# How many God(s) are in Your Religion?



## JazzByChas

After having talked about this a while, I realize there are many religions available out there, where the god or god(s) in your faith may be none, one, or more.

I myself believe in the Judeo-Christian God, who would represent one God.

How many god(s) are in your religion?

And perhaps you might explain why there are the number of gods available in your religion


----------



## tvdxer

Just One


----------



## blancalaw

I am a Christian, I believe in one God.


----------



## diegodbs

I'm an atheist, so there is no god for me.


----------



## ampurdan

There is one god and there is also a myriad of them, depending on how you consider it. As long as you consider the human mind as a concept, there will be only one God (or none), if you consider that there is no human mind, but human minds, there will be 6 billion gods. I'm a politheist atheist (as saying there is one god is quite the same as saying there is none).


----------



## la reine victoria

I believe in one God.

LRV


----------



## *Cowgirl*

Christian. One all powerful God.


----------



## perrodelmal

¿Y que pasó con los agnósticos? Yo no me considero ateo, sino agnóstico.

En fin, ateo para fines estadísticos. Creo en la naturaleza humana, la ley natural.
-------------------------------
What about agnostics? I consider myself agnostic, not atheist.

Oh Well, I'll be atheist for stadistical porpouses only. I believe in human nature, natural law.


----------



## buddingtranslator

I'm definitely agnostic verging on atheist. I don't want to go into a debate, as this isn't the place, but God cannot rationally exist. Anyway, to Ampurdan, could you explain what you mean?


----------



## cuchuflete

My one God has little use for religion.


----------



## jimreilly

I am uncomfortable with the word God because it means so many different things to different people. If I say I believe in "it" (definitely not "he" or "she" for me) people get the wrong idea. I would mean something more like pantheism, I guess.

But in another sense, there are many Gods in my country (USA), the most powerful of them being Mammon. We are not the only culture holding to this strong and ancient faith.

Maybe I joke, but only because I am serious, because there is the God one says one does or doesn't believe in, and there is the God one worships with ones' actions and life.


----------



## irka_hcmc

Actually if there is a god, there is other gods within it. This is logical. But i do believe in an only god. I believe in Osiris actually. If you guys read a little bit you would know osiris is not far from jehova and the christian culture is based from the egyptian empire which is still today a very good example of civilization !!!


----------



## fenixpollo

perrodelmal said:
			
		

> What about agnostics? I consider myself agnostic, not atheist.
> 
> Oh Well, I'll be atheist for stadistical porpouses only. I believe in human nature, natural law.


Agnostics, if I'm not mistaken, are waiting for proof one way or the other before they decide whether God exists.

_edit: now Agnostics can feel part of the group, too! _


----------



## Chaska Ñawi

cuchuflete said:
			
		

> My one God has little use for religion.



And, to use a Quakerly expression, that friend speaks my mind.


----------



## la reine victoria

irka_hcmc said:
			
		

> Actually if there is a god, there is other gods within it. This is logical. But i do believe in an only god. I believe in Osiris actually. If you guys read a little bit you would know osiris is not far from jehova and the christian culture is based from the egyptian empire which is still today a very good example of civilization !!!


 
Hi Irka,

Whilst entirely respecting your views and beliefs, as I do those of all other contributors, I have to take issue with your statement that 'the Christian culture is based from the Egyptian empire', even though, having some knowledge of Osiris (the god and judge of the dead), I can see your train of thought.

Christianity began with one person, Jesus Christ. We have only one reference source for the existence of Christ - the Bible. Can we believe what the Bible tells us? Not necessarily. Accurately recorded, historical evidence, unearthed by archaeologists, we can believe. The rest, for Christians, has to be accepted 'by faith' as being the 'true word of God, given to man.' I am not comfortable with this. As a baptized Christian (by personal choice at the age of 40) I am supposed to believe that the only way to God is via Christ.

In my private communication with God (as I perceive him) Jesus Christ doesn't come into the picture. I can have a direct link with God either by thought or word. Does this mean that I deny Christ? I really don't know. 

Organized religion, in my view, is of no importance to my God. Indeed, it seems to me that 'religion' has done far more harm than good in the world. It sets people against each other, breeds fanaticism, with the tragic results we all know only too well. It is divisive rather than unitive. If, as most religions teach, we should love our fellow man and consider his/her well-being as important, or greater than, our own, why is there so much religious intolerance? I suppose the only answer is 'fanaticism'. So why do these fanatics completely forget all they have been taught and carry out such atrocities against those whose beliefs differ from their own? I assume they have the misguided belief that they are pleasing the god of their faith. In fact they are doing entirely the opposite.

