That's a really good set of questions, and I hope they get good responses. I've often wondered the same questions myself, mostly because I have been around a lot of people in my life who's faith, to me, seemed almost wholly inherited. They were given it at birth and never did any exploration into what other religions believe in. I'm not necessarily saying this is good or bad. However, I think an analogous view that I can steal from Socrates would be "The unexamined religious faith is not worth following."

I don't think this means you have to examine your faith (whether that be Christianity, Judaism, Islam, other or none [as not being religious is a faith]) in order to change it, but to realize what you believe in context to other view points.

I foresee the potential for a lot of back and forth on this topic, but you never know.

Check out Maslovs (SP?) heirarchy of needs. Security being one one the major needs. To remove one of your core beliefs, religion, you really need to be a secure person. It's a heck of a lot easier to just go with the flow then to swim upstream.

---

"The great pleasure in life is doing what people say you cannot do."

What I've always wondered is how people who have faith in their religion (as opposed to other religions for instance) reconcile the fact they were born into that religion?

It's a good question, but I think people often tend to make too much of it. Or rather, they apply it only to the question of religious faith, and don't acknowledge that it could just as well apply to any belief that they hold. Do you believe that all men are created equal under the law? Think you'd believe that if you lived in a different country in a different time? Does that make it any less true?

If you happen to follow a particular religion, do you have complete confidence that if you were raised in a family with very different beliefs that you would still follow the religion you currently follow?

No, of course not. If I was raised by wolves, I might have turned out to be an atheist. ;)

But that doesn't mean I wouldn't have been wrong, right?

If your religion of choice is right, then that implies something on the order of 6 billion people are wrong.

Objectively speaking, yes. But again, let's not make to much of this. We hold lots of beliefs that the majority of humanity has disagreed with. We don't have much problem saying they're wrong just because they have numbers on their side. (Though I suppose it might be reasonable to hold a belief system that takes into account the fact that so many people are mistaken, and provides an explanation why.)

How do you reconcile your good fortune of being born into the religion that you now place your faith in

The short and truest answer- by the grace of God.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

I've always tended to view this early indoctrination as a bit of a brain washing process. Most people stay with the religion that they were born with and indoctrinated into because it's often the only one they know and is re-inforced by family/social conditions around them.

People who leave a particular religion, either for another or to become an agnostic or athiest have usually had negative influences in their lives from their birth religion or have been adventureous enough to learn about others and found something they found more appealing.

Although staying with your birth religion is likely to remain the norm for most people, in this more cosmpolitian world it will become increasing more common for people to change.

"It's a good question, but I think people often tend to make too much of it. Or rather, they apply it only to the question of religious faith, and don't acknowledge that it could just as well apply to any belief that they hold. Do you believe that all men are created equal under the law? Think you'd believe that if you lived in a different country in a different time? Does that make it any less true?"

I'd agree or disagree depending on what your saying. I personally don't think people make enough of it and agree that they don't apply it to much of anything. We as a species, society or community rarely question our actions or beliefs at any level. I think this action of questioning and studing our beliefs and values is becoming more and more prevelant as we are more often faced with people that have very different values.

In essence we are talking about boiling things down to an inate "truth" something that applies to all men, which is something that is very rare. As you state even statements like "All men are created equal" would be a questionable value in other countries and certainly in different times.

I think at best all we can do is continually reevalute our value system and beliefs. As situations come along that "test" those beliefs we must either pass or fail those beliefs. A much more difficult way of living life, but IMO better than being entrenched in an improper belief.

~Matt

For the most part I think those that a raised in a fairly decent situation with a consistant religious overtone have a tendency to follow that religion or at last come back to it. Some leave and don't come back and fewer still leave and go to a different religion.

I also think that those that are exposed to multiple religions have a tendency of not choosing any religion.

I also think those that are raised in poor family situations with religious overtones or extremely oppressive religious overtones have a tendency to leave and not come back.

All of the above is merely observations made by me and my experiance with religions and life.

~Matt

I think this action of questioning and studing our beliefs and values is becoming more and more prevelant as we are more often faced with people that have very different values.

I don't know that I'd agree with that analysis. I mean, I sort of agree with it, in a way, but . . . What I think is happening, on a large scale, is that those of us in the West have generally not made a serious study of our beliefs- whether those beliefs are religious, social, political, ethical, etc. We have no idea, really, why we believe them, other than the fact that we were taught that they're "self-evident." As a result, when faced with conflicting beliefs and values from other cultures, we find ourselves unable to articulate why our beliefs are correct. Pretty soon we're believing that all beliefs are inherently subjective.

