Home » General Discussions » Heated Discussions and Debates » A psychological question: "choose to believe"
|
|
|
|
| Re: A psychological question: "choose to believe" [message #444507 is a reply to message #442700] |
Tue, 01 March 2011 13:00   |
 |
ChewML
Messages: 918
Registered: June 2008
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
Spoony, you and I have discussed/debated religion quite a few times before. I respect your thoughts regarding religion and all it's subtopics. You are a very logical person.
Most of the other people in this thread just don't want to submit to anything. Not that they should without being convinced, but they lack the intelect you use in your post.
"God is overpowered, nerf plox"
"fuck god, thanks for reading"
"something about burning in hell, but god loves you"
Those are not the kinda post that are worth anything in such a topic. The third one is the most relevant, but I don't put in any stock in hell myself (I think I might be the one that you mentioned didn't believe in hell).
Now that is out of the way, my response to the question raised in the OP.
I myself was of course raised in a kinda religous family. My grandparents were very into religion, and my mom pretends to be. From the age of 11 to 17 I didn't attend church meetings regularly, I think the passover (annual) is the only thing we never missed.
When I was 17 I worked in a resturant where I discovered I worked with 2 people that shared my beliefs and practiced them. So I started going again. I on my own initiative started studying The Bible and religion in general.
Jehovah's Witnesses use the phrase, "making the truth your own".
I will not deny the fact that I was raised around these beliefs probably influenced me in some amount. I won't say that is the only reason why I chose or willed myself to believe. I was pretty into it for a while, but I couldn't manage to get my stuff together to go all the way with it. Nobody likes a hypocrite.
I have not been religiously active in the last year. It seemed as if I had lost my will to do it (even missed the passover). I still believe, there is too much for me to completely deny there is a higher power (intelligent design), but it seems as if there is also too much for my mind to comprehend.
Religion is kinda scary, with the end of the world coming and trying to imagine how it will play out is a lot to think about. So I find myself kinda in the middle now, and I am not sure how much of it is willingly...
I figured I would respond with that to see what thoughts you might have on how it is psychological. I do not wish to argue with anyone just simply hear opinions that are well put together (not insults to my intelligence).
[Updated on: Tue, 01 March 2011 13:03] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: A psychological question: "choose to believe" [message #444509 is a reply to message #444507] |
Tue, 01 March 2011 13:10 |
 |
Spoony
Messages: 3915
Registered: January 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars)
Tactics & Strategies Moderator |
|
|
I agree there were some rather useless posts on the first page.
| Chew wrote on Tue, 01 March 2011 13:00 |
but I don't put in any stock in hell myself (I think I might be the one that you mentioned didn't believe in hell).
|
Yes, I remember you saying you thought it was a misinterpretation. Gehenna and all that business. But do you think Revelation is canonical (I ask because I've heard Christians who think it shouldn't be there, and it's worth checking) - and if you do, what do you think it's actually describing? Past events, a prediction, or what? Cos once you hear that line about the Lake of Fire it's a little hard to forget.
| Quote: |
I have not been religiously active in the last year. It seemed as if I had lost my will to do it. I still believe, there is too much for me to completely deny there is a higher power (intelligent design), but it seems as if there is also too much for my mind to comprehend.
|
Well, the good thing about atheism/agnosticism/secularism is nobody's telling you you have to believe X and Y. it isn't necessary to assert the non-existence of any particular god, or to believe that evolution is true (for example). it's just a non-acceptance of the specific claims made by religions.
| Quote: |
Religion is kinda scary, with the end of the world coming and trying to imagine how it will play out is a lot to think about. So I find myself kinda in the middle now, and I am not sure how much of it is willingly...
I figured I would respond with that to see what thoughts you might have on how it is psychological. I do not wish to argue with anyone just simply hear opinions that are well put together (not insults to my intelligence).
|
about my original question about whether belief is a choice... this
"I won't say that is the only reason why I chose or willed myself to believe."
sorta says yes, doesn't it?
Unleash the Renerageâ„¢
Renedrama [ren-i-drah-muh]
- noun
1. the inevitable criticism one receives after doing something awful
|
|
|
|
| Re: A psychological question: "choose to believe" [message #444510 is a reply to message #442700] |
Tue, 01 March 2011 13:38 |
|
ChewML
Messages: 918
Registered: June 2008
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
Revelation how I understand it, is a very symbolic read.
Few big examples that I can remember well enough off the top of my head are:
The 7 headed beast = the governments (7 world powers)
Babylon the Great / The Harlot = The collective group of False religion including most of what is considered Christianity
The 4 horsemen = famine, death, sickness, Jesus (IIRC)
The Dragon = Satan (lols)
With those 4 in mind I can kinda summarize.
Revelation starts off Micheal the Arch Angel stands up throws Satan out of heaven to the earth. Woa to the Earth and to the seas for The Devil has come down to you with great anger knowing he has a short period of time.
According to some other scriptures and prophecies that was in Otober 1914 (I am sure I have made a big post somewhere about that).
