Religion: What it means to you

I am Christian, and have rather strong faith in the salvatory power of Christ. However certain theological and spiritual questions have perpetually bothered me since I started looking into biblical theology. I am not habitual in my faith, meaning I don't read the Bible all that often, nor do I pray all that much (communication with God is one of those questions that I have been investigating), but I do operate with the understanding that God knows what He is talking about when He says that certain things are sinful, or unhealthy, etc.

I believe fully that Christ Came to earth to die for the sins of humans (however, another one of my questions of theology is in regards to limited/unlimited atonement and the Calvinist "election" ideas). I also believe that, rather than Christianity being so diametrically opposed to other religions, it is in fact a culmination, and completion if you will, of all the world's religions (excluding atheism). I also believe however that, although there may be common themes in the faiths all over the world, that this does not make them equally as valid as Christianity. However, I do not dare to act as if I were right, and someone else is wrong, seeing as how that wins NOBODY'S support or agreement. Rather, I try to understand where people are coming from, and what they believe (after all, there IS the possibility, however minute, that I am misunderstanding the stories of Christ). I acknowledge my lack of knowledge, and am continually trying to append to my small amount of knowledge.

Right now, as I have been researching certain aspects of the human mind(for a religion in society class), I am experiencing a changing of my perception of the nature of human spirituality as well as how God created us. I highly doubt that the naturalization of my perception of the mind will cause me to lose my faith. Rather, I see it as just a restructuring, and a bit of demystification, of my world view, but not a total drastic change.

Oh yeah, as a little addendum. God is real, alive, and active. I just have trouble seeing that in my personal life. I DEFINITELY see it done in other people's lives, which is totally awesome, and part of the reason for the perpetuation of my faith.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by walko

i don't think that religion give the "why" too....

Why do you say that?

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by Blanka

But then again.. being a Christian isn't about church, it's about your relationship with Christ, and what you believe. Give me friends, give me love, and you can keep your church.

Well, I have to disagree with you there a lot. Your relationship with other Christians is an integral part of your relationship with Christ. The Church is the Body of Christ, and if you are a Christian, you are a part of the body. Like Paul says "The eye cannot say to the hand, 'I don't need you!' And the head cannot say to the feet, 'I don't need you!'"
Get plugged into a church.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Originally Posted by Blanka

I agree your relationship with other Christians is a very important thing, but I've always believed the Body of Christ is actually your relationship with other Christians, not a church.
I go to a housechurch, (if you don't know what that is, you pretty much just have church at someone's house..), and that seems to be the only place I've ever felt I belonged. I've always believed you should be plugged into the people, not the church. But that's probably just a personal thing.

If church makes you happy, then go for it.

And if I didn't make much sense, sorry.

No you made perfect sense. I understand what you are talking about, and you are absolutely right about it being your relationship with other believers. However, I find it bothersome when people say that there is a difference between house churches, and churches where people gather in a building that is not a home. There really should be no difference between the 2, except for size, but yet common understanding seems to say so.
So anyways, you DO go to a church. It's just a smaller scale, more intimate (as churches SHOULD be) church.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Hey, PM me about your questions sometime. Maybe we can discuss them. Or AIM chat, or something. *shrugs*

I was speaking idiomatically.

So the only reason why you believe what you do is because your mother believes what she does so strongly?
How absurd.
There are 3 ways in which you can grow up in relation to your parents.
You can either:
1. Conform exactly to how your parents are
2. Conform exactly to how your parents aren't
3. Judge carefully on what is the good, and what is the bad, and learn from it.

Two of these ways, you're parents control how you act.

It would be foolish to be pagan simply because your mom was a bad example. Don't let that control you.

How ya doing, buddy?

So in other words, you make it up as you go along.

Sounds like stuff I did as a kid.
Then I realized I was only decieving myself.

FELIPE NO

Originally Posted by Chibi Neko

Actually, some of the great religions of the world where almost extinct because of Christians 500-1000 years ago.

Like the Aztec religions? Or the polynesian head-hunters? Or the original druids? Or the american indian groups?
All of these were immensely violent cultures, built around war and violence.
Can you give any such examples of nice, peaceful groups who were "destroyed" by Christian evangelism?

Double Post:

Originally Posted by Megalith Beast

Negative. I am making nothing up.
I can understand how it may seem that I am though. As I say, I had all of these ideas about how life works etc, and then found that there were many other who shared the same view, called Pagans. I think that these views of the world came to me simply because I am a creature on this planet, and I believe all people in the world can awaken to what I would consider the 'truth'.

Care to elaborate on what these are?

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

But, is all of it true?
Just because a lot of people believe it to be so, and have done so for a long time, and you agree with them, does not make it factual. :-P ( :flatearth101: )

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by Megalith Beast

I believe it to be true because I 'feel' that it is real!
I can't tell you anything as a fact. I go by my feelings, but hey my 'feelings' could just be chemical reactions making me think things, but then again, maybe its something deeper than that. Well anyway, I trust in my feelings, so to me, what I believe in is very real.

