What's your philosophy/religion/belief system?

[Zygote]

More beer. I know. But beyond that....


It doesn't seem fair to single Lisa out to explain the filter through which she interprets the world without asking others to do the same. We all have some way of skimming what seems valuable out of the oceans of input we get.

What's your algorithm?


I'll start, but I reserve the right to change my perspective as others find more articulate ways of speaking.

I don't follow any creed. There is no one text or philosophy that defines my outlook. So I make it up as I go along. I steal from anything that seems applicable to my experience or laudable in its goals or outcomes. This includes the bible, Buddhism, Tolkien, Star Wars, Jane Austen or any other sages that pass my way. I seek to be pragmatic and realistic and, if I'm not too hungry or tired, I appreciate corrections. Some might see this as wishy-washy. I have yet to encounter any supernatural beings that were of anything more than metaphorical usefulness.

[Puck]

Hard atheist. I usually don't bring it up in public, but if someone else brings anything up of a religious nature first, I am outspoken.

[Anne]

I'm a global reconstructionalist romanus neopagan agnostic who celebrates the Wheel with blots.

I have what I believe typed up in detail on another board that's currently down, so no C&P for me.

happy to answer anything, but my answers are solely my own.

[DMB]

A very interesting topic.

I should explain that I am 69, so I've had a long time in which to ponder those questions.

I spent much of my teens looking for a model for my adult life. I can't say I found one, although I did decide that the best way to describe myself was as a Humanist. But although I belonged to a Humanist group at university, I resisted becoming part of organised Humanism for a long time. At that time I saw it as a church substitute, and I didn't think churches were admirable institutions. It's a bit like being a vegetarian (which I am, on and off) and not needing to find a meat substitute.

Not going for organised anything meant that I was constantly pondering moral questions and often revising my answers in the light of new input. One of my concerns was human behaviour towards other animals.

When I was in my forties, I got involved in humanitarian provisions in developing countries and it opened many new perspectives for me. I gradually came to have a strong commitment to human rights, and as a Humanist that meant a commitment to personal autonomy. This included being strongly pro-choice in reproductive matters. The death of my father at this time made me aware of the problems surrounding assisted suicide and I have been a strong advocate of it ever since. When I was about 50, I realised how much a lot of the things I cared about were obstructed by various religious powers. So at this time I decided it was important to get together with other unbelievers to fight for a more secular society. That was when I did get involved with organised Humanism, at both national and international levels.

Since then, I don't think I've changed so much, except to become a more militant atheist. Since I am keen on human rights, I accept the idea that people have a right to the religion of their choice. But I don't accept the idea that this is the Number One right that trumps all the others. I also think that since one quite often comes across examples of one person's right conflicting with another's, I don't think that religious practices should be given free rein of they impact unfavourably on others.

[Christina]

I've always been an atheist and I don't think that I even have the ability to believe in anything supernatural. I have a whole lot of personal principles and ethics that I try to live by but I don't think that's what you mean by having a philosophy. If I do have one it's somewhat of an activist stance along the lines of Ghandi's "Be the change that you want to see in the world" on a local level. I'm much more of a do-er than a philosopher. I don't allow my mind to wander down "is there something supernatural I can feel" paths anymore so there isn't any chance of converting me to anything or of me convincing myself of nonsense.

[epepke]

Most people would call me an atheist. I have become dissatisfied with the term, because "god" has no ontology.

I don't like many atheists, though, because I don't think they hug each other enough. They seem to me too rationalistic. I don't think they're very rational, as I could out-reason most of them with one hemisphere tied behind my head. But they like to pretend that reason is everything, which causes a lot of problems. I want to smack them upside the head whenever the spew reason in defense of suicide, which they do a lot.

I'm not a humanist. First of all, a lot of humans suck. Second, the humanist manifesti I and II seem to me to put a lot of stock into ideological bullshit. However, I'm a bit like Zarathustra. I love humanity, and I also think that anything done out of love is beyond good and evil. I just don't like them all that much.

I give everyone a chance. I'm just as happy talking with a gardener as I am with a PhD. I just don't care. I've known people with an IQ of 90 on a good day who were incredibly wise. I don't like people who are ostentatiously stupid, nor do I like clever-stupid people.

Maybe at this point, one might call me misanthropic. However, I have a lot of girlfriends, enough that counting them becomes a problem. I enjoy this. I don't think I'm going to be monogamous again; it just doesn't work. I have a few male friends, but they're good ones.

I like science. I was trained in it and did it for money for a while. I got a couple of important things about it. The first is that the only valid test of an idea is to check it out against reality. The second is that it is absolutely essential to have doubt of everything at the very core of your being.

I'm sure that many people think I'm not intelligent enough to come up for a nice, neat name for this. I think, rather, that I'm intelligent enough to realize that names are mostly bullshit.

[Zygote]

I have a whole lot of personal principles and ethics that I try to live by but I don't think that's what you mean by having a philosophy.


That is exactly what I mean. How do we choose our personal principles from all the available ethics out there?

Not going for organised anything meant that I was constantly pondering moral questions and often revising my answers in the light of new input.

We sift, evaluate, incorporate, search, reject on an ongoing basis. Even believers, followers of an established faith, make choices about which parts of doctrine or which sect they choose to follow.

My brother has changed churches several times because of doctrinal differences with various fundamentalist franchises. But he still sees himself as a follower of the one true path. He doesn't see the irony in his personal choices of which one to follow blindly.


I like science. I was trained in it and did it for money for a while. I got a couple of important things about it. The first is that the only valid test of an idea is to check it out against reality. The second is that it is absolutely essential to have doubt of everything at the very core of your being.

How many self described "believers" apply these principles? Could this be a true watershed difference - believers on one side, non-believers on the other? I would use "testable hypothesis" over "reality" since I've encountered too many believers who consider their deities to be "real."

[tjakey]

Let's see...there is no hint of supernatural, no gods, no "spirit that moves in all things,"...

Yet...there is plenty of mystery, things we don't understand, and maybe things we can't understand; so curiosity is good and humility is better.

Being rational is a good thing, but denying the needs and drives of emotion is pretty irrational.

Everyday you laugh puts you one day up on the universe.

Hurting someone who is smaller, weaker or no threat to you is beyond lame.

Having people in your life whose well being is more importan than your own is somehow fundamental to being truly human.

Fuck'em if they can't take a joke.

[Magdlyn]

neo-gnostic neo-pagan interreligionist. My only god is Einstein's, or something like The Force

I read mythology as psychology

[Brianna]

neo-gnostic neo-pagan interreligionist. My only god is Einstein's, or something like The Force

I read mythology as psychology

I am somewhere between this and Zygote.

My real only rule is "never tell someone else what they should believe or not believe in" cause it is just fraking rude.

[LoneWolf]

I’m an atheist. I don’t believe in the supernatural. My world view is one of scientific skepticism. I believe things for which there is evidence and the stronger that evidence is the more confidence I have in my belief. I try to eliminate any beliefs I have for which there is no evidence (this is an ongoing process). I try to treat people the way I think they would want to be treated, when I don’t know them well then I at least try to treat them the way I would want to be treated.

I am cautiously optimistic about the future of humanity. I think science will be our “saving grace” so to speak, if we can just make it through these rough patches.

[JamesBannon]

Religion - Atheist (you might say "hard atheist I guess). However, there is a fundamental difference between believing and knowing, so I'm something of an agnostic. My pet "hate" is fundamentalism of any kind.

Politics - Very left libertarian & very strongly egalitarian. I despise aristocracy, privilege and elitism of whatever stripe. In broad terms: we are all covered in the same shit and we all stink the same, it's just that the people at the "top" have more room to breathe!

Philosophy - Something of an empiricist / pragmatist.

Ethics - A mixture, really, mostly situational, but strongly informed by my politics.

[Philosophickle]

I are Christian.

[LoneWolf]

I are Christian.

Is you really?

[Ray Moscow]

After going through just about all options at one point or another, I settled on naturalism -- because I just got tired of all the unverifiable bullshit in most other systems.

I find Christianity to be especially heavy on the unverifiable and actually disproven bullshit and therefore especially irritating, but this is probably because I was raised in it and know it intimately.