As an archaeologist, specialising in prehistoric Britain, I have been fascinated by the things I discovered which were indicative of these early peoples' belief in a higher power. We can only make assumptions about how they perceived 'God'. Did they see him as someone who was to be feared because he sent down lightning from the sky, caused heavy rainstorms to destroy their crops, could inflict disease and death in themselves and their animals? Did they make their (frankly touching and moving) offerings to him to appease him? One very unusual Bronze Age discovery, which I was privileged to excavate, was the skeleton of an entire cow which had died whilst calving. The little calf skeleton still lay within its mother with all four feet protruding through her pelvis. One would have thought that these hunter gatherers would have feasted on the dead cow. But no. She was buried with the utmost care in an enormous pit (this must have been a labour of love, since the grave lay deep within the chalk bedrock, excavated using deer antler pickaxes). Did these people believe that 'God' caused the cow's death? Did they offer her back asking 'him' not to let this happen again?  We can only speculate.

One point I would like to add deals with a tricky point - the innate awareness of God within the soul.  I have had this since my earliest memory at age 3.  It is so difficult to explain that I shan't even try.  If you have it, then you will know.

Any comments on this point would be appreciated.

Apologies for the ramblings of an old queen.

LRV


----------



## Ana Raquel

Hi Victoria,



			
				la reine victoria said:
			
		

> having some knowledge of Osiris (the god and judge of the dead)


 
and the exemplification of the resurrection too!


----------



## JazzByChas

Hey, thanks fenix for the accurate clarification  ...I put this together rather hastily before I did my homework... 

And you're right...I was thinking about Agnostics, but I "submitted" the poll with the four, and I don't know how to change it...maybe some mod will help us out there.




> Agnostics, if I'm not mistaken, are waiting for proof one way or the other before they decide whether God exists.
> 
> *Agnostics can't vote in this poll*, because they fall outside the debate -- please feel free to join the thread, however, when you decide whether there is a God or not. Or, do like perrodelmal, and pretend to be from one of the other groups.
> 
> edit: by the way, Chas,
> theist = believes in any god (one or more)
> *monotheist* = believes in only on god


----------



## Mutichou

I'm supposed to be catholic, but I don't believe in God.


----------



## fenixpollo

You'll need to clarify that one, Mutichou.  Why are you _supposed_ to be Catholic?


----------



## Mutichou

My parents baptized me when I was a little child. So I'm catholic, aren't I?


----------



## cuchuflete

Hi Chas,
Poll edited...let me know if it's the way you want it now.

Your original statement:  





> After having talked about this a while, I realize there are many religions available out there, where the god or god(s) in your faith may be none, one, or more.



This implies that a god or gods, or our perceptions thereof, are always a function of religions.
You have my polite disagreement on that.  The existence of one or more gods, for some of us at least, does not require the existence of religions.


----------



## JazzByChas

I would think that this would indicate that your religion (or at least that of your parents) is/was Catholic. But since one's point of view can change, it doesn't necessarily mean you have to believe the way you formerly did. And religion is something I mentioned because everyone has heard of it. What you believe personally may have nothing (or everything) to do with an (organized, man-made) religion.

I should also add that I don't practice "religion." As LRV said, I practice a relationship with (one true) God by faith through God-the-Son, Jesus Christ. I won't go into atonement for sin, because it is off-topic and would take too long).



			
				Mutichou said:
			
		

> My parents baptized me when I was a little child. So I'm catholic, aren't I?


----------



## la reine victoria

Ana Raquel said:
			
		

> Hi Victoria,
> 
> 
> 
> and the exemplification of the resurrection too!


 
Thank you Ana.

I've been busy 'googling' to see if Osirism is still practised today, but my findings were inconclusive.

Getting a bit off topic I think.

LRV


----------



## JazzByChas

Cuchu: See my post above...a religion is a man-made entity, by which someone tries to define their perception of a god or gods. We don't need a "religion" to perceive a god or gods...



			
				Cuchu said:
			
		

> This implies that a god or gods, or our perceptions thereof, are always a function of religions.
> You have my polite disagreement on that. The existence of one or more gods, for some of us at least, does not require the existence of religions.


----------



## fenixpollo

cuchuflete said:
			
		

> The existence of one or more gods, for some of us at least, does not require the existence of religions.


 Nor does the existence of a religion require the existence of one or more gods.

Just because you were baptised Catholic doesn't mean you are.  That means that your parents wanted you to practice Catholicism.  However, you have free will and can decide what religion you "are".


----------



## winnie

i don't believe in any gods.


----------



## cuchuflete

fenixpollo said:
			
		

> Nor does the existence of a religion require the existence of one or more gods.



Hola Pollo,
You may be logically correct, but I've yet to stumble across a religion that doesn't have one or more gods. Maybe I've been stumbling in all the wrong places.  

