Relations who are of different religious beliefs and social conventions

[Mike80]

Did shomeone shay cupcaksssh?

Cupcakes? What? Are we talking about Florida's OOC schedule this year :p

 

[Deety]

Cupcakes? What? Are we talking about Florida's OOC schedule this year :p

Preach it, brother!

 

[jwinslow]

If a man lives all his life doing good things, helping others, and does no harm

I'm not sure I've met anyone who fits that last line, but taht is a difficult issue, and a long one probably for another thread.

When you went to your high school reunion did you notice how many still live near where they went to school?

The guys in my wedding all went to HS or college (3 hrs away) with me. I got married 1 year after college. Those guys that stood with me were living in North Korea, Colorado, Texas & Indiana (now in Miami FL). The ushers came in from LA, China & Indiana. My other closest friends in college are currently in Indiana, Minnesota & North Carolina (by way of an year long road trip from Ohio to Texas, along the coast to Cali and up to Seattle. By that time his truck was shot, so he traded it straight up for a bike). I've moved from MI to PA to MI to IN to OH, but I've been overseas to a few continents. Sorry to disappoint you :p

 

[buckeyebri]

For those who believe no proof is necessary...
For those who don't no proof is possible.....

Stuart Chase....

 

[Taosman]

For those who believe no proof is necessary...
For those who don't no proof is possible.....

Stuart Chase....

Beat me to it, sucker! :tongue2: You were watching also. And they say you can't learn anything from TV!

 

[Taosman]

Here's another one,bri.
"Democracy, as has been said of Christianity, has never really been tried."

 

[Jake]

An alternative viewpoint is that the denial of spiritual existence is simply another religion. Religious irreligion. Personally, I believe very much in spiritual existence. I have seen people find great happiness due to spiritual fulfillment.

I agree in the sense that rabid atheists have a lot in common with evangelicals. They both have "faith" in something they can't prove but "know" to be true, and tend to profess it to anyone in earshot. Personally, I don't know if "God" exists or not but I'm pretty convinced that religion is a man-made concept.

That said, I don't agree that happiness is necessarily proof of spiritual existence. One can have strong faith in Santa Claus, or any imaginary friend, attribute good things in life to them and find fulfillment in it. That doesn't mean those entities exist, but if the faith brings them happiness - and they don't attempt to craft the rest of society to conform with them - I have no problem with it. To each their own.

 

[OCBuckWife]

I agree in the sense that rabid atheists have a lot in common with evangelicals. They both have "faith" in something they can't prove but "know" to be true, and tend to profess it to anyone in earshot.

A zealot is a zealot is a zealot. But all zealots have disrespect for those around them in regards to their particular zealotry.

 

[BrutuStrength]

Many people need to believe in something. And church is a social thing too. A lot of good happens in church, it's this "chosen people" dogma that causes a lot of problems on the outside. People kill over it. Fundamentalism has become bigger. Which preaches a lack of tolerance.
We need to find some sort of balance in our lives between belief and daily life. Maybe we need to be more "spiritual" and less religious.

A couple of years ago I caught an episode of Dr. Phil that touched upon this theme. It dealt with getting people together and having them deal with other people that were opposite them on some particular spectrum. The group included a white supremacist and a black racist, it included a person that was disgusted by fat people and a fat person that hated skinny people, and it also included a recently converted Christian and an outspoken atheist.

First, the recent convert sounds a bit like what OCBW is saying about her in-laws, but even worse. She was very geared towards trying to get others interested in Christ/Christianity, but was extremely over-the-top in her efforts, and after a brief while she became openly judgmental of others. She would call them out whenever they would swear, gossip about others, drink alcohol, or did any thing else which she felt wasn't Christ-like. On top of it all, it was proven that she was a huge hypocrite... they had video footage of her swearing, drinking, and talking about others.

Unfortunately, that reference only goes to show that while such people may be well intentioned in their efforts, they are often not ready to handle such responsibility. They are often in a position where they are just now starting to be able to juggle/incorporate their new religious practices in their own lives, and really are not suited/prepared to lead others on a similar journey. In OCBW's case, it sounds like her in-laws did some good things and some bad things with their efforts. The good things would be trying to include them in settings where they could meet some other people from their church and even giving them some literature isn't that bad. The bad things being that they have continued to press the issue even after being told that they are not interested, and blowing up about the Easter zombie joke.

The other part of this is that the atheist repeatedly stated that although he was not a member of any religious organization, that he considered himself to be "spiritual." He was having an open and fair conversation with a pastor and he mentioned this to him. At that point the pastor mentioned to him something to the effect that the terms "spiritual" and "religious" are synonymous (the link provides a nice explanation to this point), and so his claim that he was "spiritual" likely didn't mean what he was intending to say. The atheist replied that he hadn't thought about it that way, he thanked him for explaining that to him, and then stated that he would come up with a new means by which to better describe himself.

