Why do so many religious people care what others believe?

[LuisDantas]

It is (biblically and logically speaking) less than reasonable to ignore the endless parades of persons who say God is self-evident to them as well as the final judgment of the wicked and righteous.

Biblically, perhaps.

 

[1robin]

We are social animals, we are all human beings, and we evolved to have pro-social characteristics. I do not understand why anyone needs more than that for an equitable, just, and moral society. And why do we need religion and faith and god for meaning and purpose? What good does hope do us in the face of facts? And what inherent value do we have? We like to say we are so valuable and important, but in the grand-scheme of things we're less than fleas hoping around on less than a moss-covered speck of iron adrift in the incomprehensibly vast cosmos. And doesn't #3 also go against the humility that Jesus taught?

What your describing isn't right and wrong, it's speciesm. For humans to thrive just about every other species on the planet must suffer. Your trying to rationalize away the fact that without God we are just picking what ethics we live by based on preference not truth. Are you suggesting moral values are the result of evolution?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

What your describing isn't right and wrong, it's speciesm.

If I tried to claim we had inherent value, you'd have a point, but my point was the exact opposite, in that we are nothing special.

Your trying to rationalize away the fact that without God we are just picking what ethics we live by based on preference not truth.

You seem to ignore my point that we have evolved to have these pro-social behaviors. We don't need god to have them. And with god, what you are given is what you are given. There is no room for improvement, change, or acting upon knew knowledge, only cherry-picking what to follow or not.

 

[Jumi]

You shared ONE. I'm citing from THOUSANDS of religious traditions.

There are thousands of Christian traditions, but it's better to be right than just follow what some people say without being able to prove it.

Regardless, you should be self-aware of God's judgment.

No one is, that's just indoctrinated into people. God is much bigger than that.

You don't understand the difference between torture and punishment? Really?
A child is put in time out, the tortured get beaten, abused, waterboarded, etc.

Your idea of hell is an eternal timeout type of punishment? You don't think putting a child in the basement for trillions of years is not torture? Really?

People not perfected by the cross of Christ are in eternal time out, not in eternal torturous agony.

Sounds like your view of God rejects most humans. Why would your "God" even create people if he just wanted them to be eternally suffering somewhere?

And it isn't enough to have "read the Bible". You can and need to go outside the Bible to confirm which Bible prophecies have occurred as historical fact, proving the scriptures.

It's fine if you believe that, but I don't have proof of those. I'd much rather have God than your religions interpretations of human morals or prophecies.

 

[BilliardsBall]

There are thousands of Christian traditions, but it's better to be right than just follow what some people say without being able to prove it.


No one is, that's just indoctrinated into people. God is much bigger than that.


Your idea of hell is an eternal timeout type of punishment? You don't think putting a child in the basement for trillions of years is not torture? Really?


Sounds like your view of God rejects most humans. Why would your "God" even create people if he just wanted them to be eternally suffering somewhere?


It's fine if you believe that, but I don't have proof of those. I'd much rather have God than your religions interpretations of human morals or prophecies.

Not to play semantics, but you put yourself in timeout, which is what you did when you were a child. Adults go to Heaven.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Biblically, perhaps.

Not just biblically. Over 98% of the people I know personally identify as self-aware of a judging God and live in that light.

Come into the light.

 

[Jumi]

Not to play semantics, but you put yourself in timeout, which is what you did when you were a child. Adults go to Heaven.

I've put myself nowhere, it's you who judge me on your human "wisdom" as someone who deserves to rot for eternity. But I wouldn't be so optimistic if I were you, I've experienced God, where you are only believing as you interpret the texts.

 

[1robin]

What is so misguided about putting spiritual knowledge before middle-men?

I am not sure what that means.

When Christians who "won" didn't read the Bible, the Gnostics read it.

Won what? Who didn't read the bible.

When Christians banned books, the Gnostics had them.

Which Christians and what book?

When Christians were against personal experience (such as your being "born again"), the Gnostics were for it. I'll edit this a bit: this is not to say that these were the "true Christians", but the reason why Christianity thrived is because of those who persecuted the other religions and heretics.