Are there agnostic or atheistic religions?  Or religions based on indifference to the question of whether or not gods exist?


Ahhh...now I see what you mean... religion can exist in the *belief* that there is a god, whether or not that supposed god does actually exist.  Good point.


----------



## fenixpollo

Actually, I was obtusely intending to infer both meanings, but you are correct in that atheists and agnostics tend not to congregate and form religions.  When they do congregate, you end up with situations like with the O'Hairs, and who needs that kind of stress?  Better off to not try to form a religion at all.


----------



## SweetMommaSue

Good Morning All!
This is a great thread topic! What better way to find out what is going on in the minds of everyone than to ask?

Well, I, to answer the question, believe in one, omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent God (which is actually a triune Godhead).

I'm with Cuchu and La Reine Victoria in that I believe that man's invention of religion causes so much more strife and bitterness than is necessary! I believe that the Bible is the Holy Word of God and the absolute Truth. That is my faith in my God. He said it, and I believe it. There are many mysteries contained within it that we mortal men cannot understand, and we are told that when we leave this life, all will be explained. I eagerly await the explanations! 

I'm with you LRV in that our Christian faith began with the history of the Hebrew people. Then with the birth and ministry of Jesus Christ it was further defined. After His resurrection and with the ministry of the Apostles, the faith was taught and spread. Then through the years came the developing of additional mandates and the birth of more "religions". 

It is my belief that if Jesus were to come to earth today to see how we "Christians" were carrying out his commands and His plan, He would be very saddened, and angered in some cases. He presented His own life as a model for how we are to treat one another. When one reads the Bible, the only people that Jesus really castigated and called "hypocrites" were the folks who were so pretentious about their appearing to be so holy and righteous, and yet they had no love inside their hearts. 

fenix:
Agnostics make up quite a number of people! I have one sister who is agnostic, one sister who believes in a supernatural "force", a sis who is Christian, a brother who is a thumping fundamentalist Christian, a brother who is a Catholic Christian and then there's me, a Christian who believes that Jesus didn't come down here to begin a denomination but to show us how to live correctly and respectfully to all. True, the Bible has many rules by which we are to abide, but the main objection to the rules would be a dislike for restrictions on how to live. The majority of them are very sensible.

Mutichou:
You are what you believe yourself to be. I, too, was baptized in the Roman Catholic church, but I do not consider myself to be Catholic. I got baptized in the James River as an adult to express my belief and faith in Jesus Christ. LOL You know, my Catholic brother says the same thing, though. He was baptized Catholic, and therefore he IS Catholic. Interesting. . .

jimreilly:
Mammon-- this is something of which I know nothing! This is the first I've heard of this idea. Now I have to go look it up!

buddingtranslator:
You may have some very pertinent ideas to consider. If Mammon hadn't been mentioned, I would have still been ignorant of its existence. You see how we people can have the same things in front of us (well, similar) and view it so differently! You say that God cannot rationally exist, but to me, the only thing that can explain the balance in this very complex and complicated world is the existence of an all-powerful God. Something much more powerful than we mere mortals can imagine.

ampurdan:
I don't understand how saying that there is one god is the same as saying there is no god???? Please clarify your meaning.  I believe in one God--I definitely would not say that I believe in none! 

I think when we die is when we'll find out the truth. I think that many people who are riding their very high spirital horses will be quite surprised that none of their ostentatious presentations make any difference to such an all-powerful God! 

It is a horrible thing that people persecute and ostracize others for not sharing the designated "correct" religion. The Lord Jesus was kind to all except phony, self-absorbed, pompous folks who trampled on others in the name of whatever. That can be seen in the Bible easily. 

Well, I must leave my soapbox. . . I passionately dislike hypocrites. They only hurt people and cause much unnecessary misery.

We are not meant to be on this earth to hurt but to HELP one another! We are to be KINDHEARTED.  Here is where we need to concentrate our efforts!

I must go now. . . anyone feel free to interrogate ask me to clarify any of my statements. I'll be back later tonight and over the weekend.

Thanks Chas, for the thread.


----------



## la reine victoria

(Quote:/I should also add that I don't practice "religion." As LRV said, I practice a relationship with (one true) God by faith through God-the-Son, Jesus Christ. I won't go into atonement for sin, because it is off-topic and would take too long).[/quote]

I must clarify one point Jazz, lest it be misunderstood. 

My relationship with God doesn't involve Christ. I know that by my choice to be baptized it should, but I seem to have moved on. Orthodox Christianity teaches us that God is Three-in-One, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. (Source - *the Bible). *Please see my previous post on this. To me God is God, as I know him.

