Jarl said:
I have a few...
From personal experience I have a friend who will write off most things I would call either luck or personal achievement to God's grace/God's favor. Do you do the same? As in, my friend got a job and thus thanked God for it, but didn't thank herself for actually being good enough to get the job. Isn't this sort of self-destructive? Likewise, if you were to get an A+ on a test (assuming you're studying), would you write that off as God's will of you having an A+, or your hard work paying off with no regard for God whatsoever?
I do the same. Though it's due to my belief in God's power. You'd understand were you a Christian. Similarly, I find that it technically makes you more thankful and humble for the great things that do befall you. We see it as; who created the thing in which we succeeded? Who gave us the muscles/brains/wit/determination to allow us to succeed. It's basically giving glory where glory is due. I managed to succeed academically and in my job without losing my sense of purpose/self (which is found in God) and have been given a humility which has lead to joy. Essentially, this doesn't work though if you're a non-Christian, because it goes with the Christian understanding of God.
How do you feel about people like Richard Dawkins? Or rather, do you believe that you, as a religious person, requires special treatment because of your beliefs? In the society I currently live in, discussing religion is almost taboo because anyone saying anything but "people should have their own beliefs" or "it's good to have something to believe in" will be shunned. I'm not saying I feel like bashing religious people, but I do wonder if you share the feeling of "persecution" from people like Dawkins, who refuses to adhere to political correctness just for the sake of not angering people.
I don't mind if he doesn't adhere to political correctness, just to empirical understanding/investigative research conventions. His book is an angry rant on Christianity with the worst research conducted on Christianity known to man. He's quite a nice guy besides that though - he teaches my friend science - something he does very well. Again though, I like challenges and controversy, as long as it's based on something.
On that note, how do you feel about the people saying that the stigma against Christianity is somewhat justified because it could easily be viewed as the most "zealous" religion, with many members trying to convert people they know or meet? Speaking from my own experience I have met many christians unable to personally accept my inability to believe in a higher power, and tried fervently to convert me, and the christians who are downright offended by Atheists, as if it is a personal offense to them that people either cannot or will not believe in whatever entity they choose to believe in.
I really rarely encounter any Christians who have "zealously" tried to convert atheists. I bemoan that at times. What I generally find is people trying to yell me down five minutes after meeting me in a lecture hall. Basically, we're told to tell people the "good news". They don't like it. That's the whole point... Call me zealous - I'm actually quite a nice guy. In terms of delivery of the "good news" - well that is debatable.
Furthermore, do you believe that "faith" is a strictly christian phenomenom? I've heard this claim that christians see "faith" as a christian thing, and that all other religious, non-christian people simply "believe". How do you feel about that?
As a Christian I think subscribed religions do require faith. I just inherently think that those believers are wrong. Again, it's how I choose to express that which is what counts.
Oh, and finally.. I know this may sound terribly insolent and as flame-bait, but it's a question I simply, for the life of me, cannot, honestly, find any logic in. Do you actually believe that there is a surpreme being that watches over every move that you do? Or is it more the fascination of the concept, or the comfort you take in the thought of divine guidance, on a level of "moral support" rather than "divine intervention" that makes you call yourself Christian?
I am a Christian because of a profound conviction, promise of eternal life and relationship with God. The logic is that I see sin, and then I read/am told about the consequence, and then I repent and get eternal life. I know this may be hard to bear, but it's no detriment to my life. In fact, a lot of the time I wonder why so many good things come my way. Similarly, I don't really need moral support or comfort too often - which scares me a bit. But then again, I'd call it God's blessing.
Which actually bring me to my final (promise) two questions; When is one a Christian?
Technically, one is a Christian when God has given them His Holy Spirit in order that they may repent and believe.
Visually, one is a Christian when they have repented and believed - and the fruitions and biblical living is to show this.
And could it not be argued that organized religion such as Christianity or Islam often does more harm to the global community than it does good?
History shows us that whenever you gather large groups of people together (and even just individuals) they are going to hurt each other. Religion or no religion, evil happens.
My doubt lies in this: My girlfriend's sister had her "faith" in the christian god confirmed at age 13, as is costumary in my country.. but mainly because she wanted a party, and that she "believed in something". Does "believing in something" make on christian?
Depends if she believed that Jesus died and was resurrected in order to forgive her sins, and if she has repented or not and if that is visual in her life. Otherwise, no. The bible says that even the demons believe in God.
Or how much of the bible must one actually adhere to/believe in to be considdered christian?
Just the part above. Have to repent and believe through Jesus. The lifestyle will reflect that decision, but won't be the ticket.
Isn't it simply an umbrella term for people seeking social acceptance while believing something that could, for all points and purposes, be different religions, only they call their gods the same and go to the same place to worship their diety of choice?
I'd disagree. What you're doing is seeing "religion" as a secular institution and not the actual reason as to why we believe
. Also, the rule of non-contradiction applies!
And, while I do agree that religion often can help individuals or small groups, it seems to be doing more harm than good in larger assemblies, such as when large groups of Muslims protest drawings they've never seen of their prophet, or incidents like Jonestown. Even middle-large assemblies or groups, such as the people of Kansas rallying for Evolution to be taught in science class, of all places. I'm just wondering if religion should be kept as a personal thing for as much as possible to avoid the large-scale stupidity that is crowds (to which religious zeal does add a dangerous edge if you ask me) while keeping the individual helping-supporting-feeling-good thing that religion does. Maybe that's just me?
I have to say it's an atheist/agnostic world view. Like I said though, passion is in all areas of human interaction. Remove religion and you're still going to have people who hate black people causing trouble etc.
Sorry for the sparse replies, I'm just looking at the time and seeing how many more posts to go hahah!
