Sweet Religion, Baby

[Derek]

There really seems to be alot of bible quotes in most post right now. So I thought we could have a discussion about religion.

I am not real sure how to start this. But it seems there are many that want to get a few quotes, beliefs, thoughts expressed.

[walking bird]

Okay.

I believe there is no Big Daddy in the sky, or anywhere else.

I believe we die and turn to dirt.

I believe we should be responsible, caring adults and the best possible parents we can be because it's the right thing to do, not because we fear the consequences or hope for some kind of eternal reward.

I believe people should have the freedom to believe whatever they want to believe, as long as they don't try to foist it onto other people.

I'm not sure this is what you had in mind for this thread, but there it is.

[Derek]

Okay.

I believe there is no Big Daddy in the sky, or anywhere else.

I believe we die and turn to dirt.

I believe we should be responsible, caring adults and the best possible parents we can be because it's the right thing to do, not because we fear the consequences or hope for some kind of eternal reward.

I believe people should have the freedom to believe whatever they want to believe, as long as they don't try to foist it onto other people.

I'm not sure this is what you had in mind for this thread, but there it is.


That's pretty much what I had in mind.

I believe people should have the freedom to believe whatever they want to believe, as long as they don't try to foist it onto other people.

My thoughts exactly. What I don't understand. Is how so many people make their decisions on wwjd.

[standman]

Thanks for starting this thread. But I am one of those weirdos on the opposite end of the scale. But I am love to listen to others beliefs. I guess one question I have would be, on what basis do you guys decide what is right? Do you think there are things that are right for everybody (and thus things that are wrong for everybody)?

[berkshire bee]

Well this might catch a lot of flack, but I think the ancient people, tribes, had it right. I think we should pay homage to the Earth and the Sun which provide us with everything. We have to take care of our planet. It's the only one we have. If we screw up, I don't think there is a supreme being that's gonna bail us out. The earth is our creator. People used to live in balance with the earth. Then someone came along and said, "You can't worship the earth, You must worship this God. And by the way, he's the only one. Religion was created by man to serve his own needs, and to ease the fear of death being the end of life. Our "spirit" lives on in the memory of those who knew us in life. I grew up a catholic, and my whole way of thinking about religion changed in the last few years.

[Oldbee]

Well this might catch a lot of flack, but.....I think we should pay homage to the Earth and the Sun,.....berkshireB.

Well, not from me. There has been a lot going on in some religions about this recently.

Something related; 'Religion and Environment': http://daphne.palomar.edu/calenvironment/religion.htm

[Beaches' Bee-Haven Apiary]

Thanks for starting this thread. But I am one of those weirdos on the opposite end of the scale. But I am love to listen to others beliefs. I guess one question I have would be, on what basis do you guys decide what is right? Do you think there are things that are right for everybody (and thus things that are wrong for everybody)?

I agree standman. When you forsake the Bible you loose all basis of right and wrong, therefore people make up their own right and wrong. So what gives some judge the right to say I'm wrong, by what standard does the gov. work off of? When our gov. was concieved the founding fathers were deeply intrenched in the Principles of the Bible, and that is what they built the Constitution off of. (Note, however, I'm not saying all of the founding fathers were Christians, Franklin was a deist, and Jefferson created his own cut down version of the Bible that almost completely took God out!) My whole point being you need a standard of right and wrong to govern, and the infalible Word of God is the only true standard. Therefore it is a little wonder that ever since this country has decided to forsake God and the Bible, we've fallen into a downward spiral.

Sorry to mix religion and politics into this thread, but its a good example of God's blessing or curse on obedience, or the lack thereof.

I believe there is a God who is activelly working in this universe and man's lives, as He has been since Creation.

[LEAD PIPE]

If there is no God then we are a bunch of chemicals. Anything we do is a result of a chemical reactions. If my brain comes up with the idea to rape a woman because it gives me joy and yours tells you to donate to starving children because it brings you joy they are both okay. After all, can one chemical reaction be morally superior to another? If there is no God Mother Teresa was a fool and Saddam was a role model. Why, because he did what gave him joy no matter who it hurt. After all we are only here for a very short time then it's over, live life to its fullest. Hanging around a bunch of starving people living in a very uncomfortable environment like she did to please some nonexistent being??? Talk about wasting your life. If there is no God then do whatever you want no matter who you hurt. Don’t let other people’s view of right and wrong get in the way of your pleasure. Just try to remember that their version of right and wrong are just chemical reactions that haven’t evolved as fully as yours.