As I mentioned, organized religion no longer concerns me or my God. I sometimes go into an empty church to enjoy the peace and tranquility, and to ponder on the many who have worshipped there, in the traditional way, over the centuries. I suspect this is part of the 'historian' in me.

I don't need a church building to communicate with God as I know him. To me he is omnipresent, available at all times to give thanks to, to pray to.

The annual rate of church closure in the UK, due to dwindling congregations, is approximately 60 - that's more than one a week. People have grown disillusioned with 'the Church' (establishment) for many reasons and prefer to practise their faith in their own way.

The vicar who baptized me grew so disillusioned with the 'Church' establishment that he took early retirement (in his 50s) and doesn't let it be known that he is an ordained priest. He has his 'time with God' either at home or whilst out walking in the countryside. He once told me that, in his opinion, worship of God should be conducted in the fields or the woods, not in some man-made edifice.

LRV


----------



## cuchuflete

Momma Sue...



> I'm with Cuchu and La Reine Victoria in that I believe that man's invention of religion causes so much more strife and bitterness than is necessary!


 I didn't say that. I just said that my relationship with God does not involve any religion, and the god of my own understanding doesn't require or concern him/her/itself with religion. I did opine on this topic, in Philippa's thread about blind faith.

LRV's threads eloquently say much of what I think and feel.

As to the nature of god, God, or even GOD if you prefer...I don't think it/he/she gives a flying fig about our human conventions of nomenclature...it's easier for me to think of that force/intelligence/spirit as a unity, but it can take billions of forms. In short, mono _vs _poli is also a very human preoccupation. We simply choose the form with which we can most comfortably commune. I'm sure God understands our petty conventions and isn't troubled by them. We anthropomorphize because that makes the entire matter easier or possible for us.


----------



## Outsider

cuchuflete said:
			
		

> Are there agnostic or atheistic religions?  Or religions based on indifference to the question of whether or not gods exist?


I've read that Buddhism is like that.


----------



## blancalaw

Mutichou said:
			
		

> My parents baptized me when I was a little child. So I'm catholic, aren't I?



Just because you were born into a certain religion, in my opinion, doesn't mean you have to follow that religion all your life. The religion you categorize yourself to be a part of is the one you follow now. So if you follow nothing now, then you can say you are of no religion.

Ps. Some people say no religion is humanism.


----------



## jimreilly

SweetMommaSue said:
			
		

> jimreilly:
> Mammon-- this is something of which I know nothing! This is the first I've heard of this idea. Now I have to go look it up!



I simply meant, SweetMommaSue, that the "god" many people worship most often is the god of money (Mammon), whatever their professed religion. The way we live our lives can say as much about our "true" religion as any creeds we recite or philosophical discussions we may have.


----------



## Papalote

Mutichou said:
			
		

> My parents baptized me when I was a little child. So I'm catholic, aren't I?


 
Salut, Mutichou

I guess that, statistically, you would be considered as part of the flock. My opinion, being a renegade RC, is that if you do not live your life, or at least try to, according to their principles, you are not an RC. But that shouldn´t bother you much, eh?

À +

P


----------



## Chaska Ñawi

I, too, was baptised and briefly raised a Catholic. I suppose that in some sense I'm still Catholic, in that on the occasions when I'm at a mass it feels like a very old, comfortable, familiar pair of slippers ... and then the priest invariably says something with which I disagree and those slippers start to pinch.  But invariably the next time I'm at a wedding or funeral mass, that mass feels comfortable and familiar again ... for a while.

 I meet any number of former Catholics.  There is a joke among us that the world's fastest-growing religion is lapsed Catholicism.


----------



## GenJen54

I voted as a "polytheist" although techncially, I am more of a spiritualist/theist. I believe in God as conveyed by the Christian church. I also believe in and try to integrate certain Buddhist and Hindi principles in my life. Do I actually "worship" any more than one god/God? No. But my beliefs stem much further than those I was "taught" to believe.

For the record, I grew up in Episcopalian schools (until high school), went to Catholic high school, and from college years have now recovered from the strife that was fundamentalism. No wonder I'm so messed up. 

In general, I believe in a "higher plane" of spirituality and in god/God (whether he, she or it) as "Creator of the Universe." What I don't believe in, as has been shared by others, is the concept of organized religion and the idea that any one "faith" or belief is fundamentally more "right," or "better" because it comes from the "word of God," or any specific book. 

To me god/God speaks within each of us if we choose to open our ears - and our hearts - to listen. How god/God presents him/her/itself to us varies as each of us vary based upon our life and cultural experiences.


----------



## fenixpollo

SweetMommaSue said:
			
		

> fenix: Agnostics make up quite a number of people!


