By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - Why did you quit Christianity?

sapphi_snake on 13 August 2010

No... Judaism is in no way more important than Hinduism, nor Buddhism.



"I don't understand how someone could like Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky, but not like Twilight!!!"

"Last book I read was Brokeback Mountain, I just don't have the patience for them unless it's softcore porn."

                                                                               (The Voice of a Generation and Seece)

"If you cant stand the sound of your own voice than dont become a singer !!!!!"

                                                                               (pizzahut451)

Around the Network
highwaystar101 on 13 August 2010
pizzahut451 said:
highwaystar101 said:
pizzahut451 said:
highwaystar101 said:

 

If you mean the first half of my last paragraph, it's because that's the way a theism works. People can be literalists or non-literalists on the same theism, but they still have the same core beliefs.

If you mean the latter half of my last paragraph, it's always struck me that the idea of a personal God is fairly absurd in my opinion. There's so many that I think none of them can be correct. I guess by that I fit the definition of "most people are atheists to all Gods but one, but some of us just go one God further".

That and I see the idea of a God at all being full of endless paradoxes.


But all people believe in the same God. (im talking about 3 major non-pagan religions) They just have diffrent cultures and diffrent book and worhsip him in the other way. Muslims call him ''Allah'', Christians simply call him God, I dont know how Jews call it lol. But its basiclly the same God. They just have diffrent stories

Do Hindus fit into this category? There are about one billion of them and they don't believe in the Abrahamic God. How about Buddhists? There's nearly half a billion Buddhists. How about people who follow traditional religions (Chinese traditional and African traditional)? There's another half a billion of them. How about those who consider themselves not to be part of organised religion? There's well over a billion of them.

Even using my rough figures you can see that there's 3billion people who don't believe in the God of Islam, Christianity and Judaism. They have many Gods, other Gods or no Gods.

Not all people believe in the same God, I think that the God followed by these three religions is one that has become most popular, most likely down solely due to the structure of the religions themselves.

And to be honest, iIf I wanted to be really pedantic I could also look at past populations and show you how other popular religions once had followers comparable (percentage wise) to the level that Islam  or Christianity do today. I can look at Greek gods, Norse gods, Roman Gods, Egyptian gods, etc... But I don't have the time.

...

Also, population sizes mean nothing.  A major God and a minor God have the same standing when you look at them objectively, regardless of the populations that follow them. Both gods would have equal standing.

For example, in the 17th century the vast majority of people (99.9% ) accepted the Geocentric model of the solar system, and only an extremely small minority accepted the Heliocentric model. The fact that 99% of people accepted the geocentric model didn't mean that it was correct, we now know that the tiny minority of people were correct. And belief in a God follows the same logic.


Is Buddisam even a religion? I always thought it was a lifestyle. How can people call it religion when there is no higher force or God in it? And i mentioned in my post that i was talking about 3 MAJOR religons ( major as in, they are the most succesful ones trought the world), so hinduisam is not included, since hindus live mostly in India. You might say ''but the only country with the jewish religion is Israel and the population isnt even that big threre'' and yes, that is true but there are a lot more jews outside of Israel than Hindus out of India (correct me if i am wrong on this one)... anyway, i wasnt disagreeing with your post or trying to start a debate, i was just saying that all 3 Abrahamic religions believe in the same God, they just call it diffrently and worhsip him in the other way

Buddhism doesn't subscribe to your God, that's all the information that is required. Whether you define it as a religion or philosophy is irrelevant.

And since when has India not been part of the world? So because the religion has a high population density in one area of the world it can't be considered a world religion? I'm afraid things don't work like that.

Either way it doens't matter, because as I said population sizes don't count for squat when assessing which is the more credible of two Gods.



pizzahut451 on 13 August 2010
sapphi_snake said:

No... Judaism is in no way more important than Hinduism, nor Buddhism.


when the hell have i said its not important?



pizzahut451 on 13 August 2010
highwaystar101 said:
pizzahut451 said:
highwaystar101 said:
pizzahut451 said:
highwaystar101 said:

 

If you mean the first half of my last paragraph, it's because that's the way a theism works. People can be literalists or non-literalists on the same theism, but they still have the same core beliefs.

