Would you agree that pretty much any religious beleif, whether it's Christianity, Shinto, Islam, Buddhism, Baha'i, Scientology, Mormonism, Judaism, Sikh, Hinduism - yes even Atheism (my beleif, or lack there of ;p) , etc... is perfectly fine when the practitioners don't take their beleif too seriously.

It's only really ever a problem when people are very serious in their beleif.

So? Do you agree? Or do you think that the World would be better if everyone was on the same page? If everyone was taught to believe the same as you ... and I mean truely believe it in their hearts - no questions asked.


Michael

Would you agree that pretty much any religious beleif, whether it's Christianity, Shinto, Islam, Buddhism, Baha'i, Scientology, Mormonism, Judaism, Sikh, Hinduism - yes even Atheism (my beleif, or lack there of ;p) , etc... is perfectly fine when the practitioners don't take their beleif too seriously.

What would be "too seriously"?

As I see it, the problem is not the belief itself, but the actions that are thought to be necessary as a consequence of that belief. Some actions may be harmless to other people; others may be harmful.

So, if you mean that religion is ok as long as it doesn't lead people to harm others (and perhaps themselves) then I agree with you. Harm is "too serious".

So? Do you agree? Or do you think that the World would be better if everyone was on the same page?

Depends what the page was. I can think of a great many beliefs that can lead to a greatly dysfunctional society even though widely shared.

What would be "too seriously"?I'd like to say: "You know the type."

We all know those people who are described, by family and friends as, "very" religous. I'd say those type are too serious. Where their beleif is not just a part of their life but the main part. Everything is seen through religious color lens so to speak.

Versus, people who only think about religion once in awhile - say when someone is married or someone dies or it's a holiday etc... other then thinking to themselves "I will go to heaven when I die" (or be reborn ect..) beleif really isn't a main concern for them. More like something they were taught as a child and so they just assume it's true but that's about it.

Michael

Would you agree that pretty much any religious beleif, whether it's Christianity, Shinto, Islam, Buddhism, Baha'i, Scientology, Mormonism, Judaism, Sikh, Hinduism - yes even Atheism (my beleif, or lack there of ;p) , etc... is perfectly fine when the practitioners don't take their beleif too seriously.

It's only really ever a problem when people are very serious in their beleif.

So? Do you agree? Or do you think that the World would be better if everyone was on the same page? If everyone was taught to believe the same as you ... and I mean truely believe it in their hearts - no questions asked.


Michael

Yes i think the world would be better if everybody truely believed Jesus in their hearts .

And you cannot truely believe Jesus without taking Him seriously.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

There's nothing wrong at all about taking your religion seriously.
In fact, I think there is a much bigger problem with those who do not take their religion seriously - and rather pick and choose bits and pieces that apply to their life and use the rest to condemn others.
I know many very religious, pious people who do notcause any problems for anyone at all.

No, taking your religion seriously isn't a problem at all.
Deciding that OTHERS need to be a part of your religion is a problem.
Applying yoru own personal views to thers and judging/condemning THEM according to YOUR beliefs is.
Not recognizing that their view as just as valid as yours are is the problem.
Being intolerant of others is the problem.
That's not the fault of religion as much as it is human nature.

Deciding that OTHERS need to be a part of your religion is a problem.What if part of your religous beleif states you must "spread the Good Word".

Applying yoru own personal views to thers and judging/condemning THEM according to YOUR beliefs is.
If, say, the religion itself condemns others? What if the religion itself is centered on a beleif that you MUST accept X Prophet or X God or X etc.. and if you do not then you will burn in Hell fire.

Couldn't taking such a religion too seriously be bad news for people who do not believe in X Prophet or X God or ect...?

How can one take a religion seriously that condemns non-believers but not condemn non-believes? That appears oxymoronic - doesn't it?

Not recognizing that their view as just as valid as yours are is the problem.
Do you think that a serious monotheistic person can accept that polytheism is a valid beleif system and not condemn it? (or visa versa?)

I've even asked moderate monotheists here if polytheism could even be a possibility and got a big fat resounding *silence* *diversion* *red-herring* etc... which is to say "NO"


I'm Atheist, but I'm not a millitant Atheist. I acknowledge that the possibility exists that Gods may exit; I just don't happen to believe they do. Yet, if I were a millitant Atheist perhaps I wouldn't. If I were in a position of power and a millitant Atheist perhaps things would be bad for non-Atheists!?!?!

BUT, if I were Atheist and didn't really think much about it - then I probably wouldn't give two craps if a person worshipped on long dead mythologized Prophet or God etc...

What do you think?
Michael

Yes i think the world would be better if everybody truely believed Jesus in their hearts .

And you cannot truely believe Jesus without taking Him seriously.


All Praise The Ancient Of DaysDo you think it's acceptable to coerce people into believing in Jesus? Say, by, teaching children at a very early age that there is a Jesus and they should get to know Him? Hence they naturally believe in Jesus? Or say, by making it harder for other beliefs to flourish - such as Scientology, Islam or Atheism?

MII

Fanaticism of religion or atheism is probably when they should start shoving individuals into assylum. :D hehe... just kidding. I got nothing against religion so they can worship whatever they want, but it's sickening when it roots itself to politic or when they try to force their belief on others. Frankly religion should never have anything to do with politic ever but that's just the way of the world as it is. There should be a universal law against that crap. IMO Religions are just a form of propaganda afterall. Maybe a psychological test every year to estimate how much of a zealot people are towards their belief and rehabilitate those that are brainwashed to the point of being spiteful towards others not believing in the same faith. Hahaha... :p

Would you agree that pretty much any religious beleif, whether it's Christianity, Shinto, Islam, Buddhism, Baha'i, Scientology, Mormonism, Judaism, Sikh, Hinduism - yes even Atheism (my beleif, or lack there of ;p) , etc... is perfectly fine when the practitioners don't take their beleif too seriously.
what do you suggest we do take seriously then?
something?
anything?
nothing?
should we seriously accept the idea that we shouldn't accept beliefs seriously?

It's only really ever a problem when people are very serious in their beleif.

So? Do you agree? Or do you think that the World would be better if everyone was on the same page? If everyone was taught to believe the same as you ... and I mean truely believe it in their hearts - no questions asked.


Michael

is not taking god seriously a sub branch of atheism?

Some traditions value seriousness more than others. To monotheists, not taking it seriously is paramount to not believing it. Buddhists would concede that their seriousness is a method, not an end in itself.

You can, and many do, take your beliefs very seriously, while accepting and respecting the fact that others have their own beliefs.

If you are not a complete believer, why would you subscribe to a religion at all?
I have never understood that.

Maybe a psychological test every year to estimate how much of a zealot people are towards their belief and rehabilitate those that are brainwashed to the point of being spiteful towards others not believing in the same faith. ...Yes, this is sort of what I was thinking.

what do you suggest we do take seriously then?
something?
anything?
nothing?
should we seriously accept the idea that we shouldn't accept beliefs seriously?


is not taking god seriously a sub branch of atheism?Well, it seems t me then, it depends on the beleif. See the above post and the below post.

Some traditions value seriousness more than others. To monotheists, not taking it seriously is paramount to not believing it. Buddhists would concede that their seriousness is a method, not an end in itself.

You can, and many do, take your beliefs very seriously, while accepting and respecting the fact that others have their own beliefs.Do I agree? Yes, but, what does it mean "respecting the fact that others have their own beliefs" - - many Christian fundamentalists "respect" the fact that Hindu are polytheistic; but not in a positive manner. They take it as an evil sin and instead of "respecting" this ancient beleif as a unique beleif system they only see it with contempt and attempt only to convert them to Christianity.

It was no accident or slip of the tongue when Bush Jr said "This crusade, this war on terrorism is going to take a while." he knew exactly what he was saying and who he was saying it to. Christians in general (as these boards can attest) no more respect Muslims than Muslims think Jesus was God on Earth and pork-chops are yummy. Ever hear a Christian say "OH, you are an Atheist, that's great!" Not if they take their beleif very serious. Some may even see you as possessed :eek:

Remember the Seinfeld episode when Elaine finds out her boyfriend Puddy is a born-again Christian and in response to Elaine telling Puddy she's not a Christian Puddy's reply is: "What do I care? You're the one going to hell" :) That's the nonchalant sort of Chrisitianess that has made America great. One could say Puddy doesn't take Christianity too seriously? Perhaps a fundamental Christian may take it upon themselves to convert Elaine or even stop dating her?

Make sense?

Would you agree that pretty much any religious beleif, whether it's Christianity, Shinto, Islam, Buddhism, Baha'i, Scientology, Mormonism, Judaism, Sikh, Hinduism - yes even Atheism (my beleif, or lack there of ;p) , etc... is perfectly fine when the practitioners don't take their beleif too seriously.

It's only really ever a problem when people are very serious in their beleif.

So? Do you agree? Or do you think that the World would be better if everyone was on the same page? If everyone was taught to believe the same as you ... and I mean truely believe it in their hearts - no questions asked.

Michael

I would agree.
Everyone is free to believe what he or she wants, but it indeed becomes a problem when people get too serious about it. For instance when they dedicate their lives to convert other people. That is an arrogance stance and just plain annoying.

However i cannot help to believe that the world would be a better place if everyone would believe the same thing. Not that thats ever going to happen...

Yes, this is sort of what I was thinking.

Well, it seems t me then, it depends on the beleif. See the above post and the below post.



Do I agree? Yes, but, what does it mean "respecting the fact that others have their own beliefs" - - many Christian fundamentalists "respect" the fact that Hindu are polytheistic; but not in a positive manner. They take it as an evil sin and instead of "respecting" this ancient beleif as a unique beleif system they only see it with contempt and attempt only to convert them to Christianity.

It was no accident or slip of the tongue when Bush Jr said "This crusade, this war on terrorism is going to take a while." he knew exactly what he was saying and who he was saying it to. Christians in general (as these boards can attest) no more respect Muslims than Muslims think Jesus was God on Earth and pork-chops are yummy. Ever hear a Christian say "OH, you are an Atheist, that's great!" Not if they take their beleif very serious. Some may even see you as possessed :eek:

Remember the Seinfeld episode when Elaine finds out her boyfriend Puddy is a born-again Christian and in response to Elaine telling Puddy she's not a Christian Puddy's reply is: "What do I care? You're the one going to hell" :) That's the nonchalant sort of Chrisitianess that has made America great. One could say Puddy doesn't take Christianity too seriously? Perhaps a fundamental Christian may take it upon themselves to convert Elaine or even stop dating her?