[Rob-bee]

Thought #1
What are you?
Atheist, Agnostic, Infidel, or Skeptic?
An Atheist is one who denies the existence of a deity or of divine beings.
An Agnostic is one who believes it impossible to know anything about God or about the creation of the universe and refrains from commitment to any religious doctrine.
Infidel means an unbeliever, especially a nonbeliever in Islam or Christianity.
A Skeptic doubts and is critical of all accepted doctrines and creeds.
Knowing the difference in the four terms above is important.

[Sundance]

I align with Walking Bird.....

Most all religions follow the same precepts. Don't kill,
don't steal, don't screw around, etc. Good moral
code stuff.

What tee's me off is when religious people try to
imply that if you don't follow an organized religion
you're "immoral".

All religions have one major function. To ease the
insecurity people feel by not being able to answer
the "unanswerable" questions. Myself... I'm OK
with not knowing.:)

[Swobee]

There must be a God or we wouldn't have bees.

[Beaches' Bee-Haven Apiary]

I align with Walking Bird.....

Most all religions follow the same precepts. Don't kill,
don't steal, don't screw around, etc. Good moral
code stuff.

What tee's me off is when religious people try to
imply that if you don't follow an organized religion
you're "immoral".

All religions have one major function. To ease the
insecurity people feel by not being able to answer
the "unanswerable" questions. Myself... I'm OK
with not knowing.:)

But only Biblical Christianity (I'm excluding mainstream catholisism) believes that Jesus Christ was God in human flesh (referencing the Trinity) and on the cross he recieved the full punishment of all the world's sin (something only God could bare) and on the third day Jesus rose from the dead (humanly impossible). NO other "religion"holds that belief. God, through His Son, Jesus Christ, is all the security anyone needs.

This is my firm belief, but I'm just posting in a BeeSource discussion, please don't take it the wrong way.

-Nathanael

[Sundance]

But only Biblical Christianity (I'm excluding mainstream catholisism) believes that Jesus Christ was God in human flesh -Nathanael

Most religions have some manifestation to put their
particular deity into a more human (comfortable) image.
A fairly common thread.

Of course each sect of religion has particular differences
in their belief structures, but the basis is pretty common.

[mike haney]

"religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich" carl marx

[Beaches' Bee-Haven Apiary]

Most religions have some manifestation to put their
particular deity into a more human (comfortable) image.
A fairly common thread.

Of course each sect of religion has particular differences
in their belief structures, but the basis is pretty common.

What other religion claims that their savior/leader/founder rose from the dead, and His followers get to heaven based on grace alone, and not merit?

-Nathanael

[Sundance]

What other religion claims that their savior/leader/founder rose from the dead, and His followers get to heaven based on grace alone, and not merit?

-Nathanael

Hey I'm not arguing here.......... to each his own. Of course
each sect has variations that differ from one to the other.
But as I said, it is common to have a humanoid figure of
some sort. A prophet, or something. His/Her/It's exact
details differ, not the concepts.

[Beaches' Bee-Haven Apiary]

Hey I'm not arguing here.......... to each his own. Of course
each sect has variations that differ from one to the other.
But as I said, it is common to have a humanoid figure of
some sort. A prophet, or something. His/Her/It's exact
details differ, not the concepts.

Didn't mean to sound argumentative, you had just brought a point that I had failed to mention in my previous post.

I don't mean to argue, I think we all know how futile that is over the web!

-Nathanael

[Wax Moth]

What other religion claims that their savior/leader/founder rose from the dead, and His followers get to heaven based on grace alone, and not merit?

-Nathanael

I used to be a praticing protestant and above is one of the keen tennets of this branch of christianity... the problem is the more time I spent with fellow Christians, the less I wanted to go to Heaven! I would not want to spend eternity with such arrogant people who had the cheek to believe that they were chosen and everyone else was damned. They used the Bible to justify their behaviour, and to explain why they were better than others. At least Catholics believe that God will decide who is chosen and that the way people behave and their relationship with God and Christ is what gets you a pass to Heaven.

Some of the doctrines of Catholism are unattractive...for example Transubstantiation (the belief that the communion wine and bread actually change into the body and blood of Christ) and I find some of the wailing and incense swinging grim... but as a bunch of Christians I found they lived much closer to Christ.

