Christians are Compassionate

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
perhaps my hilarious brand of humour got lost in that particular post.

i doubt it. sarcasm is generally regarded as the highest form of wit.
 
I see nothing wrong with what Belgium's police did. As I mentioned once before in another thread, I am appalled that the Vatican does/did nothing to stop the sex abuse by its priests. I'm even considering leaving the Catholic Church because of that. But I hesitate due to family and friends connections to the Church.

That really sucks that your family and friends might judge you for whatever decision you make surrounding the Church. You have to do what's right for you, if they have a problem with it, well, then, I guess that's their issue to deal with. I can fully understand staying because you like the people you're among, or because there's some other aspect of going to church you like. You can still be Catholic and not at all endorse the psychotic event that is this pedophilia ring. Those assholes are the people who aren't representing the Catholic faith the right way, they're not true examples of the Catholic faith, not you. You and other decent Catholics shouldn't be the ones who have to leave, they and the people who covered it up should be (they should be in jail for the rest of their lives).

But if you wish to leave the Church, too, I definitely understand that as well. I just hope whatever decision you make, it's something you want to do, and I hope that everyone learns to respect your choice :hug:.

Maybe they are frustrated that some people are willing to do evil things in the name of God, but my experience with atheists has not been a good one. I have yet to meet an atheist who does not harbor anger and hate towards someone who does believe in God. I find it funny that when an atheist complains about the hate some theists have towards certain people, yet when an atheist rants against religious people, they say basically the same thing.

I'm sorry about that. You're right, if they want respect shown towards their views, they should show it to others as well, you deserve as much respect as they do. I have met decent atheists out there, they exist-saw one on Bill Maher's show a while back sticking up for religious people, she got into a good debate with Bill over that. Hopefully you'll come across some of them down the line.

I just think the arguing and smugness people on both sides present is so pointless. Everyone's entitled to think whatever they want about God and the afterlife and all that jazz, but nobody's going to know until the end, if at all, so let's all just enjoy our time on this earth and quit yelling at each other and fighting about this stuff.

Angela
 
YES.

Those that blindly follow, there's no questioning, there's no hesitation, there's no, "Uh, yeah, this is cruel and I won't be party to it", they just go, "Okay" and do it. Shoot first, ask questions later. Not the way I'd suggest living life, but that's just me.

Angela

Isn't the issue here really less about God's "reality" and more about the willingness to act cruelly in order to gain the approval of someone else. After all, I'm sure you're not arguing that if the party making the immoral commands were a human being, it would be okay to go ahead and do it. People have made choices to hurt others at the commands of other human beings too, not only at the perceived command of God.

What would you do if it was a non-religious institution?

Who's to say she wouldn't do the same thing? Again the issue is not the "reality" of God so much as her desire to preserve a good relationship with her parents. If you'd like to judge her as wrong for making that tough choice, that's up to you.

I'd be really interested in meeting an atheist who would sincerely like to believe, that finds belief deeply appealing, but intellectually just can't (or vice versa, a believer who really would like to be an atheist but can't because they are compelled by the reality of God), but I've yet to meet one. Every Western atheist I've met, at root finds the belief systems they disbelieve deplorable and in some case are very angry at those systems. (The atheists I've met from China however, who were raised in a completely atheist environment seem to have none of the hostility that so many Western atheists do towards religion. They may be curious, or not interested at all, but the hostility is absent.) So I find the "unsound ideas" argument to be a bit self-serving.

In the words of that great sage Tom Petty, "you believe what you want to believe." I think that's true of both believers and non-believers alike.

And that's not self-serving.
 
There seems to be a lot of talk in here about atheists being angry. I really cant understand this. For the most part, I think its either a) a theists prejudice or b) mistaking frustration for anger. For the most part, the atheists I know are perfectly content to live and let others live; It's when religion as a whole infringes on matters that should remain nonreligious (ie the whole 'teach the controversy' nonsense), that the frustration begins to bubble over
 
Isn't the issue here really less about God's "reality" and more about the willingness to act cruelly in order to gain the approval of someone else. After all, I'm sure you're not arguing that if the party making the immoral commands were a human being, it would be okay to go ahead and do it. People have made choices to hurt others at the commands of other human beings too, not only at the perceived command of God.

