Is christianity, or religion in general, a belief of convinience?

yup. i am one.although most fundamentalists wouldn't really call me christian. i ignore about 90% of their basic tenets, including the accuracy and literalcy of bible.

I tend to find it's just the american based christian churches that adopt that attitude, like the JW's, mormons, and sevvies...Being polynesian and from New Zealand I can see how that attitude of intolerance based on fundamentalist christian beliefs could grate on people from another culture and can be misconstrued as a stereotypical american trait.I had a woman from The JW's come round and tell me I was a slave to babylon and she wasn't. I looked at her with her coiffed up hair and make up, gold jewelry and labeled clothes thinking...yeah right and promptly set her straightI asked a young mormon missionary once who had taken me on as a possible convert where heaven was and he didn't seem to knowI try to avoid talking politics, religion and reality to people who aren't willing to listen to an alternative perspective but sometimes I just can't help myself.My brother and I can talk smack for hours about it yet he is fundamentally a christian and as much as we disagree he still loves me for who I am not what he is. Having said that we do share a common morality that is essentially based on "the golden rule".What I find annoying is the whole post apocalyptic heavenly bliss thing for the chosen few. It's almost like denying yourself earthly pleasures so that when heaven on earth arrives you can literally party like there is no tomorrow.Just quietly, but if heaven is full of righteous christians on a big picnic with dud clothes and crap music then I'd rather not be there...

I'm not so sure that the issue is really one of religion specifically or one of submission to authority?It is far easier to simply submit to authority than to try to work to develop opinions based on your own analysis of evidence. If you can have your belief system neatly boxed and handed to you, and know that you no longer have to question anything because what is in the box is all there is, there is no new knowledge to gain or old knowledge to overturn, it can be very comforting and easy for many folk.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Speaking as a former christian zombie, it has been my belief since my "death" that religion is the easie way out for many people. What's more perfect of an argument then to say, "given that god exists, this is the case and that is the case..." There is absolutely no way to falsify a premise, or postulate, like the existence of god.My death happened almost 5 years ago and I am still angry at what christianity did to my youth. Perhaps a few more years will bring me back to the negotiating table with chritianity.

---

The Laminator

​

Hi Lam, I have a friend who is quite fundlementalist in his beliefs who everytime we debate something that he can not explain biblically he quotes Deuteromy 29 " The secret things belong unto the LORD our God: " That is where he quoted to, but when I looked up the passage I found that he omitted the rest of the verse: " The secret things belong unto the LORD our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law. " The key word is REVEALED. Why fundlementalist refuse to accept that which sciences has revealed is beyond me.

---

"One is punished most for ones virtues" Fredrick Neitzche

Being a former fundie myself, I can tell you why. They will deny this, like I did. They already had the preconcieved ideas about these things. The only problem that they encountered is that they didn't have anything to support their beliefs, so they turned to the bible and look for anything whatsoever that might be helpful while ignoring the rest of the texts.What bothers me is that they don't have the guts to admit this. Look at the christians who are racists. I am convinced that the bible did not tell them to be racists even though they claim that the bible supports their belief. I am convinced that they were racists and they only openned up the bible to find whatever they could find to justify their attitude toward non-christian white males.Anyway, I admit that I'm a bigot (against christian fundies). What I can't stand about christian fundies is that they won't admit it.

---

The Laminator

​

In some ways, I'm not sure how your story relates all that well to your story about your friend. I suppose in some fashion we are all guilty of this convenience, or shrugging off of what might be troublesome. For your friend in this case it could pose big troubles--she has recently converted over her beliefs to a man I presume she has pledged her life to, so at that level we're talking about much more than anything thought-provoking.Does that make any sense? She has invested herself into what she hopes will provide her happiness, so it's much more than convenience. Well, to your view of it, it's a convenience for her to avoid the issues; to her it is a necessary support in what is her life.Forgive me if I'm not being clear here. I'm agnostic myself, but strive to imagine myself in the other person's position. I certainly never accomplish that completely, but when I try to imagine it here, I can see how her behavior is still human, complicated, and perhaps not convenient as you seem to define it. Also, it seems likely that since this is a change from what you knew her to be like, you are likely to notice sharply those things which don't jibe with her past views and behaviors.So I doubt that she has actually stopped thinking about things. Have you ever really stopped thinking about things? Or perhaps your thoughts move to new thoughts and you think about those?