[dragonfly]

Well, if I discussed my beliefs, I would lose my standing and reputation as a right wing nut job, so I'll leave it to you guys' imagination.;)

[Sundance]

There can be no such thing as an atheist. To say categorically, "There is no God," is to make an absolute statement.

You realize the converse would have to be true if
your statement had any validity........

[walking bird]

Some good stuff here. I like Berkshire Bee's take... kind of fundamental and oddly comforting.

Rob-bee, it's interesting that you started by saying you didn't want to get into a debate, and then wrote a lengthy diatribe airing out your side. But okay, no debate.

I will answer the "Think about it," point though. I think the latest evolutionary science has shown that we descended parallel to the apes, not directly from them (not that that would be something to be ashamed of) and in fact had a number of failures that didn't end up as Homo Sapiens.

That said, if you want to take the family tree a-way back, we were all wrigglers in the primordial soup. Now THAT'S something to think about!

[Rob-bee]

Grand-pa used to say "Hit dog hollers the loudest"
Didn't intend to hit so many with my "thoughts" tho silly as they may seem to some.

[Sundance]

Grand-pa used to say "Hit dog hollers the loudest"
Didn't intend to hit so many with my "thoughts" tho silly as they may seem to some.

Rob-bee........... Honestly I think you missed the target
completely. [edit by mod]

As WB said "Rob-bee, it's interesting that you started by saying you didn't want to get into a debate, and then wrote a lengthy diatribe airing out your side. But okay, no debate."

[standman]

a rob-bee snip..

I don't really recall anything in the story of the resurrection that suggest that jesus arouse in a fully human form. a couple of somewhat to highly unreliable sources suggest he may have linger here for a day or so just to bring these "very special folks' a 'very special message'. for myself this evidence I consider to be highly unreliable essentially because they are self serving to some individual or small group (oh so you can justify doing this based upon what some dead person told you... uh huh).

I really appreciate the variety of opinions expressed on here (about bees, politics, and religion). Just a point of clarification: according to the most reliable source material, Jesus spent 40 days after His resurrection with a large number of people, including over 500 at one time. He also did a lot of things, including eating with them, apparently designed to convince them that he was really alive ("in a fully human form", or super-human if you prefer). I believe He is alive, and that He is coming back.

[JWG]

Jesus said he would return while his present followers were still alive. He didn't. Or else those people are still alive somehow, lurking around.

If you read the gospels in parallel, they differ in the information they portray and the inconsistencies are remarkable. I think by and large, Christians hold to certain doctrines and dogmas from the Bible and ignore others, even if they think they don't.

It is okay to be "firm" but hopefully it does not close one's mind to other possibilities, or truths.

No one on the side of evolutionary biology would say we came from apes! We had a common ancestor. That's all.

Happy Thanksgiving

[HVH]

[edit by mod]

The number of threads that invoke evolution really suggest to me that a thorough discussion of evolution is needed. I don't know if we evolved from a common ancestor, or not, but I do know that far too many people believe that we did without familiarity with the evidence.
The classic 1953 experiment of Stanley Miller (Harold Urey's lab) proved nothing other than some amino acids can be produced under reducing conditions with the right starting materials, some energy, and an intelligent designer. What they still fail to tell you is that the scientific community no longer believes that the primordial earth was non-oxidative, that the amino acids were an enantiomeric mixture not found in life, and that the amino acids had to be quickly removed from the reaction vessel because they are so reactive that they would have formed nitrogenous cokes. If anything could be learned from that experiment is that intelligence was needed to create amino acids under artificial conditions that didn't exist in the primordial soup. I am certain that there are still proponents of the original experiment but it is important for people to know that it is not a slam dunk.
When I graduated from college I thought that everyone that didn't think we evolved from a common ancestor was dumb. I have a habit of reading opposition literature so I picked up some books to see what the counter arguments were. To this day I am still open to the idea that we evolved, but what I found in my research was really disturbing. A large body of evidence that was used to convince me that evolution was true had actually been know for years to be false. My college zoology book still had fossil hoaxes being used as evidence. It promoted Ernst Haeckel's theory of recapitulation which was discredited a long time ago.
Does this mean that the theory of evolution is wrong - no! What it does mean is that you should not believe what you were taught in school nor should you believe me. Everyone should be in the habit of reading the opposition and getting comfortable enough with the material to see what is rock solid and what is not.

[dragonfly]

I think by and large, Christians hold to certain doctrines and dogmas from the Bible and ignore others, even if they think they don't.