 In most polls and studies, atheists and agnostics are a small percentage of the population. In our country, Suze, only 3-9% of Bush's constituents will admit to being non-believers (source).

I didn't mean to sound like I was denigrating the agnostics and their lack of decision-making skills eek: oops! there I go again! I'm just kidding ). I was just having some fun with, as Chaska would say, my Brothers. 

No offense to anyone -- especially those who posted to tell us what religion you are -- but* I couldn't give a flying f** about what religion you are.* (to paraphrase Cuchu) 

Whether or not you believe in god, or God, or gods, or what color those deities are or how many arms they have makes not the least difference to me. It has no impact on how I relate to each of you in this forum. 

I have collaborated with people, asked and answered language questions, private messaged and made friends here without regard to religion... and occasionally in spite of religion. I hope to continue my relationship with those of you with whom I have a relationship, without religion entering into it.

Spirituality, though, is a horse of a different color. (_Saludos, mi Reina!_  )


----------



## cuchuflete

Since Chas hung a poll on this thread as an enticement/inducement to good conversation, I just looked at the names of people who voted for each option.  I see many intelligent, kind, helpful, sensitive foreros in all the major categories.  

Just an aside to show my agreement with Pollo.


----------



## Fernando

I am a Catholic.

Should I click the "One or more Gods" or the "Monotheists" box? I am confused.


----------



## cuchuflete

Fernando said:
			
		

> Yes, Mutichou, you are. But you can go out whenever you want.
> 
> I am a Catholic.
> 
> Should I click the "One or more Gods" or* the "Monotheists" box*? I am confused.


It was added after the thread began...

You may click 'one or more', but Monotheist is more precise.


----------



## Fernando

My comment "Yes, you are...·" was an answer for a very previous post. I have deleted it since has no sense 20 posts later.

Monotheist, then. 

I would have expected "theist" and "monotheist", as options. The "One or more Gods " comment is a bit confussing.


----------



## JazzByChas

Actually, my final thoughts on the matter were thus:

1) No Gods = Atheist
2) Dont' Know/Need Proof (agnostic)
3) One Only (Monotheist)
4) Any God or Gods (Theist)
5) More than One (Polytheist)
6) God & Nature are One (Pantheist)

And the _*Theist*_ is someone who is "easy;" a "generalist," if you will. They will believe that the concept of god is valid, but they won't commit to what, or how many that entails. So, they don't really have their own belief, per se, they just won't knock anyone elses, either.. 

Just my thoughts...

{EDIT: I'm sure, now, that I should have thought this out a bit more before I created the poll...one lives and learns... }

{EDIT 2: Having looked up the definition of "theist" as Belief in the existence of a god or gods, especially belief in a personal God as creator and ruler of the world."  I should have left "theist" out: it is too general.}



			
				Fernando said:
			
		

> My comment "Yes, you are...·" was an answer for a very previous post. I have deleted it since has no sense 20 posts later.
> 
> Monotheist, then.
> 
> I would have expected "theist" and "monotheist", as options. The "One or more Gods " comment is a bit confussing.


----------



## Ana Raquel

cuchuflete said:
			
		

> Since Chas hung a poll on this thread as an enticement/inducement to good conversation, I just looked at the names of people who voted for each option. I see many intelligent, kind, helpful, sensitive foreros in all the major categories.


please 
what does 'major categories' mean here? the options with more votes?


----------



## cuchuflete

Sorry Ana Raquel...I meant *all* the categories.  All of them are "major", in that they represent what people choose to believe.

Edit: I find the categories too limiting. I marked "monotheist", yet I believe God and Nature are the same thing...one aspect is just more apparent to our physical senses.


----------



## Ana Raquel

_*cuchuflete wrote*: Sorry Ana Raquel...I meant *all* the categories. All of them are "major", in that they represent what people choose to believe._

Ahh, I thought you meant that the foreros that had voted the 'minor' categories were dumb, harsh, obstructive and insensitive   

_*cuchuflete wrote*: I find the categories too limiting. I marked "monotheist", yet I believe God and Nature are the same thing...one aspect is just more apparent to our physical senses._

yes, I got it, the apparent must be the manifestation of the other aspect.


----------



## *Cowgirl*

All right guys you changed the poll on me. I'm a Christian. MONOtheistic. 
One God.


----------



## Chaska Ñawi

And yet, even with the changed poll, I can't conveniently pigeonhole my beliefs into it and therefore decided not to vote.

(But then, there are very few polls that really do extract my sentiments on anything.)


----------



## cherine

Mutichou said:
			
		

> My parents baptized me when I was a little child. So I'm catholic, aren't I?


Yes Mutichou, but we're supposed to speak about what WE beleive in, not what our parents "did to us" 

As for me, I believe in a one and only God who created the whole universe.