[BWE]

I invented a religion before I turned 5 and I'm still an adherent. BWEism.

[DMB]

I'm not a humanist. First of all, a lot of humans suck.

Being a Humanist doesn't imply that one needs to think that humans are wonderful. I refer you to the Amsterdam Declaration (http://www.iheu.org/amsterdamdeclaration) of the International Humanist and Ethical Union, which is the international umbrella organisation for Humanists from around the world.

Humanism is ethical. It affirms the worth, dignity and autonomy of the individual and the right of every human being to the greatest possible freedom compatible with the rights of others. Humanists have a duty of care to all of humanity including future generations. Humanists believe that morality is an intrinsic part of human nature based on understanding and a concern for others, needing no external sanction.

One can affirm the "worth, dignity and autonomy" of a human being without thinking that s/he is an admirable person.

[Philosophickle]

I are Christian.

Is you really?

rly

[Ronin]

I am human.

[Christina]

That is exactly what I mean. How do we choose our personal principles from all the available ethics out there?

I think that you answered yourself here.

We sift, evaluate, incorporate, search, reject on an ongoing basis. Even believers, followers of an established faith, make choices about which parts of doctrine or which sect they choose to follow.

I can't easily separate what parts of my early principles came from my parents, school, books and other things like Girl Scouts that I was exposed to as a child. Possibly it's because of my disorder but I process things gut first and brain second. It's sounds oversimplified but my values come from what feels right or wrong more than from what I was taught. Most of Catholicism didn't feel right, but the parts about caring for the poor did. Most of Girl Scouts was earning silly badges, but the community service parts felt right. Lying, cruelty, living life as a victim or a bully feels wrong. Seeing someone in pain or in need and not doing whatever I can about it feels wrong to me too. Blowing off responsibilities in favor of fun was fine with me, but it would feel wrong if I was affecting someone else by it.

I can follow behind now and rationalize each one, but I rarely bother anymore. I know that what feels right is what I want to do. (As long as I'm not nuts at the time and then all bets are off. Very odd but mostly harmless things can feel very right at those times.) Is that the kind of answer that you're hoping for?

[epepke]

I'm a global reconstructionalist romanus neopagan agnostic who celebrates the Wheel with blots.

No offense, but this reminds me of a graffito I once saw:

Pseudo sado
Zoo homo
Pedo necro
Mania!

[Worldtraveller]

I'm about a 6.95 on the Dawkins scale.

This thread makes me think that someone needs to invite ojuice (from the old IIDB) over here, though, if he's still around.

[tjakey]

I despise aristocracy, privilege and elitism of whatever stripe. In broad terms: we are all covered in the same shit and we all stink the same, it's just that the people at the "top" have more room to breathe!


I keep trying to feel this way, but just about the time I get there a bunch of rednecks or religious fanatics or some just plain stupid people do some really weird, off-the-wall, bullshit thing that forces me to admit that we are not all covered in the same shit. In fact some of the shit we are covered in is a direct result of trying to drag these people out of the dark ages and/or the caves.

I mean, really, do you want the people on Jerry Springer even casting a vote on dogcatcher let alone POTUS?

[BioBeing]

My user names sums up my world view... I'm a biological being. There is an unbroken chain of 3 billion years of evolution connecting me to the first self-replicating molecules, and from thence to the rest of the biological world. I come from a long line of winners.

There is no room there for supernatural: no souls magically being instilled anywhere in this chain; no magical ghosts living in some unresolved plane. Biology and chemistry and physics say that there can be no souls. If you want to claim souls are real, or ghosts exist, show me the science!

If gods exist, they must have evolved also, and be subject to the physical laws of the universe. They are just aliens. You cannot tell me your god started the universe unless you can tell me where your god came from. Saying god always existed is a cop out.

Guess all that makes me a naturalist, or a materialist, or a reductionist. Or a hard atheist. Or all of the above.

I am a skeptic. I don't take claims at their face value. Discussion sections of scientific papers are worthless: I read the results and methods sections and draw my own conclusions. If you want to claim that homeopathy works, you'll need to convince me. Anecdotes are not very convincing, by the way.

I try to be rational and logical (sorry epepke!), but rationality and logic tell me that that I probably do not succeed.

I question myself: I think that I am right in my worldview, but realize I might not be. I am convinced, however, that every single theist I have ever met has the wrong worldview. I do not get into fights in real life about religion. (Mainly.)

I am probably a Humanist, but I don't belong to any groups. Maybe I'll join up when I am 50. I agree in the inherent worthiness of all people, even if some of them are real shits.

My wife says that in social worker school, she was taught that everyone is "spiritual" in some way. I disagree: I do not use the word "spiritual", as it implies some sort or "spirit" or soul, but I really don't know what the word means. But I do find inherent beauty in the Universe, very much in the way of Carl Sagan, or maybe even Einstein (though I would never call it "god" as there is too much baggage attached to that word). She says that is my spiritual side, so there is that.

Probably some other stuff too - that is the quick outline.

[Lanakila]

I'm an atheist. I deconverted from fundamental Baptist Christianity in 2003 after 18 years in it. I deconverted based on my own study of the Bible so I consider Christianity to be complete and utter bullshit. Beliefs are subject to challenge. But I'm also someone that believes in a live and let live philosophy of life.

Life is short and I believe in living it to it's fullest.

[Lisa0315]

Christian

(Only for you Anne)

I am a Christian. I believe that the world was created by God by the mechanism that we call evolution. I believe that the Genesis account of creation is a parable.

I do believe in the fall of man and the need for a Saviour. I believe that Saviour is Jesus Christ. I believe that he was born of a virgin, died for the sins of the world, and was raised again on the third day. I believe that He will return to judge the world. I believe that Jesus is God.

I believe that Jesus gave us two commands and one commission: The love commands are to love God and to love each other. The commission is to tell the world the good news that God loves us.

I believe there is a literal hell, but I am not sure that it is made up of literal flames.

None but the bolded blue is without exception. I can be wrong about all the rest, but the creed I want to follow is the bolded blue bit. That is the part that makes me a Christian. The rest is doctrine which may or may not be correct.

Lisa

[Anne]

Those answering 'Christian', could you explain your personal beliefs, or accept when people say 'all Christians think this, so you do as well'.

Ok?

[Barefoot Bree]

Lifelong atheist. My dad was a minister for many years (no longer active) when I was small, but I realized at some point that it had never gotten past the level of "let's pretend" for me. I just don't seem to be able to believe in anything supernatural.

I remember reading lots of stuff as a teenager about reincarnation, spirits, and what today is lumped under "psi". I wanted so hard to believe that those kinds of gifts were possible (my favorite was psychometry - reading an objects past simply by holding it), and the next (inevitable?) step in human evolution. But then I realized that every single time I heard about an actual case of psychic abilities, I was immediately and terminally skeptical. I never could believe it.

It wasn't a huge step from there to understanding that I didn't believe it because it wasn't possible, or to go from there to applying the same to the vestiges of religious belief from my childhood. Belief in the possibility of an afterlife was the last to go. (Note the word "possibility" - I never actually believed in anything concrete there, just that it might be possible.)

These days I describe myself as "hard atheist personally, live-and-let-live socially". I almost never get into religious discussions of any type in real life, and never arguments. Not least because I suck at verbal arguments, my verbal abilities have never been all that fantastic, even if I don't stutter anymore like I did when very small.

But I'm willing to allow other individuals the dignity of their own mental makeup, their own personal experiences, and their own reactions to and explanations of those experiences. My explanation is not right for you, nor is yours necessarily right for me.

Things that can be explored and explained scientifically, however, should be. And personal, non-explored explanations should never be used as an excuse for coercion or power over other individuals, or for making decisions that directly affect other people.

I firmly believe in both sides of the "live and let live" philosophy, and understand that it only really works when both parties agree to both sides. I let you live according to your lights, and you let me live according to mine.

I also believe that religion is a personal and private thing, and should remain so. The Christian Great Commission is one of the worst memes to ever be released into the human memosphere.

Other than that, several others, particularly BioBeing, have summed up my outlook pretty well.