Frankly, I think you could say that about most religious groups, athiests included.


It is okay to be "firm" but hopefully it does not close one's mind to other possibilities, or truths.



It's interesting to me that this mindset usually seems to be used in describing Christians, but not other faiths, or torward those with lack of faith in general. I don't have a dog in this fight, because I doubt there's anyone here that I would be in complete agreement with, so please don't take my comments in any personal manner. When it boils down to it, there is no proof, whatsoever, of the existence of or the lack of existence of God. A Christian is no less "intelligent" because he believes in his faith of choice, than an Athiest. An Athiest cannot prove his faith anymore than anyone else.

[Sundance]

........ fossil hoaxes.


???????/ Please elaborate.

[Beaches' Bee-Haven Apiary]

HVH, I agree.

Let me leave this thread with one final point. Regarding origins, both evolution and creation (any belief for that matter) is based on faith. Neither side was there when it happened, and neither side can scientifically prove that their belief is correct. You can prove that there is a universe. You could "prove" that it evolved over millions of years, but I could "prove" that it's only about 6 thousand years old. It takes the faith that a few basic principles are right (old, old earth that originated from nothing, or that there is a God) to build your belief off of. Of course, origins is only a component of religion, the main thrust of most religions is securing a favourable after-life. And all of religion is based on the acceptance of particular, unprovable, beliefs (faith). Ultimately each individual is responsible for his own faith.

"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen" Hebrews 11:1.

As a Christian I affirm that there is only one way to Heaven, and all other religions/beliefs result in Hell. This is my faith. And I steadfastly stand to it. This being the case I cannot agree with someone who believes differently, but I do respect those who stand firmly by their beliefs (whatever it is), and I do not feel that I am better than anyone else if they don't believe what I believe, on the contrary, I acknowledge that there are many people in this world who are "better" than I am, yet are not born again Christians, many of whom I use a personal role models. I also do not intend to impose my faith on others. However, talking with, and explaining what I believe to be the truth to someone is something that all christians are called to do. But we are discussing religion here, not converting each other! :)

Derek, thanks for the thread. It's been an interesting discussion.

-Nathanael

[dragonfly]

It takes the faith that a few basic principles are right (old, old earth that originated from nothing, or that there is a God) to build your belief off of.

There's also the third option- that both are true.

[Keith Benson]

a right wing nut job,

Is that a right-wing nut-job or a right wing-nut job?

Keith

[cow pollinater]

Faith is like love.
You can't explain it, you can't prove it, you can't deny it.
Some people will spend their whole lives looking for it and never really find it. Think of a single guy who laughs at his married buddies who want to go home early all the time. He thinks he's got it made and cannot posibly know that HE is the one missing out until it happens to HIM. But once that connection is made, there is no denying it. No proof is needed because it is TRUE.... All of a sudden your buddy can't come out and play because he'd rather stay home with his new found love.

And just like love, the experiance is different for everyone and you have to find a level of intensity that suits you. But the faith/love will only grow stronger with time. Small amounts of proof will be offered along the way and you become more sure of yourself as your faith and love grow.

And just like love, you cannot explain it to your single friend. He isn't capable of understanding it until he finds something that speaks to him.

Like love, there will always be small trials an tribulations but true happiness is found in working through those. Sometimes you might even have to admit that you are wrong and ask for forgiveness.:) But you will find that with true love\faith forgiveness is readily available if you are willing to ask for it.

[HVH]

???????/ Please elaborate.
Unfortunately I gave my zoology book away several years ago, but Nebraska man, Java man, and Piltdown man were still being described at that time as transition forms. Even Neanderthal man and Lucy are now questionable.
Nebraska man was used as evidence in the Scopes trial in 1925. Turned out to be a pigs tooth.
In 1912 Charles Dawson produced some bones from a gravel pit at Piltdown, Sussex, England. After 500 or so dissertations on these bones, it was discovered in 1956 that they were bones from a 50 year old ape that had been filed down and chemically treated.
Java man was discovered by Eugene Dubois in 1891. Dr. Dubois reversed his own opinion after much debate and admitted the find to be more likely a gibbons.
These are the more famous hoaxes but there are many more.