Make sense?

at a certain point beliefs clash - this is exhibited quite distinctly between atheists and theists through out history - even the belief that beliefs should not be taken seriously runs in to trouble when it encounters the belief that beliefs should .....

The underpinning factor behind all beliefs is what one holds as essentially true - the only exception would be someone who holds that nothing is essentially true or matters ... in which case they wouldn't have the slightest interest in voicing their opinion or bearing an influence

Do I agree? Yes, but, what does it mean "respecting the fact that others have their own beliefs" - - many Christian fundamentalists "respect" the fact that Hindu are polytheistic; but not in a positive manner. They take it as an evil sin and instead of "respecting" this ancient beleif as a unique beleif system they only see it with contempt and attempt only to convert them to Christianity.
Then they are obviously NOT respecting the beliefs of the Hindus.
Respect, but not in a positive manner? That doesn't even make sense.

It was no accident or slip of the tongue when Bush Jr said "[I]This crusade, this war on terrorism is going to take a while.
Quoting individuals does nothing but point out the strngths/weaknesses of those individuals.
Bush is a lying, manipulative propaganda machine.
What does any of this have to do with respect of the beliefs of others?
He, quite obviously, has none.

Christians in general (as these boards can attest) no more respect Muslims than Muslims think Jesus was God on Earth and pork-chops are yummy.
Christians on this board, in general, are very few - so couldn't possibly be viewed as a fair representation of the whole - not if you want to be honest.
Besides... Christians on this board are in an environment that is hostile toward them, and they feel the need to defend themselves and their religion against constant attacks. It's hard to blame them.

Ever hear a Christian say "OH, you are an Atheist, that's great!" Not if they take their beleif very serious.
How many Christians do you know on a personal basis?
I have known quite a few of them that take their faith very seriously, and still have no probelms with the belief systems of others.
There are, of course, others that do not - but that has less to do with how serious they are, than with who they are as a person,
You see very the same thing dealing with diffeences of race, politics, nationality or anything else that people can focus on as "Us" and "Them".

Some may even see you as possessed :eek:
Some people do and believe lots of things.
SOME poeple, however, take their religious conviction very seriously - whoel respecting the beliefs of others.
As for those who do not, it is a reflection of the person, not the religion.
It is much more of a social/cultural issue than it is a religious one.

Remember the Seinfeld episode when Elaine finds out her boyfriend Puddy is a born-again Christian and in response to Elaine telling Puddy she's not a Christian Puddy's reply is: "What do I care? You're the one going to hell" :) That's the nonchalant sort of Chrisitianess that has made America great.
Exactly.
It's more an America thing than a Christian thing.
People like to separate into groups and play "Us" against "Them".
That's exactly what you are doing right now, by painting all people who take religion seriously as "this".

Perhaps a fundamental Christian may take it upon themselves to convert Elaine or even stop dating her?
I wouldn't date a Fundamentalist Christian.
That does not mean I don't respect their right to their own belief systems.
It simply means that I know our value systems would be very different and incompatible (not to mention the idea of what happens when and if we have kids).
I fault no religion for not wanting their adherents to date outside the religion.
That doesn't mean they can't be friends. It doesn't mean they can't respect one another.

Make sense?
Not really, no.

What if part of your religous beleif states you must "spread the Good Word".


If, say, the religion itself condemns others? What if the religion itself is centered on a beleif that you MUST accept X Prophet or X God or X etc.. and if you do not then you will burn in Hell fire.

Couldn't taking such a religion too seriously be bad news for people who do not believe in X Prophet or X God or ect...?

How can one take a religion seriously that condemns non-believers but not condemn non-believes? That appears oxymoronic - doesn't it?


Do you think that a serious monotheistic person can accept that polytheism is a valid beleif system and not condemn it? (or visa versa?)

I've even asked moderate monotheists here if polytheism could even be a possibility and got a big fat resounding *silence* *diversion* *red-herring* etc... which is to say "NO"


I'm Atheist, but I'm not a millitant Atheist. I acknowledge that the possibility exists that Gods may exit; I just don't happen to believe they do. Yet, if I were a millitant Atheist perhaps I wouldn't. If I were in a position of power and a millitant Atheist perhaps things would be bad for non-Atheists!?!?!

BUT, if I were Atheist and didn't really think much about it - then I probably wouldn't give two craps if a person worshipped on long dead mythologized Prophet or God etc...

What do you think?
Michael


What if part of your religous beleif states you must "spread the Good Word".


If, say, the religion itself condemns others? What if the religion itself is centered on a beleif that you MUST accept X Prophet or X God or X etc.. and if you do not then you will burn in Hell fire.

Couldn't taking such a religion too seriously be bad news for people who do not believe in X Prophet or X God or ect...?


No religion does this. This is a minconception, and I will explaine why.
In Quran it is stated many times that Mohammed (pbuh) is the last and final messanger who performed miracles, prophicied, came with a criterea from the creator, guidence for mankind and much! much! more! said more or less, to worship God to obey his commands whether they be new or old, deal with each other justly, feed the poor, visit the sick, and be kind, humble, ect... actually a book could be written on this topic. In fact its called the Quran.
It is a guidance for mankind. To lead them out of the dark into the light. ok? So then... We have the commands inside Quran how do we apply these to our lives. We have the best of example Mohammed (pbuh)the best of mankind in character and in worship. We have so many authintic resouces compiled by companions of the Holy Prophets (pbuh) who were known for being a truthful people.We know well (or atleast should)what kind of cloths he wore, what kind of food he ate, when he ate, how he ate, what he said when he ate, exactly what prayers he performed, when, where, how, and why to pray them, and the list goes on.

ok so...
Quran states also that either you believe or disbelieve. Does not specificly say that you Must believe, and does not call for the death of a person or even a group of people for the simple fact that they disbelieve. This is my proof.


Quran 2-256
"Let there be no compulsion in this deen.(Way of life, belief system, or more commonly known as religion.)Truth stands clear in contrast to error. Whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy handhold in which will never break. Allah hears and knows all.

Also Mohammed (peace and blessings be upon him) comes from the line of the prophets. Means that his ancesters are prophets. ie.. Moses, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. May Allah shower mercy and blessings upon them all.

Read Quran Discover the Truth,
May Allah guide us all. ameen

I don't take ANY religion too seriously as from where I stand they ALL are shrouded in man created ignorance to some degree or another.By their very nature many religions are divisive and meant to exclude others.

I believe there is a spiritual truth to most religions but this is lost somewhat by all the corruption of the people involved in their formation...due to their human ignorance to separate and divide other people because of racist attitudes,social habits and customs of one group conflicting with another,etc.

The closest we will know about God/Afterlife in my humble opinion is the thousands of cases of Near Death Experiences as opposed to ancient texts written by largely unknown people. The overall pattern I see in NDEs' is the reference point I use to compare to the religions I have studied.

I have met some people that take their religions very seriously and still seem to respect other religous beliefs but most do not. They may be somewhat polite about others beliefs when asked about them but they still believe others are wrong.

If you are not a complete believer, why would you subscribe to a religion at all?
I have never understood that.

I'd ask you if you are a complete believer in anything, thinking you would admit that you have your moments of doubt about most things, but then I remember our discussion about fear and your not having it, so I'll approach this as statements about me.

I don't know what I COMPLETELY believe in. I have official beliefs (I mean even in relation to myself they are official) but some days, some minutes I act think feel as if I believed something else. This includes beliefs related to politics, metaphysics, health, nutrition, relationships, men/women, those beliefs that often get listed under religions or supernatural headings, and so on.

There's an ebb and flow.

One example. I had a series of very strange experiences when I was a child. I am not even going to mention of what, this would be distracting. I don't think about these experiences all that often. When I do, if I spend some time going into the memories and feeling the feelings I had which increases the vividness, I become a believer in the existence of 'something'. I simply know. It is clear. I don't doubt. But if I hadn't thought about these experiences for a while and someone asked me: Do you believe in X? My answer would probably be more agnostic, or doubting believer.

I hope that that was clear.

Grantywanty,

I suppose that's why I am not a member of any religion.

I have met some people that take their religions very seriously and still seem to respect other religous beliefs but most do not. They may be somewhat polite about others beliefs when asked about them but they still believe others are wrong.

Thinking the others are wrong does not equate to lack of respect for the beliefs of others.

I have yet to encounter the religion that fulfills the topic post. The problem with the faiths we have is that even in small doses, they're like cancer to rational thinking. I'll give Buddhism some wiggle room, but I'm still given to silly fits of laughter every time I see pictures of monks beating the shite out of one another in the street for ... well, the reasons are never clear. But Buddhists know how to fight, tellyawhat.

The thing is that in small doses, that is, without taking things too seriously, Christianity becomes something like "house", or "tea party"--a game children play. And I suppose that's just fine, except that I frequently meet adults who never stopped playing the game.

Liquor, in small doses and not taken too seriously, is an entertaining and worthwhile diversion. Doesn't mean it's not bad for you all the same.

Or, more accurately, baseball. There are some folks who like baseball, and some who go over the deep end. What marks the abyss is various. My brother owned season tickets for a few years. I still can't imagine letting baseball be that much a part of my life. To the other, though, he's safely ensconced in the respectable crowd that occupies the space between the fairweathers and the addicts.

Hell, the other day we heard about these life-sized bobble-head dolls being auctioned for charity. My brother just shrugged and said, "I'll bet one of those ends up in Joe's living room."

And even that guy is still somewhat sane.

Nonetheless, watching people either actually pray over a baseball game, or behave in a manner that fulfills a more anthropological and psychological view of prayer, it becomes quickly apparent that some folks take it way too far.

"O! Great Abner, beyond the Great Green Wall, receive us into your skybox, and shower us with the love of an eternity without ever running out of hot dogs and beer. And, uh, those stale chips with the plastic cheese on them. They're really great, Great Abner."

"Now I lay me down to sleep,
Stealing second I shall dream.
If I die 'fore rounding third,
Let the throw home hit a bird.

Abner bless Mommy,
and Daddy,
and baby sister.
And please let Kenji hit a homer tomorrow,
so I can tell all my friends about it at school.
Play ball!"