Oh, absolutely! Just that since the issue here is revolving around religion, I'm mainly focusing on God, but yes, you're completely right about that, too, and I've said that many times before as well. No matter what the leader, be it God, the president, a CEO, whatever, if they're asking a person to believe or do something that doesn't sit right with said person, it's time to speak up. I said this on some other site a while back-anyone that blindly trusts anybody or anything and never questions either is somebody who shouldn't be trusted. I would be very wary of those people, just as I would those above them who are ordering them to do all sorts of horrible things.

Angela
 
There seems to be a lot of talk in here about atheists being angry. I really cant understand this. For the most part, I think its either a) a theists prejudice or b) mistaking frustration for anger. For the most part, the atheists I know are perfectly content to live and let others live; It's when religion as a whole infringes on matters that should remain nonreligious (ie the whole 'teach the controversy' nonsense), that the frustration begins to bubble over

Okay, frustrated then.

My brother is an atheist and seems neither angry or frustrated. Thus the "in some cases" in my post.

I stand by my original assessment though. Believers believe because they like what they believe in. Atheists don't believe--at least in part--because they dislike what they disbelieve.
 
Atheists don't believe--at least in part--because they dislike what they disbelieve.

Thats not fair. The majority of religious people I know are quite outspoken about their dislike of the atheist world view. Look at any conversation on religion vs atheism and it inevitably comes up

And 'in some cases' doesnt discount the purpose of your post; that atheists are angry. I think its just that the types of conversations you have with atheists often bring out the frustration and thus, paint your picture of atheists.
 
i'm actually convinced a_wanderer is a repressed christian.

he's fighting it long and hard... it's like he's trying to convince himself he's not.

let's just pet him on the head, leave the room, and maybe he'll come to terms with the real "a_wanderer".

Would disagree, a search for truth is not necessarily the same thing as a search for God.

Occasionally, atheists veer towards religion in their old age, such as the philosopher Anthony Flew, but they're a minority.

Sorry to disappoint you.
 
Thats not fair. The majority of religious people I know are quite outspoken about their dislike of the atheist world view. Look at any conversation on religion vs atheism and it inevitably comes up

And 'in some cases' doesnt discount the purpose of your post; that atheists are angry. I think its just that the types of conversations you have with atheists often bring out the frustration and thus, paint your picture of atheists.

Uh, no.

The purpose of my point was NOT that atheists are angry. The point of my post was that everyone--believers and nonbelievers alike--believe what they want to believe. Your own observation about religious people supports that theory.

I don't care for the division of good guys on the hand, tolerant, loving, happy, and open-minded on the one hand, and the bad guys, intolerant, hateful,miserable, and close-minded on the other regardless of who the labels apply to. Whichever side adopts these labels is self-serving, regardless of which side does it.

I'm curious to know what kinds of conversations you think I'm having with atheists that bring out this frustration, though.
 
Easy there, angry religious guy :wink:

c'mon, man, you responded to my post to concede that they werent angry, but frustrated. Ergo you must think that at least a large portion of them fall into that category. Its okay if you think that, I'm just giving you reasons why that might not be true. The conversations I think you're having with atheists are probably the same kind that go on in here. Ones that inevitably lead to religion's place in society, school, etc. and to where the frustration starts to show. I'm sure if you talked to the same non religious people outside of that topic, you would find the majority neither angry or frustrated
 
I have to admit I probably am in the "angry atheist" camp... the way I see it, even after all that has happened in terms of the abuse scandals, my country is still being run by Catholic bigots:

ATHEISTS HAVE begun a campaign against the Government’s new blasphemy law, which came into force on January 1st as part of the Defamation Act.

The group Atheist Ireland has published 25 quotes it says are blasphemous, attributed to people from Jesus Christ to Minister for Justice Dermot Ahern.

Under the new law, which the group is campaigning to have repealed, blasphemy is punishable by a fine of up to €25,000.