This is a very serious problem, says me.

I think at best all we can do is continually reevalute our value system and beliefs.

As situations come along that "test" those beliefs we must either pass or fail those beliefs.

Can you explain what you mean by this, please?

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

"I think at best all we can do is continually reevalute our value system and beliefs.

As situations come along that "test" those beliefs we must either pass or fail those beliefs.

Can you explain what you mean by this, please?"

I believe that all to often we simply sit on our beliefs and say "this is what we believe". When something comes along that challenges that belief we simply reject it out of hand because "It conflicts with what we believe". Instead we should re-examine our belief against this new challenge and see how and or if it stands up to the new scruntiny. If it does not then we should decide if there is a better more valid belief to embrace.

On this matter "We have no idea, really, why we believe them, other than the fact that we were taught that they're "self-evident."" I would agree and IMO is a direct result of simply not examining ones beliefs. My hope is that as we are faced with various beliefs of other cultures, religions, politics etc etc instead of rejecting them out of hand or accepting them out of hand we'd examine and scrutinize them.

Simply changing beliefs because "it's a new belief" is, IMO, no better than hanging onto one "because it is what I believe" without examination.

~Matt

In Germany most German kids are more or less raised with the Christian belief, whether it's protestant or catholic, dependant on which church their parents belong to. Religious upbringing starts at Kindergarten and continues at school. Schools also offer Musleme classes, as long as a certain rate amongst pupil is reached. Otherwise and in case parents kids do not follow any religion, kids can also chose "Ethic Courses".

At school I learnt a lot about the other religions in this world at religious lessons. I also learnt about different sects and how they work, what their tricks are etc. Now as I am older, I can decide myself, which belief I may want to follow. I am glad I had those religious lessons at school. If I wish to become Buddhist as a grownup today, I have the freedom to do so!

What I am saying is: let kids follow the same belief as their parents do for the beginning. That is what education is all about (educare: latin = to raise) Once they get older they can still chose their religion according to their personal belief.

I think also religious education is like any other education. It's a firm basis, from which kids can live their life the way they wish to, once they are grown up. Whatever they adopt from it later is up to themselves!

---

---------------
If you ever want to know what an "eggman" is, then simply click here....http://www.emu5.de

Instead of "I think people often tend to make too much of it" don't you really mean to say that people don't make enough out of it with other belief systems? I agree with MJuric that people are too complacent in what they believe, whether that be in religion, politics or anything else.

But above and beyond any other belief system, religion is the one that we should be most honest, open and critical of in our examinations as it is the most important.

"No, of course not. If I was raised by wolves, I might have turned out to be an atheist. ;)

But that doesn't mean I wouldn't have been wrong, right? "

But doesn't Christianity teach that those that aren't Christian are "wrong" and that they will not go to heaven? If so (and I believe it does), that means if you had been an atheist (or Muslim or Jewish or Buddhist) that you would be "wrong".

"Objectively speaking, yes. But again, let's not make to much of this. We hold lots of beliefs that the majority of humanity has disagreed with. We don't have much problem saying they're wrong just because they have numbers on their side. (Though I suppose it might be reasonable to hold a belief system that takes into account the fact that so many people are mistaken, and provides an explanation why.)"

Again, why are we not making much of this? For any non-Christian that seems to be the crux of Christianity, we do not believe what you believe, therefor we are wrong.

To me one of the _______ (not sure of the right term, not irony, nor inconsistency, but let's go with "unique aspects") of Christianity is that ever since Christ (assuming Christianity is correct) those that have not believed in him have been wrong, which would be an overwhelming majority of all humans since that point in time. How then, if so many have been "wrong" can we say that we shouldn't make much of what Justin in OK is bringing up?

And as to Justin in OK's last question, and your very apt response, all I can say is that is why so many Christians in America are fervent Evangelicals.

Instead of "I think people often tend to make too much of it" don't you really mean to say that people don't make enough out of it with other belief systems?

I guess I wouldn't object to phrasing it that way. What I meant is that people often point to someone of faith and say, "Hey! You only hold X religious belief because you were raised that way!" Which might often be true, but it doesn't necessarily mean their beliefs are wrong, either. Or, for that matter, that they hold those beliefs uncritically.

