Common sense in religion

[shrewsbury]

religion can be a hot topic and often is. We have had some heated debates, hurt feelings, and even some personal attacks do to our choice of talking openly about religion. I love heated debates, I understand hurt feelings, but personal attacks are never an option, and against SCF rules.

so here is my new topic

Commonsense in religion

at first glance one could say, commonsense and religion have little to do with each other, people who believe everything in the bible show they have no commonsense.

I strongly believe logic and faith should go hand and hand, without one, the other is just a dream or illusion. And it is this thinking that keeps me being a Christian.

Most will point out miracles, creation, and godly intervention as proof the bible is not true, to me this is not an issue becuase how could any of us prove God or any act He may or may not do? We barely understand the atom, evolution, or the universe, much less God. This is where faith must play a role in any religion, but this is where my faith ends and logic takes over.

Why can't a Jew drink wine poured by a non-jew?
why is it not a sin for a muslim to lie to a non-muslim?
why do some speak in tongues, but not all?
why does any religion condemn anyone for not following their religion?
why would god need to threaten or punish us on earth?
why would any race not be equal to another?

These questions and others is what keeps me a christian, someone trying to follow the example and teachings of Jesus.

Jesus was a Jew, his followers were Jews from various nations, and He taught to accept all, no matter who or what they were. His teachings were of enlightment and understanding, of peace, and love. Sure He needed to get His point acrossed to many and some would only be swayed by fear, in fact this is how many understood god in the days of Jesus. But for those that could grasp a deeper meaning He preached love, to accept all, that the only sin is what we create, that there is nothing that is sin, but only the actions of humans create sin. You can drink what you like, with who you like, you can eat whatever you are lucky enough to have, that prayer and alms are a way of living, not a deed to be done at certain times.

I often wonder why those who so easily attack christianity do not see the difference. perhaps it is because christianity is so widely known and many outside of Judaism, and Islam know little about it.

I also wonder why many christians still try to use fear as a way to understand God and why they are not opened to others, as Jesus and his followers were.

This all seems like commonsense to me, but I have no issue with others who do not think so.

[mrveggieman]

Great points!!

[Wickabee]

I often wonder why those who so easily attack christianity do not see the difference. perhaps it is because christianity is so widely known and many outside of Judaism, and Islam know little about it.

I also wonder why many christians still try to use fear as a way to understand God and why they are not opened to others, as Jesus and his followers were.

I actually think you sort of answered your own question right there.

[JustAlex]

I think you laid out some fair points, and for the most part I don't have a problem with individuals no matter what their belief might be...

The problem I have with Christianity, Islam, Judaism, and really all religions, is that they have created a FALSE DICHOTOMY!

I will use Pascal's Wager as an example of this false dichotomy.

When I was a Christian, Pascal's wager was used repeatedly at me to reaffirm my beliefs, and I have to say that to me it was foolproof.

But then I realized....wait a minute, if I were Muslim wouldn't I think that Pascal's wager would be valid for this set of beliefs as well???

And then you open Pandora's box and you realize that Pascal's wager can be used on basically ANY and ALL belief systems in the world.


But wait a minute??

I thought for sure that my beliefs were correct, I believed in Jesus and the Bible and it all made sense to me!


But then I started to question why there are so many denominations in christianity?

Why does the bible have so many translations?

Why are Catholics and Protestants BOTH christians and yet they are vastly different?

My conclusion....all religion is false.


I think christians are some of the nicest people I have ever met, and so many of them are truly sincere in what they believe and how they go about in life.....but I can't accept their religion, I just can't.

[imronron]

I think you laid out some fair points, and for the most part I don't have a problem with individuals no matter what their belief might be...

The problem I have with Christianity, Islam, Judaism, and really all religions, is that they have created a FALSE DICHOTOMY!

I will use Pascal's Wager as an example of this false dichotomy.

When I was a Christian, Pascal's wager was used repeatedly at me to reaffirm my beliefs, and I have to say that to me it was foolproof.

But then I realized....wait a minute, if I were Muslim wouldn't I think that Pascal's wager would be valid for this set of beliefs as well???

And then you open Pandora's box and you realize that Pascal's wager can be used on basically ANY and ALL belief systems in the world.


But wait a minute??

I thought for sure that my beliefs were correct, I believed in Jesus and the Bible and it all made sense to me!


But then I started to question why there are so many denominations in christianity?

Why does the bible have so many translations?

Why are Catholics and Protestants BOTH christians and yet they are vastly different?

My conclusion....all religion is false.


I think christians are some of the nicest people I have ever met, and so many of them are truly sincere in what they believe and how they go about in life.....but I can't accept their religion, I just can't.

What is your understanding of Pascal's Wager?

[ensbergcollector]

alex - i call attention when i think you are being offensive, so the least i owe you is the opposite of that. thank you for your word choice in that reply.

[JustAlex]

What is your understanding of Pascal's Wager?

Basically it's a philosophical argument as to why people should believe in God, here are the conditions:

1. If you believe in God and God does exist, you will be rewarded with eternal life in heaven; thus an infinite gain.
2. If you do not believe in God and God does exist, you will be condemned to remain in hell forever; thus an infinite loss.
3. If you believe in God and God does not exist, you will not be rewarded; thus a finite loss.
4. If you do not believe in God and God does not exist, you will not be rewarded, but you have lived your own life; thus a finite gain.

The problem with Pascal's wager is that it can be used for every religion....furthermore, it's a false dichotomy since it's basically saying there are only two sides to this equation when in reality there are MULTIPLE sides and multiple ways to see it.

For example the fact that Pascal's wager is making an assumption that the options are only the christian god and no god. Well, what if the Muslim god is the correct god?

What if Zeus is the correct god?

What if the universe IS god, you know like pantheism?


There are far too many equations to just narrow it down to pascal's wager.

[magic_bobcat]

alex - i call attention when i think you are being offensive, so the least i owe you is the opposite of that. thank you for your word choice in that reply.

I salute you for stating this.

[Wickabee]

Basically it's a philosophical argument as to why people should believe in God, here are the conditions:

1. If you believe in God and God does exist, you will be rewarded with eternal life in heaven; thus an infinite gain.
2. If you do not believe in God and God does exist, you will be condemned to remain in hell forever; thus an infinite loss.
3. If you believe in God and God does not exist, you will not be rewarded; thus a finite loss.
4. If you do not believe in God and God does not exist, you will not be rewarded, but you have lived your own life; thus a finite gain.

The problem with Pascal's wager is that it can be used for every religion....furthermore, it's a false dichotomy since it's basically saying there are only two sides to this equation when in reality there are MULTIPLE sides and multiple ways to see it.

For example the fact that Pascal's wager is making an assumption that the options are only the christian god and no god. Well, what if the Muslim god is the correct god?

What if Zeus is the correct god?

What if the universe IS god, you know like pantheism?


There are far too many equations to just narrow it down to pascal's wager.

Pascal's wager relates to the existence of God and not religion at all. You can't try to use it to relate to any particular religion, just the existence of God. Doing anything else is doing yourself a disservice.

[magic_bobcat]

Pascal's wager relates to the existence of God and not religion at all. You can't try to use it to relate to any particular religion, just the existence of God. Doing anything else is doing yourself a disservice.

Without a god there isn't a religion though surely?