It defines blasphemy as publishing or uttering matter grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby intentionally causing outrage among a substantial number of adherents of that religion, and intending by such publication to cause such outrage.

Atheists rally over blasphemy law - The Irish Times - Mon, Jan 04, 2010


With respect to the arguments that have been made that angry atheists must have some deep-seated issues, and that their anger is more about them than anything that is going on in the real world, most of these arguments, it seems to me, are coming from posters living in the US - a secular country that, to its enormous credit, is one of the few on the planet to have genuine separation between church and state.

This separation between church and state doesn't necessarily apply in Europe - and it isn't just Ireland I'm talking about; in Italy, to this day, you'd want to be careful about being overly critical of the RC church in public, it isn't illegal as such, but it won't win too many friends in high places:

Atheist Bus Ad Campaign Banned in Italy By Church | World News | Sky News



We don't necessarily want to get rid of Christianity. We just want a level playing field.
 
And I think that's a fair thing to ask for. And this is where I start to see the atheists' point of view (as of this time I think I'm moving more and more into the agnostic camp, but there are days...). I think you have a point, too, regarding where the various viewpoints are coming from (and this makes me even more happy that we have the separation of church and state idea).

Geez, a FINE for blasphemy? Ugh. That's about one of the dumbest laws I've ever heard of, just flat out ridiculous. I guess my question now is, if those religious people are that sure of themselves, why then would someone making a blasphemous (which, by the way, can be a matter of opinion) remark bother them THAT much?

Angela
 
Easy there, angry religious guy :wink:

c'mon, man, you responded to my post to concede that they werent angry, but frustrated. Ergo you must think that at least a large portion of them fall into that category. Its okay if you think that, I'm just giving you reasons why that might not be true. The conversations I think you're having with atheists are probably the same kind that go on in here. Ones that inevitably lead to religion's place in society, school, etc. and to where the frustration starts to show. I'm sure if you talked to the same non religious people outside of that topic, you would find the majority neither angry or frustrated

: drums fingers on table:

then. . .

:sweeps the virtual coffee cups, sugar, cream etc off the virtual table in eruption of religous rage:

:wink:

I believe the word "some" is not synomous with "the majority." My position is that most people believe what they want to believe. Some are frustrated. I'm sure many are not. And why is it necessarily such a horrible thing if an atheist is angry? They have more cause to be than the believers, given that they are in the minority and are often, as you have pointed out, misunderstood and mistrusted. Finance Guy provided some pretty good reasons to be angry or frustrated.

Actually, I don't really have many conversations with atheists outside of this forum. There's my brother, but we don't generally get into issues of belief/non-belief. As for the conversations, I had if you were to take a look at the FYM archives you could see what kinds of conversations I've had. You might be surprised.

What would you predict would be my position on religions place in society, schools etc?
 
:)

Well, I wouldnt want to make that prediction. I'm actually not making any assumptions on your stance in particular, just that in a conversation about the grand scheme of things, those topics probably have popped up. You could even agree with the atheist point of view; I just figured many an atheist has probably bitched to you about it in conversation
 
:)

Well, I wouldnt want to make that prediction. I'm actually not making any assumptions on your stance in particular, just that in a conversation about the grand scheme of things, those topics probably have popped up. You could even agree with the atheist point of view; I just figured many an atheist has probably bitched to you about it in conversation

Sometimes. And I generally don't blame them.

Again, my stance is not that atheists are miserable people. My stance is that believers and non-believers alike believe what they want to believe, and to argue that one's is belief is SOLEY based on "the evidence" or "logic" or whatever, is self-serving.
 
a_wanderer, every time i come here it's pretty much the same with you. your incessant drivel against christians is a treat to read.

i want you to know... i want to affirm to you that you're doing something positive with your free time. you're making a real difference posting these things on this messageboard, a_wanderer. you're opening hearts and minds. a true inspiration to the rest of us who (most unfortunately) stumble upon here now and again.

you're clearly well-read and the wisdom you bestow on your fellow messageboard peers is cherished.

i, for one, cannot wait for your next instalment of compassionate critiquing. thanks again for doing what you do.

haha

yes, right then. if someone half as obnoxious as you existed in my real world they would need fucking aircrash investigators to put them back together.

fuckity-bye
That doesn't change how fucked up a system of thinking that can make parents disown children is.

