What are your religious beliefs?

[mcm1610]

What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof.

Christopher Hitchens

I was living in Albany by myself when his "god is not Great" book came out. I had no idea who he was and never heard of the book, but when I saw it at the bookstore I picked it up on a whim and flew through it. Good times.

[drabley]

"If people are good only because they fear punishment, and hope for reward, then we are a sorry lot indeed." Albert Einstein

QFT.

Also, you all realize how ridiculous you sound, right? Preaching against the preacher...brilliant.

[jimmythescumbag]

"If people are good only because they fear punishment, and hope for reward, then we are a sorry lot indeed." Albert Einstein

QFT.

Also, you all realize how ridiculous you sound, right? Preaching against the preacher...brilliant.

You know, I was thinking the same thing myself.

[selfreliable]

Atheism is the belief in no god, not just a biblical god but any god.

All the examples, matthewjacksonjihad, that you gave don't relate at all to the topic. You've never been to China, but other people have. You may not win in Vegas, but people have. You may not have been born with a siamese twin on your head, but people have. Name ONE person who has met god.

I cant name one person who has met God. Many people claim to met him/talked to him. As a complete outsider on this topic (as I stated, Im Scientologist) I just find it funny that the religous ones in this thread are the polite, sincere, not shoving stuff in others faces, while many of the non-believers are the asses of the thread. :

[Guest markovianprocess]

Well generally gets you no where. Genereally speaking... that being said... its all crutches by people. If you are so adament that it doesnt exist, prove it. No one can prove shit either way. Relgious people cant prove that he does except for scripture that was written by second hand people and changed depending on the translation. Non-believers cant prove that he doesnt besides "wheres the evidence he does?" I believe, but I could be wrong, that when you are trying to prove something (scientifically or just in conversation) having proof usually helps win people over. Darwinism is far from proof that a higher being does not exist, just like the Bible is far from proof that he does.

The main thing that you are overlooking is the fact that there are also people who don't really mind either way (i.e. those who consider the existence of an almighty God irrelevant). This isn't a dichotomy.

It's not really something which I think about on a day to day basis, or which affects my day or my patterns of thinking other when the issue is raised in debates like this one. I'd much rather take people at face value than to think of a whole culture in a particular way, because more often than not, doing so will paint an inconsistent picture of the beliefs of those who are part of that particular culture.

Think how much further we would be along as a collective of people if we were to stop debating each other's differences of opinion and instead embrace them and celebrate multiculturalism. That is the world I would like to live in.

[themean]

(as I stated, Im Scientologist)

I thought you were joking earlier. You are really a scientologist?

[mcm1610]

I thought he was joking too, especially because he stated something about being shocked he was the only one.

[selfreliable]

Think how much further we would be along as a collective of people if we were to stop debating each other's differences of opinion and instead embrace them and celebrate multiculturalism. That is the world I would like to live in.

As its been stated before by the grammar police, I couldnt have said it better myself.

[mcm1610]

That's all well and good, but sometimes some people's beliefs directly harm others.

Example:

http://www.aolnews.com/crime/article/ore....cid=webmaild l1

The judge who sentenced an Oregon couple to prison Monday for the death of their son says members of their church must quit relying on faith healing when their children's lives are at stake.

[casey]

(as I stated, Im Scientologist)

I thought you were joking earlier. You are really a scientologist?

Oh man, shit is about to get real.

[xjustinxschwierx]

I thought you were joking earlier. You are really a scientologist?

Oh man, shit is about to get real.

I can't wait to hear this justification of L Ron Hubbard's bad sci-fi story he somehow turned into a religion. I mean, established beliefs are one thing...but that shit is hilarious!

I'm gonna go buy some popcorn and wait for this to unfold.

[drabley]

I can't wait to hear this justification of L Ron Hubbard's bad sci-fi story he somehow turned into a religion. I mean, established beliefs are one thing...but that shit is hilarious!

I'm gonna go buy some popcorn and wait for this to unfold.

This is one of the most ignorant things I've read in a long time.

It was an established belief that the world was flat and was at the center of the solar system. We all know how that turned out.

Sigh.

[selfreliable]

keep waiting cause Im not explaining anything to you. I know how you will react, and just act like asses, so Im not even going to feed that fire. Sorry guys

[silentgods]

i've never talken to an actual scientologist. but i do have one question about one of the policies.

"Attack the Attacker" policy

Scientology has a reputation for hostile action toward anyone that criticizes it in a public forum; executives within the organization have proclaimed that it is "not a turn-the-other-cheek religion."[6] Journalists, politicians, former Scientologists and various anti-cult groups have made accusations of wrongdoing against Scientology since the 1960s, and almost without exception these critics have been targeted for retaliation by Scientology, in the form of lawsuits and public counter-accusations of personal wrongdoing. Many of Scientology's critics have also reported they were subject to threats and harassment in their private lives.[7][8]

The organization's actions reflect a formal policy for dealing with criticism instituted by L. Ron Hubbard, called "attack the attacker." This policy was codified by Hubbard in the latter half of the 1960s, in response to government investigations into the organization. In 1966, Hubbard wrote a criticism of the organization's behavior and noted the "correct procedure" for attacking enemies of Scientology:

(1) Spot who is attacking us.

(2) Start investigating them promptly for felonies or worse using own professionals, not outside agencies.

(3) Double curve our reply by saying we welcome an investigation of them.

(4) Start feeding lurid, blood, sex, crime actual evidence on the attackers to the press.

