Is there a religion that...

[Neutral]

a religion that dosen't follow any religion. Basically a religion that pleads the fifth all the time.

because I don't believe in and higher diety, but i don't follow Scientology. Atheism seems to follow this somewhat but it seems to go about it in the wrong way, like it doesn't respect anyone else for their beliefs.

I need a religion that doesn't believe in any religions but at the same time respects others religions

[Xenonight2]

1. Atheism is not a religion.

2. We can totally respect religions. Some don't, some do.

3. If you actively disbelieve in God, you are an atheist. Atheism is a label, not a religion - you don't subscribe to it, you simply are or aren't.

[gratscorpio]

lol

you sir win the game

/thread
/10char
/notgonnahappenchar
/areyouseriouschar
/gonna/yourchar


scorpio

[Neutral]

1. Atheism is not a religion.

2. We can totally respect religions. Some don't, some do.

3. If you actively disbelieve in God, you are an atheist. Atheism is a label, not a religion - you don't subscribe to it, you simply are or aren't.

ahh, i see, the thing is when i first heard of atheism it was a bunch of people just to shoot other people down and destroy their beliefs. I didn't want to do any of that because i really do respect other religions as what others believe as the base of existence

[Xenonight2]

then what is it? an irreligion?

It's a label for a system of thought that rejects the existence of God.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism

It can be for whatever reason you want.

[Phil3070]

You could be a conscientious objector of religion. (Nevermind...)

As takkun88 said, agnostic. It's a philosophy of seeing something as it is to you, with all due respect. Atheism and agnosticism can be defined many ways and all depend on the person holding the beliefs. It is not like a religion where you must fit into the certain, preset criteria. It is flexible and is molded for the person, not for an organization.

I study religion, so feel free to ask questions. It's one of my favorite topics.
Edit: And if you're wondering, my faith is best described as Agnostic Idealist. (An example of it's flexibility.)

[Jakuza]

Just out of curiosity, why do you need a religion?

That's just asking for a flame.


I personally don't care for religion.

[KniteOps]

Nah some people I know do it to seriously hook up with people they think are "wholesome" or can share a common "activity." And why not?

Religion was meant to build a sort of bonding and unity. Us against them. Minority against majority. We will overcome them with peace and love while they resort to violence with science. Not true in all cases. But you can't deny that a number of beliefs build on that "underdog" mentality.

[Phil3070]

Typical agnostic/atheist comment.

I'm just saying that in most religions, you are not free to wonder. They tell you that this is the way it was and that's that. Deciding you do not believe in just one aspect of the belief is considered blasphemy. It's all or nothing.

[Groteske]

If you want a religion that doesn't care what other's think about it....try Buddhism.

But eh I am a pantheist. God is the universe. We where born from his womb and we have been growing ever since.

[KniteOps]

There are 10 major commandments, and depending on which version of Christianity you believe in there are much, MUCH more requirements than that (over 600, I can't recall the actual number) that must be followed in order to get into heaven (better not poop yourself when you die after you've repented and before you fully pass-on). The only unforgivable sin (IIRC) is apostity (leaving your religion).

Please respond in detail. If you're going to reference a text, please tell me which text you are referencing. My experience with Christianity stems from reading the King James version of the Holy Bible. Also due to the many denominations and the difference between Protestant sects and Roman Catholic sects I would prefer if you also included that as well.

There is the book of Leviticus which states how people should worship, serve, and obey God. In this book it discusses how burn offerings, grain offerings, peace offerings, sin offerings, trespass offering, restitution, and numerous other rituals and methods of conduct should be conducted. This was stated in the Old Testament of the Bible. Additionally if you didn't conduct it properly then it was a sin, but Jesus didn't come until the New Testament so popular belief is that the majority of the Hebrew people were sent to purgatory. To be honest, I'm not too of the the textual reference for this assumption.

If you are a Christian and you take the bible as the unfallible word of god you are allowed to (or even required to) do some pretty horrible things.

Unsubstantiated. Have you read the Bible in it's entirety? There's a lot of things to keep radical fundamentalists in check.