If you mean the latter half of my last paragraph, it's always struck me that the idea of a personal God is fairly absurd in my opinion. There's so many that I think none of them can be correct. I guess by that I fit the definition of "most people are atheists to all Gods but one, but some of us just go one God further".

That and I see the idea of a God at all being full of endless paradoxes.


But all people believe in the same God. (im talking about 3 major non-pagan religions) They just have diffrent cultures and diffrent book and worhsip him in the other way. Muslims call him ''Allah'', Christians simply call him God, I dont know how Jews call it lol. But its basiclly the same God. They just have diffrent stories

Do Hindus fit into this category? There are about one billion of them and they don't believe in the Abrahamic God. How about Buddhists? There's nearly half a billion Buddhists. How about people who follow traditional religions (Chinese traditional and African traditional)? There's another half a billion of them. How about those who consider themselves not to be part of organised religion? There's well over a billion of them.

Even using my rough figures you can see that there's 3billion people who don't believe in the God of Islam, Christianity and Judaism. They have many Gods, other Gods or no Gods.

Not all people believe in the same God, I think that the God followed by these three religions is one that has become most popular, most likely down solely due to the structure of the religions themselves.

And to be honest, iIf I wanted to be really pedantic I could also look at past populations and show you how other popular religions once had followers comparable (percentage wise) to the level that Islam  or Christianity do today. I can look at Greek gods, Norse gods, Roman Gods, Egyptian gods, etc... But I don't have the time.

...

Also, population sizes mean nothing.  A major God and a minor God have the same standing when you look at them objectively, regardless of the populations that follow them. Both gods would have equal standing.

For example, in the 17th century the vast majority of people (99.9% ) accepted the Geocentric model of the solar system, and only an extremely small minority accepted the Heliocentric model. The fact that 99% of people accepted the geocentric model didn't mean that it was correct, we now know that the tiny minority of people were correct. And belief in a God follows the same logic.


Is Buddisam even a religion? I always thought it was a lifestyle. How can people call it religion when there is no higher force or God in it? And i mentioned in my post that i was talking about 3 MAJOR religons ( major as in, they are the most succesful ones trought the world), so hinduisam is not included, since hindus live mostly in India. You might say ''but the only country with the jewish religion is Israel and the population isnt even that big threre'' and yes, that is true but there are a lot more jews outside of Israel than Hindus out of India (correct me if i am wrong on this one)... anyway, i wasnt disagreeing with your post or trying to start a debate, i was just saying that all 3 Abrahamic religions believe in the same God, they just call it diffrently and worhsip him in the other way

Buddhism doesn't subscribe to your God, that's all the information that is required. Whether you define it as a religion or philosophy is irrelevant.

And since when has India not been part of the world? So because the religion has a high population density in one area of the world it can't be considered a world religion? I'm afraid things don't work like that.

Either way it doens't matter, because as I said population sizes don't count for squat when assessing which is the more credible of two God


And Buddisam isnt a relgion, so of course it doesnt subscirbe to my God. Not just my God but any God at all. since why its not a religion .Juddisam is much more spreaded trought the world than hinduisam,  and that all 3 abrahamic religions believe in the same God, thats was my whole point.



pizzahut451 on 13 August 2010
WessleWoggle said:

No joke. I am the Buddha Maitreya.


thats not the same as being antichrist or satanist like you said.... that is just horrible and wrong on so many levels



Around the Network
highwaystar101 on 13 August 2010
pizzahut451 said:
highwaystar101 said:
pizzahut451 said:


Is Buddisam even a religion? I always thought it was a lifestyle. How can people call it religion when there is no higher force or God in it? And i mentioned in my post that i was talking about 3 MAJOR religons ( major as in, they are the most succesful ones trought the world), so hinduisam is not included, since hindus live mostly in India. You might say ''but the only country with the jewish religion is Israel and the population isnt even that big threre'' and yes, that is true but there are a lot more jews outside of Israel than Hindus out of India (correct me if i am wrong on this one)... anyway, i wasnt disagreeing with your post or trying to start a debate, i was just saying that all 3 Abrahamic religions believe in the same God, they just call it diffrently and worhsip him in the other way

Buddhism doesn't subscribe to your God, that's all the information that is required. Whether you define it as a religion or philosophy is irrelevant.

