Christian Discussion Thread VII: The Christ Awakens.

[Salus Maior]

Yes, I was pleasantly surprised.

Also, Kami are the spirits worshipped in Shinto. I think?

For me what's important is that a person does what is best for them to live a fulfilled and happy life. If Christianity plays a role in that then I have no problems with it, and am happy that the person is doing what makes them best live how they want to live. Plus I do think religion and spirituality are important aspects of life, so that's also awesome!

Kami? Is that a traditional eastern faith?

Indeed! I can go into better detail, but its essentially a form of Animism.

Kami means God or divine in Japanese (woo DBZ for the given reference)

Divine is more accurate from my understanding, since Kami aren't really Gods in the commonly understood sense.

Ahh, I see. I was going to say if it was Japanese but I didn't want to be presumptuous

[Salus Maior]

So, as an Atheist, I've been taking steps and have kind of been becoming an Anti-Theist, but I wanted to talk to some actual Christians before I decided to accept and go down that path.
Let it be known that I am extremely anxious about this

I don't have a problem with Atheism in and of itself, but why become Anti-Theist? Do you believe that no one should believe just because you don't?

[Chuukango]

A lot of things, honestly, mainly the fact that it's extremely difficult to believe in a God when their existence cannot be proven easily.

Fair enough, although I am curious. Is the single most important thing for you simply that something can be proven, or does it lie with another factor?
(I'm not Christian, but I hope you don't mind my input)

Yep,
I just find it hard to be Faithful, especially when my past attempts at religion (yes, I was once quite religious) have usually ended up with me finding it unlikely that such a concept is plausible.

[Noraika]

Ahh, I see. I was going to say if it was Japanese but I didn't want to be presumptuous

It is the natural religion of Japan, yes, so terminology does often reflect that.

[Chuukango]

So, as an Atheist, I've been taking steps and have kind of been becoming an Anti-Theist, but I wanted to talk to some actual Christians before I decided to accept and go down that path.
Let it be known that I am extremely anxious about this

I don't have a problem with Atheism in and of itself, but why become Anti-Theist? Do you believe that no one should believe just because you don't?

No no, you can believe whatever you want, I've just come to see Religion as a bit of a degradation to society as of late, if that makes any sense, but at the same time, I see that Religion has brought people together and been a quite good thing.

[Noraika]

Yep,
I just find it hard to be Faithful, especially when my past attempts at religion (yes, I was once quite religious) have usually ended up with me finding it unlikely that such a concept is plausible.

Have you particularly gone between sects, or have you kind of tried to find your own spirituality independent of religion and dogma per se? Also, do you seperate the spiritual from the physical, and vice versa, in your understanding?

[Luminesa]

I don't have a problem with Atheism in and of itself, but why become Anti-Theist? Do you believe that no one should believe just because you don't?

No no, you can believe whatever you want, I've just come to see Religion as a bit of a degradation to society as of late, if that makes any sense, but at the same time, I see that Religion has brought people together and been a quite good thing.

What made you come to see religion in that way? As a degradation of society?

[Chuukango]

No no, you can believe whatever you want, I've just come to see Religion as a bit of a degradation to society as of late, if that makes any sense, but at the same time, I see that Religion has brought people together and been a quite good thing.

What made you come to see religion in that way? As a degradation of society?

Wars, extremist, and in few cases. Discrimination.
But at the same time Faith tends to unite people, which is why I'm quite divided on the subject.

Yep,
I just find it hard to be Faithful, especially when my past attempts at religion (yes, I was once quite religious) have usually ended up with me finding it unlikely that such a concept is plausible.

Have you particularly gone between sects, or have you kind of tried to find your own spirituality independent of religion and dogma per se? Also, do you seperate the spiritual from the physical, and vice versa, in your understanding?

Mostly just Christianity, and a few oddball theories that would hardly count as religion.
And yes, I do tend to separate Spiritual and Physical understanding.

[Noraika]

Mostly just Christianity, and a few oddball theories that would hardly count as religion.
And yes, I do tend to separate Spiritual and Physical understanding.

Personally, if there's one thing I've learned over my experiences, its that discrimination and war comes not from religion itself, and often has no bearing on a person's views or opinions, and those without religion can equally peddle hatred and bigotry. Its all rather unclear these days about which group believes what, in my experience.

Personally, I never found a separation of the spiritual and physical to work for me.
For example, I was raised in a very traditional, Catholic family, and was very, very religious myself, but despite all my efforts to be a good Christian, I never was able to feel any sort of connection with God. This would be one of many factors which eventually caused me to leave Catholicism, and later Christianity altogether.

Over time, as I explored spirituality, I came to find that a perspective like Animism, which focuses on the feeling of awe and connectedness within all things as a point of spirituality, as something that worked much better, and which connected with me. Not saying that you should do that, or adhere to animism of course. Just that there's plenty of different perspectives (religious or spiritual) which differ quite a bit, so I wouldn't suggest stopping at Abrahamic faiths, since there's so much beautiful diversity in our world.

Everyone has different needs, but only you can find what works for you, and that might still be not having any spirituality, but I'd still encourage you to search around. If nothing else theology's an interesting topic to study.