But doesn't Christianity teach that those that aren't Christian are "wrong" and that they will not go to heaven?

With regards to the first point, that Christianity teaches that non-Christians are wrong: Yes, of course. I really don't see how it could be otherwise. Holding any belief of any kind necessarily means that those holding opposing beliefs are held to be wrong.

With regards to the second point, that non-Christians won't go to Heaven: Yes, broadly speaking, I'll agree with that, but the reality of that particular doctrine is a lot more nuanced and complex than people generally give it credit for. (Like most Christian beliefs, probably.)

Again, why are we not making much of this? For any non-Christian that seems to be the crux of Christianity, we do not believe what you believe, therefor we are wrong.

Uh . . . what? Isn't that like saying, to a Christian, the crux of any non-Christian belief is that it says Christianity is wrong? Look, it isn't possible to hold a belief without also believing that those who don't believe it are wrong.

To me one of the _______ (not sure of the right term, not irony, nor inconsistency, but let's go with "unique aspects") of Christianity is that ever since Christ (assuming Christianity is correct) those that have not believed in him have been wrong, which would be an overwhelming majority of all humans since that point in time. How then, if so many have been "wrong" can we say that we shouldn't make much of what Justin in OK is bringing up?

I don't mean to minimize the fact that the majority of people aren't Christians. I only say that simply because the majority doesn't believe, it doesn't mean Christianity is wrong. Does that make sense? (And like I said, I suppose it's reasonable to subscribe to a belief system that provides some type of coherent explanation for why so many people can be wrong.)

all I can say is that is why so many Christians in America are fervent Evangelicals.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by that. . . ?

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

Dang, not sure how to handle another response in our thread, not sure I'll even be able to follow and I'm trying to respond to you.

I guess I wouldn't object to phrasing it that way. What I meant is that people often point to someone of faith and say, "Hey! You only hold X religious belief because you were raised that way!" Which might often be true, but it doesn't necessarily mean their beliefs are wrong, either. Or, for that matter, that they hold those beliefs uncritically.

And I agree with you here for sure, I think we should all examine our beliefs. If we do so, we'll realize the true reasons why Democracy is so great and powerful, and not rely on so much rhetoric.

With regards to the first point, that Christianity teaches that non-Christians are wrong: Yes, of course. I really don't see how it could be otherwise. Holding any belief of any kind necessarily means that those holding opposing beliefs are held to be wrong.

I thought I had an example or two that would show how this isn't necessarily true, I either can't remember them or they were wrong. Though I guess what I was grasping at was that if I think the world is flat and you think it is round neither of think the other is going to hell for it, so the implications of religion are so immense and important that it is in a different realm to me.


With regards to the second point, that non-Christians won't go to Heaven: Yes, broadly speaking, I'll agree with that, but the reality of that particular doctrine is a lot more nuanced and complex than people generally give it credit for. (Like most Christian beliefs, probably.)

Like most any beliefs I'd say, Christian beliefs definitely included. But since it was a generality it is intentionally broad and therefore a true statement.


Uh . . . what? Isn't that like saying, to a Christian, the crux of any non-Christian belief is that it says Christianity is wrong? Look, it isn't possible to hold a belief without also believing that those who don't believe it are wrong.

This came across poorly, but relates to the above where I mentioned the purgatory implications. I should have been clear with a reference to an example like the flat/round one above. Since I'm very lacking in my knowledge of Judaism, Islam, Hinduism etc I can't state what they believe about non-believers of their faith. Though I am fairly certain Buddhists don't hold a similarly fatalistic eternal-life view (though that's not really a religion per se).


I don't mean to minimize the fact that the majority of people aren't Christians. I only say that simply because the majority doesn't believe, it doesn't mean Christianity is wrong. Does that make sense? (And like I said, I suppose it's reasonable to subscribe to a belief system that provides some type of coherent explanation for why so many people can be wrong.)

Definitely makes sense. I only reiterate to me that it is at least interesting to note that Christians believe the overwhelming of humans for the past ~1960 years have gone to hell for their beliefs. Though, if other religions are of the same viewpoint they have a similar view for their own time period.

Also, and I think my lack of knowledge about the other religions I mention above is representative of a general lack of knowledge, and a general lack of those religions making those kinds of views very upfront. Christianity, either intentionally, through evangelical efforts, or a result of what sticks in people's minds, is fairly well known to hold the view regarding non-believers. That makes it unique in its public perception in the US, not sure if it is as well known world-wide.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by that. . . ?