"Dearly beloved, we are gathered here today to join this man and this woman in the holy jockstrap of love, that they may finally go past third base together, and maybe he can leg it home to score."

Okay, okay, okay. Watch Bull Durham, and remember that Susan Sarandon's character is not, in the scheme of things, all that crazy.

Maybe I should have left the post at my original idea: "Small doses, eh? But isn't religion the opiate of the masses?"

Thinking the others are wrong does not equate to lack of respect for the beliefs of others.

True. Many could think that others are "wrong" but still respect the persons' right to believe what they want.Those types I like.
But in MY experience I've met too many hard core types who don't respect other peoples beliefs at all.

Would you agree that pretty much any religious beleif, whether it's Christianity, Shinto, Islam, Buddhism, Baha'i, Scientology, Mormonism, Judaism, Sikh, Hinduism - yes even Atheism (my beleif, or lack there of ;p) , etc... is perfectly fine when the practitioners don't take their beleif too seriously.

It's only really ever a problem when people are very serious in their beleif.

So? Do you agree? Or do you think that the World would be better if everyone was on the same page? If everyone was taught to believe the same as you ... and I mean truely believe it in their hearts - no questions asked.


Michael

I think that if people were to examine their beliefs honestly and fearlessly to rid it of all contradictions and inconsistencies and retain their religious beliefs then that would be perfectly fine for me. Except that it's evident that no religious beliefs can survive after the onslaught of honestly applied intelligence.

But more directly to your question, my answer would be no. It's like asking "is taking just a little bit of poison bad?" It may not kill you but it builds in detriment. Another observation is that it allows, who may have more of an appetite than you, others to consume more and more, ever extending the idiosyncratic definition of "too much".

Except that it's evident that no religious beliefs can survive after the onslaught of honestly applied intelligence.

You sound like a fundamentalist.

at a certain point beliefs clash - this is exhibited quite distinctly between atheists and theists through out history -perhaps in modern History in Communist countries but for the most of human history it has been one God (or set of Gods) versus another. Take the Christian Crusades for example or the Islamic conquest of Persia, the Age of Discovery or the Tokugawa expulsion of Christians from Japan.

- even the belief that beliefs should not be taken seriously runs in to trouble when it encounters the belief that beliefs should .....Perhaps, but while I'll try to elaborate and defend my point I'm not going to spend every waking moment thinking about it nor will I allow it to define my life.

See the difference.

You asked what beliefs should be taken seriously. I personally spend most of my time thinking about using neural stem cells to cure broken spinal cords and other diseased CNS tissue. I take my work seriously. I present it and I defend it. While I will argue over the scientific merits of it - I wouldn't threaten, ostracize or even kill someone for not taking my side in regards to it or not believing it! I wouldn't burn people at the stake or tax those that different in opinion with me.

Then they are obviously NOT respecting the beliefs of the Hindus.
Respect, but not in a positive manner? That doesn't even make sense. I agree, but I think you can see I mentioned I didn’t quite understand your sentence as it was written. Perhaps I’d have used “accept”.

Missionary monotheists accept there are polytheist Hindus but do not place this belief on equal footing with Christianity. Actually the opposite, they condemn polytheistic belief. So, no, they do not “respect” Hindus belief system any more than they respect Atheism.

Quoting individuals does nothing but point out the strngths/weaknesses of those individuals.
Bush is a lying, manipulative propaganda machine.
What does any of this have to do with respect of the beliefs of others?
He, quite obviously, has none. Only in that such phrases are turned out only when there is a large proportion of constituents amenable to the message. Many indeed. Especially the ones with a “strong” Christian belief – I think everyone would agree that they’d be the ones most susceptible to such propaganda?

How many Christians do you know on a personal basis?
I have known quite a few of them that take their faith very seriously, and still have no probelms with the belief systems of others.
There are, of course, others that do not - but that has less to do with how serious they are, than with who they are as a person,
You see very the same thing dealing with diffeences of race, politics, nationality or anything else that people can focus on as "Us" and "Them". True.

I grew up in the States and I know many Midwest Christians. Baptists and Methodists for the most part. I don’t think too many of them would place the Hindu belief system on equal footing with Christianity.

They may accept that people of differencing phenotype as equal and accept that each political party has it’s good apples and bad (of course they naturally think America is the God blessed best country ever) but if they take Christianity at all seriously they will not accept that Shinto polytheism is an equally valid belief system – no way.

Maybe West coast Christians or those from NY but not in the Midwest.

Some people do and believe lots of things.
SOME poeple, however, take their religious conviction very seriously - whoel respecting the beliefs of others.
As for those who do not, it is a reflection of the person, not the religion.
It is much more of a social/cultural issue than it is a religious one. Maybe I don’t understand what you mean by respecting others beliefs.

I know exactly 1 Catholic Priest who is agnostic theist. He will say that yes Hindu polytheism may be correct.

Is this what you mean?

[oddly enough almost every “serious” Buddhist I have met will suggest that Christianity may be correct – I suppose unlike monotheism their belief allows for such lateral thinking?]

Exactly.
It's more an America thing than a Christian thing.
People like to separate into groups and play "Us" against "Them".
That's exactly what you are doing right now, by painting all people who take religion seriously as "this". Perhaps. Does recognizing that bigot’s exist make one a bigot?

Let me rephrase, I don’t mean to say that ALL theists (or atheists) are in the “them” category. But there are groups that do take their belief IMHO to seriously and that this is not as good as those that do not. If they are a them then so be it. I also recognize that there are people who distinguish “race” (while I find it an antiquated term) and will agree that there are phenotypic qualities that I do admire traditionally thought of as “Asian” while there are those that are blatant white supremacist skinheads.

That the difference I am getting at.
Little dose = no biggy, too serious ~(more likely to equal)~ big problem.

No religion does this. This is a minconception, and I will explaine why.
Quran 2-256
"Let there be no compulsion in this deen.(Way of life, belief system, or more commonly known as religion.)Truth stands clear in contrast to error. Whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy handhold in which will never break. Allah hears and knows all.Well I will agree that the Qur'an says such, and your theistic doctrine is as such, but I know many Christians that take it as a part of their religous beleif to spread the word of God to the unbeleiver. Which IMHO means that they do not "respect" this other persons beleif as valid or equal to their own.

Let me ask you this.

Do you think that the Japanese polytheistic religion Shinto is equal to the Qur'an? I'm assuming you are no expert on Japanese religion and I am not asking you to be. Just know that the religion has a pantheon of Gods and Goddesses and also has been a part of Japanese culture for thousands of years, much older than Islam.

Knowing this do you "respect" the Japanese beleif system as equal to your own?

Is there a possibility that the Japanese beleif system could be correct while yours is incorrect?

Michael

Grantywanty,

great post. I suppose that's why these threads can be fun. Debating allows for clarification in ones opinion and also a chance to hear about differing opinions.

Michael

Thinking the others are wrong does not equate to lack of respect for the beliefs of others.Humph .. .. ..

Just to be clear, are you saying that thinking another persons opinion is wrong, but acknowledging they may be right and your is wrong, is respecting that other persons beleif? If so I agree.

But knowing that another person's opinion is wrong does not afford that person any respect at all in MHO.

Michael

Religion in "small doses"? Religion isn't like sweets or fatty foods - it's not an on and off thing. If you are truly religious, then your religion is like a way of life. It has control over every decision you make in your life. Religion in small doses is a contradiction in itself, because following a religion in small portions is basically the equivalent to not following it at all.

I think that if people were to examine their beliefs honestly and fearlessly to rid it of all contradictions and inconsistencies and retain their religious beliefs then that would be perfectly fine for me. Except that it's evident that no religious beliefs can survive after the onslaught of honestly applied intelligence.

But more directly to your question, my answer would be no. It's like asking "is taking just a little bit of poison bad?" It may not kill you but it builds in detriment. Another observation is that it allows, who may have more of an appetite than you, others to consume more and more, ever extending the idiosyncratic definition of "too much".I see your point and tend to agree - Celpha Fiael are you agnostic atheist?

Religion in "small doses"? Religion isn't like sweets or fatty foods - it's not an on and off thing. If you are truly religious, then your religion is like a way of life. It has control over every decision you make in your life. Religion in small doses is a contradiction in itself, because following a religion in small portions is basically the equivalent to not following it at all.Is it possible to take a religion as fundamental and remain open minded in that other beleif systems are instead correct?

Michael


PS: I did mention I'm agnostic atheist?

Is it possible to take a religion as fundamental and remain open minded in that other beleif systems are instead correct?

Depends on religion. OT Christianity, HELL no.

PS: I did mention I'm agnostic atheist?

What is an "agnostic atheist"?

What is an "agnostic atheist"?Someone who accepts that there may be Gods or Goddesses but doesn't believe there are.

Logically, the possibilities exist.

Michaekl

Is it possible to take a religion as fundamental and remain open minded in that other beleif systems are instead correct?Depends on religion. OT Christianity, HELL no.Do you think this is good or bad?

That is, to be intolerant of others beliefs?

Michael

Michael,

Why do you insist on focusing on "right" and "wrong"?
Respect is separate from whether you think someone is "right" or "wrong".
Those with this mindset is exactly what I am talking about.
You can respect soemone and their beliefs - even if you think they are wrong.

It is not being serious about religion that causes these problems, it is teh unwillingness to allow others to live as they see fit - irrespective of religion entirely.
It just manifests itself in religion sometimes.
As I said, I have known quite a few people that were very serious about tehir religious/spiritual beliefs and did not have this problem and I know even more that were not religious and DID have this problem.

Let me ask you this.

Do you think that the Japanese polytheistic religion Shinto is equal to the Qur'an? I'm assuming you are no expert on Japanese religion and I am not asking you to be. Just know that the religion has a pantheon of Gods and Goddesses and also has been a part of Japanese culture for thousands of years, much older than Islam.

Knowing this do you "respect" the Japanese beleif system as equal to your own?

Is there a possibility that the Japanese beleif system could be correct while yours is incorrect?

Michael

ok I found a link to shinto website.

I do respect other peoples beliefs.
I'm not sure what is meant by when you say "hold them as equals"(by saying "them" I'm reffering to system of belief)
obviously they are not equal.
Why?
Well, the most important fundemental belief within the Islamic faith is in fact is that there is only one God. The Shinto belief system from what I've read, are only doing what there fathers did. Worshipping multiple Gods which have no power compared to the Creator and the sustainor of Everything.

and quran says about this :
(2.256)
Yet there are men who take (for worship) others besides Allah, as equal (with Allah): They love them as they should love Allah. But those of Faith are overflowing in their love for Allah. If only the unrighteous could see, behold, they would see the penalty: that to Allah belongs all power, and Allah will strongly enforce the penalty.

