the Episcopal church apart, since it was like a government mandate to perform actions or be fired for "bigotry"). The guy in Colorado? Yeah, these little ****s came from Massachusetts, could have held the wedding there, instead decided to travel to Colorado just to make a political statement or something. They ruined the guy. He was fighting for years, until finally Supreme Court handed out a verdict (we don't have right to discriminate, but these guys clearly overstepped their bounds since he was willing to bake them a cake just not participate in the wedding, and they went hysterical and sued him for that).

Here's the official stance of the Catholic Church.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church, a text which contains dogmas and teachings of the Church, names “homosexual acts” as “intrinsically immoral and contrary to the natural law,” and names “homosexual tendencies” as “objectively disordered.” While the Catholic Church does not consider “homosexual orientation” sinful in and of itself, it does have a very negative attitude toward it. The 1986 Letter states, “Although the particular inclination of the homosexual person is not a sin, it is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder.”

The fact that Catholicism does not consider the “inclination” sinful is very different from more fundamentalist Christian churches. It is one of the reasons that the Catholic Church has not officially approved of reparative therapy. The Catechism further states that “Homosexual persons are called to chastity.” However, the doctrine also specifies that, “Such persons must be accepted with respect and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.”

The actual experience of LGBTQ parishioners can vary widely across dioceses and parishes. Many Catholic communities reach out to LGBTQ members to offer as full of a welcome as possible within the limits of a Church policy that does not approve of same-sex relationships, even committed ones. Other parishes have denied membership to LGBTQ individuals and families. There have also been recent instances of LGBTQ employees in the United States being dismissed from Catholic schools and parishes following the celebration of a same-sex couple’s marriage.

TL;DR version, yes it's probably not good for you, no you're not any more a sinner than any other person. You're encouraged to be abstinent, but they shouldn't discriminate. Whether or not they do... depends on the priest.

Which is kinda the topic really. Those same words, the priests interpreted several different ways based on what they wanted. Likewise, I'm pretty sure I will never convince you from that quote that Catholics are super-accepting.
 
Top