Trend in RF

[PoetPhilosopher]

I like you.

I really like you too. I don't follow every thread you make all of the time, but I do know when you make a light-hearted one, you know exactly what to say, it's top-notch.

 

[Samana Johann]

people have a right to disagree

A choice (for good or bad) would be better. Would be strange where a selfcalled Atheist deprives given rights, or inherent rights from... believers, only believers...

 

[The Reverend Bob]

I really like you too. I don't follow every thread you make all of the time, but I do know when you make a light-hearted one, you know exactly what to say, it's top-notch.

Thank you my friend, I always like to see you contributing to the fun when I make those threads

 

[Samana Johann]

Spoken of kamma, one experiances: there are some not fearing to revile and encourage toward revile toward clergy, or say "religions leader"... so given one receives, upwardly or downwardly,the direction where giving into is ones choice and will mark ones fellows.

May some tend to push, beat and give into lower, and others push, beat and give into higher, that being the cause, leads to certain gatherings.

 

[Father Heathen]

People confident in their beliefs should welcome critique and scrutiny.

 

[Samana Johann]

People confident in their beliefs should welcome critique and scrutiny.

There might be two fault in this statemente, householder Father Heathen: demanding is not a religions quality, while it is if one gives is (first, thats importand!). People firm would do such, when those who are not going after their duties for gain (if even interested... which is more the point of the OP, obiviouly being not a re-ligious forum here and now.)

"In five ways, young householder, should a householder minister to ascetics and brahmans (e.g. those firm) as the Zenith:

(i) by lovable deeds,
(ii) by lovable words,
(iii) by lovable thoughts,
(iv) by keeping open house to them,
(v) by supplying their material needs.

"The ascetics and brahmans thus ministered to as the Zenith by a householder show their compassion towards him in six ways:

(i) they restrain him from evil,
(ii) they persuade him to do good,
(iii) they love him with a kind heart,
(iv) they make him hear what he has not heard,
(v) they clarify what he has already heard,
(vi) they point out the path to a heavenly state.

"In these six ways do ascetics and brahmans show their compassion towards a householder who ministers to them as the Zenith. Thus is the Zenithcovered by him and made safe and secure." Thus spoke the Exalted One. And when the Master had thus spoken, he spoke yet again:...The Layperson's Code of Discipline

It work everywhere in that way.

 

[David T]

It look like there has become a trend in RF to have threads that want to degenerate religions and spiritual life, is this form not a religious form any more? Somehow it look like the form has become a forum for people to find fault in every religion they can. And make "fun" of those who take their religion seriously.

And if someone disagree in certain topic then they are bad people?

The grearest

It look like there has become a trend in RF to have threads that want to degenerate religions and spiritual life, is this form not a religious form any more? Somehow it look like the form has become a forum for people to find fault in every religion they can. .

And if someone disagree in certain topic then they are bad people?

"And make "fun" of those who take their religion seriously".

It look like there has become a trend in RF to have threads that want to degenerate religions and spiritual life, is this form not a religious form any more? Somehow it look like the form has become a forum for people to find fault in every religion they can. And make "fun" of those who take their religion seriously.

And if someone disagree in certain topic then they are bad people?

I

I am not talking about confirmation of own belief, i have no doubt in my own belief, What i talking about is when someone in discussions or in debate talk trash about religion because some if not all religion has some moral rules that should be followed, and it is the "should" that seem to be a problem, because people do not want to be told what to do if following that religion. or what is expected of the practitioners.

Moral guidlines are always a conflict point historically regardless. I am pretty sure most of us have very similar moral guidlines in some broad ways. Usually when things get chall

When you expect people to believe your "should" and not criticize it then your "should" is definitely the problem. Not everyone is going to like your "should". Half the problems in the world are caused by "shoulds"

Well shoulds turn into musts, and musts can become dangerous.

 

[Quagmire]

I think anybody really living thier faith would be too busy to worry about any of this.