I didn't. I was not influenced by my parents friends pastor or Bible. I tried for a while to reconcile evolution with the Bible and eventually gave up thinking it was just too great a mystery for me to understand. I tried for a while to believe in evolution, but the leaps of faith it made and the lack of evidence of intermediary fossils just did not sit right with me. I tried to understand how uniformitarian geology produced the features I saw, but something still did not sit right with me. Then I bought Walt Brown's book and my eyes were opened. All kinds of questions I had about the world around me were answered. I learned a little more here and there and now I'm convinced that evolution is not responsible for creation and expansion of complexity of lifeforms. I watched a show on the discovery channel about mystery after mystery that science cannot explain, and it was SOOO obvious to me how the hydroplate theory explained them. I've learned more and more about the Bible and it is amazing how well everything fits.

edit for weird hyperspace glitch that duplicated my prior postThis message has been edited by Gastric ReFlux, 07-14-2004 09:37 PM

This confirms Yaro's explanation in this thread. To be frank, you wanted an easy way out.People have the misconception that science is suppose to explain everything, and if it can't explain some things then the rest of it is wrong.Your message there really really sounds like you wanted everything to be handed to you on a silver plate.Science isn't about finding out truth or to explain everything there is to explain. It is about being objective when approach the problems. No wonder you are so disappointed. You wanted the scientific community to give you truth.By the way, you just introduced the hydroplate theory as if it has been confirmed. I have seen several creationists done something like this, where they presented ideas in threads like this as if these ideas were confirmed facts even though they've either been debunked in other threads or are so rediculous that noone ever paid attention to. Other people couldn't say anything because it is technically off-topic. So please, spare us the preaching. Actually, why don't you start a new thread on the hydroplate theory?Let me ask you a simple question. Please be honest. Regarding the various theories that are out there to support creationism, did the people come up with those theories with the purpose of verifying the existence of a creator or did the people look at the evidence, came up with those theories, and then saw that those theories suggested a creator? In other words, is the creator a given or not?

---

The Laminator

​

No, not yet another hydroplate thread? This message has been edited by jar, 07-14-2004 11:52 PM

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I do not believe you are a bigot. I believe you as myself can not abide the arrogance of certainty that many fundlementalist smugly proclaim. The only thing that is certain is change.This message has been edited by 1.61803, 07-15-2004 12:13 AM

---

"One is punished most for ones virtues" Fredrick Neitzche

I know. This topic has been beaten to death many many times... even more so than homosexuality. Unfortunately, some people are quick to forget just how rediculous we have shown this theory to be in other threads. I guess he mentioned it hoping that noone would say anything about it and that it could deceive newbies.

---

The Laminator

​

I can't help but wonder that myself sometimes when I see my fellow preacher-2-Bs closing their mind the same way you described. However, lots of us still think about deep stuff, and I don't care what anybody says; I will NOT condemn homosexuality or peaceful non-Christians. Nothing can justify immoral discrimination. Nothing.I think the question should be:Is FUNDAMENTALIST religion a convenient methodology for simplifying your life? Is it a way to eliminate complex questions, and deep thought?

---

Wanna feel God? Step onto the wrestling mat and you'd be crazy to deny the uplifting spirit. http://www.BadPreacher.5u.com (incomplete, but look anyway!)

especially not a religion that says things like "love your neighbor" "love your enemy above yourself" and "judge not, lest ye be judged" i agree, and it probably is.