[Lisa0315]

Those answering 'Christian', could you explain your personal beliefs, or accept when people say 'all Christians think this, so you do as well'.

Ok?

Edited my post.

[Anne]

Those answering 'Christian', could you explain your personal beliefs, or accept when people say 'all Christians think this, so you do as well'.

Ok?

Edited my post.

Thanks Lady.

[Philosophickle]

Those answering 'Christian', could you explain your personal beliefs, or accept when people say 'all Christians think this, so you do as well'.

Ok?

Wait...what?
I'm an Orthodox Christian, if that's what you're after.

[Anne]

Which flavor?

Orthodox brings to mind

http://greecetourguide.blogsome.com/wp-admin/images/Greek%20Orthodox.jpg

to me...

[David B]

Those answering 'Christian', could you explain your personal beliefs, or accept when people say 'all Christians think this, so you do as well'.

Ok?

Wait...what?
I'm an Orthodox Christian, if that's what you're after.


Greek? Russian? Catholic? Something else?

David

[Lisa0315]

Philosophickle strikes me as a lulzer.

[Anne]

Philosophickle strikes me as a lulzer.

I disagree.

he's a GIGGLZ.

;)

[Lisa0315]

Philosophickle strikes me as a lulzer.

I disagree.

he's a GIGGLZ.

;)

Aha, and forgive my ignorance, but what is the difference?

Lisa

[Brother Daniel]

I am human.
That's what I put in my "religion" tag on facebook. "I'm human. So are you."

Pretty much sums it up.

Oh, people want more detail? How about this: I believe that people believe stuff.

[Christina]

Philosophickle strikes me as a lulzer.

I disagree.

he's a GIGGLZ.

;)

<derail> Geez, do you really think that Lao Tzu would invite a lulzer? Phil's not one of them. </derail>

[Lisa0315]

Philosophickle strikes me as a lulzer.

I disagree.

he's a GIGGLZ.

;)

<derail> Geez, do you really think that Lao Tzu would invite a lulzer? Phil's not one of them. </derail>

I don't know Lao Tzu. :dunno:

[Ray Moscow]

Those answering 'Christian', could you explain your personal beliefs, or accept when people say 'all Christians think this, so you do as well'.

Ok?

Wait...what?
I'm an Orthodox Christian, if that's what you're after.

"Everyone is Orthodox to himself" -- John Locke

[Philosophickle]

Which flavor?

Orthodox brings to mind

http://greecetourguide.blogsome.com/wp-admin/images/Greek%20Orthodox.jpg

to me...

I are Apostles Creed flavor.

Those answering 'Christian', could you explain your personal beliefs, or accept when people say 'all Christians think this, so you do as well'.

Ok?

Wait...what?
I'm an Orthodox Christian, if that's what you're after.


Greek? Russian? Catholic? Something else?

David

Meh, I meant "orthodox" as an historical, doctrinal term, not a denominational term.

Philosophickle strikes me as a lulzer.

I disagree.

he's a GIGGLZ.

;)

WIN.

[Anne]

ambiguity!

the devil's volleyball.

still follow Vatican 2, or are you pre vatican 2?

[Zygote]

Those answering 'Christian', could you explain your personal beliefs, or accept when people say 'all Christians think this, so you do as well'.

Ok?

I'd like to see an expansion into why or how Christians came to hold that set of beliefs that they label as "Christian." The "what" doesn't tell me much about how you got there.

Do they resonate with you personally? Were you convinced by evidence? Is it the only world view you have ever known or could imagine? Something else?

What internal choices lead you to value certain parts over certain others? Does it make you feel safer? help you become the person you want to be? connect you with something (what?)?

What are your values and how does your philosophy, religious or otherwise, relate to them?

[David B]

I disagree.

he's a GIGGLZ.

;)


<derail> Geez, do you really think that Lao Tzu would invite a lulzer? Phil's not one of them. </derail>

I don't know Lao Tzu. :dunno:

There is no Lao Tzu.

Seriously, he is another canary in a coal mine, as well as a fine poster. Who plays around with his mates, as well:cool:

While he is here, the board is in pretty good shape, IMV.

David

[Christina]

There is no Lao Tzu.
*snickers

Seriously, he is another canary in a coal mine, as well as a fine poster. Who plays around with his mates, as well:cool:

While he is here, the board is in pretty good shape, IMV.

Since an admin is continuing the derail...

I know he's brilliant and funny and an asset to the forum and all but I never agreed to share my mineshaft with him. He needs his own. There's stuff you don't know about him. :eek:

[Philosophickle]

ambiguity!

the devil's volleyball.

still follow Vatican 2, or are you pre vatican 2?

Non-denominational. I'm a minimalist with no particular ecclesiological holdings.
I want to learn more about these lulzers.

[Christina]

If you're serious, send me a PM. It's kind of a "that which shall not be rehashed" around here.

(Now watch, someone will post a long, drama-generating explanation.)

[Brother Daniel]

Meh, I meant "orthodox" as an historical, doctrinal term, not a denominational term.
I think you threw people off by using a capital "O". Lower case "o" is somewhat better for conveying what you're saying (I think).

[Philosophickle]

Meh, I meant "orthodox" as an historical, doctrinal term, not a denominational term.
I think you threw people off by using a capital "O". Lower case "o" is somewhat better for conveying what you're saying (I think).

You're right.
:bang:

[Anne]

you see? And to me, posting 'Christian' means 'bible believing born again'.

you need details, people!

[Philosophickle]

you see? And to me, posting 'Christian' means 'bible believing born again'.

you need details, people!

If you ask me some questions I'll try to answer.
Or refer you to my people.

[Anne]

and which people are those?

[Brother Daniel]

you need details, people!
This much is true: There's a wide variety of different sorts of Christians, and when someone self-labels as Christian, we must be careful about what assumptions we make about what he/she probably believes. So I can sympathize with the demand for more details.

However...

The problem with asking for details in this thread is that the OP question is so broad. It seems to be a request for a total core-dump: Give me a complete account of the workings of your brain.

The question is too big for me.

So I'd rather not burden the Christians with having to give a more complete answer than I've given for myself.

As Phil said, ask a more specific question.

[Philosophickle]

and which people are those?

My sockpuppets. In particular, DRM, Christina, Lao Tzu and Trout.

[Anne]

don't look at me!

I'm not the OP!

I just see a trend that Christians self identify as Christian, but then say not all Christians are alike...

This is a good place to show why non Christians may think they are...

[Philosophickle]

don't look at me!

I'm not the OP!

I just see a trend that Christians self identify as Christian, but then say not all Christians are alike...

This is a good place to show why non Christians may think they are...

I could give some examples if you're interested.
I'm not an inerrantist, meaning I don't think the Bible is incapable of error, textual or otherwise. I also sympathize with the Plymouth Brethren (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plymouth_Brethren#No_clergy) (of the open variety) movement, which eschews formal church for a more organic, grassroots kinda thing.

[Anne]

dbl

[Christina]

and which people are those?

My sockpuppets. In particular, DRM, Christina, Lao Tzu and Trout.

Don't look to me for help. Before I started hanging around with these guys I thought that apologetics meant people that were apologizing for their religion and that eschatology probably had something to do with bugs. Theologically speaking, I might as well have been raised by wolves.

[Lisa0315]

and which people are those?

My sockpuppets. In particular, DRM, Christina, Lao Tzu and Trout.

Don't look to me for help. Before I started hanging around with these guys I thought that apologetics meant people that were apologizing for their religion and that eschatology probably had something to do with bugs. Theologically speaking, I might as well have been raised by wolves.

Why do you think we call y'all heathens! :evil:

Nah, 4 years ago, I thought there were True Christians and then there were false prophets and teachers. I believed in YEC, inerrancy, literal fire and brimstone hell, Catholics were all going to hell, gays were sinning by choice, and I never even heard labels like Conservative, Liberal, or Moderate in context of Christianity. I thought those were political terms only.

The hairline fissure crack in my otherwise perfect walk and talk was that I could not hate people or be mean to people. That crack led to a fissure which ended up as a wide divide between me and other Christians.

Lets just say that y'all are not the only ones getting prayed for in that arrogant and dismissive manner.