----------



## la reine victoria

I originally voted 'theist' but now I am 'monotheist'.

I have, reluctantly, to draw swords with Cuchuflete over his statement that God and nature are the same thing, although I can see the line along which he is thinking.  Nature, itself, is not a god.  God created what we call 'nature' for our pleasure and delight.  When we see all the wonders and beauty of nature then our souls are uplifted and inspired.  Thus we turn our thoughts to God the Creator and are prompted to thank him for all that he has revealed of himself to us.

Here endeth the first lesson.

Is this what you meant, Cuchuflete? 

LRV


----------



## cuchuflete

You may return your snickersnee to it's sheath, Your Majesty.

Ana Raquel got it, despite my shorthand:



> _*cuchuflete wrote*: I find the categories too limiting. I marked "monotheist", yet I believe God and Nature are the same thing...one aspect is just more apparent to our physical senses._
> 
> yes, I got it, *the apparent must be the manifestation of* the other aspect. http://forum.wordreference.com/editpost.php?do=editpost&p=623578



I don't believe the grasses and ferns are a deity.  All of nature, collectively, including thunderstorms, rainbows, plants, oceans, are part of a broad manifestation of the existence of what I perceive to be God.  It's a fuzzy explanation, but in dealing with such an enormous topic, our limited supply of only millions of descriptive words fails me, or I them.

How about "continuum"?  Nature is an aspect, which our physical senses can apprehend, of something we can 'know' through faith.  The essence isn't physical, but we are graced with wonderful signage.


----------



## la reine victoria

Thank you Cuchuflete.  My sword is now sheathed and a white flag is waving from the west turret of Osborne House.

I hadn't noticed Ana Raquel's comment.  In a concise statement of ten words she has managed to sum up beautifully what most of us are struggling to say with extreme verbosity.

I salute you Ana Raquel for your acumen.

Grasses and ferns?

Thanks again, Mr Cuchuflete.  I shall see that you are awarded the most honorable order 'Knight of the Feather Duster'*.  :>)*

La Reine Victoria


----------



## lampiao

Mutichou, 
The questioin is "do you feel catholic"?

As a christian, I do believe in one God only.


----------



## Ana Raquel

Hi Victoria and Cuchflt.

*cuchuflete said:* How about "continuum"? Nature is an aspect, which our physical senses can apprehend, 

continuum, does this suggest that what we perceive are not really aspects, parts and divisions, but that we see them as separated because our physical body works in that mode? 


*cuchuflete said:* of something we can 'know' through faith. 

I think we won't come to know anything through faith


*cuchuflete said:* The essence isn't physical, but we are graced with wonderful signage.


----------



## la reine victoria

Ana Raquel said:
			
		

> Hi Victoria and Cuchflt.
> 
> *cuchuflete said:* How about "continuum"? Nature is an aspect, which our physical senses can apprehend,
> 
> continuum, does this suggest that what we perceive are not really aspects, parts and divisions, but that we see them as separated because our physical body works in that mode?
> 
> 
> *cuchuflete said:* of something we can 'know' through faith.
> 
> I think we won't come to know anything through faith
> 
> 
> *cuchuflete said:* The essence isn't physical, but we are graced with wonderful signage.


 
Hi Ana Raquel,

I'm still in hiding at Osborne House.  I like you but I'm a bit scared of Cuchuflete.  He can answer for himself.

LRV


----------



## Josh_

Wow, as of writing this post atheist is the leader in the poll.  That's something I would not have expected.  I am also an atheist.  I remain impartial to religion and respect all religions equally.


----------



## SweetMommaSue

Quote:
I'm with Cuchu and La Reine Victoria in that I believe that man's invention of religion causes so much more strife and bitterness than is necessary! 


			
				cuchu said:
			
		

> I didn't say that. I just said that my relationship with God does not involve any religion, and the god of my own understanding doesn't require or concern him/her/itself with religion. I did opine on this topic, in Philippa's thread about blind faith.*  I'm sorry, Cuchu, for the misinterpretation. Thanks for clarifying. I'm going to find that thread and read it in a moment.*
> 
> LRV's threads eloquently say much of what I think and feel.
> 
> As to the nature of god, God, or even GOD if you prefer...I don't think it/he/she gives a flying fig about our human conventions of nomenclature *{I agree with you here, Cuchu! }*...it's easier for me to think of that force/intelligence/spirit as a unity, but it can take billions of forms *{**this is something which I find interesting}*. In short, mono _vs _poli is also a very human preoccupation. We simply choose the form with which we can most comfortably commune. I'm sure God understands our petty conventions and isn't troubled by them. We anthropomorphize because that makes the entire matter easier or possible for us.