Remember the famous line "Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny" - another hoax. Remember the 1953 Miller/Urey experiment - turns out they were wrong in their assumption that the early earth had a reducing environment. They could not have produced amino acids without a reducing environment. Remember the transition form, Coelacanth? Kind of embarrassing when a live one was caught in 1938. I am almost positive this fact was not presented in my zoology text. How about Archaeoptryx? There was hope in the evolutionary circles that this bird was not a bird of flight. Read below -
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2/4254news3-24-2000.asp

You can find arguments and counter arguments for much of this debate but the truth is that the theory of evolution is not nearly as well supported by facts as one would expect from all the hyperbole.

I have stated on other threads that we may have an answer in the next 10 to 20 years. One of the stated goals of metagenomics is to bring the cost of sequencing a patient's genome down to $1000.00. When the cost gets this low you will see every academic lab on earth heading to the sequencing lab to get their subject species sequenced. It would be nice if we could do this with fossils, but even in their absence, many of the lines on the phylogenetic tree can be challenged. Of course the data will be spun for years and each camp will dig their heels in, but some of us will get our answer despite all attempts to suppress the data.

[cow pollinater]

I saw a show on Scientific Adam. I don't remember all of the details as it was late and I'm an early riser but scientists began studying human genetics and found that the major races of the world shared a common mutated gene that separated them from other races. This sugests that every race has a founding father. They also found evidence that the "founding fathers" had one common anscester that was also the result of gene mutation.That leaves open the possibility for the evolution crowd that there really was an Adam and his children evolved into us.:)

[Sundance]

Not to quibble........ but you are referring to archeological
finds. Not fossils. I respect your belief system, as an one
who believes in evolution I don't agree.

[HVH]

I saw a show on Scientific Adam. I don't remember all of the details as it was late and I'm an early riser but scientists began studying human genetics and found that the major races of the world shared a common mutated gene that separated them from other races. This sugests that every race has a founding father. They also found evidence that the "founding fathers" had one common anscester that was also the result of gene mutation.That leaves open the possibility for the evolution crowd that there really was an Adam and his children evolved into us.:)
Actually, I think this would support the theory of evolution without a need for Adam. I like to be very careful, though, about letting others interpret data for me. It usually turns out that publications rarely support the conclusions drawn by "interested parties".

[cow pollinater]

Actually, I think this would support the theory of evolution without a need for Adam. .

I kind of saw it as both. The evidence pointed to one man that we are all descended from.

[Sundance]

Did "god" create several Adam and Eve's? A black set?
Asian? Is it not adaptation and evolution that have
differentiated the races?

Was Adam and Eve even white?

[cow pollinater]

[QUOTE]Did "god" create several Adam and Eve's? A black set?
Asian? Is it not adaptation and evolution that have
differentiated the races?

According to the show and my religious belief, we have all descended form one man and (according to the show) genetic mutations explain the different races.

Was Adam and Eve even white?

Who knows? Who cares? Does skin color matter so much that you can't accept a religion unless they believe the first man and wife were white?

[Sundance]

Does skin color matter so much that you can't accept a religion unless they believe the first man and wife were white?

Just asking about the belief system. I don't believe in
Adam and Eve in the first place so they can be any
color.:)

I don't "accept" any religion, but respect them all.

[cow pollinater]

I don't "accept" any religion, but respect them all.

Please read post#32. I don't expect you to change your mind but I'd sure like for you to share the contintment that I have found. It really is your loss if you don't.

[HVH]

Not to quibble........ but you are referring to archeological
finds. Not fossils. I respect your belief system, as an one
who believes in evolution I don't agree.

Fossils (from Latin fossus, literally "having been dug up") are the preserved remains or traces of animals, plants, and other organisms from the remote past.

You don't believe that the hoaxes were hoaxes?

[Sundance]

Please read post#32. I don't expect you to change your mind but I'd sure like for you to share the contintment that I have found. It really is your loss if you don't.

I'll share my contentment if you share yours.:) I
found a high level of serenity many years ago, it
followed my sobriety date in 1985. It's been a
good 23 years since.:thumbsup:

I truly appreciate your thoughts. However, it is a
misconception that "non-believers" are not
content. So are, some aren't. Same with religious
folks I've met. Contentment lies inside us and
our deeds.

[Sundance]

Fossils (from Latin fossus, literally "having been dug up") are the preserved remains or traces of animals, plants, and other organisms from the remote past.

I ascribe to a fossil being an item whose original cellular
structure have been, in whole or part, been mineralization.
But whatever works for you........

You don't believe that the hoaxes were hoaxes?

Nope

[HVH]

I ascribe to a fossil being an item whose original cellular
structure have been, in whole or part, been mineralization.
But whatever works for you........