Lisa

[JamesBannon]

Look at it this way, Lisa: be glad to be freed from an unforgiving & ruthless master.

[Steviepinhead]

Indulgent agnostic hedonism, tempered with a modicum of interpersonal responsibility, some pride in craft, and a deep undercurrent of curiosity...

[Lisa0315]

Look at it this way, Lisa: be glad to be freed from an unforgiving & ruthless master.

That unforgiving and ruthless master was me. :o

[David B]

Look at it this way, Lisa: be glad to be freed from an unforgiving & ruthless master.

That unforgiving and ruthless master was me. :o

And now the 'love' person is you:)

No God necessary, in either case.

David

[Lisa0315]

Look at it this way, Lisa: be glad to be freed from an unforgiving & ruthless master.

That unforgiving and ruthless master was me. :o

And now the 'love' person is you:)

No God necessary, in either case.

David

Or God broke through the monster to save me. :)

[Anne]

god was on both sides. And in the monster.

But then, so were you.

Namaste

[Lisa0315]

god was on both sides. And in the monster.

But then, so were you.

Namaste

Namaste, Anne.

Garnet, anyone from CF GA, who the heck was that poster who began and ended every post with Namaste? I lubs him. Why can't I remember his name?

Lisa

[David B]

That unforgiving and ruthless master was me. :o

And now the 'love' person is you:)

No God necessary, in either case.

David

Or God broke through the monster to save me. :)

Why give the credit to anyone else? Especially to a hypothetical entity whose origins are hard to explain, who works by magic, and is, at first sight anyway, rather arbitrary in how he dispenses his favours.

I find this hard to understand.

On the one hand you seem to be putting yourself down by invoking a divine explanation for what it seems to me demands none.

On the other, for you to think that God has defeated your monster, when he fails to defeat the monsters of others who have believed in him just as passionately, seems to me to demand some sort of unwarranted specialness in the eyes of your putative God.

Perhaps it is that you want to believe, so find some sort of way of rationalising belief, perhaps you just find it hard to let go.

Do you find the idea of a Godless universe frightening, Lisa?

It's not, really.

David

[Steviepinhead]

I certainly take credit for my self-indulgence.

I usually need help with the hedonism.

I'll credit genetics and good early parenting for the curiosity.

(Namaste.)

[Garnet]

god was on both sides. And in the monster.

But then, so were you.

Namaste

Namaste, Anne.

Garnet, anyone from CF GA, who the heck was that poster who began and ended every post with Namaste? I lubs him. Why can't I remember his name?

Lisa

V-something. Vhijarda? Something like that.

One of my favorite people, but I never could spell his user name.

[Lisa0315]

god was on both sides. And in the monster.

But then, so were you.

Namaste

Namaste, Anne.

Garnet, anyone from CF GA, who the heck was that poster who began and ended every post with Namaste? I lubs him. Why can't I remember his name?

Lisa

V-something. Vhijarda? Something like that.

One of my favorite people, but I never could spell his user name.

Yes! Thats him! I couldn't spell it either. I used to call him something for short.

Lisa

[Garnet]

To the OP. I'm an atheist. The rare kind who says, "God doesn't exist." As for philosophy, I don't really know.

[Garnet]

Namaste, Anne.

Garnet, anyone from CF GA, who the heck was that poster who began and ended every post with Namaste? I lubs him. Why can't I remember his name?

Lisa

V-something. Vhijarda? Something like that.

One of my favorite people, but I never could spell his user name.

Yes! Thats him! I couldn't spell it either. I used to call him something for short.

Lisa

I used to just call him V.

[Lisa0315]

And now the 'love' person is you:)

No God necessary, in either case.

David

Or God broke through the monster to save me. :)

Why give the credit to anyone else? Especially to a hypothetical entity whose origins are hard to explain, who works by magic, and is, at first sight anyway, rather arbitrary in how he dispenses his favours.

I find this hard to understand.

On the one hand you seem to be putting yourself down by invoking a divine explanation for what it seems to me demands none.

On the other, for you to think that God has defeated your monster, when he fails to defeat the monsters of others who have believed in him just as passionately, seems to me to demand some sort of unwarranted specialness in the eyes of your putative God.

Perhaps it is that you want to believe, so find some sort of way of rationalising belief, perhaps you just find it hard to let go.

Do you find the idea of a Godless universe frightening, Lisa?

It's not, really.

David

Yeah, I do find the idea of a Godless universe frightening. I also find the fundie God frightening, and the Muslim and Jewish one. If God is any of those, then, we are all fucked.

I am unable to let it go, David. I am hardwired for belief. I believed even when I didn't want to. I will believe until the day I die. I will believe even if I am shown proof positive that God really is the monster that most of Scripture portrays. Believe in, not believe on.

I believe ON Jesus Christ and the commands to love. That I can put my faith in and live my life by.

I worry that I will get "in" by a technicality and find that heaven is really hell for me. I worry that if the fundies are right, there are many people that I deeply care about that will burn for eternity, again, because of a technicality.

A life without belief would be easier in many ways. I am already in hell not knowing for sure what kind of God I serve. That, I suppose, is the crux of faith. I have to believe that God does what God does for a purpose and for the good of all.

Lisa

[Barefoot Bree]

OK, Lisa, please please enlighten me. That "on" has been bugging the shit out of me since I first saw it. I always thought it was "in". I believe "in" things. How do you believe "on" things (or people)? I just doesn't make semantic sense to me. How do you mean that phrase? I'm serious here.

[sidhe]

V-something. Vhijarda? Something like that.

One of my favorite people, but I never could spell his user name.

Yes! Thats him! I couldn't spell it either. I used to call him something for short.

Lisa

I used to just call him V.

Vajradhara - it means "diamond way", or some such. He was the awesome.

I'm a delicious Celtic pagan and proponent of open source spirituality. I see nothing wrong at all with inventing your own myths. I'm also, professionally, in the "soft science" of Information. I don't believe in deities...I just don't not believe in phenomenally powerful entities that we can not yet identify or explain by any objective means.

[Worldtraveller]

don't look at me!

I'm not the OP!

I just see a trend that Christians self identify as Christian, but then say not all Christians are alike...

This is a good place to show why non Christians may think they are...
Once I saw this guy on a bridge about to jump. I said, "Don't do it!" He said, "Nobody loves me."

I said, "God loves you. Do you believe in God?"

He said, "Yes."

I said, "Are you a Christian or a Jew?"

He said, "A Christian."

I said, "Me, too! Protestant or Catholic?"

He said, "Protestant."

I said, "Me, too! What franchise?"

He said, "Baptist."

I said, "Me, too! Northern Baptist or Southern Baptist?"

He said, "Northern Baptist."

I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist or Northern Liberal Baptist?"

He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region, or Northern Conservative Baptist Eastern Region?"

He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region."

I said, "Me, too!"

Northern Conservative†Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1879, or Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912?"

He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912."

I said, "Die, heretic!" And I pushed him over.:cool:

[Anne]

I love Emo.

how did you know that was running through my head this whole time?

Why the long face?

[Lisa0315]

OK, Lisa, please please enlighten me. That "on" has been bugging the shit out of me since I first saw it. I always thought it was "in". I believe "in" things. How do you believe "on" things (or people)? I just doesn't make semantic sense to me. How do you mean that phrase? I'm serious here.

There are two cases in Scripture for belief. One is believing in, and one is believing on. Jesus said even demons believe (in) and tremble. The difference between believing in and on is this: One can believe in the existence of God and have no faith. To believe on, means to have faith in. It means putting your entire life into the hands of God. Salvation, then, is believing on the name of Christ.

Lisa

[Brother Daniel]

It means putting your entire life into the hands of God.
This is clearly a metaphor for something. (Since "your entire life" is an abstraction, not something that can literally be "put into" something physically.)

So ... does there exist a plain, literal statement corresponding to this idea?

(Does "putting your entire life into the hands of God" really mean anything more than "convincing yourself that your entire life is in the hands of God"?)

[Lisa0315]

It means putting your entire life into the hands of God.
This is clearly a metaphor for something. (Since "your entire life" is an abstraction, not something that can literally be "put into" something physically.)