By this I mean that since Christians believe that non-Christians are going to hell, that they view it as their calling to spread the word and to try and save people's souls, which is why many are so dilligent to their calling.

These are some random thoughts after spending 15 min. skimming this thread. Good thread, by the way:

I've thought about a lot of this myself and have no strong opinions, but here are some observations:

As to the conviction that Christians who truly "believe" go to heaven and most others (most anyone who has sinned anyway) not going, I have had serious Christian friends who simply say "We cannot understand or predict what God will decide." Sorta gets them off the hook, but the point is to look out for yourself first.

My more conservative Christian friends confide that they believe most non-believers are destined to fry ... But I have some Christain friends who believe the whole afterlife is more "metaphorical;" yeah, it's there wiating for us but its not as concrete as believe=heaven; don't=hell.

As to being born into a religion, well its intersting that Judeo-Christianity invites converts: People convert to Islam, Christianity and Judaism all the time. Not so in Asia: Do Hindus (a billion of them) try to get people to convert? Not that I know of ... My understanding of Hinduism is that you are born into the system and you must follow that path: If your caste says "shopkeeper" you had better not stray to far. There are consequences for stepping out of line ... And if you are not born Hindu, well, you won't really ever become one ... but you are welcome to practice somewhat in some communities ... to some degree. That's what I gather anyway. Don't know about Sikhs or Buddists. -TB

As far as I learnt this image of heaven and hell was made up by church during the Middle Ages in order to scare the shit out of people and to make them obey to anything the local priest had said.

I can hardly believe that people still believe in heaven and hell!


What is a church worth which still uses those methods?

If my kids ever came home from school believing in heaven and hell, I would immediately have a serious word with whoever made them believe in such a nonsense!

---

---------------
If you ever want to know what an "eggman" is, then simply click here....http://www.emu5.de

As far as I learnt this image of heaven and hell was made up by church during the Middle Ages

Well, you learnt wrong.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

A better explanation is here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hell#Christianity

You're right, it was even before that!

---

---------------
If you ever want to know what an "eggman" is, then simply click here....http://www.emu5.de

Well, we can have the theological debate about whether Hell was ever "made up" or not if you want, but I don't see that going anywhere as a productive discussion. I'd just point out that before you get all itchy for a fight with some imaginary school teaching your kids such "nonsense," you might first have a serious word with whoever it was who learnt you such a factually wrong tidbit that Hell was made up in the Middle Ages.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

Ok, you're right in that point, what I rather meant was this one:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purgatory

Ever since humans can think, they believe in good and bad powers, call it god and evil, or heaven and hell. I more referred to purgatory as such! Sorry about the misunderstanding! School has been too long ago!

---

---------------
If you ever want to know what an "eggman" is, then simply click here....http://www.emu5.de

Quote:

Protestant churches largely reject explicit belief in Purgatory. As 2 Maccabees is a deuterocanonical book, most Protestants consider it to be apocryphal, and do not consider that the other Scripture verses mentioned admit of a belief in Purgatory. Many Protestants claim that belief in Purgatory has been used, by unscrupulous priests if not by the Catholic Church itself, to terrify parishioners into donating money to fund Church projects, on the pretext that they might effectively buy their loved ones out of the torment of Purgatory

---

---------------
If you ever want to know what an "eggman" is, then simply click here....http://www.emu5.de

Interesting. When I was taking classes at college, I wrote a paper on Purgatory, relating it to the story of the prodigal son. (It was a class on the Gospels at a Jesuit school. Taught by a Presbyterian minister. If that professor was representative of his denomination, the Presbyterians must not believe in much of anything anymore.)

Purgatory seems to me an entirely reasonable belief, given what else Christians believe about God.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

You must have not seen the South Park episode where everyone is standing around in hell wondering how they got there since they led a good life when Satan comes out and says, "Sorry folks, the correct answer was Mormon".

I believe a persons faith changes as they grow older. We keep learning about ourself and our faith. I light of this, consider religions of the world have there own agenda. At times various religions have had to individualize themselves from other competing religions to survive. This is a generalizations but religions do evolve for may reasons.

The Romans adopted Christianity as a common denominator to unite the Roman Empire under one religion. If they had not done that many of us today would be speaking Hebrew.

---

Saddlesore

The Romans adopted Christianity as a common denominator to unite the Roman Empire under one religion. If they had not done that many of us today would be speaking Hebrew.

Not.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."