Have you ever considered dabbling?

If you find you are against any faith regardless if it is religious or not religious, have you ever thought of opening your mind to a certain faith, meaning to read up on them more
If find yourself only ever hunting out ie – anti-Christian articles to share with others, have you ever once stopped to think, perhaps there are articles that are more respectful than the ones posted?

If you can sit and fight for human rights ie – gay rights..then what’s the difference in doing that than someone fighting for Christian rights? If you are all for human rights, then don’t you think it makes more sense to open up to ALL, not just look for the negative?

If you sit and think – people have the right, people should have freedom of speech, then shouldn’t the same go for those who follow a Christian faith?, don't they have their rights also?Too many of us seem to focus on what a religion says about homosexuals, and like a scab, pick at it till its gotten rotten and you wind up feeling sore you did <--good pun if I may add lol

I always looked for the negative, I was blinded by my own ignorance and I am not afraid to admit this. It was the thread were each of us had to roll play that had me looking up real Christian sites and I found myself in a Christians shoes...I then grew stronger from it.and with the help of my friends also
I will ALWAYS debate when I feel I have to or ask questions, but this time, I will take the time to read their posts and understand them.........but that don't mean i must become one

There are those of us that only focus on the negative parts of atheism, if you do not wish to explore it, and you have your mind stuck on the negative side to it, then why bother wasting your time and others on silly posts? Its best to explore it and ask questions, its the only way to learn
Same goes for Pagan /wiccans, if you find yourself putting them down, making wild claims about their faith being ie - evil, then you are wasting time, cuz its obvious you have let ignorance get in the way of actually reading up on it all

The above is not aimed at anyone in particular...its aimed at EVERYONE in general
The point to all of this is – before you jump to show ignorance and look for nothing but negative in ANY given faith or lack of..then try learning more about it 1st , otherwise you only make yourself look silly

PS If you find yourself annoyed by this thread blinded by your own ignorance and feel I dont have a right to ask people in general to try opening their minds and listening to others..then you should just make a quick exit

BM

This is how I have felt for a long long time. Its why I consider the debates on here from purely academic reasons.

When someone is so resistant and angry about considering the positives of other people's faiths you can believe that its because it is an old wound.

Even me, I was thinking in the other thread that I tend to have little patience for Wiccan movements because they remind me of my mom when she was crazy.

So it is natural I guess for us all to have our point of no return.

But I think the thing to do is to ask the other person what GOOD religion or belief or lack thereof does in ones own life.

How does it help you. Because really that's why most people turn to whatever they do.

I do read up. In fact, I watched all of the Millennium series recently, and every time anyone mentioned an exerpt from the bible I knew what it was, where to look for it... I felt almost clever.

The thing is, I'm a logical person. When I explore a religion I dissect it. I question everything. I pick it apart. It's what I do... I'm analytical. If something strikes me as illogical then I will say so. When you're a critical person like me, such indepth scrutiny is never going to be welcomed by someone who believes their religion should not be dissected. But for the most part, those who are secure in their own faith are not phased by being intellectually mugged... they take it in their stride and remain strong in what they believe.

I don't believe in tippytoe-ing around religion. "Question everything" is a way of life for me. And the fact that I view certain religions to be counter productive to the development of mankind doesn't mean I stop reading up on them... in fact I read even more so. The day I stop learning is the day I die.

If I have a question about another "religion" I ask someone who actually practices it. Otherwise I'm not really too concerned over what people believe or don't believe anymore. Yeah I have opinions when I see some thoughts presented, but doesn't everyone?

I don't think it necessary to know all sorts of stuff about what other folks believe, it's more important to just let them be.

Of course I don't like conversion agendas.

Shadow on the surface that seems like a great point. But it rubbed me the wrong way for a bit. I think its for this reason.

I don't think anyone can dissect something for scrutiny before what they understand what they are dealing with.

I think if you approach the belief with the agenda of tearing it apart then really what's the point in entering into the conversation in the first place.

For academic reasons, we are always taught that first you must know it before you attempt to criticize it.

What I see a lot on UM is people who don't know the first thing about another religion tearing it apart with stereotypes and agenda.

I agree with you that learning is a never ending process

I don't need to open my mind. I just ignore them and let them go about their business, as long as their not disturbing me.