So ... does there exist a plain, literal statement corresponding to this idea?

(Does "putting your entire life into the hands of God" really mean anything more than "convincing yourself that your entire life is in the hands of God"?)

I realize that I am speaking in fundie dialect. :D

It means to trust fully. It goes along with the Romans 8 chapter in which all things work for the good of them that love God. It means that God is looking out for His followers even when it appears that there is no hope. When times are at their worst, that is the time to trust God.

Lisa

[Brother Daniel]

So in fundie dialect, "believing on God" is a shorthand for "believing that God is taking care of me"? Is that a fair summary?

[Lisa0315]

So in fundie dialect, "believing on God" is a shorthand for "believing that God is taking care of me"? Is that a fair summary?

Sort of. I think it is a bit deeper than that, but I don't quite know how to relate it to you.

Oh, here is a typical fundie explanation that I have heard probably a thousand times.

A fundie preacher, they almost always have kids, right? Just about all of them tell a story about their kid jumping off their bed saying, "Catch me Daddy!"

Something like jumping off and believing that God will catch you.

Lisa

[Zygote]

The problem with asking for details in this thread is that the OP question is so broad. It seems to be a request for a total core-dump: Give me a complete account of the workings of your brain.


I'm the OP and I didn't ask for what you believe, I asked how do you pick what you believe. What's your algorithm? What's your filter?


Christina answered the question: "with my gut" and with an emphasis on community service. Right there you have the values and the method.

For the Christians the question is still the same: HOW to you pick what is important.

For instance, if you state in your credo that you believe Christ died for your sins and was raised bodily into heaven, why do you choose that part to believe? What part of your personal values system (and no fair resorting to circular reasoning by referencing Christian doctrine or dogma) does that resonate with? How does that belief define what you do and who you are?

I think what I'm driving at is how, on what evidence or impulse, we as human people each evaluate and choose for ourselves what philosophy or doctrine to follow as our compass.

[Christina]

Christina answered the question: "with my gut" and with an emphasis on community service. Right there you have the values and the method.

Life is much simpler if you don't clutter up your mind with all that philosophical and religious crap. ;)

[lpetrich]

On the subject of belief systems, historian Richard Carrier has a description of a form of liberal Xianity that I think is worth repeating:
My experiences with religion as a child were all good. My mother was a church secretary at a First Methodist Church only a block from our home, and I attended Sunday School fairly regularly, but my parents rarely insisted that I attend any sermons. The religion sold at this local business was a very liberal brand of Christianity. It was more like a preschool and social club, and that made it an excellent asset to the community, and a place of fond memories for me. Amidst arts and crafts, lunches, running and climbing about, and basic learning, the alphabet and numbers and whatnot, Sunday School had its story time. Bible stories were always on the menu, intermingled with other popular fables and parables, and it was never even suggested there was any difference. The Good Book was always treated as a collection of handy tales used as springboards for teaching moral lessons, not as a history book. Indeed, I was never once told that unbelievers go to hell or that I had to "believe on Christ" to be saved or anything like that. All good people went to heaven, so you'd better be good. That was it. Jesus in this version of Christianity was little more than a moral teacher. Being the Son of God made him an authority on the subject but had no other importance. Perhaps it was no accident that everyone who attended this church was very kind and jovial and all around just good folk.
It is from his testimonial, From Taoist to Infidel (http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/testimonials/carrier.html), which describes his spiritual journey from nominal liberal Xian to philosophical Taoist to a more mainstream sort of atheist.

Has anyone here had an experience with some form of Xianity that approximately resembled this one?

[Brianna]

I'm the OP and I didn't ask for what you believe, I asked how do you pick what you believe. What's your algorithm? What's your filter?




My gut, the way I feel, what I perceive as right to believe based on what I can sense.

[Monad]

100% atheist - I don't go for that "how can we ever really know? crap (how can we ever really completely know there are no fairies or pan galactic space goats? - irrelevant question if it's a made up thing)

Marxist - not Stalinist note and no it is not a religion or belief system any more than Darwinism is - to put it simply it means I am a materialist (of the dialectical rather than mechanistic kind) and I see material conditions (including how we make a living socially, and the fact that how some groups of people live requires them living off other groups of people which places them in contradiction ) as being the context within which we live our lives and as having a major influence on how we live and how we think about how we live - we make our own history but not under circumstances of our own choosing to paraphrase Marx

Humanist - in the sense that we create our own gods, meanings, morals etc, they are not given from on high. However I do not see humanism as meaning "pro human", I think that is a common misinterpretation of the concept. I would also say I'm transhumanist in that I see us continuing to evolve but I don't think all of that evolution is likely to be biological and undirected, and that this requires we decide what our attitude is going to be to such developments (including our definition of human and sentience)

[sidhe]

I'm the OP and I didn't ask for what you believe, I asked how do you pick what you believe. What's your algorithm? What's your filter?

A combination of gut instinct, personal experience, and a reality map completely filled to the brim with metadata that lets me tie any one thing to any other thing. :D

[Barefoot Bree]

On the subject of belief systems, historian Richard Carrier has a description of a form of liberal Xianity that I think is worth repeating:
My experiences with religion as a child were all good. My mother was a church secretary at a First Methodist Church only a block from our home, and I attended Sunday School fairly regularly, but my parents rarely insisted that I attend any sermons. The religion sold at this local business was a very liberal brand of Christianity. It was more like a preschool and social club, and that made it an excellent asset to the community, and a place of fond memories for me. Amidst arts and crafts, lunches, running and climbing about, and basic learning, the alphabet and numbers and whatnot, Sunday School had its story time. Bible stories were always on the menu, intermingled with other popular fables and parables, and it was never even suggested there was any difference. The Good Book was always treated as a collection of handy tales used as springboards for teaching moral lessons, not as a history book. Indeed, I was never once told that unbelievers go to hell or that I had to "believe on Christ" to be saved or anything like that. All good people went to heaven, so you'd better be good. That was it. Jesus in this version of Christianity was little more than a moral teacher. Being the Son of God made him an authority on the subject but had no other importance. Perhaps it was no accident that everyone who attended this church was very kind and jovial and all around just good folk.
It is from his testimonial, From Taoist to Infidel (http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/testimonials/carrier.html), which describes his spiritual journey from nominal liberal Xian to philosophical Taoist to a more mainstream sort of atheist.

Has anyone here had an experience with some form of Xianity that approximately resembled this one?

Me! Me! That is precisely the kind of Christianity that my dad preached, and the kind of churches we attended when I was small and the folks still do.

I absorbed two lessons about religion: Works Not Words - how you live your life and how you deal with others is more important than the details of your beliefs about god; and One God Many Faces - that all religions worship the same god, just the details vary by the culture. It's not a huge step from the latter to realize that if that's true, god isn't actually very important, and maybe/probably/definitely noexistent.

And I still hold to both of them, actually, as the basis of my belief system. The kind of person you are and how you deal with me and others is much more important to me than the details of what you believe; and all religions have the same potential to do either good or evil in the world. It all depends on the individuals within each religion, the acts they perform and the speeches they make, as to which way I judge the religion.

[Barefoot Bree]

I'm the OP and I didn't ask for what you believe, I asked how do you pick what you believe. What's your algorithm? What's your filter?

I think what I'm driving at is how, on what evidence or impulse, we as human people each evaluate and choose for ourselves what philosophy or doctrine to follow as our compass.

Ah. Mea culpa.

Well, even though I don't believe in god, the two lessons I outlined in my last post (Works Not Words and One God Many Faces), along with a thorough grounding in the Golden Rule, still stay with me and provide the foundation.

But I cannot choose what to believe, that comes naturally from my investigation (however deep or brief that investigation is). I find I either believe a set of claims or what-have-you, or I don't. It's not a conscious choice.

As to which philosophy to follow, other than those basics, I don't really "follow" anything in particular. Some philosophies I have read about sound pretty good, but I've never been the type to make conscious decisions based upon them.

Like Christina, I'd have to say 'with my gut', with an emphasis, again, on the three basic and very well internalized precepts listed above.