It doesn't change the profound lack of accountability which religious institutions are held to in most societies.

It doesn't change the manipulation of the law by religious lobby groups to take away peoples rights in most countries (freedom of speech, freedom to marry and freedom to change belief).
 
i'm actually convinced a_wanderer is a repressed christian.

he's fighting it long and hard... it's like he's trying to convince himself he's not.

let's just pet him on the head, leave the room, and maybe he'll come to terms with the real "a_wanderer".
You fool I'm obviously a Muslim.
 
I'm curious to know what kinds of conversations you think I'm having with atheists that bring out this frustration, though.



i'm not an atheist, i'm an agnostic. but i'll try to quickly tell you how i got there.

let's put aside organized religion. i'm really not all that upset or betrayed by the Catholic (i am a baptized and confirmed Catholic) Church's teachings. obviously, i think they're wrong, to put it mildly, but i also know that it's a human institution -- so, whatever, i think. i absolutely reject the rules of organized religion as having any sort of divine approval. certainly the 10 Commandments have lots of great suggestions, and certainly there's much that's beautiful about most of what Jesus taught, many people have made their own lives (and the lives of others) better because of these rules and the inspiration. but not me. maybe when i was a child, but no longer. i don't place any more credibility in those above and beyond my own lived-in experience.

so, rules aside, and getting to the real meat of the issue -- is there a deity, is there something beyond this, is there something within me that will continue after my body dies. that's the real issue, isn't it? that's what's at stake?

well, for me, through a combination of experience and learning more and more both intellectually and emotionally, it really does seem to me that there isn't a God. it's all so explainable -- religion -- and the big question is: why does there have to be a God? the universe could continue just fine without one. it seems entirely irrelevant to existence. we obviously don't need God to live and function. isn't it more logical that existence simply is, that it's not willed into being, that it's not designed and crafted, and that there isn't a love and logic behind it all. i think we can create all that for ourselves, and that's powerful and beautiful, but i really do think, deep down, in creeping moments, and it almost fills me with dread, that there's no there there, there's only what we put there.

let me talk about that dread. that dread, to me, feels awful, but it also feels like it's where religion comes from. that it's brutal, but yet honest, to actually face the dread -- that we are alone, that we are big bags of water on a rock floating through space, that none of this means anything *beyond what we allow it to mean* -- and process it for what it means: there is no God. it seems to me that the dread is so unbearable, that it makes you wake up in the middle of the night feeling as if you are drowning, that the thought of blankness, of nonexistence, of nothingness, is so terrifying, that religion gets us through the night, but that it is, ultimately, comfort. and it feels, i don't know, brave to stare the dread in the face and call it what it is.

that's where i am. :shrug:

however, i do want there to be a God. a God could logically exist (though it seems that this position is more complex than that he doesn't, and therefore is less likely to be true). and i do find other people's experiences compelling. it's certainly not for me to tell them that what they experience isn't true, even if i can easily explain it at least in my mind. i also find it compelling the stories of being in a room when someone actually does die. i have not experienced this, but i'm told that it does feel as if something has left the room, and when you see an actual dead person, there's such a remarkable, tangible difference that it does feel as if the body is inhabited by something. but what?

so that's why i come down as an agnostic. because i can't absolutely rule it out.
 
on totally different note -- and not to derail the thread -- i'm going Down Under in November. i need advice via PM. clean out your Inbox!
 
let me talk about that dread. that dread, to me, feels awful, but it also feels like it's where religion comes from. that it's brutal, but yet honest, to actually face the dread -- that we are alone, that we are big bags of water on a rock floating through space, that none of this means anything *beyond what we allow it to mean* -- and process it for what it means: there is no God. it seems to me that the dread is so unbearable, that it makes you wake up in the middle of the night feeling as if you are drowning, that the thought of blankness, of nonexistence, of nothingness, is so terrifying, that religion gets us through the night, but that it is, ultimately, comfort. and it feels, i don't know, brave to stare the dread in the face and call it what it is.

