Art Thou Religious?

[Harovan]

I'm Satanist and deeply offended to be left out of your poll.

[Blake]

I believe that no communication with God is possible.

This can be made "true" in one of two ways:
1) There is no God.
2) Were God to reveal himself (in some way) to a mortal, it would destroy the Mortal's mind, resulting in the loss of self and hence no original self believing in God - the weaker version of this is that if I were made in some way to believe in God, I would no longer identify with my present self (as a trivial example, replacing me with a clone who believes in God - to external observers it'd appear as if I have been converted, but I-I'd be dead). Note that this isn't necessarily true for those who believe that they are of (at least partially) Divine nature, presumably their Divine soul could handle contact with God.

I either believe that no proof of god is possible, or that no possible proof of god can sway me, and not only "proofs by men", but if God himself were to attempt to try and prove his existence to me, I'd be destroyed before accepting it.

I believe this makes me a very hard atheist, because according to my belief system, God is incapable of doing something (convincing me to believe in him) and hence God is not omnipotent and hence God is not God.

I believe the weakest point of my argument is that of Divine nature of humanity - if humans (including myself) do in fact have some divine nature then that would act as a bridge between Man and God without the "self death" thing. Religions have the soul concept for a reason, of course.

I do not discount the possibility of less than omnipotent God-like beings (which can be eventually encompassed by scientific understanding), or God whose actions are indistinguishable from the "smooth running of the Universe" (although that really is simply a matter of subjective perception). Both are irrelevant as Personal Gods.

[Nikolai]

Christian.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov
the Judaism option was somehow hidden so I voted other.


I consider myself non-observing Jewish.

I prescribe to beliefs which would be called "Reformist" and I learnt in a school with a "reformist" tendency.
.

You didnt go to a state secular school? You went to a school affiliated with the Israeli Progressive movement, the Israeli affiliate of the World Union of Progressive Judaism, to which USA Reform is also affiliated? Is there a Progressive equivalent of the Tali schools? Or did you go to a Tali school?

Curious, I am.

[Kidlicious]

I'm anti-religious. Not anthiest or agnostic damn it!

[Alexander I]

Well the results so far are not especially surprising. It just confirmed that we at Apolyton are mostly Europeans or Americans who are either Irreligious or Christian, with a few other religions thrown in the mix.

[Cort Haus]

I dunno, Alexander. Don't underestimate the power of the Cult of the Banana.

[Alexander I]

Originally posted by Cort Haus
I dunno, Alexander. Don't underestimate the power of the Cult of the Banana.

Yeah, you're right. How could I neglect the Banananites?
They're almost as bad as those who worship this creature:

[Heresson]

agnostic is something completely different than atheistic and it's silly that in such a detailed poll You grouped it together.

[MightyTiny]

Originally posted by Heresson
agnostic is something completely different than atheistic and it's silly that in such a detailed poll You grouped it together.

Most - if not all - atheists are also agnostics. And I'd venture to say that by far most agnostics are also either theists or atheists. Quoting myself from a few posts up:

I don't believe that "I'm an agnostic" answers the question "what do you belive?" at all. It's like saying "3 o'clock" when someone asks you whether or not you own a watch.

I always ask people who describe themselves only as agnostic: "So, you don't know either way, but what do you BELIEVE?"

There are some agnostics who claim no belief either way, but I find myself a bit sceptical whether they don't fall even slightly on one side or the other - it would be quite remarkable after all, that they evidence bearing on the question that they'd encountered would be exactly balanced between the claims "there are no gods" and "there is a god or gods".

An agnostic who refuses to acknowedge any level of belief as to whether or not there is a god, and claims that it is unreasonable to believe either way, is actually making a rather remarkable claim: that there exists ONE question "is there a god or gods?" that is different from all other questions on which we trivially form, reasonable, TENTATIVE, non-dogmatic beliefs on a daily basis, based on incomplete evidence. That this question, unlike the question, say "does the big foot exist?", is not only unanswerable, but unaproachable.

I've never heard a "pure" agnostic justify why that one question (whether or not god exists) - unlike all others - is beyond us even to approximate what answer would be more probable, yes or no. After all, a belief doesn't automatically mean a dogmatic, absolute belief, but rather, most beliefs we hold are tentative, subject to change with evidence, and not held with any particular conviction.

I don't think it is at all unreasonable to form a belief on any question, as long as one remains agnostic - i.e. doesn't confuse that belief with absolute knowledge.

[mrmitchell]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
There's a vote? Seriously, because I don't know.

A few wealthy, conservative parishes in Virginia voted to separate themselves from the Episcopal Church of the USA in protest of Gene Robinson's confirmation as the first gay bishop.

The Economist noted it was rather ironic that the wealthiest parishes in America, that were home to most of the Founding Fathers and have history that stretches back into the 1600s, have in their quest for realignment technically joined the Church of Nigeria. The Nigerian Church is led by Peter Akinola, who has virulently rallied against at first homosexuality and now against the entire Episcopal Church of the USA, calling for our expulsion from the Anglican Communion.

I guess Doc Strangelove's congregation is another one that will be making the decision to stay or go in a few months. I would advise y'all to reject separation and infighting. The current activity is little more than bickering and politicking, but more importantly, it is doing nothing to spread Christ's message.

[SlowwHand]

There's a precedent set by the Baptists. Vastly different outlooks. Let me note, it's United Methodists.

[Perfection]

"Agnosticism" started out as just a weasel word for atheism.

[SlowwHand]

I started a thread years ago that agnostics were atheists without balls. It may have been a little harsh.

[Perfection]

Well, they were, but there are some self-described agnostics that I wouldn't call atheist, more "utterly confused"