[Salus Maior]

What made you come to see religion in that way? As a degradation of society?

Wars, extremist, and in few cases. Discrimination.
But at the same time Faith tends to unite people, which is why I'm quite divided on the subject.

Well, I think I can safely say that most of us here see wars and extremism in the same way you do. At least, modern religious wars.

And the funny thing that I've seen from extremists, either in Christianity or Islam, is that they tend to ignore massive amounts of doctrine and texts of their own religion in order to pursue their agenda. Making those who take their religion to extremism really not the best examples of the faith.

[Czervenika]

Wars, extremist, and in few cases. Discrimination.
But at the same time Faith tends to unite people, which is why I'm quite divided on the subject.

See, this is a tricky one since secularist/atheist movements also have blood on their hands. There's also been plenty of discrimination from atheists as well.

[Dinake]

I went to a Greek Orthodox church for the first time today. An experience to say the least. The incense and standing were about to put me in a coma.

The first divine liturgy I ever went to(I go to an eastern Catholic church near my Latin mass parish every so often) was an ordination mass. "Goodness gracious, what am I doing" was the thought around hour 2.5.

[Dinake]

May I ask what has been turning you off religion?

A lot of things, honestly, mainly the fact that it's extremely difficult to believe in a God when their existence cannot be proven easily.

A lot of the problem comes with how proof is seen.
God, by definition, cannot be tested. Therefore, there can never be a scientific proof of God. It's difficult to even conceive of scientific evidence that would point there. What's more, scientists who disregard God for their experiments and whatnot are just doing their job, because science requires all the variables to be isolated and God would kind of be a variable. So no, science can't prove God. It really shouldn't have anything to do with Him.
Proof of God comes from philosophy, and from testimony.

[Chuukango]

Wars, extremist, and in few cases. Discrimination.
But at the same time Faith tends to unite people, which is why I'm quite divided on the subject.

See, this is a tricky one since secularist/atheist movements also have blood on their hands. There's also been plenty of discrimination from atheists as well.

True, which is one of the reasons why It's quite difficult to make an either/or decision about whether Theism/Anti-Theism/overall religion (though Atheism is not a relgion) is good or bad overall.

[Eisen Choras]

A lot of things, honestly, mainly the fact that it's extremely difficult to believe in a God when their existence cannot be proven easily.

A lot of the problem comes with how proof is seen.
God, by definition, cannot be tested. Therefore, there can never be a scientific proof of God. It's difficult to even conceive of scientific evidence that would point there. What's more, scientists who disregard God for their experiments and whatnot are just doing their job, because science requires all the variables to be isolated and God would kind of be a variable. So no, science can't prove God. It really shouldn't have anything to do with Him.
Proof of God comes from philosophy, and from testimony.

True.. That and personal experience, if not of G_d or of an angel, then a demon could suffice. Though not always best choice (and don't read the necronomicon, cause that is great way of meeting demons much easier and to your dispair).

[Luminesa]

A lot of things, honestly, mainly the fact that it's extremely difficult to believe in a God when their existence cannot be proven easily.

A lot of the problem comes with how proof is seen.
God, by definition, cannot be tested. Therefore, there can never be a scientific proof of God. It's difficult to even conceive of scientific evidence that would point there. What's more, scientists who disregard God for their experiments and whatnot are just doing their job, because science requires all the variables to be isolated and God would kind of be a variable. So no, science can't prove God. It really shouldn't have anything to do with Him.
Proof of God comes from philosophy, and from testimony.

Science shouldn't have anything to do with God?

But what if God created the universe?

I'm not looking to jump into an evolution/intelligent design/creationism argument, but if you, Dio, believe in creationism OR ID OR evolution, don't you feel God could have put the world in order?

[Dinake]

A lot of the problem comes with how proof is seen.
God, by definition, cannot be tested. Therefore, there can never be a scientific proof of God. It's difficult to even conceive of scientific evidence that would point there. What's more, scientists who disregard God for their experiments and whatnot are just doing their job, because science requires all the variables to be isolated and God would kind of be a variable. So no, science can't prove God. It really shouldn't have anything to do with Him.
Proof of God comes from philosophy, and from testimony.

Science shouldn't have anything to do with God?

But what if God created the universe?

I'm not looking to jump into an evolution/intelligent design/creationism argument, but if you, Dio, believe in creationism OR ID OR evolution, don't you feel God could have put the world in order?

My views on creation vs evolution vs ID are a contorted, constantly changing mess. I do think that God put the world in order, and have been getting steadily more skeptical of evolution. But I do know that science, taken by itself, points towards evolution, and that's what it should do, regardless of which one is right. The scientific method involves isolating the variables. God would be a variable, and neither creationism nor ID would work without that variable unless you're a UFO theorist, in which case it's just another variable.

My point was more along the lines of "science can't study God, and it shouldn't try. God is not testable. Any attempt to do so is probably blasphemy. Science has nothing to say on the subject of God, unless you're already a religious sort in which case it only says what anything else showing the universe being amazing says. It should have nothing to say on the subject of God, because it can't study Him, full stop."

