"Religion is for people who don't want to go to hell....."

[Reverend Rick]

The OP's quote amounts to Atheist proselytizing and little else.

There are God fearing Christians, thats a given.

If you want to dismiss another person's beliefs thats fine with me, if you want to paint them as ignorant or go even another step and say what YOU think they should or should not believe you might as well pitch a tent and start preaching yourself.

 

[SageTree]

The OP's quote amounts to Atheist proselytizing and little else.

To interject a fact: The person who shared this was an intensely spiritual individual... only because he doesn't describe his practice as a religion.

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

If you want to dismiss another person's beliefs thats fine with me, if you want to paint them as ignorant or go even another step and say what YOU think they should or should not believe you might as well pitch a tent and start preaching yourself.

I agree in that it takes two to argue. Both theists and atheists can point to what they each feel is a critical reason to convince the other side is necessary. In that sense this forum does seem to serve as the common 'tent' where both can make their case, and strike down the nonsense of the opposing view. (Which certainly occurs all around.)

One of the things I like about open discussion is that it helps me to become aware of my own biases and faulty thinking. I value that much more than convincing someone else that they are wrong and I am right.

 

[InChrist]

According to the biblical scriptures Jesus is for people who don't want to go to hell.

 

[ChristineES]

Religion is for people who like to imagine other people in hell. Is that statement to broad?

I certainly wouldn't want to see ANYONE in hell- if I believed in a literal hell. And you are forgetting that there are religions- most of them, that don't have hell in their teachings at all. :sarcastic
Generalizing theists is just as bad as generalizing atheists and agnostics- don't you agree?

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

I certainly wouldn't want to see ANYONE in hell- if I believed in a literal hell. And you are forgetting that there are religions- most of them, that don't have hell in their teachings at all. :sarcastic
Generalizing theists is just as bad as generalizing atheists and agnostics- don't you agree?

:yes: Yes I do agree. I meant my question as a sign that I realize my statement is a generalization.

But hell and it's relation to reason for believing was introduced in the OP. I offered my statement as having at least equal legitimacy (and felt the need to disclaim it).

If one believes out of fear of hell, then hell becomes the punishment for those not validating the believer. One irrational conclusion demands the next. To those insecure in their first conclusion, fire and brimstone become readily available in defense of the faith.

 

[Reverend Rick]

The bottom line for me is, neither side can prove the other wrong. From my standpoint, both sides have an equal possibility of being right or wrong.

Many in our society believe science is the last word on this subject, but until I see science creating life from nothing or even finding the most simple form of life anywhere else in the universe, their theories fall flat explaining anything beyond an opinion.

If we seriously apply logic to religion, the Agnostics are the only ones who are not biased.

What I have seen here on the forum is a generation of people who despise religion because the power and control it has over social issues that they want changed.

While I have changed my position on these social issues and understand my personal beliefs should not affect others lives and we all should be free to live and love as we see fit, I also see many folks that want religion gone all together.

Instead of working together to resolve issues, things have become a push and shove proselytizing event for both sides and the results are poor at best.

You can't force people to think any certain way and the only solution to the problem is mutual respect and tolerance for one another.

 

[Thief]

I surrendered my religion (rogue theologion)
I did not surrender my faith.

 

[Thief]

The bottom line for me is, neither side can prove the other wrong. From my standpoint, both sides have an equal possibility of being right or wrong.

Many in our society believe science is the last word on this subject, but until I see science creating life from nothing or even finding the most simple form of life anywhere else in the universe, their theories fall flat explaining anything beyond an opinion.

If we seriously apply logic to religion, the Agnostics are the only ones who are not biased.

What I have seen here on the forum is a generation of people who despise religion because the power and control it has over social issues that they want changed.

While I have changed my position on these social issues and understand my personal beliefs should not affect others lives and we all should be free to live and love as we see fit, I also see many folks that want religion gone all together.

Instead of working together to resolve issues, things have become a push and shove proselytizing event for both sides and the results are poor at best.

You can't force people to think any certain way and the only solution to the problem is mutual respect and tolerance for one another.

But heaven can decide what will enter and what will be left behind.

 

[Reverend Rick]

But heaven can decide what will enter and what will be left behind.

Yes, and that is not our call to make.

 

[Father Heathen]

The bottom line for me is, neither side can prove the other wrong. From my standpoint, both sides have an equal possibility of being right or wrong.

Incorrect. Sides that are more logical and substantiated are more probable than those that are not.

 

[Thief]

Yes, and that is not our call to make.

I have considered that possibility.

Refering to scripture....I would rather be a door keep in the house of my Lord, than dwell in the tents of the wickied

What if the last man in the door takes his turn as door keep?