So Taos, maybe it would be more to your intended meaning for you to say something to the effect that "Maybe we need to be more "introspective" and less preachy."

...I will pose to you a question I posed to my mom...If a man lives all his life doing good things, helping others, and does no harm yet never sets foot in church will God turn him away at his day of reckoning?

Well, it appears as though the particular religion you seem to be referencing with your hypothetical scenario is Christianity. Christianity, at it's core, deals with accepting Christ as your lord and savior. It is the only stated way by which a person will be accepted into heaven (although I believe one person ascended via a fiery chariot in the Old Testament).

The answer to your question could be yes or no. Allow me to clarify.

Scenario 1: A person need not find God in a church, nor accept Christ in a church to become saved. A church is a building where people worship and have fellowship together. Members can support each other when they need help, and work together with like-minded people. It's where they can receive further religious education to help them incorporate their beliefs into their daily lives. That being said, should a person strike up a conversation with a neighbor/missionary/family member/etc one day and become saved, they truthfully need not ever attend a church to go to a heaven. So in that scenario, the answer could be yes.

Scenario 2: Let's say someone goes through life as the nicest person ever known to have existedc. Should they die without being saved, then there is nothing in the Bible (at least that I'm aware of) that discusses "exceptions." So unless the Christian God works on some sort of an exception basis, then the answer is no. That's why most Christian based churches send out missionaries to spread the word, so that as many people as possible at least have the opportunity to make an informed decision/choice.

A few years ago I wrote a number of posts dealing with religion and perspective. The key thing to remember is that while a person can choose their own religion, they can't choose that religion's rules (unless they start a new religion of their own). So if a person doesn't like a particular religion for any instance, in this case we'll say it's because it won't automatically send the nice guy from scenario 2 to Heaven, then they would be better served to find an alternate religion.

 

[Steve19]

I agree in the sense that rabid atheists have a lot in common with evangelicals. They both have "faith" in something they can't prove but "know" to be true, and tend to profess it to anyone in earshot. Personally, I don't know if "God" exists or not but I'm pretty convinced that religion is a man-made concept.

That said, I don't agree that happiness is necessarily proof of spiritual existence. One can have strong faith in Santa Claus, or any imaginary friend, attribute good things in life to them and find fulfillment in it. That doesn't mean those entities exist, but if the faith brings them happiness - and they don't attempt to craft the rest of society to conform with them - I have no problem with it. To each their own.

We are in agreement. Just for the record, I didn't say that happiness is necessarily proof of spiritual existence. I said that I know people who derive a lot of happiness from what they perceive to be spiritual fulfillment.

 

[muffler dragon]

If a man lives all his life doing good things, helping others, and does no harm yet never sets foot in church will God turn him away at his day of reckoning?

No. However, one can also determine whether hell is a real place or not. (The same can be said for heaven, of course). That said, once the repercussions/rewards are dismissed one typically can live their life as they see fit. And, personally, I tend to believe that people want to do "good" or the "right" thing. Just my perspective though.

 

[AKAK]

Cupcakes? What? Are we talking about Florida's OOC schedule this year :p

*knock, knock, knock*

Hello Sir, have you ever heard of the book of Meyer? It explains that after his resurrection in the Holy Land, Tebow appeared to the Native Americans of Florida to preach the gospel of the spread offense....


Hmm... that joke would work better if Tebow was from Ohio and went to Florida State.

Damn.

 

[OCBuckWife]

First, the recent convert sounds a bit like what OCBW is saying about her in-laws, but even worse. She was very geared towards trying to get others interested in Christ/Christianity, but was extremely over-the-top in her efforts, and after a brief while she became openly judgmental of others. She would call them out whenever they would swear, gossip about others, drink alcohol, or did any thing else which she felt wasn't Christ-like. On top of it all, it was proven that she was a huge hypocrite... they had video footage of her swearing, drinking, and talking about others.

A perfect example of the issue I have with "new" converts.

In OCBW's case, it sounds like her in-laws did some good things and some bad things with their efforts. The good things would be trying to include them in settings where they could meet some other people from their church and even giving them some literature isn't that bad. The bad things being that they have continued to press the issue even after being told that they are not interested, and blowing up about the Easter zombie joke.

I can't agree here that the literature was a good thing. It was something that had previously been specified was not something I wanted to have happen, especially in my own home. So giving me those books was one of the first ways they disrespected my wishes. We expected the invites so that wasn't a big deal. The books really pissed me off. It was compounded by the zombie Jesus thing because his anger echoed mine, and it was for the same reason, yet he was completely incapable of seeing it because of the veil of righteousness he was wearing.

 

[BrutuStrength]

I can't agree here that the literature was a good thing. It was something that had previously been specified was not something I wanted to have happen, especially in my own home. So giving me those books was one of the first ways they disrespected my wishes. We expected the invites so that wasn't a big deal. The books really [censored]ed me off...