[dug_down_deep]

I think the how do you decide question is going to be the same for most people. They take a look and choose the conclusions that seem to make sense. Or refuse to choose conclusions, if that makes sense. "Making sense" is something psychological.

I am an ontological agnostic but believe in meaning as the foundation for all experience. Life is a story. I do not know if there is an author, or if the story is self-generating, or something in between. Everything is psychology. The ontological house is built upon the epistemological sands. Synchronicity is real, but unexplained.

Something like that.

[Christina]

I've been thinking about this a bit more because I've forcibly removed the idea of believing in something from my mind. Something is either tangible or it isn't and the tangible doesn't require belief. If I start believing in the intangible it means that I need new meds.

I do what feels good and makes me happy, and it just so happens that working on anti-poverty issues makes me very happy. It isn't as much of an "I should" principle as a "because I can and it feels good" thing. That may be my philosophy and there's probably a name for it but I don't think it's hedonism. Some people are led around by their brain, others by their gut, others by their dick (or the equivalent) and others by the hum of happy hypomania. I'm not sure that the latter represents anything that anyone else here can relate to but it's usually a very happy thing that wants to spread itself around.

I have no idea how the rest of you that read all sorts of religious and philosophical texts pick parts of established ideas to believe in or toss out. It isn't a very intellectual process for me.

[Anne]

gut, experience, reasoning, and hope.

[BioBeing]

So in fundie dialect, "believing on God" is a shorthand for "believing that God is taking care of me"? Is that a fair summary?

Sort of. I think it is a bit deeper than that, but I don't quite know how to relate it to you.

Oh, here is a typical fundie explanation that I have heard probably a thousand times.

A fundie preacher, they almost always have kids, right? Just about all of them tell a story about their kid jumping off their bed saying, "Catch me Daddy!"

Something like jumping off and believing that God will catch you.

Lisa

I let my kids fall once in a while, just to let them know leaping without looking was dangerous. A couple of trips to the ER for concussion, and they get the message.









[I'm kidding!]

[Lisa0315]

So in fundie dialect, "believing on God" is a shorthand for "believing that God is taking care of me"? Is that a fair summary?

Sort of. I think it is a bit deeper than that, but I don't quite know how to relate it to you.

Oh, here is a typical fundie explanation that I have heard probably a thousand times.

A fundie preacher, they almost always have kids, right? Just about all of them tell a story about their kid jumping off their bed saying, "Catch me Daddy!"

Something like jumping off and believing that God will catch you.

Lisa

I let my kids fall once in a while, just to let them know leaping without looking was dangerous. A couple of trips to the ER for concussion, and they get the message.









[I'm kidding!]

...
Lisa

[Brianna]

Sort of. I think it is a bit deeper than that, but I don't quite know how to relate it to you.

Oh, here is a typical fundie explanation that I have heard probably a thousand times.

A fundie preacher, they almost always have kids, right? Just about all of them tell a story about their kid jumping off their bed saying, "Catch me Daddy!"

Something like jumping off and believing that God will catch you.

Lisa

I let my kids fall once in a while, just to let them know leaping without looking was dangerous. A couple of trips to the ER for concussion, and they get the message.









[I'm kidding!]

...
Lisa

hehehe. :evil:

[Barefoot Bree]

(Maybe this discussion should be split off....)

So in fundie dialect, "believing on God" is a shorthand for "believing that God is taking care of me"? Is that a fair summary?

Sort of. I think it is a bit deeper than that, but I don't quite know how to relate it to you.

Oh, here is a typical fundie explanation that I have heard probably a thousand times.

A fundie preacher, they almost always have kids, right? Just about all of them tell a story about their kid jumping off their bed saying, "Catch me Daddy!"

Something like jumping off and believing that God will catch you.

Lisa

I'm still struggling with this.

Would it be fair to say that the phrase "believe on" includes the implication that the belief in (on) god or Jesus is the foundation of your belief, that it underlies everything else? (An extremely pale permutation is praying "in Jesus' name".)

[Lisa0315]

(Maybe this discussion should be split off....)

So in fundie dialect, "believing on God" is a shorthand for "believing that God is taking care of me"? Is that a fair summary?

Sort of. I think it is a bit deeper than that, but I don't quite know how to relate it to you.

Oh, here is a typical fundie explanation that I have heard probably a thousand times.

A fundie preacher, they almost always have kids, right? Just about all of them tell a story about their kid jumping off their bed saying, "Catch me Daddy!"

Something like jumping off and believing that God will catch you.

Lisa

I'm still struggling with this.

Would it be fair to say that the phrase "believe on" includes the implication that the belief in (on) god or Jesus is the foundation of your belief, that it underlies everything else? (An extremely pale permutation is praying "in Jesus' name".)

Yes! Believing ON is absolutely positively the foundation. That is a VERY good way to put it. Believing On is that mustard seed of faith. If we truly did it, we should be able to do anything, even miracles.

Lisa

[BioBeing]

...
Lisa

I left Lisa speechless! That has to be a first! Do I get a prize?

[Lisa0315]

...
Lisa

I left Lisa speechless! That has to be a first! Do I get a prize?

:notworthy: Mark the date on your calendar. Doom is upon us all!

Lisa

[Barefoot Bree]

Yes! Believing ON is absolutely positively the foundation. That is a VERY good way to put it. Believing On is that mustard seed of faith. If we truly did it, we should be able to do anything, even miracles.

Lisa
OK, then. The phrase still makes my inner Grammar Nazi cringe, but now that I understand the meaning behind it, I guess I can cringe-and-go.

Thanks!

[Lisa0315]

Yes! Believing ON is absolutely positively the foundation. That is a VERY good way to put it. Believing On is that mustard seed of faith. If we truly did it, we should be able to do anything, even miracles.

Lisa
OK, then. The phrase still makes my inner Grammar Nazi cringe, but now that I understand the meaning behind it, I guess I can cringe-and-go.

Thanks!

Well, translators were probably trying to distinguish between two words or phrases and that is the closest they could get. Plus, Elizabethan English and all that.

[DMB]

Oh, here is a typical fundie explanation that I have heard probably a thousand times.

A fundie preacher, they almost always have kids, right? Just about all of them tell a story about their kid jumping off their bed saying, "Catch me Daddy!"

Something like jumping off and believing that God will catch you.

Lisa

You're going to hate me for this, Lisa, but I am irresistibly reminded of this story:

A man was rockclimbing on a high, steep cliff, when he found he was stuck. He could go neither up nor down and was precariously hanging on by his fingertips.

"Help!" he called.

No reply.

"HELP! Is there anyone there?" he yelled.

A deep voice replied, "Yes, my son. Have faith in me. Let yourself go and I will catch you."

The man thought for a minute. He called again, "Help! Is there anyone else?"

[Zygote]

Yes! Believing ON is absolutely positively the foundation. That is a VERY good way to put it. Believing On is that mustard seed of faith. If we truly did it, we should be able to do anything, even miracles.

Lisa

I could see how the possibility of being able to do anything, even miracles, as being a very strong motivator for cultivating absolute, unconditional belief. Hope for that sort of strength or power (not necessarily over others, but towards a good cause) could trump even logic as a guide of what path to follow and what doctrines to adopt.

And, presumably, an absence of miracles doesn't disprove the doctrine. It only demonstrates that the underlying faith wasn't yet complete enough. Hope endures.

A quest for peace and hope - would it be fair/accurate to add this to "wanting to help others," etc. as another driving force in selecting life paths/philosophies?

[Lisa0315]

Oh, here is a typical fundie explanation that I have heard probably a thousand times.

A fundie preacher, they almost always have kids, right? Just about all of them tell a story about their kid jumping off their bed saying, "Catch me Daddy!"

Something like jumping off and believing that God will catch you.

Lisa

You're going to hate me for this, Lisa, but I am irresistibly reminded of this story:

A man was rockclimbing on a high, steep cliff, when he found he was stuck. He could go neither up nor down and was precariously hanging on by his fingertips.

"Help!" he called.

No reply.

"HELP! Is there anyone there?" he yelled.

A deep voice replied, "Yes, my son. Have faith in me. Let yourself go and I will catch you."

The man thought for a minute. He called again, "Help! Is there anyone else?"