What if My task upon arrival becomes choosing the next man in?

I must choose carefully. The next man I allow in becomes a reflection of my judgment.

I believe I am unique in this perspective.

But no longer.....for now I have revealed a secret to many.

 

[Reverend Rick]

Incorrect. Sides that are more logical and substantiated are more probable than those that are not.

Expressing opinion as fact? Actually, if there is a God, these "logical" people would be the last ones to accept that as fact.

You all would be akin to global warming deniers if my example is true. :sorry1:

 

[LuisDantas]

Expressing opinion as fact? Actually, if there is a God, these "logical" people would be the last ones to accept that as fact.

Quite possibly.

But the point still stands, nevertheless. It is not reasonable to choose unlikely explanations just because.

Or, to put in another way: neglecting reason out of personal conviction is not a virtue, but rather a particularly poor form of hubris.

If there is a God and he does not realize that... well, why even call him a God then?

You all would be akin to global warming deniers if my example is true. :sorry1:

Everything is possible until proven false, I guess. For all I know I can be a werewolf. And the legitimate heir of Japan's throne. And a mutant refugee from Alpha Centauri. It is not quite impossible and it is certainly impossible to prove wrong.

 

[Reverend Rick]

Luis, I don't have one problem in this world with what you believe or don't believe.

Threads speculating on why religious folks think the way we do is a faulty concept at best. We all believe what we do for many reasons. There is no one concept for our beliefs and to imply as the OP does is at the very least insulting to religious folks.

While I do not have the right to not be insulted, I do not have to endure speculation and ridicule implying I am wrong because of the superior reasoning skills you all believe you have.

When you say you have the ability to find all the answers but yet you still don't demonstrate these assumptions, your rhetoric is reduced to cheap shots and falls very short of Atheist proselytizing.

Why don't we lay the cards on the table. You want everyone to think as you do so you can change or remove the control or influence religion has on society.

Your opinion is nothing more than an agenda, because the difference between us is, I don't give a tinkers damn what you believe but you care very much what others believe and wish to either change our beliefs or at the very least make fun of them. Where is the fellowship in that my friend?

 

[LuisDantas]

I have no problem with religion or belief. Much less with diversity of opinion.

Now, irrationality, that is something else entirely.

If expecting people to be rational is an agenda, than yes, I do have it.

 

[SageTree]

Nice reading this thread folks.

I sort of posted the quote on a fleeting thought.
I don't hold it as truth.

So I appreciate that this has mainly been a talking thread,
and not an arguing thread

 

[Quintessence]

In my experience, "irrationality" is what someone labels someone else's thinking when they do not understand or disagree with the reasons behind of that perspective. The word is used as a value judgement. As such, I find it almost entirely useless and unenlightening and spare others from that label at all times.

 

[Father Heathen]

Expressing opinion as fact?

Even if you wish to refer to it as opinion, opinions that are rational and substantiated by evidence are still vastly superior to opinions that are irrational and unsubstantiated by evidence.

Actually, if there is a God, these "logical" people would be the last ones to accept that as fact.

Actually, as a agnostic deist, if there was/is a god my morals and ethics wouldn't change an iota. He would descend and affirm my perspective by giving me a high five.

You all would be akin to global warming deniers if my example is true. :sorry1:

Who's "you all"?

 

[Father Heathen]

Luis, I don't have one problem in this world with what you believe or don't believe.

Threads speculating on why religious folks think the way we do is a faulty concept at best. We all believe what we do for many reasons. There is no one concept for our beliefs and to imply as the OP does is at the very least insulting to religious folks.

While I do not have the right to not be insulted, I do not have to endure speculation and ridicule implying I am wrong because of the superior reasoning skills you all believe you have.

When you say you have the ability to find all the answers but yet you still don't demonstrate these assumptions, your rhetoric is reduced to cheap shots and falls very short of Atheist proselytizing.

Why don't we lay the cards on the table. You want everyone to think as you do so you can change or remove the control or influence religion has on society.

Your opinion is nothing more than an agenda, because the difference between us is, I don't give a tinkers damn what you believe but you care very much what others believe and wish to either change our beliefs or at the very least make fun of them. Where is the fellowship in that my friend?

What oh earth are you babbling about? Personally, I think people should be free to believe and practice as they wish, as long as they don't victimize or violate the rights of others in the process. And that last part is the issue, religious folk attempting to impose their "values" upon others and reduce and/or deny other people rights, equality and liberty. It's one thing when people use religion as guideline for their own personal lives, but it's another thing entirely when it's used as a means and justification to judge, condemn and control others.