 

[Quagmire]

When you expect people to believe your "should" and not criticize it then your "should" is definitely the problem. Not everyone is going to like your "should". Half the problems in the world are caused by "shoulds"

And the other half are caused by "shoulda", the past tense of "should".

 

[Skwim]

Do you try to sidestep my OP? You do know i dont talk about sci-fi figures.
And again. I do not talk about someone attacking me personally, they attack religion in it self. But if a person is not religious why bother with what religious people say or do? it is their life to follow a religion. Atheists are not within a religion and would hence not be a part of the religious rules or guidelines. So yes some religious people do wrong too in saying bad about non belivers. But this thread is about why must non belivers "attack" belivers and their religion?

If it hasn't dawned on you, or it's something you've forgotten, let me remind you . . .

Most RF's members live in the United States where the promotion of religion is quite strong and wide spread, Some of the faithful even try to influence secular aspects of our lives with their faith based beliefs. Right now some Christians are mounting efforts to abolish or severely limit a woman's right to an abortion. Other Christians are working very hard to sneak creationism into public high school science classes. And even more prevalent are those Christians who would delight in limiting the rights of LGBTQ, and have vigorously opposed same sex marriage. In other cases they ignore our Constitution's Second Amendment that establishes a separation of church and state, and purposely violate its mandate. So it's these and other such issues that come up and generate debates. Other issues arise because of the thousands of Christian denominations in the United States where disagreements often come up over various theological differences, none of which are off limits to those outside the debating denominations, including atheists, agnostics, and simple non-believers. This isn't to say that it's only atheists who attack such positions, because many Christians are right along side them.

The point is, there are a lot of interesting religious issues to discuss and while talking among the choir may be safe and tea-party pleasant, I believe most here find the issues a lot more interesting and challenging when the "outsiders" are allowed in. Of course no one is twisting anyone's arm, so if you find talking with atheists and agnostics to be too challenging, upsetting, or whatever, you always have the option of . . . .

.

.

 

[Enoch07]

It look like there has become a trend in RF to have threads that want to degenerate religions and spiritual life, is this form not a religious form any more? Somehow it look like the form has become a forum for people to find fault in every religion they can. And make "fun" of those who take their religion seriously.

And if someone disagree in certain topic then they are bad people?

My suggestion is discuss and debate ideas with the few good ones on here that will do this in a civilized manner. Some people just like to act like petulant children. The only way they can feel good about themselves is to bully and harass people, solely because their own life is terrible.

So report those if they break a rule, and/or block em, then move on with your discussion.

 

[Nimos]

It look like there has become a trend in RF to have threads that want to degenerate religions and spiritual life, is this form not a religious form any more? Somehow it look like the form has become a forum for people to find fault in every religion they can. And make "fun" of those who take their religion seriously.

And if someone disagree in certain topic then they are bad people?

I think what is important is also to keep things separated, criticizing religions, concepts and ideas is not a personal attack. People might perceive it as such, since its their belief, but if people weren't allowed to do it, everyone would simply have to accept religions and all of their ideas, because someone might feel offended. A religion is nothing but a belief or set of ideas that one believe to be true. And since all ideas should be questioned so should religion.

 

[Valjean]

How does one discuss a subject intelligently without criticism; without weighing the good and bad, or the functional and dysfunctional? Wouldn't any intelligent poster be insulted if no-one criticized his or her proposal? Ignoring or politely acknowledging an idea is to trivialize it.
I assume posters are interested in truth. The polite and helpful thing to do in discussions is to find and point out the faults in a given proposition.

I maintain health by paying specialists to examine and find faults in my body. Assessing the health of an idea or religion is no different. It must be examined and criticized.

 

[Mock Turtle]

But if a person is not religious why bother with what religious people say or do?

Does one really have to point out that we all live in the same world, where religions undoubtedly affect the non-religious just as much as the religious - in morality, laws, etc. - do we expect some views to be beyond criticism? No doubt many of the religious do expect this but it should not be so since beliefs should all exist on a level playing field - harsh as this may seem. Which is why I detest things such as blasphemy, heresy, etc. - claiming an authority where none should exist.