That joke was started by a Baptist preacher. I guarantee it.

Here is my fave made up by a Catholic on Christian Forums, just in one of those moments of genius wit that (hopefully) everyone has on occasion.

Baptists are known for the literal interpretation of the King James Bible and for always having a reason to have a meal. Justified by the first, they literally interpret one verse in particular to justify the second:

John 21:15
So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs.

[Christina]

Baptists are known for the literal interpretation of the King James Bible and for always having a reason to have a meal. Justified by the first, they literally interpret one verse in particular to justify the second:


A friend who is Jewish sent me this yesterday. I'm not sure why she does it because she knows that I'm an atheist and that I'll never forward this stuff around. She can make jokes about Jewish people but I'm sure not going to. But your food joke reminded me of this. I hope this is funny because I don't get most of it. I don't think it's offensive.

As a general principle, Jewish holidays are divided between days on which you must starve and days on which you must overeat. Many Jews observe no fewer than 16 fasts throughout the Jewish year, based on the time-honored principle that even if you are sure that you are ritually purified, you definitely aren't. Though there are many feasts and fasts, there are no holidays requiring light snacking.

Note: On Jewish holidays most Jews take the whole day off. This is because Jews, for historical and personal reasons, are more stressed out.

The Diet Guide to the Jewish Holidays:

Rosh Hashanah ------- Feast

Tzom Gedalia ----------- Fast

Yom Kippur -------------- More fasting

Sukkot -------------------- Feast for a week +

Hashanah Rabbah ---- More feasting

Simchat Torah --------- Keep right on feasting

Month of Heshvan ----- No feasts or fasts for a whole month. Get a grip on yourself.

Hanukkah ---------------- Eat potato pancakes

Tenth of Tevet --------- Do not eat potato pancakes

Tu B'Shevat ------------ Feast

Fast of Esther --------- Fast

Purim --------------------- Eat pastry

Passover ---------------- Do not eat pastry for a week

Shavuot ------------------ Dairy feast (cheesecake, blintzes, etc.)

17th of Tammuz -------- Fast (definitely no cheesecak e or blintzes)

Tish B'Av ----------------- Serious fast (don't even think about cheesecake or blintzes)

Month of Elul ------------ End of cycle. Enroll in Center for Eating Disorders before High Holidays arrive again.

[Lisa0315]

Yes! Believing ON is absolutely positively the foundation. That is a VERY good way to put it. Believing On is that mustard seed of faith. If we truly did it, we should be able to do anything, even miracles.

Lisa

I could see how the possibility of being able to do anything, even miracles, as being a very strong motivator for cultivating absolute, unconditional belief. Hope for that sort of strength or power (not necessarily over others, but towards a good cause) could trump even logic as a guide of what path to follow and what doctrines to adopt.

And, presumably, an absence of miracles doesn't disprove the doctrine. It only demonstrates that the underlying faith wasn't yet complete enough. Hope endures.

A quest for peace and hope - would it be fair/accurate to add this to "wanting to help others," etc. as another driving force in selecting life paths/philosophies?

In my case, no, at least not in the beginning. Then, yeah, I wanted to help others, but I am not sure if it were from a pure motive or from an OCD pov of trying to please God. I am not a typical case, I guess, so that question is pretty hard for me to answer.

The only real experience other than talking to other denominations online is from an Independent Baptist experience. For those who may not know this distinguishment, Independent Baptists are those who voted "No" back in the 1970's to join the Southern Baptist Convention. Most considered the Southern Baptists to be to liberal. (Yeah, I know. :D)

Most people who get saved in an Independent Baptist church are not looking for a philosophy to follow. They are generally not that high-browed. It is more like a religious experience in which one is invited to church, hears a sermon, and is moved by the Holy Spirit during the altar call. They get "saved" which many, many Christian denominations call a farce. Other denoms believe that salvation is a journey and received at the end of one's life, not in a single moment. OSAS, or Once Saved Always Saved believers would say that they got saved in a moment. They would not characterize it like this at all, but I have written before that OSAS is faith that God will complete what He has begun. Therefore, one is saved in a moment by faith that the journey will be completed. The motive is generally a conviction that one has fallen short of God's expectations and that one is going to hell unless they fess up.

The "good works" of an Independent Baptist is a sign that salvation has occurred. The good works should first begin within the believer's own life and then extend outward. Works vs Faith, of course, has been the crux of the fight between Protestants and Catholics for centuries. Yet, even so, there is a great deal of pressure to participate in whatever "good works" is going on in the church. Few people are allowed to come to church to worship and go home. At least, I never had that experience.

I hope that answers your question without being too convoluted.

Lisa

[JamesBannon]

Baptists are known for the literal interpretation of the King James Bible and for always having a reason to have a meal. Justified by the first, they literally interpret one verse in particular to justify the second:


A friend who is Jewish sent me this yesterday. I'm not sure why she does it because she knows that I'm an atheist and that I'll never forward this stuff around. She can make jokes about Jewish people but I'm sure not going to. But your food joke reminded me of this. I hope this is funny because I don't get most of it. I don't think it's offensive.

As a general principle, Jewish holidays are divided between days on which you must starve and days on which you must overeat. Many Jews observe no fewer than 16 fasts throughout the Jewish year, based on the time-honored principle that even if you are sure that you are ritually purified, you definitely aren't. Though there are many feasts and fasts, there are no holidays requiring light snacking.

Note: On Jewish holidays most Jews take the whole day off. This is because Jews, for historical and personal reasons, are more stressed out.

The Diet Guide to the Jewish Holidays:

Rosh Hashanah ------- Feast

Tzom Gedalia ----------- Fast

Yom Kippur -------------- More fasting

Sukkot -------------------- Feast for a week +

Hashanah Rabbah ---- More feasting

Simchat Torah --------- Keep right on feasting

Month of Heshvan ----- No feasts or fasts for a whole month. Get a grip on yourself.

Hanukkah ---------------- Eat potato pancakes

Tenth of Tevet --------- Do not eat potato pancakes

Tu B'Shevat ------------ Feast

Fast of Esther --------- Fast

Purim --------------------- Eat pastry

Passover ---------------- Do not eat pastry for a week

Shavuot ------------------ Dairy feast (cheesecake, blintzes, etc.)

17th of Tammuz -------- Fast (definitely no cheesecak e or blintzes)

Tish B'Av ----------------- Serious fast (don't even think about cheesecake or blintzes)

Month of Elul ------------ End of cycle. Enroll in Center for Eating Disorders before High Holidays arrive again.

The Jews tend to have a somewhat singular sense of humour. I like it :D

[Criada]

I haven't a clue how to answer this...
I became a Christian after a lot of study of world religions, reading books for and against it, but really, when it came to it, it was a 'gut' thing, I guess.
I don't think we can ever operate entirely intellectually, too many instincts and feelings get in the way.

I like the quote:
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away."
Philip K. Dick

I guess that sums up why I hold on to what I believe. I have tried, very hard, to stop believing in God.. but He won't go away!

[sohy]

I didn't choose my beliefs either. I'm a strong atheist with humanist tendencies. I was raised by evangelical Xians of the fundy variety. While I was successfully indoctrinated as a child, I was always a budding skeptic. I gave up the Santa belief at the age of four and asked my parents plenty of questions about their beliefs. Being a young child, I tended to accept their less than convincing explanations. They were the adults and I was the child. I expected adults to know more than I did.

Jump ahead to age 18. I sometimes think that age 18 is when most of us start to think for ourselves. While attending a fundamentalist Xian college, I quickly lost my Xian faith. I remained somewhat of a theistic agnostic for several years. After giving serious consideration to most of the world's religions, I had an epiphany. It was weird but suddenly I realized that there are no supernatural elements, no gods, no life after death etc. It was as if something in my mind had become free. I was also very relieved to have ended my long search. I use the term strong atheist because I am no longer able to consider the possibility that gods exist. Not even if I tried.

I am not an anti-religious atheist. I do believe there are both positive and negative things that come from religion. I see the positive things all around me. I also see the harmful effects. Human constructs tend to be dichotomous. It's probably impossible to weigh the good and bad that comes from religion objectively. I'm not interested in arguing the point. My views won't change your mind and your views won't change mine. I've spent way too much time examining the evidence before I came to that conclusion. I don't believe religion will ever go away, but I do hope it will become more liberal. I like liberal religion.