Don't ever tamely submit to an investigation of us. Make it rough, rough on attackers all the way. You can get "reasonable about it" and lose. Sure we break no laws. Sure we have nothing to hide. BUT attackers are simply an anti-Scientology propaganda agency so far as we are concerned. They have proven they want no facts and will only lie no matter what they discover. So BANISH all ideas that any fair hearing is intended and start our attack with their first breath. Never wait. Never talk about us - only them. Use their blood, sex, crime to get headlines. Don't use us. I speak from 15 years of experience in this. There has never yet been an attacker who was not reeking with crime. All we had to do was look for it and murder would come out.

—Attacks on Scientology, "Hubbard Communications Office Policy Letter," 25 February 1966

[saxamaphone]

[xjustinxschwierx]

I can't wait to hear this justification of L Ron Hubbard's bad sci-fi story he somehow turned into a religion. I mean, established beliefs are one thing...but that shit is hilarious!

I'm gonna go buy some popcorn and wait for this to unfold.

This is one of the most ignorant things I've read in a long time.

It was an established belief that the world was flat and was at the center of the solar system. We all know how that turned out.

Sigh.

the established beliefs comment was a sigh of oh well, I guess some people will never get it.

I don't believe in any gods, in that it is my reaction to the usual, whatever, I'm not trying to convert you, leave me be that has been thrown out in this thread pretty liberally.

However, the idea behind scientology is hilarious. It's based on what can only be described as a bad sci fi premise from the 40's like a half-assed HP Lovecraft story...and I'm downright fascinated that people can say they believe in it with a straight face...much like what goes on in the bible...but with Aliens!

[username]

^ Good post.

Also in reference to steven tangent's...

[mcm1610]

I can't wait to hear this justification of L Ron Hubbard's bad sci-fi story he somehow turned into a religion. I mean, established beliefs are one thing...but that shit is hilarious!

I'm gonna go buy some popcorn and wait for this to unfold.

This is one of the most ignorant things I've read in a long time.

It was an established belief that the world was flat and was at the center of the solar system. We all know how that turned out.

Sigh.

I just want to point out that it was a bajillion (roughly) years ago that anyone thought the earth was flat. Christopher Columbus didn't prove that to anyone: it was Washington Irving, the author of Rip Van Winkle who created that myth around 1830 when he wrote a biography of Columbus. Every sailor ever noticed that a ship disappeared over the horizon and the last thing you saw was the crow's nest; the ship didn't just get smaller and smaller in the distance. It's established that at least the Greeks knew the world was round, and I'm sure it's older than that.

I don't know if there ever was a civilization that outright claimed a flat earth (I don't know my ancient history so well) but I'm sure if there was, it was a tiny, relatively-stationary civilization.

[drabley]

This is one of the most ignorant things I've read in a long time.

It was an established belief that the world was flat and was at the center of the solar system. We all know how that turned out.

Sigh.

I just want to point out that it was a bajillion (roughly) years ago that anyone thought the earth was flat. Christopher Columbus didn't prove that to anyone: it was Washington Irving, the author of Rip Van Winkle who created that myth around 1830 when he wrote a biography of Columbus. Every sailor ever noticed that a ship disappeared over the horizon and the last thing you saw was the crow's nest; the ship didn't just get smaller and smaller in the distance. It's established that at least the Greeks knew the world was round, and I'm sure it's older than that.

I don't know if there ever was a civilization that outright claimed a flat earth (I don't know my ancient history so well) but I'm sure if there was, it was a tiny, relatively-stationary civilization.

My point was that it takes creative and sometimes heretical thought to challenge "established belief" and foster progress.

To say Scientology is somehow less valid because it is a relatively new belief system is bullshit. Moreover, Scientology is no more far-fetched than the rest of the religious bunk everyone is editorializing over in this thread.

A pile of horse shit is still a pile of horse shit whether it's 2 months or 2 minutes old.

[scottheisel]

Can someone please just tell me if I'm going to hell or not?

[mcm1610]

I'd say Scientology's hierarchy, aggressive stance on challengers, and the weird shit that leaks out every now and then about how it's run is much more laughable than any of its beliefs, but that could be because I know jack shit about what they actually believe, I just have a huuuuuuge hunch that it's a money grab.

[drabley]

I'd say Scientology's hierarchy, aggressive stance on challengers, and the weird shit that leaks out every now and then about how it's run is much more laughable than any of its beliefs, but that could be because I know jack shit about what they actually believe, I just have a huuuuuuge hunch that it's a money grab.

Any more than the Catholic Church is?

Also, if people believed in themselves half as much as they did their gods, the world would be a much better place.

[lonesomexloveus]

I'd say Scientology's hierarchy, aggressive stance on challengers, and the weird shit that leaks out every now and then about how it's run is much more laughable than any of its beliefs, but that could be because I know jack shit about what they actually believe, I just have a huuuuuuge hunch that it's a money grab.

Any more than the Catholic Church is?

Also, if people believed in themselves half as much as they did their gods, the world would be a much better place.

the catholic church brings the lulz.

[benchwarmer]

Also, if people believed in themselves half as much as they did their gods, the world would be a much better place.

this.

[selfreliable]

I'd say Scientology's hierarchy, aggressive stance on challengers, and the weird shit that leaks out every now and then about how it's run is much more laughable than any of its beliefs, but that could be because I know jack shit about what they actually believe, I just have a huuuuuuge hunch that it's a money grab.

Money grab for the top for sure. That is why I dont believe I need to pay 10grand to be cleansed. I never will give them money to be cleansed at all when you can do it yourself. The aggressive stance on challengers is from a long period of harassment against the church. Why cant the church retaliate. A Priest molests a child and it makes headlines, it would be considered low brow if the church said that the reporter that broke the news was arrested for OUI/spousal abuse etc... We dont care, you throw mud at the church, the church will throw it right back.

And the only reason I responded to that was because you admitted you knew nothing, and saw the same flaw at the top that I see. Not all religions are perfect and I can see that mine isnt, but its the one that fits me the best.