You've misinterpreted what I wrote. You've gone from "dissect" to "agenda of tearing it apart"... and the two things are entirely different. Also, when I refer to myself as critical I am refering to the fact that I subject everything to critical analysis, in the scholarly sense.

How do you know something before you've delved into it? The dissection comes first. When you dissect something, you learn and you draw conclusions, then you dissect some more, draw more conclusions, and so it progresses. It's a constantly evolving process.

Such indepth analysis leads to a greater understanding, but it doesn't necessarily lead to a favourable conclusion, as is the case with me and revealed religions. But the process would be the same regardless of the subject being dissected or the eventual conclusion.

I know exactly what you're talking about because that's exactly what I do. Revealed religions ask to be taken on faith what they offer is true. That the texts that come about, whether it's the islamic texts revealed to Muhammad, or the bible, are inspired words of an irrefutable, infallible, omniscient, omnipotent deity.

Critical thinking about such stuff, analytical thinking as it were, causes some to look beyond the facade that presents itself and asks to be taken, whole cloth, as true. I've never been about that. I've always asked, "why", when someone says something like religion, is absolute and true.

I don't know what agenda driven means. Perhaps some imagine it is possible to dare tell others they have no right to inquire about what makes a religion "tick". I would not concur. Especially when religions think their philosophy is so profound, that it is invested with the right to declare itself exclusive, absolute, and as such entitled, to take over the world. When a faith says, there is only one way to believe, I know that is unnatural, unrealistic and arrogant. In nature, there is not one of anything, nor is there a straight line, found in nature. So to imagine there is one straight and narrow path to finding the inspiration for faith, in what created all that exists. All that is known and seen, all that is unknown and unseen, is illogical.

As such, there are institutions of study into such matters, like comparative religion, for example. That looks into all religious ideologies, and dissects, or takes them apart, as well. There's a common thread that runs through many. Many have their roots in paganism, as is the case with christianity, and catholicism. None of this would have ever been found, or known, had people believed there was no need to analyze what is proffered as faith and religious constructs. They would simply have accepted what they were told, and thought nothing more of it.
At one time, daring to question the faith, was a death penalty offense. It is tragic that in this 21st century there are many that would imply that was not a bad idea. That one is not entitled to question, to delve, to analyze that what believes has the right to tell people they must accept this philosophy, or be damned.
I'd rather be damned for daring to ask questions. Than be damned as one that lives without a thought to do so.

Fortunately when I went to school they could actually TEACH us about other religions in a historical/geographical context....

....and as an athiest, it never bothered me to be taught WHAT OTHERS BELIEVED.....

Keeping your mind isn't the easiest thing in the world though... Sometimes, as a door blown shut by a gust of wind, one abruptly realises one's mind isn't open as it should be... And, of course, there are those who find it impossible...

I didn't mean for it to seem that I was disagreeing with you per se. I do agree with the idea.

However if you start dissecting it before you truly understand it then you are not going to be really grasping what you are dissecting.

I was thinking of a way to explain this when I was out, and I thought of internet relationships. I have a few friends who do not use the internet and they are very suspicious and critical of it.

My one friend gets very defensive and paranoid about the internet. She insists that its not possible to really know who we are talking to and is shocked that I've actually exchanged phone numbers and have met some of the people online.

I've tried and tried to explain it to her, the ways in which it is possible to detect fraud and people with multiple accounts for example.

But in her mind its not possible to do this over the internet without actually meeting the other person. She also doesn't believe that you can make true friendships.

To you or me or pretty much anyone who is a regular poster on this site, I can easily explain the possibilities of this.

But to my friend its impossible for her to understand it because she hasn't really experienced it for herself. This is why I tend to hesitate before assuming I truly understand the religious experience of others if I haven't truly tried it myself and immersed myself in the belief.

Buddhism and Paganism are two religions that I know nothing about. So I'd hesitate to dissect or criticize them even though I may have "read up" or studied them.

I hope this makes more sense.

Thats the whole idea behind all faiths GW...the fact that people call then true..........

If you followed something anything...the only reason as to why you would do so, is because you felt it spoke truth to you...only real reason to follow it. Of course not everyone is going to believe it to be truth, but see thats what makes us all different...thank goodness we arent all the same

go for it. i don't think anyone around here would mind too terribly much.