As for the possibility of the shinto belief system, being labled as correct.
I'm absolutly sure that within the Shinto system of belief are many true and sound judgments. Other wise I don't think the people of japan would have allowed for such a way of life to be passed onto there children for three centries.

As for the belief system which I follow being in a state of incorrectness, is impossible.
why?
Allah has chosen this way of life for humanity.
and he would not be so injust as to tell us to follow the wrong path.
supporting detail would incude verse from Holy Quran
'This day I have completed your religion for you, completed My Favor upon you and have selected for your Way of Life, Al-Islam." [Holy Quran, 5:3]

Because Allah is most Just, all Knowing, most Gracious most Mecifull, and the list goes on.

Do you think it's acceptable to coerce people into believing in Jesus?

You cannot coerce belief. Oh you can coerce people to say anything but you cannot force someone to believe something. Followers of Jesus are saved by believing Jesus, not just saying they believe in Jesus. So if someone tried to coerce someone into believing they are trying to do the imposable.



Say, by, teaching children at a very early age that there is a Jesus and they should get to know Him?

That is no coercion. That is giving ones children understanding in the beliefs that one holds dear. If this forces the child to believe in Jesus then this forum would not be filled with atheists who where brought up in Christian families and where taught about Jesus. The fact that so many of the people in this section of the forum come from that background proves that it is impossible to coerce belief.



Hence they naturally believe in Jesus? Or say, by making it harder for other beliefs to flourish - such as Scientology, Islam or Atheism?

MII

Well of course it is harder for other beliefs to flourish, But what is hard is not impossible. Many people brought up in a Christian environment have become all the examples you have given.

Therefore teaching ones children Jesus is not coercion. And attempting to coerce belief is vanity and a waste of time.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

Oops - see next post. (Mod, please delete this post)

Michael,

Do you think it is wrong to teach yuor children what you to believe is right and wrong?
Do you believe it is wrong to instill what you think is proper values in yoru children?

Can you respect the beliefs of others (even though they may differ from yours)?

Well I will agree that the Qur'an says such, and your theistic doctrine is as such, but I know many Christians that take it as a part of their religious belief to spread the word of God to the unbeliever. Which IMHO means that they do not "respect" this other persons belief as valid or equal to their own.

And what is wrong with that?

If you believed that grass was green but another believed it was purple would you accept that believe as equal in validity to yours? Would you respect it?

No.

If you think you have the truth and believe others hold to something that is false you should not respect those false beliefs. To show respect for a belief you believe is false is an act of a liar. I know many atheists in here who have no respect for Christianity. Why because they believe it is lies and a deception. They mock it and spew forth hatred against it. So all this talk of respect is a load of garbage.

Now you can have no respect for another view but you can tolerate that person holding that view. Tolerance is putting up with something you disagree with it is not respecting something you disagree with. One does not need tolerance for something they respect.

We Christians believe that Jesus is the Messiah and the Only way to eternity with God and we are directed by Jesus to give each and every human being alive in this world the opportunity to accept this. The only way to do this is to spread the message of Jesus. We Christians know the other eternity for those who reject the Messiah Jesus is not good, so to fail to give the message of Jesus is in fact an act of hatred towards the person you withhold the Word of God from.

Now people can accept of they can reject the message, People can take whatever emotional position they like towards it from hilarity to outright physical hostility but as far as a true followers of the Messiah Jesus is concerned they are called upon to give it no matter what the emotional response they receive.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

PonderuponThis,

On the one hand you agree that the 3000+ year old Japanese Shinto religion probably has many virtuous aspects that you would agree with. Japan, after all, has been a civilized nation for millennia with it's own traditions and language and culture and Religion and Shinto is a intertwined interconnected part of that.

But, you can not entertain the notion that the Japanese indigenous Religion is equal to Islam. As a matter of fact - it can not even be correct? It is, in effect, at it's very heart and nature - dead wrong. I wonder, do you think that the possibility exists that the Japanese Religion may be correct and Islam may be dead-wrong? Or does even such a possibility not exist?


We know that Shinto is interconnected to all parts of Japanese society and culture. By saying that Shinto is not equal to Islam: Are you in effect inferring that Japanese culture is not equal to Islamic culture?

If a person where to take this attitude to the extreme - do you think it will be good for society - in general? What happens when two people meet with such implacable attitudes?



The funny thing about Japan is that Buddhism is also a large part of Japanese society. Buddhism and Shinto are intertwined in Japanese culture. They seem to balance one another. The Buddhist, being from India, is not a Japanese Theology - yet it was accommodating to the Japanese Shinto beleif system and the Shinto were likewise receptive to Buddhism. The Buddhist seem to have an attitude that Shinto may in fact be correct. The possibility exists. As a matter of fact, Buddhist build Shinto Shrines within their Temples in Japan and Shinto build Buddhist places of prayer within their Shrines. Accepting that such a possibility may exist seems to not only go along way in my book but also in the real world to boot.


Which do you think holds more respect for the Shinto beleif system of the Japanese: Buddhism or Islam?

Buddhism holds the Shinto beliefs to an equal status; even providing special Shrines to the local Gods within Buddhist Temples.

OR

Islam which you just posted seems to suggest of the Shinto belief system - as being in a state of incorrectness, it is impossible to be equal nor is it correct.

I wonder: Which is better for the Religion for the Japanese and why?


Imagine a person who takes such a Religion very seriously and then imagine that this person is invited to a Japanese home and then invited to a Shinto Shrine or Buddhist Temple. How will such a person perceive such a place? As a wonderful cultural experience? Would they even enter such a place? Burn in scent to the local deities with their hosts?

If no then this is what I mean when I say too serious, if yes, then if it fine that they can take their Religion in small doses :)

What do you think?
Michael

Someone who accepts that there may be Gods or Goddesses but doesn't believe there are.

Logically, the possibilities exist.

Michaekl

An athiest believe that there is not God. So an athiest is of the firm belief that God does not exist.

But an agnostic Believes that God may exist.

You cannot hold both positions. If you believe that God does not exist call yourself an athiest

If you believe that God might exist then call yourself an agnostic.


From what you have said you are agnostic.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

Michael,

Do you think it is wrong to teach yuor children what you to believe is right and wrong?
Do you believe it is wrong to instill what you think is proper values in yoru children?

Can you respect the beliefs of others (even though they may differ from yours)?1) Yes (but society has a huge impact here), 2) No (also again society has a huge impact), 3) I'll try to teach my children to believe as they think it best for them (when I have children). If I married my present partner my children may become a certain faith because her father is a Priest of this faith. There will be an inclination to go in this direction of course. Then again I am an atheist. Will I brainwash my child to become an atheist? No. As atheist are fewer than, what 3%?, it is more then likely they will not be an atheist. Which is fine.


So long as they are happy that's the main point.

Michael

Now you can have no respect for another view but you can tolerate that person holding that view. Tolerance is putting up with something you disagree with it is not respecting something you disagree with. One does not need tolerance for something they respect.Buddhism seems to find a middle ground? No?

Also, it seemed that the old polytheistic pantheons more than tolerated other deities. They accepted them openly.

I suppose it's only monotheism that has it's panties in a bunch!
;)

Michael

So if your child steals a pack of gum, you will not say that it was wrong, you will say, "Well, whatever you think"?

An athiest believe that there is not God. So an athiest is of the firm belief that God does not exist.

But an agnostic Believes that God may exist.

You cannot hold both positions. If you believe that God does not exist call yourself an athiest

If you believe that God might exist then call yourself an agnostic.


From what you have said you are agnostic.


All Praise The Ancient Of DaysThe definition I take is agnostic accepts it is impossible to prove a negative. Of course were a God to come down here and say: "Hey puny humans I am Amaterasu you will know I am the Goddess-head" then a positive is more than easy to prove.

But, just like you, I am an atheist in regards to the Goddesses Amaterasu. I lack a beleif in her.

Just as I do for all Godessess and Gods.

Hence, agnostic atheist,

Michael

So if your child steals a pack of gum, you will not say that it was wrong, you will say, "Well, whatever you think"?Of course not. I will teach them that stealing from others is not correct behavior.

Oh I should have replied 1) No, 2) No, 3) explanation (my mistake!)

Oh I should have replied 1) No, 2) No, 3) explanation (my mistake!)

That makes more sense! :D

Ridiculous. Dont take it too seriously, just a little past time?

Religion is religion. There is no such thing as ''too seriously'' unless you mean Extremism, and that is a totally different matter.

But there' s also no such thing as 'small doses'. If you're faithful, you're faithful. If you're not, you're not.

Buddhism seems to find a middle ground? No?

What middle ground?

Also, it seemed that the old polytheistic pantheons more than tolerated other deities. They accepted them openly.

That’s because many of them believed that they had their gods and other peoples had their gods. That there where many gods that they did not know about, that had other peoples as their devotees. Many of these religions did not care if people in other places followed other gods, in fact many of these religions would go god-collecting trying to get as many gods that they could from other peoples in an attempt to increase the blessings they would receive. They thought, well 15 gods are good how about we get gods from the neighbours and we will have 25 gods that will be even better. The hindu religion is the end result of that process.


I suppose it's only monotheism that has it's panties in a bunch!
;)

Michael

"panties in a bunch" ??????? ummm ok i will really try very hard here and go ha..ha......ha...........ha... sorry forced laughter is a waste of energy.


If one believes in one God then of course one cannot have respect for the belief in multiple Gods and belief in No God.

Getting ones panties in a bunch is a way of saying that believers in one God get angry. Anger is a choice. Just because one believes in one God does not necessarily follow that one will have anger towards a person who believes in multiple Gods or someone who does not believe in God.

A believer in One God can feel sorrow and compassion for those who believe in Multiple Gods and those who do not believe in God.

If one has the right Spirit as a Christian they will hate the false belief but love the person who holds the false belief. It is entirely possible for one to hate a belief without hating the people who hold to that belief. Just as it is possible as Jesus said to love even ones enemy, to love even the person who persecutes you for your belief in Jesus.

