Has anyone else read this incredible story?

What many have failed to do in their posts is differentiate between religious belief as in theology, philosophy etc. and faith and the inner peace and serenity that comes seemingly from a greater power.

The simple reality is that if one is a humanist then "man is the measure of all things" and for the believer (at least in the Judeo-Christian context) "man is evil and possesses original sin." In reality, I think more people are externally motivated by organized religion to lead more moral and ethical lives than by a sense of true faith. Most IMO do not really delve too deeply into theology or philosophy and some kind of rules to live by. Again, in the context of my experience I find that people tend not to really understand the principles of the belief they hold, nor do they really understand historical context.

I find it quite interesting that Fred Phelps, Osama Bin Ladin, The Inquisition are always dragged out, and of course all the wars fought in the name of religion, including the one we are fighting now. On the other hand, religion has played an important role in the cultural development of society. Religion was the inspiration for the Pyramids of Egypt, the cantatas of Bach, the great cathedrals of Europe and it could be argued that the Reformation led directly to the Enlightenment which greatly influenced the founding of the United States. Certainly the knowledge of antiquity and the classical world were preserved by the Roman Catholic Church. One cannot divorce Christianity, for instance, from Western Civilization nor any other culture or civilization from its religion(s).

My read on the Columbine father is that he has achieved an inner peace and has received something akin to spiritual enlightenment. Whether it is produced by some chemical process in the brain, a flash of insight from a higher power, or a fifth of Jack Daniels, I care not to speculate as the ability to transcend to the spiritual or a sense of inner peace is quite different from being religious as opposed to being spiritual.

IMO, when a culture or a society loses its consensus, it falters. A common religion or religious beliefs tends to encourage consensus.

One can be a very moral and upstanding person and be an atheist or an agnostic, but those who get there usually get there through thoughtful self-examination and study. The atheists that I know (some of whom survived living in foxholes, contrary to popular belief) have been to a person thoughtful, intelligent people who got there through critical examination, and the same can be said for many agnostics I've met. I have also known people of various and sundry religions who have transcended religion and have become truly spiritual. Granted most everything I have shared here is opinion and anecdotal and I am confident that those of a scholarly and intellectual bent could rip me a new one from many perspectives, but I can't help believe if our leaders and wannabe leaders would get in touch with their spiritual self as opposed to their religious selves we would be in a much better place, but that's not going to happen.
 
Last edited:
In reality, I think more people are externally motivated by organized religion to lead more moral and ethical lives than by a sense of true faith. Most IMO do not really delve too deeply into theology or philosophy and some kind of rules to live by. Again, in the context of my experience I find that people tend not to really understand the principles of the belief they hold, nor do they really understand historical context.

I agree completely with all of this.

I will even restate it for clarity: I agree that religion motivates a not-insignificant number of people to live more moral lives.

However, the danger comes with what you talk about at the end of your statement. Most people do not fully understand the basis for the beliefs that they hold. Taking up a religion because that's what your parents believed often does not lead to the deeper spirituality and understanding of one's beliefs. When people fail to question their beliefs at some point in their lives, that is when those beliefs begin to be misused.

Instead of one's own internal spiritual journey, people begin to look externally for some sort of challenge to their belief. They start thinking that "the fags" or "the Jews" or "the infidels" are the cause of their misery. This is demonstrated quite well in the delusions of persecution that many Christians have adopted in this country. 50% of marriages are ending in divorce, but all of a sudden it's gay marriage that's destroying marriage? It certainly couldn't be that straight people are failing to take the concept of marriage and the supposed deep spiritual bonding that comes with it seriously...it must be the homos!

I find it quite interesting that Fred Phelps, Osama Bin Ladin, The Inquisition are always dragged out, and of course all the wars fought in the name of religion, including the one we are fighting now. On the other hand, religion has played an important role in the cultural development of society.

I agree with this as well, but I think it's important not to underestimate just HOW MUCH carnage religion has been responsible for over the ages.

Religion was the inspiration for the Pyramids of Egypt,

It's ideal that you mention this. Yes, the pyramids are one of the most unbelievable things ever created by mankind and their sophistication is something to be marveled at. However, is enslaving thousands of people to build a monument to a pharaoh's megalomania really something that we should be praising? How many people were worked to death for the sake of a structure to help one guy have a really nifty afterlife? Is this really an endeavor we should praise?

I don't think that there isn't something to be said for the building of the pyramids...but its critical to keep in mind the truth of what that meant for the average person who was actually doing the work. That, in this case, is the questioning of the faith/spiritual journey.

the cantatas of Bach, the great cathedrals of Europe and it could be argued that the Reformation led directly to the Enlightenment which greatly influenced the founding of the United States. Certainly the knowledge of antiquity and the classical world were preserved by the Roman Catholic Church. One cannot divorce Christianity, for instance, from Western Civilization nor any other culture or civilization from its religion(s).