4 horsemen start riding, we see more death, famine and sickness (which is accurate about the last century according to historians).
Eventually the beast turns on The Harlot and pretty much eats her, because God puts it in them to do so. So the governments will turn on all of religion, some quotes could be pulled from the news that might hint at that. Plus with all the holy wars, talk about same sex marriages, or whatever else it's not to far fetched to see that coming.
There is not going to literally be a 7 headed 10 horned beast, it is symbolism to something we have already seen.
It is still somewhat scary in my mind to think that the world as we know it could be in for a ride... if The Bible is right and my understanding is correct of course.
If I were assuming that is is, I would say Revelation definetly should be there, and it was a prediction prophecy that we are living in now, so there is more to come, luckly it does have a rather nice ending.
[Updated on: Tue, 01 March 2011 13:43] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: A psychological question: "choose to believe" [message #444520 is a reply to message #444510] |
Tue, 01 March 2011 21:17 |
|
Spoony
Messages: 3915
Registered: January 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars)
Tactics & Strategies Moderator |
|
|
| Chew wrote on Tue, 01 March 2011 13:38 |
The 7 headed beast = the governments (7 world powers)
|
i remember you saying bear = russia, lion = britain etc. the funny part was you said dragon = china. i'll come back to that in just a second...
| Quote: |
The Dragon = Satan (lols)
|
mmhmm. and isn't Revelation when it was decided that the "serpent" in Eden was Satan? cos there's nothing in Genesis about Satan. Nothing. So thousands of years later someone on an island in the Med decides that the snake was actually Satan?
The serpent is Satan because it suits you, and the dragon is Satan because it suits you, except when it's China...
| Quote: |
Revelation starts off Micheal the Arch Angel stands up throws Satan out of heaven to the earth. Woa to the Earth and to the seas for The Devil has come down to you with great anger knowing he has a short period of time.
According to some other scriptures and prophecies that was in Otober 1914 (I am sure I have made a big post somewhere about that).
|
yes, i remember it well. i remember my reply, too. you basically turned the rules of mathematics into balloon animals. anyone could have come up with all sorts of different dates by approaching it the way you did.
but the question of Revelation's timeline is very interesting to me, and i'll come back to that too.
| Quote: |
4 horsemen start riding, we see more death, famine and sickness (which is accurate about the last century according to historians).
|
...and every century?
| Quote: |
Eventually the beast turns on The Harlot and pretty much eats her, because God puts it in them to do so. So the governments will turn on all of religion, some quotes could be pulled from the news that might hint at that.
|
sure, and some quotes can be pulled from the news which say it's the opposite.
| Quote: |
If I were assuming that is is, I would say Revelation definetly should be there, and it was a prediction prophecy that we are living in now, so there is more to come, luckly it does have a rather nice ending.
|
firstly, the bit about the Lake of Fire isn't nice.
secondly, back to the question about the timeline, i.e. is it a prediction or a description of past events? (they aren't the only two options of course, it could also be the ravings of a lunatic or just some rather bad fiction, either of which seems a lot more likely)
y'know i started a thread asking people which version of the bible they use, and recommend? well, my KJV is probably a lot older than anyone else's here; it's been in my family for generations and it's very old and battered. i honestly don't know how old it is. it contains something you don't seem to see in bibles anymore; dates in the margin of every page. it says when all the events took place. e.g. it puts Genesis at 4004 BC (lol), the Ten Commandments at 1491 BC, the death of Jesus at 33 AD (his birth at 5 BC, which raises some questions...)
but to the question about Revelation; it dates the events to 96 AD. (that's a few years after the book was written, making it a prediction of the near future at the time). well, maybe bibles don't say that anymore, but they used to. why was that the common belief, do you think? why did the printers of the King James Bible decide that this should be included in the bible? equally valid question, why did they decide that it should no longer?
Unleash the Renerageâ„¢
Renedrama [ren-i-drah-muh]
- noun
1. the inevitable criticism one receives after doing something awful
|
|
|
|
| Re: A psychological question: "choose to believe" [message #444529 is a reply to message #442700] |
Wed, 02 March 2011 04:08 |
 |
JohnDoe
Messages: 1416
Registered: May 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
Spoony seems very reasonable and logical when arguing with Jehovah's Witnesses or Baptist mindrape victims. There are enough Christians that don't believe in heaven and especially hell as literal places, or believe that the Ougabongo tribe is going to hell because missionaries never visited their part of the rain forrest.
lol
|
|
|
|
| Re: A psychological question: "choose to believe" [message #444532 is a reply to message #444529] |
Wed, 02 March 2011 04:27 |
 |
snpr1101
Messages: 425
Registered: June 2007
Location: Australia
Karma: 0
|
Commander |
|
|
| JohnDoe wrote on Wed, 02 March 2011 04:08 |
Spoony seems very reasonable and logical when arguing with Jehovah's Witnesses or Baptist mindrape victims. There are enough Christians that don't believe in heaven and especially hell as literal places, or believe that the Ougabongo tribe is going to hell because missionaries never visited their part of the rain forrest.
|
With the amount of inconsistency in beliefs. With the amount of picking and choosing that seems to go on if you call yourself a Christian / insert religion here. "Oh I believe this and this, however this part of the Bible / teachings is bullshit. "Oh I don't take this literally"
It fucking pisses me off to no end. If there is a God and I am called before such a being one day to answer for my sins and why I did not follow the righteous one; I will promptly point out the amount of fucking inconsistency and bullshit that existed between people in my lifetime and argue that there was no clear path to follow.