So anger against another person is a choice and choosing it reveals one to have the wrong Spirit towards other human beings.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

What if part of your religous belief states you must "spread the Good Word".


If, say, the religion itself condemns others? What if the religion itself is centered on a beleif

Couldn't taking such a religion too seriously be bad news for people who do not believe in X Prophet or X God or ect...?


No religion does this. This is a minconception, and I will explaine why.You are kidding, right!
what are you doing in your next paragraph if it's not "spread the Good Word"
In Quran it is stated many times that Mohammed (pbuh) is the last and final messanger who performed miracles, prophicied, came with a criterea from the creator, guidence for mankind and much! much! more! said more or less, to worship God to obey his commands whether they be new or old, deal with each other justly, feed the poor, visit the sick, and be kind, humble, ect... actually a book could be written on this topic. In fact its called the Quran.
It is a guidance for mankind. To lead them out of the dark into the light. ok? So then... We have the commands inside Quran how do we apply these to our lives. We have the best of example Mohammed (pbuh)the best of mankind in character and in worship. We have so many authintic resouces compiled by companions of the Holy Prophets (pbuh) who were known for being a truthful people.We know well (or atleast should)what kind of cloths he wore, what kind of food he ate, when he ate, how he ate, what he said when he ate, exactly what prayers he performed, when, where, how, and why to pray them, and the list goes on. And what are you doing again in the next paragraph, but promote that you MUST accept X Prophet or X God or X etc... Fair enough your not promoting here the unbelievers will burn in hell, but the Qu’ran does.

The cow 2:6 As for the Disbelievers, Whether thou warn them or thou warn them not it is all one for them; they believe not.
2:7 Allah hath sealed their hearing and their hearts, and on their eyes there is a covering. Theirs will be an awful doom."

the family of imran 3:4 Aforetime, for a guidance to mankind; and hath revealed the Criterion (of right and wrong). Lo! those who disbelieve the revelations of Allah, theirs will be a heavy doom. Allah is Mighty, Able to Requite (the wrong).


ok so...
Quran states also that either you believe or disbelieve. Does not specificly say that you Must believe, and does not call for the death of a person or even a group of people for the simple fact that they disbelieve. This is my proof.


Quran 2-256
"Let there be no compulsion in this deen.(Way of life, belief system, or more commonly known as religion.)Truth stands clear in contrast to error. Whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy handhold in which will never break. Allah hears and knows all.

Also Mohammed (peace and blessings be upon him) comes from the line of the prophets. Means that his ancesters are prophets. ie.. Moses, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. May Allah shower mercy and blessings upon them all.

Read Quran Discover the Truth,
May Allah guide us all. ameenSo it seems you need to go and reread this Qu'ran of yours don’t you.
As your reply to Michael’s last question "Couldn't taking such a religion too seriously be bad news for people who do not believe in X Prophet or X God or etc...?" must be a resounding, YES!

Michael,

I'm muslim, and this is how muslim see difference in beliefs:

Once ONE become A MUSLIM, then one believes in the teachings of Islam, which, if there difference with others, muslim should BELIEVE the others are wrong.

In rephrase, A MUSLIM should run on ISLAM CORRIDOR in absolute manner, no comparison, no mixing, no mess up with other beliefs, no partial doses. One should run it in a complete set.

And Islam teaches there is no compulsion in religion. NO one muslim should ever JUDGE wether any non muslim is wrong or right, wether any non muslim will go to heaven or hell. Islam teaches that those businesses are God's, not human's.

Judging other's acts using one's value (which is different) is unjustified. For a muslim, other beliefs are just outside of the Islam system. Muslim BELIEVE the others are wrong, but there is no way muslim could JUDGE they are wrong.

Just put attention between BELIEVE (irrational based action) with JUDGE (rational based action).

It's quite a close system in terms of believe, but Islam also teaches "AKHLAQ" - individual behaviours / etiquette and morality - which applies for individual in regarrds to social interaction. If one takes it (religion) seriously, then one would act based on AKHLAQ's teachings seriously, so one won't take any offensive and disturbance to others.

When you see most of terrorists nowadays are muslims, do you think they take their religion too seriously? I doubt it. They seriulsy didn't do what are instructed by Qur'an. They seriously put aside most of the teachings, which is doing Islam not in a "complete set". Yes, Qur'an allows to go to war, and killings is inevitable in war, but the way terrorists doing is not the way Qur'an teaches.

Ridiculous. Dont take it too seriously, just a little past time?Yea, like celebrate religous holidays with a prezzi but don't start slicing meat off your back to show God what kind of man you are.

Religion is religion. There is no such thing as ''too seriously'' unless you mean Extremism, and that is a totally different matter.What exactly is extremism?

I'd say praying multiple times a day is extreme.

But there' s also no such thing as 'small doses'. If you're faithful, you're faithful. If you're not, you're not.Again what's wrong with going to the Christmas mass but skipping the rest until passover?

Michael

Once ONE become A MUSLIM, then one believes in the teachings of Islam, which, if there difference with others, muslim should BELIEVE the others are wrong.How do you think this affects those other people that are perceived as being wrong? If you think they are wrong in their belief - don’t you think this could be interpreted in a negative manner by them?

Once ONE become A MUSLIM, then one believes in the teachings of Islam, which, if there difference with others, muslim should BELIEVE the others are wrong.

In rephrase, A MUSLIM should run on ISLAM CORRIDOR in absolute manner, no comparison, no mixing, no mess up with other beliefs, no partial doses. One should run it in a complete set. But who is to say what is correct or not correct? Once you have set the rule that all other beliefs outside of Islam are inherently wrong then these non-Muslims are then open for personal attack on their selves and their property. Which we see happening over and over in Islamic coutries. Don’t you think that this is a direct result of some people taking such an uncompromising attitude towards other peoples beliefs.

OK, let me ask:
Did you think it was wrong of those Afghan Muslims that destroyed the 2300 year old Buddhist statues in Afghanistan? They seemed to think they were acting in accordance with the Qur’an and were simply destroying false idolatry. They were running in a pure Islamic Corridor - at least in this respect.

What do you think?


Also, say you were in Japan and were invited to burn incense with your Japanese host family to honor their local God. Would you?

Michael

My apologies Adstar, I shouldn't have cracked the joke. Sorry.

I simply feel that when people take an uncompromising approach in their beleif and this beleif also demands that other peoples beliefs are inherently wrong - well bad things are going to happen.

Tell me this Adstar, assuming you are from a Western country (we'll pretend Canada) do you think that Islam should be portrayed in a very positive light? That people should be encouraged to read about Islam and maybe even become Muslim? If your answer is NO then how do you think that makes LiveInFaith feel?

And LiveInFaith, think about what you are saying as well. Because your likemindedness would make Hindu feel likewise of course.

Can't you two see that either of your beliefs, if taken too much to the "extreme", causes other people sadness? Have you ever wondered if a beleif that directly causes so many other people such sadness is a beleif worth holding onto at all?

Michael

How do you think this affects those other people that are perceived as being wrong? If you think they are wrong in their belief - don’t you think this could be interpreted in a negative manner by them?


For a muslim, the acts should be "your religion is yours, mine is mine". No compromise. Agree to disagree. For others how to behave, I don't know. I never been non-muslim, I cannot imagine how to behave when a muslim see me as wrong. But I know exactly when others, say Christians, say I am wrong, that what i say "yours is yours, mine is mine".



But who is to say what is correct or not correct? Once you have set the rule that all other beliefs outside of Islam are inherently wrong then these non-Muslims are then open for personal attack on their selves and their property. Which we see happening over and over in Islamic coutries. Don’t you think that this is a direct result of some people taking such an uncompromising attitude towards other peoples beliefs.


Muslim say Islam is correct, Christian say Christian is correct. It runs like a proprietary system, not compatible each other. No one to say which one is correct when compared. That I said, no comparison, cannot messed up with others.
Muslim prohibit to personal attack, or personal property offence. So the inherent 'wrong' is not open to attack, it is protected by a 'firewall' of many regulations in Islamic teachings.
If that happens, it simply because muslim break the rules.


OK, let me ask:
Did you think it was wrong of those Afghan Muslims that destroyed the 2300 year old Buddhist statues in Afghanistan? They seemed to think they were acting in accordance with the Qur’an and were simply destroying false idolatry. They were running in a pure Islamic Corridor - at least in this respect.

What do you think?

Also, say you were in Japan and were invited to burn incense with your Japanese host family to honor their local God. Would you?

Michael

Purely Islamic speaking, it was wrong to destroy Buddhist statue in Afghan. They compelled others. Totally wrong. They never read seriously 'let there be no compulsion in religion". There is preaching suggestion in Islam, to spread the light of Islam, but not to physically destroy other properties. The preaching should go to the 'heart', which is educating people about Islam, and let the message go to their conscience. Faith is deep in the 'heart'. When faith is triggered, then it is there. Forcing is no use.

In Japan, I would not do their rituals. It is compromising beliefs, which is not what Islam teaches. Not compatible, cannot compromise, so I would not do. But I will respect them doing it, would be there to silently watch if they ask, but not involving in the rituals.

I simply feel that when people take an uncompromising approach in their beleif and this beleif also demands that other peoples beliefs are inherently wrong - well bad things are going to happen.


Any beliefs will do. Not exclusively regards to religion.
But you have to realize, religion is a complete set of way of life, it is teaching people how to behave. One bad potentials in one side, should be having good potentials on other sides. There a serious religious people would make balanced considerations in their actions.



And LiveInFaith, think about what you are saying as well. Because your likemindedness would make Hindu feel likewise of course.


I lived in a Hindu community for one and a half years. Everything was just allright.
I was kind of trying to internalize why they do what they do in no judging way, and finally I found I kind of having a bit understanding why they so devoutly mannered in their religion (which I believe they are wrong, and they believe I am wrong). That is, assuming God of each religion is true, then belief systems are such cohesively solid systems which each and every bit of the teachings, are complementing and completing each other, to be walked in lives. If one aspect of Hindu is put in other teaching system, it is like putting a virus in a computer system, maybe the system will crash.

Two uncompatible systems cannot run at the same time in the same machines, both should run in their own environment.

When two religions crossing each other in the cross street, both should be finding in their books, how to deal with other people in social interactions. There must be teachings that would prevent such bad acts. If not written there, then I dare (in my belief) to say that is not a religion from God.