From reading your post true...you come accross very understanding towards others, looks as though you have been rather observant towards everyone and everything they stood for

I can understand as to WHY some that have been hurt from a religious person or persons...its an open wound and like anything ...if a mad dog bites you and scars you, you are weery of going near other dogs in the future

Or if you want to put it another way -- You fall for a guy..head over heals...he breaks your heart, this tears you up, you slip into depress mode for some time, and then you think - all men are alike!!

I am lucky I wasn't raised and had religion drummed into me........I was lucky to be given a choice, maybe thats why i am finding it easy to lookat other faiths

And yea...there are those that get stuck in one thing and so used to it, its all they have ever known.....the thoughts of dabbling intrest in another faith is strange to them

all of which is understandable

I got my hands full with the religion I have, besides I have studyed many other religions and I have found the religion I am happy with.

How does one understand what one is being faced with, if one hasn't yet dissected it? How do we learn without analytical exploration? Surely the exploration comes first, then the conclusion, not the other way around?

You live it

First I would define a faith as any strongly held belief or social construct. It may be based on logic or emotional response or on a philosophical response to an otherwise inexpliable series of events.
I do not think there really is a "right" faith, but I am pretty sure there are some "wrong" ones.

I would judge a faith on the balance of "good" versus "bad' it does for its believers and also those non believers with whom it connects. Thus National Socialism may well have provided some good for its believers, but the great harm it did to others made it a "wrong" faith. At times christianity has done more harm than good at other times vice versa.

Usually it is not the faith, but the nature of the humans who follow it which determines both good and evil outcomes. For example both the bible and the Koran are followed by people ranging from aesthetic hermits , through social and moral philanthropists to extremists prepared to kill,and die, for their faith.

Faiths usually only last when they respond to and fulfill basic human needs, just as the family exists in similar formats all round the world. Faiths also respond and develop according to scientific knowledge and understanding. The christian faith pre- gallilleo and copernicus was no more "wrong" for its times than the present christian faith is for today.Yet someone looking back on us from a couple of hundred years in the future will struggle to understand why we would follow the forms of faith we hold today.

So if you must judge a faith, do it on the following basis

1. Personal. Is it "right" for you on emotional or logical grounds?

2. Societal. If it is not for you, is it still a reasonable faith for others based on the good it does for believers and the encompassing community?

3. Ethical. Even if it does good for both believers and non believers, does it promote harm through fundamentally non ethical practices?

For example personally, I would have no problem with a religion that promoted multiple partners or non traditional but consensual sexual practices (unless there was evdence that these caused considerable harm to individuals or communities). It would not suit me, but it might be a good and workable faith.

On the other hand I have real difficulties with faiths that do, or allow, real physical and emotional harm to people, because it is seen as a necessary element of the faith. Female genital mutilation is perhaps the clearest example, but also honour killings or the "sacrifice" of a woman on her husbands funeral pyre.

While some logical and ethical arguments can, and are, put forward by women for wearing traditional islamic dress, the same arguments can not be used to justify harm to anyone; even where the families, communities, and even the individuals concerned, may accept such harm as necessary for the greater good of the community in maintaining a faith.

I don't want to be a Christian, any more than I want to be a Jew or a Muslim. If I were approaching any other subject... politics, science, art history... I would question, dissect, delve into it and figure out how everything works. Why should religion be any different?

Perhaps that's where we differ. Religion, to me, is just another subject. It has no special status.

This is one of the reasons why I love your soul, True

Well this is what I mean. I don't think believers would agree with you. You are only dissecting the surface of it, not the heart and soul and as such you are pretty much wasting your time because your dissection IS only "tearing it apart" because you really don't understand what you are dealing with.

I thank you for this line of thought btw SH and I'm sorry if it comes across like I'm nagging you, I do understand the scholarly interest in these religions, but the answers one comes up with when dissecting it this way are false answers because they aren't really addressing what the belief is about.

I've been trying to say this for a few months so thanks for helping me word it better.

And Inner Space you are too sweet and too good for my ego!

I find the idea of "dissecting" a faith something that can only be done from an OBJECTIVE stance.

To say that you can only "understand" christianity by becoming a christian is not true. This goes for the other religions aswell.