Futile to even think up scenarios like this If I ever did find myself in this situation, I know. An all knowing being surely knows what I am going to say and have some amazingly enlightening answer for me on my way to a literal, figurative, metaphorical (Insert your bullshit definition for hell here).
The amount of denominations that stem from one religion or religious figure, let alone the entirety of religions - forms one big fucking cesspit of lies, deception, conflicting stories, conflicting beliefs etc. If you choose to align yourself with such people, then I no longer question the reasoning behind your beliefs. I bid you good luck and hope your God turns out to be real after all; because you have some serious competition.
[Updated on: Wed, 02 March 2011 04:36] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: A psychological question: "choose to believe" [message #444534 is a reply to message #444529] |
Wed, 02 March 2011 05:54 |
|
Spoony
Messages: 3915
Registered: January 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars)
Tactics & Strategies Moderator |
|
|
| JohnDoe wrote on Wed, 02 March 2011 04:08 |
Spoony seems very reasonable and logical when arguing with Jehovah's Witnesses or Baptist mindrape victims. There are enough Christians that don't believe in heaven and especially hell as literal places, or believe that the Ougabongo tribe is going to hell because missionaries never visited their part of the rain forrest.
|
I'm quite happy to have the same conversation with those Christians... my first question would probably be why don't they believe those things are literally true?
Unleash the Renerageâ„¢
Renedrama [ren-i-drah-muh]
- noun
1. the inevitable criticism one receives after doing something awful
|
|
|
|
| Re: A psychological question: "choose to believe" [message #444544 is a reply to message #444534] |
Wed, 02 March 2011 09:00 |
 |
Starbuzzz
Messages: 1637
Registered: June 2008
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
Like as if the other chasms of Christianity are any different! It's the same ice cream but different toppings each vying for canonical dominance depending on social trends.
I guess we should just look at the latest modernized "cleaned-up" belief strain of the religion as the ultimate final say.
Where will the Amazon tribesmen go in their afterlife? The Christian stance on that is throughly divided. Some will say they don't know. Some will say they are going to hell and yet, some will claim the gospel has to be brought to them (meaning they have to be saved from hell).
According to a suggestion above, we should listen to the latest modernized believers who outright believe things that aren't biblical or simply cop out of the question grandly by saying "I don't believe so." This begs the follow-up question asked by Spoony, "why not?"
Such modernist revisions of the religion conflict with those majority groups who held onto their dogmas on biblical authority for thousands of years alone while rejecting outside social influences; the very same secular influences which made us revisit the subject of hell from the prespective of a more mature moral dimension.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: A psychological question: "choose to believe" [message #444665 is a reply to message #444545] |
Sun, 06 March 2011 21:30 |
|
Starbuzzz
Messages: 1637
Registered: June 2008
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| JohnDoe wrote on Wed, 02 March 2011 09:47 |
it only makes sense for a holy book to be written in a language the people could wrap their minds around...such language becomes more and more obsolete as humans become more aware about life
|
Literally, we have quiet accurate translations from the original texts (or so we think). But if you mean it figuratively, I don't know if what we are seeing has to do with "language." I don't see language being changed but the very content, concepts, ideals, and purported facts that were once held to be the truth.
Good example is where will people of different religions go in the afterlife. Christians around the world have always been told that it was hell. Now in the era of telephones, video conferencing, jet planes, and most importantly: interfaith dialogue groups(!), the very biblical and Christian idea of non-Christians going to hell had quickly become out of style.
Eitherway, in hindsight, this is a very good thing. It's quiet amusing to see the latest youngsters coming fresh off the line with significantly different concepts reflecting social trends. While it is quiet disappointing to see the newer breeds and strains claiming canon-status (lol), Christianity's trend towards a more deistic, easy-style spirituality ruled by convenience is positively encouraging.
[Updated on: Sun, 06 March 2011 21:40] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: A psychological question: "choose to believe" [message #444673 is a reply to message #444665] |
Mon, 07 March 2011 06:01 |
|
JohnDoe
Messages: 1416
Registered: May 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
People would be more inclined to give your posts a fair shot if you dropped the anime villain writing style. I'm not Christian, so you're neither coming off as clever, nor particularly eloquent.
It doesn't matter whether hell describes a fiery place with torture chambers you're sent to for bad actions or the state of everlasting misery you've put your soul in through said bad actions. Neither is desirable and you should draw the same consequences.
lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Tue May 07 12:49:44 MST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00987 seconds
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