[Prosocial]

Science shouldn't have anything to do with God?

But what if God created the universe?

I'm not looking to jump into an evolution/intelligent design/creationism argument, but if you, Dio, believe in creationism OR ID OR evolution, don't you feel God could have put the world in order?

My views on creation vs evolution vs ID are a contorted, constantly changing mess. I do think that God put the world in order, and have been getting steadily more skeptical of evolution. But I do know that science, taken by itself, points towards evolution, and that's what it should do, regardless of which one is right. The scientific method involves isolating the variables. God would be a variable, and neither creationism nor ID would work without that variable unless you're a UFO theorist, in which case it's just another variable.

My point was more along the lines of "science can't study God, and it shouldn't try. God is not testable. Any attempt to do so is probably blasphemy. Science has nothing to say on the subject of God, unless you're already a religious sort in which case it only says what anything else showing the universe being amazing says. It should have nothing to say on the subject of God, because it can't study Him, full stop."

But there's a difference between the usual questions that science has nothing to say about, like "what end should I seek?" "why does the universe exist?" and "is there a God?" and things like the fossil record, or the distance of the furthest stars, which provide nearly incontrovertible evidence of an old earth with a gradual evolutionary history. Faith doesn't call us to believe things that science can rigorously show to be false, it calls us to believe things science can't address at all.

[Nordengrund]

I found a small book that can fit in your pocket. Idk really know what it is or what it's called, but it has a bunch of prayers in it, and there is a section about Catholicism and Mass. AFAIK, everyone in my family is Protestant or apathetic about religion but culturally Protestant. If there are Catholics in the family, they're not open about it.

We are the only family to live in this house since it was just built.

[The Princes of the Universe]

I found a small book that can fit in your pocket. Idk really know what it is or what it's called, but it has a bunch of prayers in it, and there is a section about Catholicism and Mass. AFAIK, everyone in my family is Protestant or apathetic about religion but culturally Protestant. If there are Catholics in the family, they're not open about it.
We are the only family to live in this house since it was just built.

Maybe it's a sign. One of us... One of us... One of us...

[Blitz Epidemic]

But there's a difference between the usual questions that science has nothing to say about, like "what end should I seek?" "why does the universe exist?" and "is there a God?" and things like the fossil record, or the distance of the furthest stars, which provide nearly incontrovertible evidence of an old earth with a gradual evolutionary history. Faith doesn't call us to believe things that science can rigorously show to be false, it calls us to believe things science can't address at all.

I have to disagree with this statement. The 'fossil record' proves nothing and the distance of the furthest skies are not evidence of age. There is no such thing as 'incontrovertible evidence of an old earth with a gradual evolutionary history' if you involve science.

[Shyubi Koku Naishifun]

Science shouldn't have anything to do with God?

But what if God created the universe?

I'm not looking to jump into an evolution/intelligent design/creationism argument, but if you, Dio, believe in creationism OR ID OR evolution, don't you feel God could have put the world in order?

Personally, I do not believe that scientific inquiry can answer the question of the existence of God only by itself, nor can it provide a disproof or a refutation of God. Suppose we do a scientific inquiry of creationism or evolutionism, it only answers how the Earth and the Universe came to be and how life came to be, not who set everything in motion in the first place.

True.. That and personal experience, if not of G_d or of an angel, then a demon could suffice. Though not always best choice (and don't read the necronomicon, cause that is great way of meeting demons much easier and to your dispair).

Oh, the Book Man Was Not Meant to Read that actually did not exist in the first place.

[Luminesa]

I found a small book that can fit in your pocket. Idk really know what it is or what it's called, but it has a bunch of prayers in it, and there is a section about Catholicism and Mass. AFAIK, everyone in my family is Protestant or apathetic about religion but culturally Protestant. If there are Catholics in the family, they're not open about it.

We are the only family to live in this house since it was just built.

COME TO THE CATHOLIC SIDE!!!!

Pope Francis made cookies.

[Luminesa]

Science shouldn't have anything to do with God?

But what if God created the universe?

I'm not looking to jump into an evolution/intelligent design/creationism argument, but if you, Dio, believe in creationism OR ID OR evolution, don't you feel God could have put the world in order?

My views on creation vs evolution vs ID are a contorted, constantly changing mess. I do think that God put the world in order, and have been getting steadily more skeptical of evolution. But I do know that science, taken by itself, points towards evolution, and that's what it should do, regardless of which one is right. The scientific method involves isolating the variables. God would be a variable, and neither creationism nor ID would work without that variable unless you're a UFO theorist, in which case it's just another variable.

My point was more along the lines of "science can't study God, and it shouldn't try. God is not testable. Any attempt to do so is probably blasphemy. Science has nothing to say on the subject of God, unless you're already a religious sort in which case it only says what anything else showing the universe being amazing says. It should have nothing to say on the subject of God, because it can't study Him, full stop."

Oh, I see. I misread you there. My bad.

[Noraika]

COME TO THE CATHOLIC SIDE!!!!

Pope Francis made cookies.