 *I'm not sure if I anthropomorphize, Cuchu. That is ascribing human characteristics to something. I believe that we were created in God's image. So, then I think we have certain of His characteristics rather than the reverse. He came first and created us. 
*


			
				jimreilly said:
			
		

> I simply meant, SweetMommaSue, that the "god" many people worship most often is the god of money (Mammon)*{oh yeah-- mammon=money; I did know that; guess I'm gettin' that sometimer's disease, yeesh.}*, whatever their professed religion. The way we live our lives can say as much about our "true" religion as any creeds we recite or philosophical discussions we may have.* You are sooooo right! Actions often speak much louder than words, and many folks do act as though "the almighty dollar" is their god--though outwardly professing otherwise.*


*

Thank you, fenixpollo, for the link.  Interesting stats. I actually thought that the numbers of stated agnostics and atheists were much higher. So, I stand corrected.
*


			
				la reine victoria said:
			
		

> One point I would like to add deals with a tricky point - the innate awareness of God within the soul. I have had this since my earliest memory at age 3. It is so difficult to explain that I shan't even try. If you have it, then you will know.


*Ever since I can remember I have also been aware of God's presence around me. It is why I have such a strong faith that He exists. Growing up thru childhood and adolescence I had to follow the ways of my parents. Once I was out of the house, my spiritual journey began. 
GenJen mentioned a "higher plane" which is how I perceive heaven. I believe the spiritual world co-exists with our own, but on a different plane or dimension. It is possible to open the door to this other realm, but whether it is wise to do so is questionable. I had some pretty hair-raising experiences with this, and so I believe the Bible when it says to leave that area alone. 
So far, my quest for spiritual truth has led me to this point of having a spiritual relationship with the Christian triune Godhead. I do believe the Bible, but I'm uncomfortable with most "named" denominations because every religion has man-made interpretations carved into its rules and regs. Moreover, I have witnessed and experienced terrible judgmental behavior which didn't make any sense. What happened to the love, longsuffering, patience, kindness, etc. taught in the Word? 
So, I believe and teach my children about the Christian God, and I teach them that just as there are many different people on this earth, so there are many different ideas about God. As they are in public school, they will be exposed to the various beliefs. I encourage them to ask questions, and to not judge. I tell them it is our job to be loving, kind and helpful, and God will be the Judge in the end. 

UMMM. .. with the poll change, my answer changes to Monotheist. 
thanks,
SMS
*


----------



## cuchuflete

Hi Momma Sue,
You have written so many thought-provoking things, I could spend hours thinking and replying...I'll pick just one for now.
If the creation "in his image" is literal (I expect it's symbolic and broad...but that's just a personal opinion), then by calling 
God a "he", wouldn't that imply that God has, for example, toenails?   Let's also recall that when biblical texts were written, society was not politically correct, or very open-minded either, so to have called anything other than "he" would have been unthinkable. 

There is no right or wrong about biblical interpretation, just tons of variety. 

 Of course every professional bible interpreter would have my head on a spike for saying this, as they are convinced of their righteousness.  Thank heavens for the amateurs, who find the essence of loving and kindness, as you have.


----------



## -Lady-

Who says there is one god or indeed ANY gods?  Religion is simply a belief in a certain creed.  A belief does not make it fact.


----------



## Maria Juanita

Well, here we go... (me and my very immature 24 years old opinions) 

With the poll change, I'll be out of it and I stand for it. I'll still be an agnostic person.
Etimologically, Agnostism should be regarded as a lack of knowledge. By saying this, I mean that some agnostic people believe in the presence of something we can not properly know what it is. We can't _embrace _or even take them (just a way of say it) ergo, we know the universe is full of amazing miracles and things we don't have any explanation for.

Saludillos,

Juanita


----------



## diegodbs

-Lady- said:
			
		

> Who says there is one god or indeed ANY gods? Religion is simply a belief in a certain creed. A belief does not make it fact.


 
You are right. The fact that we can believe in one god, many gods or no god at all is irrelevant to its/their existence or non existence. 
But I don't _believe _that "god doesn't exist", I know there is no such thing/person/entity or whatever.
I say (mostly to myself) that god doesn't exist and I won't even try to convince the others on that point, and believers have always been trying to convince the non believers (by subtle or not so subtle methods) of god's existence.


----------



## cuchuflete

-Lady- said:
			
		

> Who says there is one god or indeed ANY gods? Religion is simply a belief in a certain creed. A belief does not make it fact.


Lots of people, billions of them, say it. That doesn't make it true in any rational sense. I think you have confused religion with faith. Not surprising at all, as many religions do exactly that.