If you don't take the bible literally, I always wonder why label yourself as Christian? If you think some bits are just stories, how do you decern which are factual and which are fallacies? If you can exclude certain parts, how do you decide which parts to keep and which to discard? Maybe that whole "Thou shalt not kill" thing isn't as important in god's eyes as 'thou shalt not plant two different crops in the same field' thing. And if anything in the bible isn't true, who is to say the whole Jesus part isn't fictional?

Most theology students see the Bible as being a contextual document that was gathered by merchants who had popular books on paper for sale. The version of the Bible that we have today are only the popular manuscripts that were able to be carried over into modern society leaving behind various sub-texts that could add into the Bible. Looking at this perspective does undermine the legitimacy of the Bible and have led certain scholars to look into the background of the authors. For example, in the book of Revelation the apostle John was exiled to the island of Patmos where he was forced to mine endlessly. Many students believe that John may have gone insane during his isolation due to the type of rocks he was mining which had hallucinogenic properties and inspired him to write Revelation. The Bible was written by people and not all people are perfect.

I have read this text on my own time for leisure. I have also read the Koran but that wasn't nearly as fresh in my mind. I just get pissed off when people attempt to define religion without any textual reference. It's disgusting. I'm not even a religious advocate for Christ's sake. I just hate people who don't know what the hell they're talking about. This thread is probably just going to piss me off and isn't a Christian thread per se. I regret attempting to put substance into my post. I forgot that such actions are not reciprocated on this forum board. Because everyone here just loves to be an asshole, myself included. If hell existed, I would probably be there. And if by unfortunate circumstances other people are there, then we could start a party. The more the merrier. I really don't care about the after life. I think it's a bunch of consequentalist b.s. that ruins the mood for Christianity and a lot of other religions. I believe what I believe in because it's the truth. Not because I want to get into some ritzy place high in the skies.

[xBlazex]

Atheism is mostly use by religions people who find out that person don't believe in there god so they call that person Atheist and Atheist is not religion is just label people who accept life without a god. I think it wrong religion judge people who don't believe in there god and calls a bad person. But religions is more a sin then not have one. Because god kill more people then atheism person would

[KniteOps]

Blaze I bet you didn't know that Jesus kills Dumbledore in the Half Blood Bible.

[Oisterman]

Sounds like you're...Neutral.

Couldn't help myself.

Also - why do you "NEED A RELIGION"? Thats like saying "I NEED to label myself". Just be man. Why do you need a category?

[Veron]

i dont have a religion

and im not athiest so call me one and ill show you what type of mans dick that can put holes through trees can do to you

[Danuve]

He probably doesn't want to be defined by a label.

[Norrin Radd]

Regardless, there is a label for every possible position, I think.

I neither confirm nor deny any deity. I'm apathetic toward it all.

[Norrin Radd]

What ever Mr. Fence Sitter.

Look, I'm sorry that my existence is enough to prove wrong your very argument, but I can't change being born.

For those watching at home, I'll explain why Irony is misusing application here.

He says: "You either believe in something or you don't.".

This is a trick statement that leads a lot of people to assume that it means: "You either believe in God or you believe he doesn't exist.".

It doesn't, no matter how much he loves to make people believe that and make his debate easier.

Not believing in God is not an act of believing in his non-existence, it's an act of not believing in his existence.

You can, like me, not believe in God and still not be sure if he exists or not. You can not believe in God and still feel that you can't be sure he doesn't exist.

IronyTaken likes to trick people, that's all. He doesn't like that you can, factually, sit on the fence.

[IronyTaken]

Look, I'm sorry that my existence is enough to prove wrong your very argument, but I can't change being born.

For those watching at home, I'll explain why Irony is misusing application here.

He says: "You either believe in something or you don't.".

This is a trick statement that leads a lot of people to assume that it means: "You either believe in God or you believe he doesn't exist.".

It doesn't, no matter how much he loves to make people believe that and make his debate easier.

Not believing in God is not an act of believing in his non-existence, it's an act of not believing in his existence.

You can, like me, not believe in God and still not be sure if he exists or not. You can not believe in God and still feel that you can't be sure he doesn't exist.

IronyTaken likes to trick people, that's all. He doesn't like that you can, factually, sit on the fence.

So basically you are an atheist because you don't believe in god and an agnostic because you don't know if he exists or not.