I do a lot of architectural photography and I find cathedrals very interesting. On one hand, they really are a monument to what humans can achieve. Many of them are truly remarkable structures. I recently visited the cathedral of St. John the Divine in NYC and was astounded by the level of detail in the stonework, the finish inside, the way it was constructed to work with light, etc. However...when I read the bible it sure seemed like God was a lot more concerned with tolerance, helping people, remaining humble, etc. than he was about building elaborate palaces to celebrate him. All the money that went into building that cathedral could have been used, instead, to help the poor or the sick, or even on outreach to bring more people into the fold.

That's just my opinion and, having been raised protestant, maybe I have a more austere perspective on Christianity than Catholics. But...these are questions that I don't feel enough people ask about their faith.

IMO, when a culture or a society loses its consensus, it falters. A common religion or religious beliefs tends to encourage consensus.

It does, but this is not at all relevant in this country. This country was founded to enable freedom of religion. That means that everyone should be able to practice their faith as they see fit (within the bounds of law and morality...no human sacrifices), but it also means that when it comes to laws and government no one groups morality should be forced upon those who do not share that faith.

One can be a very moral and upstanding person and be an atheist or an agnostic, but those who get there usually get there through thoughtful self-examination and study. The atheists that I know (some of whom survived living in foxholes, contrary to popular belief) have been to a person thoughtful, intelligent people who got there through critical examination, and the same can be said for many agnostics I've met. I have also known people of various and sundry religions who have transcended religion and have become truly spiritual. Granted most everything I have shared here is opinion and anecdotal and I am confident that those of a scholarly and intellectual bent could rip me a new one from many perspectives, but I can't help believe if our leaders and wannabe leaders would get in touch with their spiritual self as opposed to their religious selves we would be in a much better place, but that's not going to happen.

I agree 100x over.

I am very much against mixing religion and government. I also regard organized religion with a lot of skepticism. HOWEVER, that does NOT mean I do not have respect for religious people. Some go on their personal spiritual journey and find that they really do fall into a particular category of faith. Those people, in my experience, tend to be the most moral, the most in touch with what their religion is trying to tell them (at least from where I sit), the least involved with hatred and bigotry, etc.

I feel the same way about atheists and agnostics as well. People who "just don't believe in anything" often do not act all that ethically. They have not probed the deeper questions in life. That is not something to respect. However, people who HAVE read philosophy, who HAVE investigated these questions DO tend to be moral and intelligent people, despite their lack of faith.

What it comes down to, as always, is that we are all individuals and the quality of a person's character has little to do with what belief system they hold. In terms of what we should encourage in society? I would say encouraging the STUDY of religions, the study of philosophy, the UNDERSTANDING of different belief systems.

What it comes down to is that, when you study those things, you find that most reasonable and moral people come to the same conclusions regardless of faith.

...and that is what offends me in threads like this. Religious people seem to be under the impression that they have a monopoly on believing in moral behavior, on acting right, on being spiritual. It is this blatant disrespect that I regard as prejudice.
 
Maybe my experience is limited but it always seems that the anti's start the poo throwing and then the believers throw back.Personally I try to stay out of it because it achieves nothing.

I don't agree at all.

People don't like to discuss this stuff, though. It's rare to find a religious or nonreligious person who is interested in having a real dialogue about this stuff. Example: I never said anything against people being able to freely practice their religion in this thread, but that has become the overtone of the responses to me. People feel the need to get defensive...they can't have a real conversation about this stuff.

I like discussing this stuff though. I love when I can find a religious person who can talk about their faith on this level. I find it tremendously interesting when I locate an obviously intelligent person who has come to believe in an organized faith. They're smart, they asked the questions, and they came to a very different conclusion than I did. The only thing that can come from talking to a person like that is more information and understanding for me.
 
I don't agree at all.

People don't like to discuss this stuff, though. It's rare to find a religious or nonreligious person who is interested in having a real dialogue about this stuff. Example: I never said anything against people being able to freely practice their religion in this thread, but that has become the overtone of the responses to me. People feel the need to get defensive...they can't have a real conversation about this stuff.

I like discussing this stuff though. I love when I can find a religious person who can talk about their faith on this level. I find it tremendously interesting when I locate an obviously intelligent person who has come to believe in an organized faith. They're smart, they asked the questions, and they came to a very different conclusion than I did. The only thing that can come from talking to a person like that is more information and understanding for me.

You have completely misread me. My comments were not directed at you. It was a general observation about anti's poo throwing. I don't find your comments offensive at all. Some of them are thoughtful.

The bottom line is that I don't find these conversations productive. Poo throwing is just as non productive. It's not going to get us anywhere. Let the believers believe and the non believers not believe. Lets' just leave it at that. There will be no consenses.
 
Belief in god is not the same as religious bullshit.

If you look at what has happened to this country - there have been people and groups working to eliminate "God" and "morality" and their perception of "religion" from the moral foundation of this country.

They try to replace this with humanism - and socialism - and communism - as a belief system. What all of those belief systems do is basically try to take away all moral foundations - as a methodology to make people into incoherent slaves. It just so turns out that people with no moral foundation - go nuts and start shooting each other - because it's all relative. Moral relativism that is.