Very well put. We seem to be coming from the same place :up:
 
I'm a Catholic and I'm 16. This is because I was brought up this way. Chances are, if I was brought up Jewish or any other religion, I would stick to it as well. There is part of me that has doubts, and another part of me that believes, just by emotion, not logic. There's a part of me that is somewhat baffled by the traditions and actions that have come from my religion, and there is a part of me that becomes overwhelmed with humility and the sheer belief that comes over me when I pray to God. Sometimes, I feel unsure of my faith, due to the sciences that contradict Christianity, to think, Does God REALLY exist? Then, I'll recieve what may be a gift from God, or a sign, or I'll just have revelations that God is truly real, at least to me. For now, I'm sticking to Catholicism. I don't know if 10 years from now, if I will still believe, or if I will become a devout Catholic, but this is who am I NOW, and that's all that matters. The beauty of free will is that I can choose what to believe, even as the years go by.
 
let me talk about that dread. that dread, to me, feels awful, but it also feels like it's where religion comes from. that it's brutal, but yet honest, to actually face the dread -- that we are alone, that we are big bags of water on a rock floating through space, that none of this means anything *beyond what we allow it to mean* -- and process it for what it means: there is no God. it seems to me that the dread is so unbearable, that it makes you wake up in the middle of the night feeling as if you are drowning, that the thought of blankness, of nonexistence, of nothingness, is so terrifying, that religion gets us through the night, but that it is, ultimately, comfort. and it feels, i don't know, brave to stare the dread in the face and call it what it is.

I don't doubt for a second that religion can be (and has been) used to exploit fear in the populace. From my experience, however, I can't relate to the dread you're talking about -- mostly because I think that, while fear can be used to motivate people in the short term, genuine, reflective people can't be kept there. And some of the most genuine and reflective people I've met -- regardless of their denomination or religious affiliation -- have been those who have decided that there is something more there -- not out of fear, but out of genuine curiosity. It's that curiosity that fueled the discoveries of some of the world's foremost artists, scientists and mathematicians, many of whom were also deeply, profoundly religious people.

I find that artistry and spirituality have a great deal in common. I'm part of a faith community that believes that creativity is the natural result of spirituality. There is a phrase in Latin, "ex nihilo" -- out of nothing. Art is created from nothing -- the same way that, at least according to myth, the world was created. Most of the artists I know who have endured -- and whose work has endured -- have tended to create not out of terror, or even necessarily out of a desire to arrange chaos into order, or out of a desire to process personal trauma (though all those things may have something to do with it) -- but because, at their core, they had to. Created in order to create.

It makes me wonder if the impulse to create is connected to the impulse to believe. If one takes a coldly clinical approach to life, art and spirituality could be seen as two sides of the same coin -- they serve no objective, functional purpose in day to day life, they are fairly subjective and experiential by nature, and they frequently are ultimately futile attempts to make the invisible, visible. However, it may well be that art and religion give voice to the soul and fill in the canvas of the human experience.

I don't think genuine, reflective people are moved by art out of fear. Rather, they are moved because somehow, against the odds, someone created a piece of work that expressed what they felt, or experienced. I think religion -- at least, the best kinds -- serves much the same purpose. Having been a part of ecstatic worship experiences, I can say that there's little fear in the room when the Spirit's in the house -- just an ecstatic sense of wonder.
 
That doesn't change how fucked up a system of thinking that can make parents disown children is.

It doesn't change the profound lack of accountability which religious institutions are held to in most societies.

It doesn't change the manipulation of the law by religious lobby groups to take away peoples rights in most countries (freedom of speech, freedom to marry and freedom to change belief).

Long-time listener, first time caller.

I like that you express concern for peoples' basic human rights. And, on that note, your opinion of Palestinians?

I'll hang up now and listen to your answer.
 
Back
Top Bottom