Had an interesting conversation with my neighbor today. He's a Christian preacher and found out about, my well, gobbledygook gook of spiritualness.
We had a conversation that shook me more than it should have, it made me feel bad to not be Christian but follow similar morals. Upon further thought, there would have been no positive outcome regardless of my religion. Even Christians dislike and disagree with other Christians, hence, sects. But still it makes me dislike structured religion more, mostly because it doesn't matter what you believe, not everyone, meaning a majority will approve.
Not meant to be an angry rant in any way, just an observation.
10th September 2007
It's mainly a matter of previous conditioning. I still have some sort of fear of Hell because I was raised to fear it.
We all love you regardless of whatever "gobbledygook is possessing your mortal soul" <3
"I'd shush her zephyr." ~ Zephyr.
One of my fears is someday becoming religious. Not to sound like a bastard, but the thought of believing in something like god actually frightens me (which is ironic, because I think most religious people are also afraid of god, but in a different way). Anyway, I'm afraid of becoming one because it's like I'm losing whatever individuality I actually have. I guess that's kind of the point of religion though, isn't it? They may not have had the NSA to strike fear into the people, but they had the next best thing.
I actually am spiritual though, but not in the way most people are.
I didn't make it!
Jesus is not the problem, in my opinion. I don't know whether he existed or not, for all I know he did and he was an awesome guy (but not magic like he's in the Bible, sorry to any Christians). The problem, again in my opinion, is how misguided most his followers are, and how twisted his worship is. I have met good Christians, who are respectable and respectful and good friends to me, but most are just way too fanatical. I still don't believe in God though.
Voice of joy and sunshine
26th May 2003
I think that's a human thing more than it is a religion thing. We've all got different areas of interest and different beliefs. Mostly we don't talk about those things in face to face company.
Still, it's a maxim I heard yonks ago:
[INDENT]'Never talk about religion, politics, or money.'[/INDENT]
Of course the never is a bit much - sometimes you can get away with it. Still mostly it seems best avoided unless you know the group well and think no-one's going to take it too much to heart. I'd never dream of talking about politics, for instance, to people I work with - I need those people. Better to let it sail on by uncommented.
I agree with all of the views on this, it's just that there's no wrong way to live life, that's up to the individual. The main point of contention was what makes you a good person. His view was to follow the spirit of the 10 commandments in the eyes of god, while I do agree with most of the commandments, my take is that I will be the best person I can within reason. If you ask for my help, I will do the best I can to assist! If I can make someone else's life a little easier and better, and I am happy with the decisions I have made at the end of te day great! If not I will do my best to fix my mistakes.
The counter argument from him is that it wasn't what makes you happy, but what makes god happy. I see where he's coming from, but I couldn't live like that. I want to be happy and I will do it in the best way I can :).
I suppose it comes down to whatever helps you sleep at night, but it was an interesting conversation, we did agree on a lot, just the fine details were disagreed upon.
7th December 2003
MoreGun89;5741199His view was to follow the spirit of the 10 commandments in the eyes of god
Got to love people who call themselves "Christian" but reduce their definition of Christianity to a narrow section of the old testament.
I think there are a lot of clever things written in the Bible, but it is not like those guys were the first to discover or revolutionize morality.
10th September 2007
Interesting note on that very topic:
Most colleges require students to take at least two semesters of world history. In my book, it covered everything from the code of Hamurabi to ancient Taoist philosophy. The fact that people can read through that and still come to the conclusion that Christianity (often Protestant Christianity) is the only correct way to live is almost maddening.
If there's anything you could take away from university (lol) it would be that you don't have to just believe something because it's what's prevalent. You should learn to have SOME standards for acceptance. If something seems fishy well...it probably is.
MoreGun89;5741199The counter argument from him is that it wasn't what makes you happy, but what makes god happy. I see where he's coming from, but I couldn't live like that. I want to be happy and I will do it in the best way I can :).
That sounds rather masochistic to me =p
It kind of reminds me of something Christopher Hitchens used to say:
"Who but a serf wants it to be true?"
Perhaps a bit harsh, but IME it's not too inaccurate.
"I'd shush her zephyr." ~ Zephyr.
"It's not about what makes you happy, it's about what makes me happy. Let me tell you what I want." - emotional abuse "It's not about what makes you happy, it's about what makes God happy. Let me tell you what God wants." - Christianity
Problem with religion isn't so much what it preaches, as what it does. Or rather what the people "following" some god or another do to satisfy themselves so much so that any modern religion is less associated with it's religious book, which, IMO, just grants a possible perspective on life (especially when people were possibly stupider and less thoughtful in general a century or few back), and more with the unnecessary enforcement of questionable, self-imposed laws of a religion by even more questionable men (extreme case being Muslim terrorists).
Though, while looking to their religion, if one must have a reason with the thought of God in mind to guide their lives, one needs to also consider the fact that is it not presumptuous that an entity so infinite in capacity and being is reduced to the finite texts, written by men who are finite in their abilities?