Then people do not understand religion. you can NOT change a word within a true religion because then it becomes a false religion and can not save any human being. If we change to religion to fit us, then we are doomed, but if we as human beings adapt to the religious practice then we can be saved. Religion is not about what we want, it is only a way to enlighten. and one does not enlighten by changing the way the religion was first given. Not ONE word should be changed. But yes i do know this happen within mostly every religion now.

Your last sentence sums it up - in that virtually every religion has developed along these lines - which is why I tend to see them all much the same and could hardly choose between them in all honesty (especially when they all appear to be human-founded), but no doubt you don't. For me, it is a bit like rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic (discussing the finer points of any particular belief), when the top-level assertions just don't seem plausible, so why bother dealing with anything lower?

 

[sooda]

Do you try to sidestep my OP? You do know i dont talk about sci-fi figures.
And again. I do not talk about someone attacking me personally, they attack religion in it self. But if a person is not religious why bother with what religious people say or do? it is their life to follow a religion. Atheists are not within a religion and would hence not be a part of the religious rules or guidelines. So yes some religious people do wrong too in saying bad about non belivers. But this thread is about why must non belivers "attack" belivers and their religion?

You mean like ridiculing the Bible story of Elisha and the bears?

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

...because people do not want to be told what to do if following that religion. or what is expected of the practitioners.

So, you're saying that even people who follow the religion do not want to be told what needs done in order to follow the religion they have chosen to practice? I don't know that I have seen this very often. There are certainly disagreements about what is the correct course or set of behaviors to act out if you want to consider yourself an adherent to the religion, but I don't know that I have seen many people actively in a religion who go on to denounce a lot of the core things that the religion teaches.

Or are you talking about non-believers not wanting to be told "what to do," and you think they are picking apart your religion in order to "get around" having to do what you think they should be doing because your religion has prescriptions for their behavior?

Or are you talking about non-believers not caring to hear about what it is your religion is about? That they literally don't want to be told what it means to follow your religion and don't care what is expected of the practitioners?

None of these alternatives seems like very valid ground to be trying to cover. They all seem very sophomoric ideas about how your religion should interface with the rest of the world. I'm very confused.

 

[Sunstone]

Then people do not understand religion. you can NOT change a word within a true religion because then it becomes a false religion and can not save any human being. If we change to religion to fit us, then we are doomed, but if we as human beings adapt to the religious practice then we can be saved. Religion is not about what we want, it is only a way to enlighten. and one does not enlighten by changing the way the religion was first given. Not ONE word should be changed. But yes i do know this happen within mostly every religion now.

You have astonishing faith in fallible human sages.

 

[Vinayaka]

RF is one of the few larger religious sites on the net that is not a bubble site where everyone agrees with everyone else. This means that people's views will be criticized. Thus, RF is necessarily for people who can take a little criticism. That is, we can't be both diverse and a bubble site at the same time. If you see anything that you feel crosses the line into a personal attack, then you should report it to the mods.

I've been on RF for 15 years. I don't see a new trend. It's pretty much the way it's always been.

And during that time many overly sensitive people have left.They make a point. Someone disagrees, they get angry and they leave. Far more have left than have stayed.

 

[Sunstone]

And during that time many overly sensitive people have left.They make a point. Someone disagrees, they get angry and they leave. Far more have left than have stayed.

It seems like nearly everyone nowadays wants to surround themselves with people who agree with them. On college campuses, they can't even listen to speakers espouse opinions different than their own these days. Where will it all end?

My guess is it will not end well.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

And during that time many overly sensitive people have left.They make a point. Someone disagrees, they get angry and they leave. Far more have left than have stayed.

I'll try to stay myself, but my moral compass is a bit different than most people's. For example, it does take quiet time or humor, to refuel my energy tanks. My only pet peeves are boringness and medieval-style ideas.