PonderuponThis,

On the one hand you agree that the 3000+ year old Japanese Shinto religion probably has many virtuous aspects that you would agree with. Japan, after all, has been a civilized nation for millennia with it's own traditions and language and culture and Religion and Shinto is a intertwined interconnected part of that.

But, you can not entertain the notion that the Japanese indigenous Religion is equal to Islam. As a matter of fact - it can not even be correct? It is, in effect, at it's very heart and nature - dead wrong. I wonder, do you think that the possibility exists that the Japanese Religion may be correct and Islam may be dead-wrong? Or does even such a possibility not exist?
The fact that Islam is based upon truth alone is enough reason for me to doubt the possibility that there is any other truer System of Belief. And I see that for all people who wish to base there system of belief on truth. And if any system of beliefs were to contain the weight of an atom or even smaller , other than pure truth, the system is in fact fallible. And in the end will lead to destruction.


We know that Shinto is interconnected to all parts of Japanese society and culture. By saying that Shinto is not equal to Islam: Are you in effect inferring that Japanese culture is not equal to Islamic culture?
See that’s one of the beauties of Islam. It doesn't matter what culture you come from. You are accepted with open arms. You can see the architecture found throughout the middle east. Groups of people accepted Islam and in the Masjid in Turkey . You can see the colors they used when building the dome. Food is another cultural aspect carried from one generation to the next. Culture is intermingled though out the human race, as you know. Nobody should ever find oneself looking down upon another human being for the simple fact that he or she comes from a different culture, race, blood, color or even belief. In fact one should never find him or herself thinking that anyone is less than anyone. Allah know what is in the hearts, and we don’t.



If a person where to take this attitude to the extreme - do you think it will be good for society - in general? What happens when two people meet with such implacable attitudes?
Yes if a person were to take anything to the extreme would be a grave mistake. Because the action that manifested from the belief that one should become extreme is in itself an act of ignorance. Extremism finds no home within the fold of Islam. Now on the other hand What is Extremism. And how did this parasite of a word become inner tangled with such a great system of beliefs called Islam?




The funny thing about Japan is that Buddhism is also a large part of Japanese society. Buddhism and Shinto are intertwined in Japanese culture. They seem to balance one another. The Buddhist, being from India, is not a Japanese Theology - yet it was accommodating to the Japanese Shinto beleif system and the Shinto were likewise receptive to Buddhism. The Buddhist seem to have an attitude that Shinto may in fact be correct. The possibility exists. As a matter of fact, Buddhist build Shinto Shrines within their Temples in Japan and Shinto build Buddhist places of prayer within their Shrines. Accepting that such a possibility may exist seems to not only go along way in my book but also in the real world to boot.


Which do you think holds more respect for the Shinto beleif system of the Japanese: Buddhism

or Islam?

Of course Islam is the best system of belief for any human on the face of the earth no matter where they come from. There is nothing wrong with Shinto and Buddhist men and there cultures interweaving though out the face of the globe. But to set up shrines for one to send prayer to is not right no matter who you are. (I wont go into why.) Even if the Shinto people as a whole embraced Islam and deserted There old belief system on count of being fallible and leading to destruction. Should by no means interfere with there relationship with the Buddhist people. But sense %96 percent of the Japanese people are Buddhist means that in fact the Buddhist would have to be the ones who were the ones embracing Islam on the count that Buddhism is Fallible and leading to destruction. Still the very small Shinto System of belief seems to becoming extinct if its 3000 years plus and there are very few Shinto followers in Japan. Why is that? Is it inevitable that Truth prevails? Yes it is.



Buddhism holds the Shinto beliefs to an equal status; even providing special Shrines to the local Gods within Buddhist Temples.

OR

Islam which you just posted seems to suggest of the Shinto belief system - as being in a state of incorrectness, it is impossible to be equal nor is it correct.

I wonder: Which is better for the Religion for the Japanese and why?


Imagine a person who takes such a Religion very seriously and then imagine that this person is invited to a Japanese home and then invited to a Shinto Shrine or Buddhist Temple. How will such a person perceive such a place? As a wonderful cultural experience? Would they even enter such a place? Burn in scent to the local deities with their hosts?

If no then this is what I mean when I say too serious, if yes, then if it fine that they can take their Religion in small doses :)

What do you think?
Michael
I’m sure that for the large amount of Buddhist who live in Japan would agree when I say this, ” leave me to mine and you to yours, but if you would like to share with me you beliefs (In small doses that is). Then lets have tea.


What if part of your religous beleif states you must "spread the Good Word".

If, say, the religion itself condemns others? What if the religion itself is centered on a beleif that you MUST accept X Prophet or X God or X etc.. and if you do not then you will burn in Hell fire.

Couldn't taking such a religion too seriously be bad news for people who do not believe in X Prophet or X God or ect...?

How can one take a religion seriously that condemns non-believers but not condemn non-believes? That appears oxymoronic - doesn't it?

Michael

You are kidding, right!
what are you doing in your next paragraph if it's not "spread the Good Word"[/COLOR]


No religion does this. This is a minconception, and I will explaine why. What I was refering to when this statement was made was that no where in the Quran does it specificly say that you must believe. Notice the the word must in big bold letters. The argument you made is based upon a missunderstanding most likely caused my my inability to express myself as well as i should. But for the most part yes spread the good word and also you are not forced to believe. Its your choice.

My apologies Adstar, I shouldn't have cracked the joke. Sorry.

I simply feel that when people take an uncompromising approach in their belief and this belief also demands that other peoples beliefs are inherently wrong - well bad things are going to happen.

WHY?? Bad things only happen when people feel they are under the command to force others to submit to their religion. I am under no such command from Jesus. Therefore there is no such danger of bad things (violence and persecution) coming from my direction.

Tell me this Adstar, assuming you are from a Western country (we'll pretend Canada) do you think that Islam should be portrayed in a very positive light?

No. The true teachings of islam should be revealed to the populace of the west to reveal to them the great evil the world faces. Treating the western population like mushrooms because of political correctness will lead to their submission to islam or their extermination.

That people should be encouraged to read about Islam and maybe even become Muslim? If your answer is NO then how do you think that makes LiveInFaith feel?

I think people should be encouraged to read the calls of muhammed to terrorise the infidels until all the world submits to islam. LiveInFaith can choose to Fear what i say, Hate what i say, Accept what i say or reject what i say. LiveInFaith has the freedom to react in any why LiveInFaith chooses. Other people’s reactions are theirs.

And LiveInFaith, think about what you are saying as well. Because your likemindedness would make Hindu feel likewise of course.

Can't you two see that either of your beliefs, if taken too much to the "extreme", causes other people sadness? Have you ever wondered if a belief that directly causes so many other people such sadness is a belief worth holding onto at all?

Michael

A crack addict going through withdrawal symptoms feels pain and a lot of suffering. But if you believe that a form of existence leads to destruction you will encourage someone to come to a way of life that leads to eternal life.

To do otherwise is like telling the crack addict to keep doing the stuff smile and say hey whatever makes you feel good is good for you, increase your dose man and live in a state of bliss. Is that love? Is that caring? Nope that’s sweet sounding hate.

The book of proverbs says it well:

Proverbs 27
6 Faithful are the wounds of a friend, But the kisses of an enemy are deceitful.

Sometimes the people who really care about you will tell you things that will cause you sadness and a lot of discomfort. Someone who truly loves you will take your anger and the venom you spit in the hope of bringing you to the right path.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

What I was refering to when this statement was made was that no where in the Quran does it specificly say that you must believe. Notice the the word must in big bold letters. The augument you made is based upon a missunderstanding most likely caused my my inability to express myself as well as i should. But for the most part yes spread the good word and also you are not forced to believe. Its your choice.so you say it doesn't say you must believe, but if you don't, you'll be doomed.
that pretty much say's it all doesn't it.

the cow 2:85 Believe ye in part of the Scripture and disbelieve ye in part thereof ? And what is the reward of those who do so save ignominy in the life of the world, and on the Day of Resurrection they will be consigned to the most grievous doom. For Allah is not unaware of what ye do.

2:88 And they say: Our hearts are hardened. Nay, but Allah hath cursed them for their unbelief. Little is that which they believe.

2:99 Verily We have revealed unto thee clear tokens, and only miscreants will disbelieve in them.

2:191 And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter. And fight not with them at the Inviolable Place of Worship until they first attack you there, but if they attack you (there) then slay them. Such is the reward of disbelievers.
2:192 But if they desist, then lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

absolutely no religion has to be taken seriously, we have to make fun of religious pretender, make fun of politicians, make fun of ourselves, and most importantly (as someone is going to say) make fun of other people (=

Would you agree that pretty much any religious beleif, whether it's Christianity, Shinto, Islam, Buddhism, Baha'i, Scientology, Mormonism, Judaism, Sikh, Hinduism - yes even Atheism (my beleif, or lack there of ;p) , etc... is perfectly fine when the practitioners don't take their beleif too seriously.

It's only really ever a problem when people are very serious in their beleif.

So? Do you agree? Or do you think that the World would be better if everyone was on the same page? If everyone was taught to believe the same as you ... and I mean truely believe it in their hearts - no questions asked.


Michael

This is a more complex question than I originally thought. There are billions of opinions on this you see, and thus religious beliefs, and definitions of "serious" and "better" are extremely subjective.

- It has been said that liberal theists contribute indirectly to the violent fundamentalists' free reign on the planet. By demanding and succeeding in gaining protective and elevated status for any number of religions, even the most ridiculous ones, it is an avenue for the fundamentalist to traverse to almost unacceptable lengths of psychosis in the name of religious belief. By the time the rest of the world notices the bomb-countdown, it's too late. In this light, the hodgepodge of religions seem to be more detrimental than beneficial

- Better if we're on the same page? It depends on how much you like straightlaced routine boredom. Variety as they say is the spice of life. The world might be a little more ordered...

- Better without religion? Right now, in 2007, I'd have to say we've long sinced passed the time where humans should need a religious heirarchy to keep behaviour at large in check (which was a main purpose for the invention of religion). I know I'd be happy if religion did not pose hindrances to my life as it does now, that's as far as I am willing to dream at the moment :shrug:

You sound like a fundamentalist.

I was being facetious. Here: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?r=2&q=facetious

They compelled others. Totally wrong. They never read seriously 'let there be no compulsion in religion". A couple questions:

1) Was it then wrong to force the polytheistic Arabs to stop worshiping multiple Gods in Mecca? If not then why?