And since when has India not been part of the world? So because the religion has a high population density in one area of the world it can't be considered a world religion? I'm afraid things don't work like that.

Either way it doens't matter, because as I said population sizes don't count for squat when assessing which is the more credible of two God


And Buddisam isnt a relgion, so of course it doesnt subscirbe to my God. Not just my God but any God at all. since why its not a religion .Juddisam is much more spreaded trought the world than hinduisam,  and that all 3 abrahamic religions believe in the same God, thats was my whole point.


Did you understand my post? I'm not interested in debating the definition of religion. You asserted that most people believe in a God, and that God is the same God, just with different stories. I have tried to show in previous posts that this was false for two reasons:

1. Most of the world doesn't subscribe to the Abrahamic God,

2. Population sizes don't count when assessing the credibility of a God's existence objectively.

Now what I've shown is that simply is that number one is valid, as over 3 billion people in the world reject the Abrahamic God. Whether Buddhism is a religion or a philosophy is completely irrelevant to my argument, the bottom line is that they are half a billion people who do not subscribe to the Abrahamic God.

The same with Hinduism. Hinduism counts as over a billion people who reject the idea of the Abrahamic God. Whether they are a worldwide organisation or not doesn't matter, the point is that they don't subscribe to the Abrahamic God. I don't care if Jewish people are spread out worldwide, I'm not interested in debating that as it's completely irrelevant; the fact is that there is vastly more Hindus than Jews.

Either way population sizes wouldn't matter when looking at the credibility of a personal God. Whether it is Yaweh or Thor, the playing field is level.



Rath on 13 August 2010
richardhutnik said:
sapphi_snake said:


What do you mean "you religious people"?  I am not sure religious people are going to be happy with the state labeling everything "Civil unions".  I proposed the civil union solution as a way to deal with the issue of homosexual marriage without having to change the values of society to redefine what it considers to be marriage, before the issue can be resolved.

Yeah, cause it's very hard to say that marriage is between two people (of either gender) rather than between a man and a woman. SOOOO HAAARD.

Why not just say a marriage is between any number of entities who are legally able to sign contracts?  Why deny polyamorious individuals the right to have more than one spouse?  Do you want to rob them of their happiness?  Care to show how the current safeguards to protect people in marital relationships now will work, such as the dividing up of property when one individual in a marriage to more than one person would work?  How about custody of the children?

Those problems sure are solvable though. It just requires a bit of thinking with how to get it all to work.

I'm fine with polygamous marriage as long as it's entirely consesual, one man multiple wifes or vice-versa.



FaRmLaNd on 13 August 2010

My main issue with polygamists is not that they want to marry multiple women. My issue is that many of the people arguing for such rights are against one woman marrying multiple men. I don't care if it goes both ways, but if you only want it one way then I cannot support any laws in that direction. Sexual equality is more important.



Coca-Cola on 13 August 2010
FaRmLaNd said:

My main issue with polygamists is not that they want to marry multiple women. My issue is that many of the people arguing for such rights are against one woman marrying multiple men. I don't care if it goes both ways, but if you only want it one way then I cannot support any laws in that direction. Sexual equality is more important.

ha, never thought about that.  Are there women that want to marry multiple guys?

I dream of having multiple wives - few having jobs to support the family, others for domestic support. 



FaRmLaNd on 14 August 2010
Coca-Cola said:
FaRmLaNd said:

My main issue with polygamists is not that they want to marry multiple women. My issue is that many of the people arguing for such rights are against one woman marrying multiple men. I don't care if it goes both ways, but if you only want it one way then I cannot support any laws in that direction. Sexual equality is more important.

ha, never thought about that.  Are there women that want to marry multiple guys?

I dream of having multiple wives - few having jobs to support the family, others for domestic support. 


It doesn't matter if theres 0 women that want to do it. Aslong as the law is equal and gives women the chance to marry multiple men then I will support the law.