Nope

Since these hoaxes/misrepresentations are irrefutable I would have to say."welcome to the church of Darwin". Look up Ernst Haeckel on wiki, or Piltdown man and see for yourself. This only scratches the surface. When I studied this subject years ago the number of hoaxes and misrepresentations I found were staggering. If you are not willing to look into it for yourself then please recognize the religious overtones embodied in that sentiment. People that think they have the intellectual high ground because they believe in evolution but don't know anything about it are arguing fallaciously - argumentum ad verecundiam. Again, this does not make the theory false, but there has been a lot of deception.

[Sundance]

HVH...... The fact that there were a couple "hoaxes"
with men presenting something like the Piltdown as
genuine is meaningless to me.

This does nothing, nada, ZERO to cast even a shadow
of a doubt on the subject.

If it proves anything, it's that there are some really
dishonest people out there out for fame and fortune.

However, it casts no doubt that early man existed and
freely roamed the planet. For each of your "hoaxes"
there are multitudes of genuine finds.

[standman]

If genetic mapping etc. continue to support descendency from a single Adam and Eve for all of the human race, it will provide unique support for the Biblical account and divine creation. Because, admit it, who would have written the story that way looking at the current human race? Most of us would have written the story based on our limited info, describing an "Adam" that looks like us. Only Someone who was there would know the real truth. Maybe it is time for us to read that account (the Bible) again.

[HVH]

HVH...... The fact that there were a couple "hoaxes"
with men presenting something like the Piltdown as
genuine is meaningless to me.
Not a couple - I could dig out many, many more.

This does nothing, nada, ZERO to cast even a shadow
of a doubt on the subject.

That's how people respond when they are told the Bible has some inconsistencies.

If it proves anything, it's that there are some really
dishonest people out there out for fame and fortune.


However, it casts no doubt that early man existed and
freely roamed the planet. For each of your "hoaxes"
there are multitudes of genuine finds.

Since you believe the fossil evidence is so overwhelming maybe you could provide a half dozen indisputable hominid finds that are considered intermediates. It should be really easy with all the "multitudes" to choose from. Please don't choose Neanderthal which was a man with rickets or Lucy which came on the scene after fully bipedal man (Kanapoi hominid and Castenedolo Man) or Peking man that has been reclassified as Homo erectus.

[tecumseh]

cow pollinator's post #32... yep couldn't agree any more. very nicely said.

[sqkcrk]

Well this might catch a lot of flack, but.....I think we should pay homage to the Earth and the Sun,.....berkshireB.

Well, not from me. There has been a lot going on in some religions about this recently.

Something related; 'Religion and Environment': http://daphne.palomar.edu/calenvironment/religion.htm

It's nice to see that other religions are catching up to something that Unitarian Universalists have beenonto for quite some time, "Respect for the interdependant web of all existence of which we are a part.", one our seven principles.

[Sundance]

It's nice to see that other religions are catching up to something that Unitarian Universalists have beenonto for quite some time, "Respect for the interdependant web of all existence of which we are a part.", one our seven principles.

Sure wish there was a Unitarian fellowship here.:(
Visited the one in St Cloud Mn a few times and was
really impressed. Nice to have the fellowship without
the dogma.

[sqkcrk]

Thought #1
What are you?
Atheist, Agnostic, Infidel, or Skeptic?
An Atheist is one who denies the existence of a deity or of divine beings.
An Agnostic is one who believes it impossible to know anything about God or about the creation of the universe and refrains from commitment to any religious doctrine.
Infidel means an unbeliever, especially a nonbeliever in Islam or Christianity.
A Skeptic doubts and is critical of all accepted doctrines and creeds.
Knowing the difference in the four terms above is important.

I'm a skeptical infidel w/ agnostic and atheistic leanings. According to the pov of some folks it must be a wonder that I'm not a raping and pilaging murderer, but I'm not. IMO ones' morals and understanding of what's right or wrong doesn't have to come from GOD or Christ (sorry for the redundancy), but from the understanding that we are all connected to one another and everything else, that all people have dignity and worth and that whatever we do has effects beyond or own ability to comprehend. That's part of what I believe.

[sqkcrk]

What other religion claims that their savior/leader/founder rose from the dead, and His followers get to heaven based on grace alone, and not merit?

-Nathanael

The followers of the God Isis, way before Jesus walked the earth.