Yeah, that's why I said it didn't appear to be that bad but it was wrong for them to do so as soon as you asked them to stop, as I'm unaware of any previous discussions you guys might have had. In general, I don't find the act of someone simply handing out pamphlets to be that bad. Although I don't need the Jehova's Witnesses stopping by house to talk to me, I'll sometimes take their literature and just deposit in the trash. But I realize that scenario's also dealing with people which I don't have existing relationships.

...It was compounded by the zombie Jesus thing because his anger echoed mine, and it was for the same reason, yet he was completely incapable of seeing it because of the veil of righteousness he was wearing.

This strikes me as also possibly being related to the newness of their conviction. I've met a number of religious people that have a fine sense of humor about religious topics. During the midst of the child abuse scandal in the Catholic church, a guy approached my Brother-in-law and I while we were waiting in line at some sort of store. He proceeded to share a joke with us relating to the scandal. My B-i-l replied with a joke or 2 of his own. I thought it was an interesting exchange since my B-i-l worked for a Cincinnati-area Diocese at the time.

Oh well, sometimes it does not even matter what was said as much as who said it. Maybe your husband would have received a pass since they're brothers. As long as it wasn't said in front of my kids I wouldn't consider it to be that big of a deal, but I've also been a Christian for 30+ years, so I've also dealt with such things before.

 

[Taosman]

A couple of years ago I caught an episode of Dr. Phil that touched upon this theme. It dealt with getting people together and having them deal with other people that were opposite them on some particular spectrum. The group included a white supremacist and a black racist, it included a person that was disgusted by fat people and a fat person that hated skinny people, and it also included a recently converted Christian and an outspoken atheist.

First, the recent convert sounds a bit like what OCBW is saying about her in-laws, but even worse. She was very geared towards trying to get others interested in Christ/Christianity, but was extremely over-the-top in her efforts, and after a brief while she became openly judgmental of others. She would call them out whenever they would swear, gossip about others, drink alcohol, or did any thing else which she felt wasn't Christ-like. On top of it all, it was proven that she was a huge hypocrite... they had video footage of her swearing, drinking, and talking about others.

Unfortunately, that reference only goes to show that while such people may be well intentioned in their efforts, they are often not ready to handle such responsibility. They are often in a position where they are just now starting to be able to juggle/incorporate their new religious practices in their own lives, and really are not suited/prepared to lead others on a similar journey. In OCBW's case, it sounds like her in-laws did some good things and some bad things with their efforts. The good things would be trying to include them in settings where they could meet some other people from their church and even giving them some literature isn't that bad. The bad things being that they have continued to press the issue even after being told that they are not interested, and blowing up about the Easter zombie joke.

The other part of this is that the atheist repeatedly stated that although he was not a member of any religious organization, that he considered himself to be "spiritual." He was having an open and fair conversation with a pastor and he mentioned this to him. At that point the pastor mentioned to him something to the effect that the terms "spiritual" and "religious" are synonymous (the link provides a nice explanation to this point), and so his claim that he was "spiritual" likely didn't mean what he was intending to say. The atheist replied that he hadn't thought about it that way, he thanked him for explaining that to him, and then stated that he would come up with a new means by which to better describe himself.

So Taos, maybe it would be more to your intended meaning for you to say something to the effect that "Maybe we need to be more "introspective" and less preachy."


Well, it appears as though the particular religion you seem to be referencing with your hypothetical scenario is Christianity. Christianity, at it's core, deals with accepting Christ as your lord and savior. It is the only stated way by which a person will be accepted into heaven (although I believe one person ascended via a fiery chariot in the Old Testament).

The answer to your question could be yes or no. Allow me to clarify.

Scenario 1: A person need not find God in a church, nor accept Christ in a church to become saved. A church is a building where people worship and have fellowship together. Members can support each other when they need help, and work together with like-minded people. It's where they can receive further religious education to help them incorporate their beliefs into their daily lives. That being said, should a person strike up a conversation with a neighbor/missionary/family member/etc one day and become saved, they truthfully need not ever attend a church to go to a heaven. So in that scenario, the answer could be yes.

Scenario 2: Let's say someone goes through life as the nicest person ever known to have existedc. Should they die without being saved, then there is nothing in the Bible (at least that I'm aware of) that discusses "exceptions." So unless the Christian God works on some sort of an exception basis, then the answer is no. That's why most Christian based churches send out missionaries to spread the word, so that as many people as possible at least have the opportunity to make an informed decision/choice.

A few years ago I wrote a number of posts dealing with religion and perspective. The key thing to remember is that while a person can choose their own religion, they can't choose that religion's rules (unless they start a new religion of their own). So if a person doesn't like a particular religion for any instance, in this case we'll say it's because it won't automatically send the nice guy from scenario 2 to Heaven, then they would be better served to find an alternate religion.

A lot of good thought here. I'm just not as eloquent as some here. Thanks! (I saw the exact same Dr Phil)