Ah, but your feelings are predetermined by your previous experiences, which map out your emotional responses to stuff. Emotions and feelings are unreliable as an objective source of determining truth. ( :Neurology101::Psychology101: )

I hope Sassu doesn't get all angry at me for being this inquisitive in her thread. :P

And I see there are exclamation points in your post. Please don't get riled up. I am just saying and asking stuff.

EDIT: also... did you used to watch Captain Planet when you were young?

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by Megalith Beast

Excuse my exclamation marks, that is where I am getting excited, not angry. You may have a good scientific theory about feelings, but I think that they exist on a spiritual level as well. I realise it's irriatating when 'religious' types use spiritual energy in their arguements because it can't be proven or disproven, but that's just the way I think it is.
Oh and I did watch Captain Planet, heh, Hmmmmmm, well who knows, my whole life could be based around that mediocre cartoon!

I figured just as much about Captain Planet. You were born the same year I was. I used to be of the same sort of persuasions as you, to a certain extent. I guess I just could not find anything to substantiate it, and as such, it just became something fun to think about, but nothing more. I cannot also forget to credit my father for teaching me a lot about critical thinking.

As for feelings, I am finding it a rather interesting journey in my mind, as I delve into the deeper sciences, philosophies, and psychology, trying to pin down where exactly the spiritual may start and where the physical may end.


Wow, postcount+++ at this forum

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Originally Posted by Megalith Beast

Delving into philosophies and psychology hm? Heh I can tell you're that kind of person just from your signature! Ghost in the Shell does indeed raise some interesting points.
Well, I wish you luck on your 'spritual journey' if I may call it that!

I am into everything.
And thanks.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Those were not through evangelism though.
Those are all perversions of Christianity, not operating even within the most strict of interpretations of scriptures.
Let us also not forget that there ARE people who will call themselves Christians, but only to attempt to gain the support of the populace at large, or only do so because that is basically the "cool" thing to do at the time.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Newton.
Every image I have ever seen of Descartes has him with at least a small mustache.
Not to mention that Descartes has a more prominent nose not nearly as prominent a chin.

Although Einstein was more Deistic than anything.
And Newton cast off many tenants of Orthodox Christianity, such as claiming that the Trinity was nothing but a machination of the Church.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Well... somehow I don't think that anyone will deny that the Aztec religion was a big fan of live human sacrifices.

FELIPE NO

Originally Posted by Megalith Beast

Need a good example of Christians trying to destroy a peaceful group? How about in the 'crusades', where pagans had to convert to christianity or die.

You clearly have no idea what the crusades really were.
Please be silent, and read a book that actually gives a more in depth analysis and FACTUAL treatment of the crusades, rather than the brief histories found in high school history books.
Or would you like me to give you an education in Crusade history?

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

Originally Posted by Minion

And don't you think it's possible that many of today's scientists are not into Christianity because they've been indoctrinated into thinking science has made it obsolete and as such, it's embarrassing for them to be spiritual in the scientific community?

Although really, that is not just "possible." That is actively going on in the scientific world. We have a new dogma system on our hands, and no one wants to admit it.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by Megalith Beast

Please give me an education.

Originally Posted by Azral

let's not forget about the crusades!... Christians didn't seem to peaceful then, now did they?

The crusades started when the Turkish empire and various other muslim groups moved in on the trails from Europe to to Jerusalem, and regularly slaughtered massive groups of pilgrims on their way to the Holy City, and even within the town, with the purpose of driving out the "filthy chrstian infidels" and such. Beforehand, the middle east region, under Christian rule, was in a relatively peaceful state, allowing all peoples of all faiths to come and go as they chose.

Due to the violence though, Alexius Comnenus, then emporer of the Byzantine empire, wrote a letter complaing to the Count of Flanders about the problems with the Turks. The Count then passed this issue on the the pope, Urban II, who saw this as an opportunity to not only protect the citizens of the Christian nations, but also to unite Europe (which had been rather fractured and warring for a long time since the siege of Rome) for the purpose of driving these murderers of Christians out. And thus, the first crusade was called. Not to "convert the pagans" or whatever, but to drive them away, and keep them from killing innocent civilians.

Interestingly enough, the first crusade that was REALLY performed was started by an overtly radical monk named "Peter the Hermit," and he whipped up an "army" (if you could call it that) of civilians who would march ahead of the offical army and do something. (what they intended to do... I dunno )
This time is actually what people are really talking about when they refer to the Jews being brutalized in medieval Europe. (However, keep in mind that at this time, the Catholic church did not allow the scriptures to be accessible to the common person in their own language)

Before this time, the Jews lived with other Europeans in relatively good peace, although inevitable cultural tensions were there (the Jews deliberately isolated themselves and their culture from the surrounding peoples, for obvious reasons). However, the uneducated masses viewed the Jews as the enemies of God and murderers of Jesus, and other such uninformed crock, and thought that if the warrior crusaders could defeat "the enemeies of God," then they could do that at home. However, the Catholic church itself took an active role to condemn such acts, and had it's clergy preach against such violence and in some cases, set up safe houses for the Jews. Unfortunately for many areas, the people would not listen to reason, and either drove out the clergy, killed the priests, or just ignored them. And then proceeded to attempt to "purge" Europe of Jews. Then, they marched on to Constantinople, ransacking all sorts of towns and villages for supplies, without an afterthought, and when they arrived, the Byzantine emperor just arranged to have the shipped off to Anatolia, rather than cause a mess in his city.
Upon arriving in Anatolia, they pretty much murdered a bunch of Byzantine Christians, and then were wiped out by the Seljuks after holeing themselves up in a castle.