[dragonfly]

IMO ones' morals and understanding of what's right or wrong doesn't have to come from GOD or Christ (sorry for the redundancy), but from the understanding that we are all connected to one another and everything else, that all people have dignity and worth and that whatever we do has effects beyond or own ability to comprehend.

And what might that come from, if not a mythology in one form or another? All people (imo) live by some type of religion if they have social conscience. Even if they claim to be atheistic, there is some underriding belief in some kind of mythology if they believe in the "right" way to live, as opposed as the wrong way to live.

[sqkcrk]

I really appreciate the variety of opinions expressed on here (about bees, politics, and religion). Just a point of clarification: according to the most reliable source material, Jesus spent 40 days after His resurrection with a large number of people, including over 500 at one time. He also did a lot of things, including eating with them, apparently designed to convince them that he was really alive ("in a fully human form", or super-human if you prefer). I believe He is alive, and that He is coming back.

No disrespect meant, but what about Elvis? He has been "seen" by lots of people. Should we believe that he too is alive? Or do you mean alive in your heart, that type of alive? Or alive and sitting at the right hand of the father, that sort of thing?

It is interesting to me, and something that I'll probably never fully understand how christians (believers in Christ) can talk about God and Christ as one and then still have the image of their seperateness, such as Father, Son and Holy Spirit all being the same thing, God. Then again H2O can be a gas, a liquid and a solid, but not at the same time.

[sqkcrk]

When it boils down to it, there is no proof, whatsoever, of the existence of or the lack of existence of God. A Christian is no less "intelligent" because he believes in his faith of choice, than an Athiest. An Athiest cannot prove his faith anymore than anyone else.

Most atheists that I know about, even Dawkins and Maher, say show me the evidence and I'll change my mind. But most people of faith that I know about say that there is nothing you can do to change my mind, I don't need proof, I have my faith (the belief in things not evident). So, whereas i agree w/ you about the intelligence of either side, one side does aloow for the possibility of change and the other doesn't seem to.

[dragonfly]

Most atheists that I know about, even Dawkins and Maher, say show me the evidence and I'll change my mind.

My point is that they don't need to change their mind. The mythology is already there.

[sqkcrk]

Sure wish there was a Unitarian fellowship here.:(
Visited the one in St Cloud Mn a few times and was
really impressed. Nice to have the fellowship without
the dogma.

Look around for like minded folks such as yourself and start a Fellowship. Check out uua.org for advice.

I spent yesterday morning w/ the congregation in which I was raised. It has gone through quite a transformation in the last 5 years. It was so nice to see so many POC in what once was a 99% white congregation. During the sermon I found out that Pres. Elect Obamas' Grandparents took him to their church when he lived w/ them, a UU church. Maybe he'll attend another one when he moves to DC. I hope he considers it.

[sqkcrk]

And what might that come from, if not a mythology in one form or another? All people (imo) live by some type of religion if they have social conscience. Even if they claim to be atheistic, there is some underriding belief in some kind of mythology if they believe in the "right" way to live, as opposed as the wrong way to live.

I recognize the mythology in many religions. (I would say all, but i don't know all religions, so that would be an exageration). But isn't the Golden Rule the only rule that we really need if we truly believe it?

[Sundance]

Look around for like minded folks such as yourself and start a Fellowship. Check out uua.org for advice.

Good advise........ In that light I emailed 3 people from
the Grand Forks ND fellowship. It's 100 miles away though.
But it appears to be the closest.

As to starting a group??? I'll check it out.

[dragonfly]

But isn't the Golden Rule the only rule that we really need if we truly believe it?

Yes, but now, ask yourself why you believe it.

[Sundance]

Yes, but now, ask yourself why you believe it.


Ask yourself, why you ask why? And why is it relevant?
(now that's a lot of why's!):)

I used to get into arguments over alcoholism being
genetic or environmental. As if it had to be one or
the other. Finally I just decided it's irrelevant to me
and a waste of energy bantering it about.

[dragonfly]

Ask yourself, why you ask why? And why is it relevant?


Because lack of questioning results in a closed mind.

[Sundance]

Because lack of questioning results in a closed mind.

Having a "closed mind" on some issues is not
necessarily a bad thing IMO. Especially in the
religion topic.

At some point those that follow a religion "close"
their minds and run on faith. That's a good thing
for them. It's the main function of religion. To
give finality to unanswerable questions.