We all know (or at least I hope) what mechanisms religion has at work on the human mind. This I believe is a constant with any organized religion to varying degrees.

Once this is understood it is then that the "dissecting" of the differnt dogmatic teachings can take place, then the rituals, then the ceromonies, so on and so forth........

One must be careful, for to fully engulf one's self into religious fervor is akin to drunkeness from the wine........sickness always ensues.

I don't know how you'd ascertain what my scholarly interest addressed... I haven't indicated how much I've studied, so that would be guess work on your part. And as you continue to define "dissect" as "tear apart" I doubt you are ever going to understand what it is that I'm actually saying. I had considered my posts to be self explanatory, but obviously they're not.

Perhaps it serves some purpose to make religion so mysterious, and to suggest that only by being a [insert religion here] we can understand the concept, but honestly I think that's nonsense. It's a myth fostered by those who are religious to make it easier to make up for the inconsistencies in their holy books. It's smoke and mirrors, and I simply don't buy it.

My gradfather was a Christian, and so way my sister. My grandfather thought, and my sister thinks, that I have a pretty good grasp of what Christianity is all about... without ever having to have been a Christian. She sits with me now and we talk for hours about the religion she was a part of until very recently... and she reaches the same conclusions that I do, having lived it.

If members of a religion feel that understanding their faith means agreeing with it, then it's understandable that they see disagreement as a sign of little understanding. But it is simple disagreement. I find Christianity to be entirely illogical, in every respect, and it has nothing to do with a lack of understanding. But if it makes a Christian feel better to believe that this conclusion is based upon a lack of understanding then fair enough... whatever gets them through the day.

By your reckoning the Nazi party should be respected as a movement, and the KKK, the communist, the cults, why not every one deserves freedom why not. So what if the religion preaches hate and intolerance, so what if its responsible for millions of deaths. so what that it built huge churches or Mosques while millions starved. So what that the holy Pope stood by while millions were baked alive and gased, yes millions but they werent Catholic so whats the difference right? So what that people where burned at the stake freedom of religion right, listen you want to believe in some 4000 year old story designed to control the populace fine just dont tell me I have to respect it and not ridicule the insanity which is organized religion. So please lay of the were innocent believers being bullied by the secular tyrants, its just that most people woke up from the hypnotisim and are taking society into the hands of reason and logic . God Forbid we actually think...

When we support social structures and really that is what a beleif (faith) is eventually, in some form, there are many aspects that one would look into... any beleif construct that stauncly resists any efforts for change or any approach for growth is a dogma... a good idea would seek to create genuine oopourtunity and genuine dignity for all...amoungst many other things...

any one can say live and let live this is rather simplistic..... but to truly scrutinize, understand the theoretical structures in which visions are built... only few get into this deep..this is what generates change and growth.. the gem of anything is in the next quetion you are lead to not the answer.....


this is a place of awareness which seems to come after letting go of the one true path, the only way truth paths...

I think some people deliberately misinterpret peoples quieries into anothers faith to side step issues they find challenging to it. When i say deliberate, i do not think they are aware they are doing this, if they were it would mean facing up to their ignorance. But this is where tactics get involved and posts become a PR battle of spin. ...its so silly when it goes down this path, i just try my hardest to stick to the point

I agree mama kitty challenging beleifs is second nature to me even the ones i apply for a time, I put them through some serious scrutiny first then if they hold up i give em a whirl, but on the end its my personal exeprince that talks to me the most...
It is as you say facing ones own ignorance the not knowing kind and maybe fear IMO....

To understand christianity is NOT to become one...............I understand it...but I have no intention in becomming one...not in this lifetime...but it does no harm to read up on it

What I mean, and what is blatantly apparent that others don't understand, is that when you approach a religion with angry attack in your heart, you can swear up and down you are being objective but you are not.

For example, although I know nothing about Buddhism I tend to think of Buddhists in a positive way.

On the other hand Pagans tend to come across as silly to me. Now if I am not careful to check that at the door and try to understand what the Pagan is all about and why this WORKS for some people, I won't really be giving it a chance at being understood.

Sitting there discussing religion when you have nothing but negative things to say about it, SHOWS that you are biased. Because many people who follow religions are positive and happy people.