Then the first REAL crusaders came up to Constantinople, where the different nation's armies diverged and went on their own individual campaigns.

Anywho, I just realized that I am getting needlessly detailed.
Basically, it just kept escalating back and forth, with each group trying to gain control of the region over and over, and vendettas, wars within wars, and what have you. The rest is essentially unimporant to my original point, which is that the Crusades were not an evangelism campaign, but instead were a campaign to ensure the safety of the European nations' citizens.

And getting even closer to my original original point, these violent campaigns were not in conformity to scriptural doctrines, where such violence is considered absolutely unacceptable.
One can certainly not say that the same about the Muslim belief system; suggesting that is it built upon purely peaceful notions.

Most amazing jew boots

Originally Posted by Azral

Fyodor, your attention to detail and knowledge of the subject is intimidating to say the least... Let's get back on track to what this thread is truly asking though:

What does religion mean to you?

I want to elaborate on this question for you. In an earlier post you mentioned church and relations with your fellow Christians is a very important part of the Christian religion... What is your relationship with Pagans, and how do you value it?

Sure.
To me all pagans are still humans, and deserving of the same amount of respect and love as any of my other neighbors. I feel that they are dangerously wrong in what they believe about the world, but that does not lower my respect or value for them one bit. Sometimes I value my relationships with non-christians even more than I do with christians, because of something like a "salvation factor." Basically, I care enough for other people, that I would rather see them experience the best they can get, and avoid the worst they may run into. (heaven/hell, and healthy/unhealthy life)

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Originally Posted by Azral

You're a Virgo, aren't you? You communicate like one.

Nice. I have my birthdate broadcasted publicly.

(what a joker):juggler:

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Originally Posted by RacinReaver

And of the tribes that were in what's now America and Canada? They may have been violent, but that was over land disputes and issues similar to what Europe went through for, what, a couple thousand years?

I'm curious as to how the Catholic Church has never been involved in violent acts, though. I mean, if they've never done any of that stuff, how'd they manage to build up such a fantastic reputation?

Ok, I guess I will have to look deeper into the religious nature of american indians. But I still believe that a large amount of them readily incorporated war and battle rituals into the acceptable practice of their religion.
As for the RC church, I won't defend, because they pretty much did the same thing that I believe these indian tribes have done. They deliberately (and impressively seamlessly) incorporated war and violence into it's acceptable religious practices.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Originally Posted by RacinReaver

Fyodor, as far as I remember, the tribes that lived on the plains and further in the south tended to be more violent. However, the ones that lived in the Northeast were pretty laid back as far as things go. I think a lot of them just get a bad rap because the Europeans would have tribes fight against each other so they wouldn't do the actual clashing, kinda like what happened back in Korea.

Danka.
I will have to do more research.
(SO MUCH FUCKING STUFF TO LOOK UP!!! ;_; )

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Yeah Cod, back that statement up.

FELIPE NO

Originally Posted by wvlfpvp

I had a spiritual moment this morning that was rather trancendental. Through some knowledge of Buddism, Hebrew world-view at the time of Jesus, and the Christianity I was raised in, I made some massive connections.

OK, first, the Hebrew worldview: At the time of Jesus (and before) the view was that the World was God, as opposed to the more modern view (at least as I've been raised) of the World and God being two separate entities. Therefore the World is a holy thing. It is holy for two reasons: it IS God and it was created by God. If it's holy because God created it, then LIFE ITSELF is a holy thing, because it was created by God.

Well, I for one think you are totally wrong about what you think the Hebrew conception of God was.
God has ALWAYS been maintained and believed as a non-worldly being. The world was not God, and has never been believed to be so... unless there is some mysterious unknown sect of Judaism back in that time that nobody ever talked about but everyone followed.
It was very clearly heresy for anyone at all to claim that anything physical were God. Why do you think Jesus got into so much trouble?

However, some of your other reasoning I call into question. If the world was God, how did God create God? Was the universe ever-exisiting?

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

And guys with degrees in that sort of thing also say exactly the opposite of what you say.
The difference is that one (your guys with degrees) is built purely on speculations and extrapolations, whereas another (my guys with degrees) is built upon actual written records.
One is interpreting things in lieu of the 20th century mind, and the other is interpreting in the minds of the people at those times.

As for "stomping and shitting:" why must we wait until this "epiphany" sinks in before we argue against it. These sorts of considerations are pointless in a debate.

Jam it back in, in the dark.