Your over generalizing all over the place. Christians have always believed in personal experience including the born again experience, you simply wrong about that.

Originally the Gnostics and Christians were brothers in being persecuted by Empires. Only that when Christians came to dominate, they started oppressing the Gnostics, yet the Gnostics survived and even their books were found, being buried by Christian monks who wanted to save them from the other Christians. But I'm sure you already knew this.

No, in 13000 debates, decades in church and in religious investigation, and watching 100s of hours worth of professional theological debate I have never heard anyone mention or even hint that any Christians buried any Gnostic books for later use by Christians. The canonization process is very well known (including the books they excluded).

Or a humanistic foundation. It depends on what you are basing your views on.

It does not matter what label you use what I said is still true:

Evolution (or biology) alone has never made two equal things in history. No one is equal to another in a natural context. If racial equality exists you won't find it or it's foundations in nature. If we are all equal then it must have a supernatural foundation.

Humanism which is just another group of humans can't make people actually equal either.

No human has your rights to give you. No government has a rights warehouse whey they distribute them to us. Nature can only tell us what is happening it can never tell us what should happen.

What I mean is, this exists in most places of the world without your religion. Why should your religion get the credit for something that it doesn't own?

First your going to have to tell what it is you think I am claiming Christianity owns.

You can choose what you base your views on.

This is still not an argument.

Prove then points of your objective morality and I'll consider what you say.

What does "prove then points" mean?

I see that clearly with religions. People who are born gay are "oughted" to be something else, often forcibly, often just pressured into being something they're not.

I see that the answer is No, you are not familiar with the is - ought gap. I said ought not out. Your just not that experienced with philosophy are you?

The opposite of that, actually. Where people think scripture alone is worth consideration, the Gnostic looks first to experiential knowledge. Here the similarity with your modern Christianity and Gnosticism is apparent. It was experiential knowledge that was banned by the Church why the Gnostics were persecuted.

The foundation of Gnosticism was a heretical fringe that "claimed" they were following Judeo-Christian doctrines but were in fact denying them. Judeo Christian core doctrine states that man is separated from God by sin, therefore your claims of personal experience (unless you are a born again Christian) defy the foundations of Gnosticism themselves. The only doorway to personal experience of God is through Christ.

John 14:6
Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.
Ephesians 2:18
for through Him we both have our access in one Spirit to the Father.

So unless you personally know Christ you are cut off from any personal experience of God according to the text the original Christians and Gnostics are supposed to adhere to.

The usual meaning of gnostikos in Classical Greek texts is "learned" or "intellectual"
Gnosticism - Wikipedia
Not experiential.

Then that experience is something people of all religions experience with their scripture. Gnosis is different, it gives you experience of God. After that, it doesn't matter if you say "God is this, God is that" and point to scripture for your proof, because you have experienced it and nothing can take it away.

See the above.

 

[LuisDantas]

Not just biblically. Over 98% of the people I know personally identify as self-aware of a judging God and live in that light.

Come into the light.

In all honesty, I hear that and I immediately think "non-representative sample".

 

[Jumi]

I am not sure what that means.

Getting experiental knowledge = Gnosis for yourself, instead of trusting a middle-man like a religious authority telling you what to believe.

Won what? Who didn't read the bible.

Christians for a thousand years left the Bible to priests and monks, thus letting them tell what to believe about spiritual things. Look, the Bible was too expensive for normal people to have it, but even if they saved all their lives or got lucky they couldn't read it, because it was in Latin.

Which Christians and what book?

Read about the Nag-Hammadi writings. Hidden by Christian monks who wanted to preserve them, because the church wanted to control access to experience.

Your over generalizing all over the place. Christians have always believed in personal experience including the born again experience, you simply wrong about that.

Really? You mean the whole of protestant reformation was for no purpose?

No, in 13000 debates, decades in church and in religious investigation, and watching 100s of hours worth of professional theological debate I have never heard anyone mention or even hint that any Christians buried any Gnostic books for later use by Christians. The canonization process is very well known (including the books they excluded).