I know I will never, ever, know the origin of the
universe. And I am OK with that........ I listen to
theories on the subject but know they will always
be just that, theories. Does that make my mind
"closed" to the subject?? Perhaps....... but that's
OK.

[Barry]

At some point those that follow a religion "close"
their minds and run on faith. That's a good thing
for them. It's the main function of religion. To
give finality to unanswerable questions.

Everyone runs on faith in their lives.

1. complete trust or confidence in someone or something
2. a strongly held belief or theory

To separate yourself from a particular faith group merely indicates where your faith is. To me, he whole "closed mindedness" thing gives an air of superiority.

I'm religious yet I still have a lot of unanswered questions. I'm OK with that.

[Barry]

The number of threads that invoke evolution really suggest to me that a thorough discussion of evolution is needed.

I would be interested in such a thread.

[dragonfly]

I would be interested in such a thread.

Me too.

[Sundance]

To separate yourself from a particular faith group merely indicates where your faith is. To me, he whole "closed mindedness" thing gives an air of superiority.

I hear you. I experience that "air of superiority" every
single time religion comes up. Every times someone
assumes you need "saving". Or worse yet, implying
that you don't have morals unless you follow some
religion.

Separation of faith groups is essential I would think.
I mean......... they can't all be "right" can they???

[Barry]

I hear you.

No, you didn't hear me. ;) You turned it around and deflected it back, not wanting to acknowledge it could apply to you. Truth is, that "air of superiority" often comes from both sides, neither being much able to see it in themselves.

[SantaCruzBee]

No, you didn't hear me. ;) You turned it around and deflected it back, not wanting to acknowledge it could apply to you. Truth is, that "air of superiority" often comes from both sides, neither being much able to see it in themselves.
Oh, it never comes from Sundance's or my side... :)

Doug

[Sundance]

No, you didn't hear me. ;) You turned it around and deflected it back, not wanting to acknowledge it could apply to you. Truth is, that "air of superiority" often comes from both sides, neither being much able to see it in themselves.

I did hear you, and did turn it around. I personally
apologize if anything I say or said comes off as
"superior". It wasn't meant to be. That an issue
with typing vs face to face conversation. Intent
is all to often inferred by subjective translation.

I just get very frustrated when atheists or agnostics
get repeatedly attacked (albeit covertly and without
intent of harm). Constantly inferring the need to be
"saved". That "air of superiority" is sometimes
hurtful. I have been told I am damned, that I have
no moral compass. All this based on not aligning
myself with a deity.

So yes I turned it around. It goes both ways.

[Barry]

IMO ones' morals and understanding of what's right or wrong doesn't have to come from GOD or Christ (sorry for the redundancy), but from the understanding. . .

And where did THAT understanding come from? :D

[sqkcrk]

Yes, but now, ask yourself why you believe it.

Hmm. Because intellectually and by experience it makes sense? And I hope, but do not necassarily expect, that if I act accordingly others will do the same in regards to me.

[sqkcrk]

Me too.

Perhaps some reading is in order before jumping into this? Anyone want to suggest a sylobis, silibis, er sylobus, (darn it!) a list of books on the subject? :)

[sqkcrk]

And where did THAT understanding come from? :D

FROM GAWD!! :)

[dragonfly]

Hmm. Because intellectually and by experience it makes sense? And I hope, but do not necassarily expect, that if I act accordingly others will do the same in regards to me.

Well, I don't think you really understood the point I was making, but that's okay. I appreciate your willingness to discuss it. :)

[sqkcrk]

Well, if I discussed my beliefs, I would lose my standing and reputation as a right wing nut job, so I'll leave it to you guys' imagination.;)

You'd only loose your standing w/ a certain portion of the posters. But never me d'fly. You're always welcome in the beesource congregation, if I have any say so.

Aum, om.

[dragonfly]

You'd only loose your standing w/ a certain portion of the posters. But never me d'fly. You're always welcome in the beesource congregation, if I have any say so.



Aw Mark, that's so sweet of you. Thanks.:)

Aum, om.

My mantra goes "Uhmmmmm?";)

[cow pollinater]

Yeah Dragonfly, You are right and nutty enough that we'll let you in the club no matter what your religion is or isn't.:D

[dragonfly]

Yeah Dragonfly, You are right and nutty enough that we'll let you in the club no matter what your religion is or isn't.:D

Thanks CP, and I will proudly carry the nuts-have-rights banner for my poor misunderstood bretheren in the congregation. I'm honored.;)