I like humanism because it's very idealistic. I don't for a minute think any of the humanistic ideals will ever come to pass, but I think that humans are at their best when they have hope. Humanism is something that provides one with hope, and sometimes community as well. My humanist community is fragile, but it's better than nothing. Atheists, even humanists are not very good at forming successful groups. At least that has been my experience.

Finally, I am also somewhat of a hedonist. By that, I, like most humans seek out behavior that gives me pleasure. Advocating and caring for others gives me pleasure, so I do well in my position as a nurse. Of course there are many other things that give me pleasure, that are far less noble. As long as my pleasure seeking behavior doesn't harm others, I'm going with it.

[Brother Daniel]

I'm the OP and I didn't ask for what you believe, I asked how do you pick what you believe. What's your algorithm? What's your filter?
Right. That's why I described the question as a request for a total core-dump. How can anyone really know the causality behind their beliefs?

The question "what do you believe" would be far simpler to answer (and, granted, far less interesting).

[Brother Daniel]

But I cannot choose what to believe, that comes naturally from my investigation (however deep or brief that investigation is). I find I either believe a set of claims or what-have-you, or I don't. It's not a conscious choice.
This. Exactly. I'm glad someone said it.

[Worldtraveller]

Apparently, I'm a fundamentalist atheist. :rolleyes:

[LoneWolf]

I like the quote:
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away."
Philip K. Dick


Nice quote, I like that too.

Although your results may, and apparently do, vary.

[Zygote]

But I cannot choose what to believe, that comes naturally from my investigation (however deep or brief that investigation is). I find I either believe a set of claims or what-have-you, or I don't. It's not a conscious choice.
This. Exactly. I'm glad someone said it.

Choices aren't necessarily conscious. I don't make a daily decision to love my kids, but I don't doubt that there are physiological reasons why I do love them (beyond, of course, their inestimable charm and radiant personalities :P).

I can't even claim to follow a consciously chosen values system when I give back the extra change at a store when the clerk miscalculates. I do it because, for some unknown reason, it feels good. The act of not taking unfair advantage of someone else resonates with something deep inside.

It could be that I'm responding to a conditioned reflex. Or it could be the residue from some ancient instinct (there are statistical evolutionary advantages to certain strategies of generosity).

My point is that each of us has some form of internal drivers. Our motivational mood isn't handed down from an external force, any more than our thoughts and feelings are separate from our brains. We choose or are driven to follow certain general ethical, social, personal paths because doing so feels better to us than not doing so.

For facts and reasoning, we can use and study our conscious brains. For choices about values and beliefs, we're relying on something less known and obvious. We use the chosen value/belief sets themselves to glimpse indirectly the person within. Someday, I hope we'll have better tools and understanding.

[dug_down_deep]

I'm the OP and I didn't ask for what you believe, I asked how do you pick what you believe. What's your algorithm? What's your filter?
Right. That's why I described the question as a request for a total core-dump. How can anyone really know the causality behind their beliefs?

The question "what do you believe" would be far simpler to answer (and, granted, far less interesting).
Also, the best anyone could do is a hypothesis, since that's a question for psychology, or neuroscience, or cognitive science, or...

[Zygote]

Also, the best anyone could do is a hypothesis, since that's a question for psychology, or neuroscience, or cognitive science, or...

Just because we don't have the means to find the answers (yet) doesn't mean that the question is not worth asking.

We may not be able to know the why or how yet, but we can learn a lot from seeing what things people feel drawn to in terms of behaviors or beliefs.

For instance, some people seem immune to the "god of the gaps" rationale while others are convinced that it is logical and consider it a vital cornerstone of their world view.

This raises the question: Do some of us experience uncertainty as a more uncomfortable thing than others do? Or do we each just find different ways of calming ourselves in the face of the unknown?

[Norrin Radd]

Fundamentalist (in terms of the "Five Fundamentals"), Arminian (approximately), Pneumatic/Charismatic/Pentecostal. That should suffice for now.

[SallyAnne]

I steal from anything that seems applicable to my experience or laudable in its goals or outcomes. This includes the bible, Buddhism, Tolkien, Star Wars, Jane Austen


"Star Wars and Jane Austen" LOL, ah man that's funny.:D

[SallyAnne]

What's your algorithm?




Bible Thumping Christian Fundamentalist Evangelicalite, Socialist, Auf Wedersehen Pet fan, X-Files fan, Pug fan.

[SallyAnne]

I am human.



I like that!:clap:

[Norrin Radd]

What's your algorithm?

..., Socialist, ...

:crackwhip: :hammer: :spank: :buried: :fishslap: :tomato:

[SallyAnne]

What's your algorithm?

..., Socialist, ...

:crackwhip: :hammer: :spank: :buried: :fishslap: :tomato:


:hide:

[SallyAnne]

delete

[dug_down_deep]

What's that last smiley saying?

[SallyAnne]

What's that last smiley saying?

Nothing, it's just me being silly to NorrinRadd. Sorry, I'll go delete it.

[dug_down_deep]

No no no no no! I was just asking what Norrin's last smiley is saying. It's lips are moving, and I'm curious. :)

[SallyAnne]

No no no no no! I was just asking what Norrin's last smiley is saying. It's lips are moving, and I'm curious. :)

Oh I dunno what Norrins one is doing...

LOL! Oh, sorry, I thought the last smiley I posted was annoying you that's why I went and deleted it. It's just that at other sites Norrin and I (and some other friends) used to play games just communicating with each other using smilies. I forgot where I was, haha, and just carried it on here...

my last smiley was just a little dancing bunny, it's cute -----> :bunny:

[SallyAnne]

It's the "commence throwing of rotton tomatoes":tomato:

[Norrin Radd]

No no no no no! I was just asking what Norrin's last smiley is saying. It's lips are moving, and I'm curious. :)

I don't know. I used to be able to zoom in on things like that, but since my Great System Reload a few days ago -- process still ongoing, in fact -- that ability seems gone.

[Lisa0315]

What's that last smiley saying?

He is telling a joke and getting a tomato thrown at him.

Or....he is witnessing and that atheist you cannot see is throwing a tomato.

Or...he is coming onto some girl and she throws a tomato.

Damnnit! Use your imagination!

Lisa

[dug_down_deep]

I gotta know, dammit.

Also, I can't believe I added an apostrophe to "its".

[DMB]

I gotta know, dammit.

Also, I can't believe I added an apostrophe to "its".

:spank: (DMB, grammar-Nazi Mod).

[Lisa0315]

I gotta know, dammit.

Also, I can't believe I added an apostrophe to "its".

:spank: (DMB, grammar-Nazi Mod).

Or, someone who just likes to tap that ass! :evil:

[VoxRat]

I'm atheist.
I was born into a family that was conventionally christian. That is, my father was: conservative, politically, culturally, CofE'er. So we all went to church every Sunday, and I even went to a Episcopal (the American version of CofE) high school.

I believed that (1) the church people (and my father) were right, and knew what they were talking about, but it didn't really make sense to me. I figured that was because I was young and hadn't thought about it hard enough. So I gave it the benefit of the doubt, and continued to think it was important to think about it harder, and to stay involved in the church. (I was even an altar boy!)

We had required courses in school on religion, church history, church doctrine. I found it quite interesting. I still do. But the more I learned about it, the more I found it didn't make sense, and the more I became convinced that no one could offer a defensible reason for any of the doctrine; that all the apologists were either pawns or players in a power game.

Nothing traumatic; I just gradually went from

the priests know what they're talking about and have moral authority and if they say it, it must be true, to some of the priests seem like bright and good people, and even though it doesn't make sense, it must be true in some sense, to even the bright and good priests seem to be talking nonsense; but perhaps the church is a good institution to stay affiliated with, even if it's based on fantasy, to this is all bullshit, and though some churches may be involved in worthwhile charitable enterprises, it's dishonest to pretend to buy the bullshit; you can do the worthwhile charitable stuff without the church.