You've had decades of investigation and never heard of the Nag-Hammadi Library. That only means you've focused on a narrow area.

It does not matter what label you use what I said is still true: Humanism which is just another group of humans can't make people actually equal either.

Humanists disagree. I think you could debate them on this.

I see that the answer is No, you are not familiar with the is - ought gap. I said ought not out. Your just not that experienced with philosophy are you?

Rather the thing you are trying to drive at isn't relevant.

The foundation of Gnosticism was a heretical fringe that "claimed" they were following Judeo-Christian doctrines but were in fact denying them. Judeo Christian core doctrine states that man is separated from God by sin, therefore your claims of personal experience (unless you are a born again Christian) defy the foundations of Gnosticism themselves. The only doorway to personal experience of God is through Christ.

It seems you don't know about Gnosticism any more than you knew about how the Bible ended up getting translated and people suddenly not in control of the middle-men. Too bad Christianity took steps back.

I think you'd be surprised what Jews (hello @Tumah @) would think about this supposed Judeo-Christian doctrine.

Judaism's Rejection of Original Sin

And I quote:

The doctrine of original sin is totally unacceptable to Jews (as it is to Christian sects such as Baptists and Assemblies of G-d). Jews believe that man enters the world free of sin, with a soul that is pure and innocent and untainted.

The usual meaning of gnostikos in Classical Greek texts is "learned" or "intellectual"
Gnosticism - Wikipedia
Not experiential.

You're misquoting wikipedia to someone who is Gnostic......

 

[BilliardsBall]

I've put myself nowhere, it's you who judge me on your human "wisdom" as someone who deserves to rot for eternity. But I wouldn't be so optimistic if I were you, I've experienced God, where you are only believing as you interpret the texts.

Why the inflammatory language? I find that those who experience God are loving. It's loving to share truth.

My human "wisdom" informs me that imperfect people cannot go to a perfect utopia. Transformation is needed. This is provided by the cross of Christ. Trusting Christ, I will not be ready to go to Heaven now--I'm imperfect--but I will be ready on that day.

 

[BilliardsBall]

In all honesty, I hear that and I immediately think "non-representative sample".

I understand. I only have the anecdotal evidence I present from the thousands of persons I've witnessed the gospel to. You can, however, quote white papers on the subject.

 

[Jumi]

Why the inflammatory language?

I could ask you if you realize that calling someone a child who is going to hell for disagreeing with you isn't being nice, all the while calling yourself an adult. But you don't seem to realize how you acted.

I find that those who experience God are loving. It's loving to share truth.

I don't expect most people who say they've experienced God to have experienced it. They just don't know the difference.

My human "wisdom" informs me that imperfect people cannot go to a perfect utopia. Transformation is needed. This is provided by the cross of Christ. Trusting Christ, I will not be ready to go to Heaven now--I'm imperfect--but I will be ready on that day.

Transformation comes naturally when you experience God. Where you believe you are going, these are human things as the experience will show you.

 

[LuisDantas]

I understand. I only have the anecdotal evidence I present from the thousands of persons I've witnessed the gospel to. You can, however, quote white papers on the subject.

Eh. That and a few dollars will buy me a movie ticket.

 

[RollyOng]

"Why do people cling with such ferocity to the belief in a mind-independent reality? It is surely because if there is no such reality, then ultimately (as far as we can know) mind alone exists. And if mind is not a product of real matter, but rather is the creator of the illusion of material reality (which has, in fact, despite the materialists, been known to be the case, since the discovery of quantum mechanics in 1925), then a theistic view of our existence becomes the only rational alternative to solipsism."
～ Richard Conn Henry is an Academy Professor of Physics and Astronomy at Johns Hopkins University, author of one book and over 200 publications on the topics of astrophysics and various forms of astronomy.
～ Alain Aspect is a French physicist noted for his experimental work on quantum entanglement.
Alain Aspect and Anton Zeilinger on Unreality