Cool you are an atheist agnostic just like me.

switching negatives around will not change the outcome here.

[Norrin Radd]

So basically you are an atheist because you don't believe in god and an agnostic because you don't know if he exists or not.

Cool you are an atheist agnostic just like me.

switching negatives around will not change the outcome here.

Then everyone's an agnostic, if what you just said is what you believe.

That's what you just implied.

I'll leave you to figure out why.

[Norrin Radd]

Never speak based on what people "consider" fact.

You don't "consider" fact. Fact is or fact is not. There's no subjective fact.

Wrong. Because some people are gnostic because they say they know god exists.

Do they know God exists, or do they think they know...despite factually not knowing?

Doesn't matter if they have that knowledge only that they think they have it.

It does, actually.

Simply because there's a bit of a drop-off between thinking something is true and knowing something is true.

It's not a difference that can be ignored.

Nobody knows God exists, this is an inarguable fact. People are only sure that their faith is placed correctly, they do not actually know.

I am only labeling by what information you have given me.

No, you're labelling however best suits your argument.

I am not an atheistic anything. I am an agnostic. You do not have say in this matter. You believe I am somewhat atheist because of your odd version of atheism. I'm sorry, but that doesn't work.

You cannot escape from someone labeling you it what humans do.

You literally have the free will to label me, but you're factually wrong.

My word over me will always trump yours. If you say I'm atheistic anything, and I say: "No, I'm not.", you don't get a say. You do not have equal word on me. Nobody has higher word on any human but themselves.

An no we are all born atheists.

Unconvinced = atheist

Unconvinced is agnostic.

Atheists are totally convinced that there is no God.

Is Richard Dawkins unconvinced? Read The God Delusion. That's a hell of a lot of pages, and I didn't exactly get the feeling that he's sitting there saying: "Umm....God? No God? GOSH DARN IT I CANNOT CHOOSE!". It's called The God Delusion, he's one of the world's most famous atheists on top of that.

It's not called The God Maybe. It's a man clearly identifying himself as, and being identified as, atheist, telling everyone else why God doesn't exist and why he dislikes agnostics. Yet, even he admits that nobody is 100% atheist. So not only does HE prove you wrong also, but he proves me correct on two counts.

1) Nobody is sure and everyone is agnostic by logic.

2) Atheism is belief that there's no God.

No matter how you try to change the syntax of your posts it will always give the same answer.

Atheist/Theist = belief

Agnostic/Gnostic = knowledge

knowledge≠belief

Simple yet you try to ignore the obvious.

And it's always funny when someone tries to thwart the topic by playing the victim card.

No, you're plain and simply incorrect. It's there for all to see.

[IronyTaken]

*prays ironytaken doesnt see this or they holy wall of text will appear*

and only thing i can think of is athiestic agnostism(i do it ritz irony?) or straight up athiest.

You already missed the beginning hahahah!

[Bacn]

why do people try to push their " you dont need to label yourself, be a rebel" BS on him? if he wants to label himself help him or leave? hate when people push their views on other people >_>

Because walking to Mount Doom and back in order to have something to call yourself is a foolish endeavor. All titles do is give people a way to describe themselves, something that can easily be done without one.


And just for the record, I was helping him.

[IronyTaken]

why do people try to push their " you dont need to label yourself, be a rebel" BS on him? if he wants to label himself help him or leave? hate when people push their views on other people >_>

Well labels can easily lead to a misconception as it is doing so in this thread.

Easiest way to end this argument would be to just address the main information and leave the label alone.

If you are not convinced there is a god then fine "you are not convinced there is a god".


I call that atheism you can call it firbalicious if you want, but it doesn't change the meaning,

[V-Opolis]

Because walking to Mount Doom and back in order to have something to call yourself is a foolish endeavor. All titles do is give people a way to describe themselves, something that can easily be done without one.


And just for the record, I was helping him.

but your pushing your view on him, thats not nice. if he wants to label himself thats his problem...regardless of how you view it.

Well labels can easily lead to a misconception as it is doing so in this thread.

Easiest way to end this argument would be to just address the main information and leave the label alone.

If you are not convinced there is a god then fine "you are not convinced there is a god".


I call that atheism you can call it firbalicious if you want, but it doesn't change the meaning,

uh oh........