2) Do you think it is moral behavior to force non-Muslims to pay a tax for not being Muslim?

3) Is it OK for a Muslim to make the moral choice (for themselves) to stop being Muslim and convert to Hinduism or convert to Atheism?

4) Do you think that Jews should be able to build Synagogues and Hindus be able to build Polytheistic Temple in Saudi Arabia (for their personal beleif obviously) Lets suppose a Muslim owned some land in Mecca or Medina and they converted to another religious beleif and wanted to build a Temple to their personal new God.

5) Should Christians be able to preach their Religious and seek converts in Muslim coutnries? (again this is a personal choice).


Just a point of matter, most Japanese are not very religous. But this shouldn't be mistaken that the Shinto Religion is a minority of Japanese. Shinto perform many traditional ceremonies like Marriage and Buddhist perform traditional ceremonies like funeral. There are many many many Shinto Shrines in Japan that are patroned by many Japanese. They are every where in Japan. That aside I didn't understand your answer. While you said each to their own, and I understand this, do you personally consider Japanese culture (based on Shintoism and Buddhism) equal to Islamic culture?



Just trying to clear up a few things,
Michael

PS: What did you think of Adstar's response?

A couple questions:

1) Was it then wrong to force the polytheistic Arabs to stop worshiping multiple Gods in Mecca? If not then why?


The word FORCE. All I know Muhammad preached, .... long story then... culminated in war, and it happened that time with it's contextual war situation. Maybe it was some kind of 'one of defence is offensive' tactics.
Had it happened today, I mean forcing to diminishing all the statues, I would say it would be wrong (in the way purely Islamic way, but below, let's see when it is ruled under such government who are to regulate a 'social system'). Maybe today, it is better to just relocate them.


2) Do you think it is moral behavior to force non-Muslims to pay a tax for not being Muslim?

This is contextual to land, government regulation.
Muslim Gov't A would not draw tax to Mr. non-muslim B at Mr. B's country land.
See, tax has nothing to do with Islam, but in practice where the social members was dominantly muslim, they have to regulate. Unfortunately, there is discrimination as the product of social system regulation.


3) Is it OK for a Muslim to make the moral choice (for themselves) to stop being Muslim and convert to Hinduism or convert to Atheism?


It is called murtad (apostate). Once he is determined, though many would try to stop, neverthelee, no body can.


4) Do you think that Jews should be able to build Synagogues and Hindus be able to build Polytheistic Temple in Saudi Arabia (for their personal beleif obviously) Lets suppose a Muslim owned some land in Mecca or Medina and they converted to another religious beleif and wanted to build a Temple to their personal new God.


Had I the law maker there: Government would set rules where to build them (allowed under some regulations). This should be considering everyone's interest. You should surely know , nothing can satisfy everybody, always there be pros and cons. The planolog should consider the social system.


5) Should Christians be able to preach their Religious and seek converts in Muslim coutnries? (again this is a personal choice).


Same above. If you talk about "country", hence government, my personal opinion, be me a law maker, there should be a regulation - time, place, how, etc - on applying that wish. You know, law is supposed to prevent uncontrolled conflicts.


Just a point of matter, most Japanese are not very religous. But this shouldn't be mistaken that the Shinto Religion is a minority of Japanese. Shinto perform many traditional ceremonies like Marriage and Buddhist perform traditional ceremonies like funeral. There are many many many Shinto Shrines in Japan that are patroned by many Japanese. They are every where in Japan. That aside I didn't understand your answer. While you said each to their own, and I understand this, do you personally consider Japanese culture (based on Shintoism and Buddhism) equal to Islamic culture?

Just trying to clear up a few things,
Michael



I don't know. I 'm not acknowledged by that. But I guess I can say yes, in approximation, should be more or less. As long as some "religion" has their complete set of way of life (as I think Shinto does), they should be equal more or less. I would be saying that would also came from the same source (the Creator), in different time, different place.



PS: What did you think of Adstar's response?

He can live his self-righteousness.
I am taught not to be a hater or accuser.

Maybe he never been taught that God / Creator sent messengers to all human kind, all time, all places.
I was taught that, that's why I believe Gautama, Confusius, Zarathustra, whoever spread the message of Shinto, not excluding Jesus of course, brought messages of how to live the life in regard to creator, were messengers of God.

the cow 2:85 Believe ye in part of the Scripture and disbelieve ye in part thereof ? And what is the reward of those who do so save ignominy in the life of the world, and on the Day of Resurrection they will be consigned to the most grievous doom. For Allah is not unaware of what ye do.

2:88 And they say: Our hearts are hardened. Nay, but Allah hath cursed them for their unbelief. Little is that which they believe.

2:99 Verily We have revealed unto thee clear tokens, and only miscreants will disbelieve in them.

2:191 And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter. And fight not with them at the Inviolable Place of Worship until they first attack you there, but if they attack you (there) then slay them. Such is the reward of disbelievers.
2:192 But if they desist, then lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
See Audible, When Allah speaks of slaying them wherever you find them,
he is reffering to those who attack The muslims, as stated in the previous
verse, the one you just so happen to conceal.

To put it into context

2:190 Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not
transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors.

2:191 And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive
them out of the places whence they drove you out, for
persecution is worse than slaughter. And fight not with
them at the Inviolable Place of Worship until they first
attack you there, but if they attack you (there) then slay
them. Such is the reward of disbelievers.

2:192 But if they desist, then lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful


As for knowing the truth and those who conceal the truth. Allah revealed these verses

2:41 And believe in what I reveal, confirming the revelation which is
with you, and be not the first to reject Faith therein, nor sell My
Signs for a small price; and fear Me, and Me alone.

2:42 And cover not Truth with falsehood, nor conceal the Truth
when ye know (what it is).

2:43 And be steadfast in prayer; practise regular charity; and bow
down your heads with those who bow down (in worship).


See the problem with taking verses of any book out of context,(with out big picture)is People can get the wrong idea about a particular topic. This is a common practice with those who's intentions are to prove the Quran to be false. There aim is to conceal the truth. Whether they relize it or not.
Now for one who logicly consider what is actualy being said in Quran, its extremly difficult to find fault in absolute truth. As you can see in verses 2:190 - 2:192 It is justified for anyone who attacks the muslims that the muslims can retaliate, but within the bounds set by Allah and his messanger (pbuh),

I think we can see that some people, who take their religous belief very seriously, may be (if either a robust representation of the popultation or in a position in power) detrimental to society - especially to those who happen to disregard or even be anti- their particular faith. And this is IMHO regardless of what that particular beleif is. Jesus, Allah, Mosses, PU or FSM. It really doesn't matter. Which is why I suggest that Religion in small doses is the best option for society. And also, I put forward, should never be in political control - that is, secular governments are preferred.

Or so I think anyway,
Michael

Michael
“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
at a certain point beliefs clash - this is exhibited quite distinctly between atheists and theists through out history -
”
perhaps in modern History in Communist countries but for the most of human history it has been one God (or set of Gods) versus another. Take the Christian Crusades for example or the Islamic conquest of Persia, the Age of Discovery or the Tokugawa expulsion of Christians from Japan.
there are many ways to explain clashes of interest throughout history - religion is one, politics is another ....

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
- even the belief that beliefs should not be taken seriously runs in to trouble when it encounters the belief that beliefs should .....
”
Perhaps, but while I'll try to elaborate and defend my point I'm not going to spend every waking moment thinking about it nor will I allow it to define my life.
then you must have other beliefs/values that take the forefront of your life, and can be brought to focus by encountering the antithesis of them - it sthe nature of duality in this world - there is no avoiding it

See the difference.

You asked what beliefs should be taken seriously. I personally spend most of my time thinking about using neural stem cells to cure broken spinal cords and other diseased CNS tissue. I take my work seriously. I present it and I defend it. While I will argue over the scientific merits of it - I wouldn't threaten, ostracize or even kill someone for not taking my side in regards to it or not believing it! I wouldn't burn people at the stake or tax those that different in opinion with me.
I also wouldn't burn people at the stake either (for reasons religious or otherwise), nor would I condone it- people have different ways of expressing their values on others - intelligent discussion is one - causing a coup with the light armored division might be another

OMG I have a really bad flu :(

Thanks for your opinion guys, also, LiveInFaith you seem like an open minded person in regards to the statue smashing - that's good.


One more general question:
What does religous extremism actually mean? Is it generally a good thing or bad?
What about fundamentalism?

MiCHAEL

I would like to disagree about people saying whats wrong with being too religous. I once knew a kid at my school who would constantly follow me around, immediatly pair up with me for projects, etc. But whenever he talked, it was always " God this, God that". He would often ask me what I thought God was thinking, and I would always say know. He was too cheerful, and would often say that everything was made by God. He even went so far to say that evolution is a lie and that intelligent design is true. This kid let religion take over his life. And because of it, he wasn't prepared for the cold, harsh, and remorseless nature of life. At my last year there, I told him to back off, because I was tired of him following me everywhere and being partners with me for everything because we both knew he would fail if he didin't partner. Anyway, what I said seemed to of fractured him in some way. He never acted the same since.

I am used to lifes cruel ways, how it snatches away the ones we hold most dear. How it destroys familys and drives people into denial. And because of my grandfather dying when I was still about 8 years old, I have been prepared for how ruthlesslife can be. I have grown used to it. Letting your beleifs take over your life will only disappoint you in the long run. And because of my experience, which is quite traumatic for kid that was my age, I have grown somewhat insensistive to other people, prefering to isolate myself.

I think we can see that some people, who take their religous belief very seriously, may be (if either a robust representation of the popultation or in a position in power) detrimental to society - especially to those who happen to disregard or even be anti- their particular faith. And this is IMHO regardless of what that particular beleif is. Jesus, Allah, Mosses, PU or FSM. It really doesn't matter. Which is why I suggest that Religion in small doses is the best option for society. And also, I put forward, should never be in political control - that is, secular governments are preferred.

Or so I think anyway,
Michael

Well, I can't discredit your personal experience, but I can tell you that what you have posted above certainly does not apply to me. I take my religion very seriously, and I do contribute to society. People consider me pretty intelligent and sensible, and personally, there is nobody I can't get along with, given they don't mind befriending a Muslim. I know plenty of people who believe in a different religion (or lack thereof), and I am perfectly fine with that. To me, their beliefs are wrong, but that is their business, so as long as it doesn't pose any danger to me, I'm fine.