If the only people you equate with the religion are trailer trash parents that beat their children until they are taken away, or foolish and deluded people who attack and berate others for their lack of belief

then its quite obvious that you haven't really tried to UNDERSTAND the religion but rather simply to justify your own prejudice.

I think in listening to those who have a positive experience without sitting there ready to pounce, you can try to understand it or "live it" through the eyes of the believer.

When someone tells me they don't know any nice Christians except for one LONE person they met along the way, I suggest they have blindly followed their ignorance into a dead end.

That's neither academic nor open minded.

Every religion has some truth to it and all wants the best humankind and earth so whats the problem. We gotta use our heads and stop helping the DEVIL in worldwide RELIGION GANGBANGING on spirituality

INTELLIGENCE and WISEDOM are not the same

You hit the nail on the head with that last post, truethat...

Oh my...I LOVE YA HUN!!! Couldn't agree more.

And yes, I have studied other religions (4 high school years worth...a lot!) plus my own studies.

I have to respect each and every one for whatever they believe.

All the religions of the world, while they may differ in other respects, unitedly proclaim that nothing lives in this world but Truth. ~ Mohandas Gandhi

Way to go She-ra

My old high school only ever taught you christianity

Why havent we got to this point as individuals.

My mind has been opened to all faiths for a very long time, and still is.
That doesn't mean I necessarily believe all or any particular faiths.

I'm very critical of Abrahamic Faiths, but that doesn't mean I only focus on the negative. It's just that the negative is all that differentiates them from, say, Buddhism, Taoism or Hinduism. Kinda funny really.

I had a very loving upbringing, from a mostly Catholic family. I suffer no wounds, and I consider my criticisms to be entirely objective.

For those of us that dont believe the devil exists and that evil only remains in man alone...man is solely responcibile for evil and wrong doings IMO of course

Yeah that is true that in the end man can not blame the devil for the wrong they done but still i believe it is an entity that started all this. Sort of like mysery loves company!

Absolutely...I find it weird how man likes to point the finger at some spirit for anything that goes wrong...when there is NO clear evidence there is such a being responcible....YET on ther other hand there is LOTS of clear evidence that man is responcible for all that is evil...

BM: I think that what we consider to be "Evil" and what we consider to be "Good" were both here before man was. They just weren't named until man came about. And I agree that man does create an awful lot of the former.

I respect your opinion lol but as a realist (so to speak lol) I dont see how anyone can prove there was good or evil before we arrived

As far as im concerned...evil is created by man meaning both men and women...not some made up evil spirit............the only evidence you have ever seen that shows evil doings is from man and only man

Critical thinkning , problem solving and skills for living are great tools to use in ones life....even so called justifiabale acts are held up to intense scrutiny and, nothing would be accepted on face value..

One can live in understanding, awareness and non violence and find some ideas/ faiths not applicable under any circumstances...its par t of discernment weeding out quality and merit that is the point of critical thinking.....IMO

often the oppositiion to critical thinking is it will often lead to a diffenrt conclusion than is wanted/desired , being open to 'faiths' has little to do with what it means to be opened minded almost anyone can be openminded and is ...... the issue we have is that this conversation is being constructed within a separation paradigm thats why its seen as lack of openess...
it would be useful to see within a oness/unified paradigm to apprecaite the point some are making...

there are many approaches and implemetations to the same destination....

.

"But believing as I do, that Truth only is beneficial, and Error, from whatever source, and under whatever name, is pernicious to man, I consider no place too holy, no subject too sacred, for man's earnest investigation; for by so doing only can we arrive at Truth, learn to discriminate it from Error, and be able to accept the one and reject the other." Ernestine L. Rose

Alas, all too often a refusal to accept error for truth leads to accusations of prejudice... when in actual fact it is simply a result of earnest investigation and a search for the truth. I will continue my search regardless, because I would rather be considered prejudiced for having an inquiring mind, than be considered praiseworthy for having a closed one.

Edited: to add speech marks to quote

its truly the spirit of inquiry and its the most natural thing in the world.....its in the questioning is where wisdom is found.....

Fortunately, my mom taught me to respect all different religions. She encouraged me to visit other churches when I was younger and decide for myself what path I wanted to follow. I enjoy learning about different religions and why people believe that way.

wise words from a wise woman.

May your journey bring you enlightenment and joy.