Regardless of how "religious" or not you are, this country was formed on a very strong belief in God by our founding fathers. God is in every major doctrine and many of the "rights" we now cherish are, or were, considered "God given" We have the freedom to agree or disagree without reproach, but we also can't take the parts of the original principles that we like and ignore the rest that we don't. Believe it or not, and I am a true believer, this country was blessed for years, and had the best of everything. It is my belief this was due to the fundamental structure of God in all things, including our money, pledge of allegiance, etc. Now that we as a people have let the PC idiots remove all these things, how blessed are we looking now? ANYWAY, I have usually known better than to argue faith or politics, but here is where I stand.
 
I don't agree at all.

People don't like to discuss this stuff, though. It's rare to find a religious or nonreligious person who is interested in having a real dialogue about this stuff. Example: I never said anything against people being able to freely practice their religion in this thread, but that has become the overtone of the responses to me. People feel the need to get defensive...they can't have a real conversation about this stuff.

I like discussing this stuff though. I love when I can find a religious person who can talk about their faith on this level. I find it tremendously interesting when I locate an obviously intelligent person who has come to believe in an organized faith. They're smart, they asked the questions, and they came to a very different conclusion than I did. The only thing that can come from talking to a person like that is more information and understanding for me.

I agree with just about everything you said in your previous post. I actually have trouble with the word "religion" myself. I consider myself a Christian man, but unfortunately I am a "beacon" to no one. I was also raised Catholic but could not adhere to its extravagance. My faith in God is very strong and affects most everything do, but I do not feel I am better than anyone else. I probably falter more than others who are not believers, but my foundation is strong, and I totally respect others' rights to not believe ( but I do pray for them). You seem like a very intelligent and grounded man and I respect what you wrote. Thanks.[thumbsup]
 
Regardless of how "religious" or not you are, this country was formed on a very strong belief in God by our founding fathers. God is in every major doctrine and many of the "rights" we now cherish are, or were, considered "God given"
Nice claim there, care to back it up? The founding fathers generally had only a weak belief in God at best; the "Creator" model in Deism bears little resemblance to the God of Christianity.

For a country supposedly founded on a belief in God, strange how the concept doesn't appear anywhere in the Constitution other than in the formal naming of the date (Year of Our lord...), and the only mention of religion at all was tacked on after-the-fact in an amendment telling congress NOT to write laws about religion. That doesn't sound very god-centric to me!

this country was blessed for years, and had the best of everything. It is my belief this was due to the fundamental structure of God in all things, including our money, pledge of allegiance, etc.
My dad grew up in the USA without God on his paper money or in his pledge of allegiance, and he turned out fine. God was added to paper currency only about 50 years ago, in 1964. The word "God" was added to the pledge just ten years earlier, in 1954. Both changes were more about giving the finger to "godless communist enemy nations" than about promoting judeo-christian theology.
 
Last edited:
Nice claim there, care to back it up? The founding fathers generally had only a weak belief in God at best; the "Creator" model in Deism bears little resemblance to the God of Christianity.

For a country supposedly founded on a belief in God, strange how the concept doesn't appear anywhere in the Constitution other than in the formal naming of the date (Year of Our lord...), and the only mention of religion at all was tacked on after-the-fact in an amendment telling congress NOT to write laws about religion. That doesn't sound very god-centric to me!


My dad grew up in the USA without God on his paper money or in his pledge of allegiance, and he turned out fine. God was added to paper currency only about 50 years ago, in 1964. The word "God" was added to the pledge just ten years earlier, in 1954. Both changes were more about giving the finger to "godless communist enemy nations" than about promoting judeo-christian theology.

I must admit your history is better than mine. Also let me be clear that I never have said nor believed that those who are not "believers", for lack of a better word, are not every bit as good in every other conceivable way. I guess I am perhaps overly sensitive to the way we removed God from so many things in the name of PC yet allow other cultures to run freely and, it would seem, cater to their needs. Anyway, as I have said, my faith is unbreakable and I can never be convinced otherwise. By the same token I would not impose my beliefs on anyone else UNLESS their heart was open to it. Thanks.
 
The way I see it, the US added God to so many things in the name of McCarthyism (the political correctness of the 1950s), and only recently has the nation come to it's senses and realized that if Americans go around tacking religion onto secular matters, both areas are damaged.

For example, if you read the original referenced article, it talks about prayer in school, as if anybody was out to ban personal prayer. No, what is being changed are school systems which explicitly promoted organized (Christian) prayer in school, led by teachers and resulting in ostracism of (or threats/violence against) any student who dares not participate or suggests that a school-sponsored prayer to the God of the old testament might not be appropriate. I'm not talking about something that happened ten or twenty years ago, it's happening right now in Rhode Island.

It's not that non-believers are trying to stop you from believing, it's just that many Americans, religious and non-religious, don't want one specific set of beliefs paid for with our tax dollars and promoted as being the one correct way to believe over all others. There's a difference between private faith and promoting one specific set of beliefs in public schools, courthouses, and other taxpayer-funded venues. You are welcome to have your God in your home and church, but I liked the pledge better as it was intended, before "God" was wedged into it as a political tool.
 
Back
Top Bottom