Ultimately, I don't very much agree with this thread. Religion is a serious issue; you can't pick and choose what you'd like to practice and what you'd like to omit. Either you're totally committed, or you're not committed at all. My two pennies.

I would like to disagree about people saying whats wrong with being too religous. I once knew a kid at my school who would constantly follow me around, immediatly pair up with me for projects, etc. But whenever he talked, it was always " God this, God that". He would often ask me what I thought God was thinking, and I would always say know. He was too cheerful, and would often say that everything was made by God. He even went so far to say that evolution is a lie and that intelligent design is true. This kid let religion take over his life. And because of it, he wasn't prepared for the cold, harsh, and remorseless nature of life. At my last year there, I told him to back off, because I was tired of him following me everywhere and being partners with me for everything because we both knew he would fail if he didin't partner. Anyway, what I said seemed to of fractured him in some way. He never acted the same since.

I am used to lifes cruel ways, how it snatches away the ones we hold most dear. How it destroys familys and drives people into denial. And because of my grandfather dying when I was still about 8 years old, I have been prepared for how ruthlesslife can be. I have grown used to it. Letting your beleifs take over your life will only disappoint you in the long run. And because of my experience, which is quite traumatic for kid that was my age, I have grown somewhat insensistive to other people, prefering to isolate myself.
*************
M*W: I liked your post, because it is true. I myself was too religious during my young adulthood. Everything I ate, lived and breathed was within the parameters of Roman catholicism. I only read books that were pope-approved. That was way too religious for my own good! I shut out the rest of the world to live within the confines of a belief system that included not only catholicism but other christian denominations as well. Then I got pulled into the charismatic revolution, and I scorched the Earth praying and preaching and laying on of hands. This didn't seem to bother anyone I knew, because they, too, were all catholic charismatics and protestant pentecostals. Small world to hide in, I'd say.

You spoke of the guy who followed you around... I had that same experience in college (a Baptist university). This young man (well I was young at the time, too), kept following me around everywhere. He sort of annoyed me, and I thought he was just a lonely nerd pest. I couldn't seem to get away from him, and I'd actually hide when I could! Then one day I asked him if he knew this senior guy BMOC who was a real charmer, and I innocently told him I'd like to meet him! This guy was so crushed, he started to cry... literally... right there on campus between classes! I didn't think this guy liked me like that, but that's when I found out! I felt so bad about it, but I just wasn't interested in him since he was so aggressively christian and was preaching to me all the time. When I started dating my future husband (now ex-) and those kids found out I was dating a catholic, I swear to you, they practically abducted me to deprogram me from associating with a catholic! I had to get out of that place. It was too creepy for me, and they pushed all that baptist religion down our throats! Threatened us that if we dared to dance, we'd all go to hell! Just imagine what they thought about me dating a catholic! I was already fried!

Well, I can't discredit your personal experience, but I can tell you that what you have posted above certainly does not apply to me. I take my religion very seriously, and I do contribute to society. People consider me pretty intelligent and sensible, and personally, there is nobody I can't get along with, given they don't mind befriending a Muslim. I know plenty of people who believe in a different religion (or lack thereof), and I am perfectly fine with that. To me, their beliefs are wrong, but that is their business, so as long as it doesn't pose any danger to me, I'm fine.That's what's wrong with the word serious. It is a little vague. I think from reading MW post you can get an idea of what I meant anyway.

Also, probably from my point of view you're not all that serious. Oh, you are in a sense, but not to the point of, say, not playing FF or Okami because they deal in magics and other religions.

Right?

I went to a dinner a Chinese woman was preparing. Her Muslim friend demanded that she help prepare the food because it needed to meet certain standards. This peeved her a little because she wanted to prepare the dinner herself. So she said no. Then when the Muslim girl came, a little early, she said the food was not right (religiously) and so she couldn't eat some of it. And because she was there early she helped prepare some of the OK food. Then when the Chinese womans' Hindu friend arrived she said she couldn't eat food that was prepared by a Muslim. Needless to say the Chinese woman was so pissed off.

I'd say that is too religous.

Also, a student here whose mother was kind enough to come and make us lunch couldn't touch me (as in no hand-shake) because we were not of the same faith and that kind of, at the time, made me think I didn't ever want to eat a lunch of hers again. I was rather insulted and I would simply rather not have the food. Maybe if some food comes again I will eat it or maybe I will not. I'm not sure. But I wonder if I turned down the food and said I can not eat food from someone who can not shake my hand - how would she feel? I wouldn't say such a thing because obviously it is insulting.

I have a Muslim buddy who lives unmarried with his Catholic girl friend, drinks beer, downloads porn, boot-legs software, smokes etc... see, his religion doesn't interfere too much with him having a good time and living his life - which in MHO is much more preferable than if it did. (he does observe the rules for Ramadan)

Make sense???

MII

That's what's wrong with the word serious. It is a little vague. I think from reading MW post you can get an idea of what I meant anyway.

All I get from MW's post is that she had a creepy stalker.

Also, probably from my point of view you're not all that serious. Oh, you are in a sense, but not to the point of, say, not playing FF or Okami because they deal in magics and other religions.

Yes, I am all that serious. There is nothing wrong with learning about other religions or playing video games based off ficticious ones; the only problem is when you actually believe it. Haven't seen very many muslims apostating to become a "religion" inscribed in FF. In no way are video games disallowed in Islam, unless they displayed pornography and things alike.

I went to a dinner a Chinese woman was preparing. Her Muslim friend demanded that she help prepare the food because it needed to meet certain standards. This peeved her a little because she wanted to prepare the dinner herself. So she said no. Then when the Muslim girl came, a little early, she said the food was not right (religiously) and so she couldn't eat some of it. And because she was there early she helped prepare some of the OK food. Then when the Chinese womans' Hindu friend arrived she said she couldn't eat food that was prepared by a Muslim. Needless to say the Chinese woman was so pissed off.

Umm...okay. Who said I agreed? Refer to when I said, it depends on the religion. Regardless, she has every right to refuse the food, and I'm saying this as a Muslim.

Also, a student here whose mother was kind enough to come and make us lunch couldn't touch me (as in no hand-shake) because we were not of the same faith and that kind of, at the time, made me think I didn't ever want to eat a lunch of hers again. I was rather insulted and I would simply rather not have the food. Maybe if some food comes again I will eat it or maybe I will not. I'm not sure. But I wonder if I turned down the food and said I can not eat food from someone who can not shake my hand - how would she feel? I wouldn't say such a thing because obviously it is insulting.

That's a shame, but she has every right to do that. Deal with it.

I have a Muslim buddy who lives unmarried with his Catholic girl friend, drinks beer, downloads porn, boot-legs software, smokes etc... see, his religion doesn't interfere too much with him having a good time and living his life - which in MHO is much more preferable than if it did. (he does observe the rules for Ramadan)

He's a Muslim by faith, but he does sin. Where's the confusion in this? Obviously, he is not a strict believer/follower of his faith, considering your description.

Kadark,

Which is why I said the word "serious" is a little too vague. Let me try to qualify the the terms. Too Religiously Serious: Someone who will not read, nor allow their children to read (if they have children), the Harry Potter books for fear their soul may be damned and that they may bring down the wrath of God upon themselves and their descendants.

THAT'S too serious!
:)
Michael

PS: There are religous people who think this.

Kadark,

Which is why I said the word "serious" is a little too vague. Let me try to qualify the the terms. Too Religiously Serious: Someone who will not read, nor allow their children to read (if they have children), the Harry Potter books for fear their soul may be damned and that they may bring down the wrath of God upon themselves and their descendants.

THAT'S too serious!
:)
Michael

PS: There are religous people who think this.

I suppose the average person would consider that too serious, but we must respect the parents' decision. I myself would never hesitate in reading Harry Potter (except for the facts that the books suck), nor would I forbid my hypothetical kids to read them. Does any religion specifically forbid against reading such books? Not trying to sound condescending, but rather an honest question.

OMG I have a really bad flu :(

if you are at the mucus stage try eating a huge bowl of hot porridge made from semolina(1 part) with water(2 part) butter (1 part) and sugar (1 part) for breakfast and without drinking any fluids afterwards for about six hours

if you are at the sore throat stage try eating a little bit of grated ginger with salt from time to time


One more general question:
What does religous extremism actually mean? Is it generally a good thing or bad?

religious extremism tends to mean acts done in the name of religion that contravene currently held social norms




What about fundamentalism?

fundamentalism tends to also mean the same thing, although technically it means returning to the "fundamentals" of religion - it tends to happen when the philosophy that tags along with religion gets so watered down as to become ineffective in every day life (ie when the philosophy of what is to be done and what is not to be done becomes obscured, eg - "nothing is good, nothing is bad, all things lead to the same end, etc)

I went to a dinner a Chinese woman was preparing. Her Muslim friend demanded that she help prepare the food because it needed to meet certain standards. This peeved her a little because she wanted to prepare the dinner herself. So she said no. Then when the Muslim girl came, a little early, she said the food was not right (religiously) and so she couldn't eat some of it. And because she was there early she helped prepare some of the OK food. Then when the Chinese womans' Hindu friend arrived she said she couldn't eat food that was prepared by a Muslim. Needless to say the Chinese woman was so pissed off.


This one's a little strange to me, because of all religions, friends of mine who follow the Hindu religion are the most liberal, and least anal-retentive. Even the one vegetarian Hindu is vegetarian by his own choice and not due to religious upbringing (his Hindu dad did not subscribe to vegetarianism).

Then again, most of my current friends are liberal anyway :)

Umm...okay. Who said I agreed? Refer to when I said, it depends on the religion. Regardless, she has every right to refuse the food, and I'm saying this as a Muslim.



That's a shame, but she has every right to do that. Deal with it.


I think the point of the discourse you responded to was the fact that those people are perfect examples of the results of religion overdose.

Clearly, with their rights as individuals, they can accept or refuse anything they want to for any reason they flim-flam out of their imaginations. However, the 'reasoning' behind it was the point of the story...that they would deny themselves food or deflect basic social interaction for outdated religious reasons.

if you are at the sore throat stage try eating a little bit of grated ginger with salt from time to timeginger + salt it is - I'll give it a go :) thanks

religious extremism tends to mean acts done in the name of religion that contravene currently held social norms that's good definition - in relation to current social norms