Faith is not about facts. Thus you are totally correct in saying that a belief does not make it fact. Many religions try to present a case for a factual basis for belief or faith. That's a doomed exercise in tail chasing. 

There may well be one god or many, regardless of your or my ability to demonstrate such a thing factually. By identical logic, you cannot adduce facts to disprove the existence of one or more gods.


----------



## SweetMommaSue

-Lady- said:
			
		

> Who says there is one god or indeed ANY gods? Religion is simply a belief in a certain creed. A belief does not make it fact.


Welcome to our forums, Lady!!!! 

Please, by all means, tell us your view! So, do you then believe in no god(s)? We welcome your input to our discussion!

Smiles!!
Sweet Momma Sue


----------



## -Lady-

You're right Sweet Momma Sue.........I don't believe in God.


----------



## JazzByChas

I must also say, since this poll changed, it now reflects, a bit less acurately, my belief since I first posted it. I would be Mono-theistic, i.e. I believe in one (true) God.

Thank you ladies and gentlemen...Jazz has left the building


----------



## cuchuflete

Leaving us to ponder the seemingly redundant "(true)".

Let all those who believe in false gods raise their hands. We can add a couple of categories to the poll


Bogusmonotheist: I believe in the one and only non-existent god.

Pluriphoneytheist: I believe in lots of imaginary gods.

Bettertheist: My God is real and true...Your god is dubious at best.


----------



## JazzByChas

I would agree, Cuchu: faith is not a thing that is proved by facts, because you cannot prove or disprove things spritual, at least not empirically.  And facts, again empirically, cannot prove the existence of things spritual.  Religion is an interpretation of things spiritual, and neither proves things spiritual nor provides facts about things spiritual.  

On the other side of this issue, *faith*fully speaking that is , I would say, as I have said in another thread, that the created universe is evidence of a Supreme Being, who has vastly superior knowledge, intelligence, and forsight than we as mere humans could ever have.  I also believe such of God of infinite resources, can communicate with those he created.  So the point here, is you can have a _*relationship*_ with that God, should you chose to believe He exists. And a relationship is not a religion.  At least I hope so, because loving those dear to me is something I do not condider motivated by _*religion*, _but by _*relationship*_.  

Obviously, one can choose to believe in some other point of view (which are many, so I won't expand this point).  



			
				Cuchu said:
			
		

> There may well be one god or many, regardless of your or my ability to demonstrate such a thing factually. By identical logic, you cannot adduce facts to disprove the existence of one or more gods.


----------



## JazzByChas

O.K Cuchu...I believe you are starting to live up to my signature. "...you are crazy, and very good at it.." I like you sense of humor too!
And to further your point: I said "true" God, because there are those who think that "truth" is in the eye of the beholder. I.e. the "truth" is there are no g(G)od(s). Especially from the Agnostic point of view, there may not be a god at all...until more evidence comes in. Or the existential point of view that says, "there is a god if I think there is a god...until I change my mind..." 

But I do see the irony in believing in a bogus/untrue god...
_{EDIT: Upon further reflection, I realize that what I meant by true is the opposite of false/bogus/dubious as opposed to non-existent. So according to your definitions below, I guess I am a BetterTheist.  }_




			
				cuchuflete said:
			
		

> Leaving us to ponder the seemingly redundant "(true)".
> 
> Let all those who believe in false gods raise their hands. We can add a couple of categories to the poll
> 
> 
> Bogusmonotheist: I believe in the one and only non-existent god.
> 
> Pluriphoneytheist: I believe in lots of imaginary gods.
> 
> Bettertheist: My God is real and true...Your god is dubious at best.


----------



## lampiao

-lady- said:
			
		

> _Who says there is one god or indeed ANY gods? Religion is simply a belief in a certain creed. *A belief does not make it fact*._


True, but the opposite is also valid: A disbelief does not make it untrue. 

There is no scientific evidence there is one God, or more, but there is no evidence He/they don't exist either.


----------



## asm

Not for a debate, but could you explain the reason of your statement:





			
				buddingtranslator said:
			
		

> God cannot rationally exist


 
I do not want to argue against, I just want to know the rational behind the sentence. Thank you


----------



## ampurdan

ampurdan said:
			
		

> There is one god and there is also a myriad of them, depending on how you consider it. As long as you consider the human mind as a concept, there will be only one God (or none), if you consider that there is no human mind, but human minds, there will be 6 billion gods. I'm a politheist atheist (as saying there is one god is quite the same as saying there is none).





			
				buddingtranslator said:
			
		

> Anyway, to Ampurdan, could you explain what you mean?





			
				SweetMommaSue said:
			
		

> I don't understand how saying that there is one god is the same as saying there is no god???? Please clarify your meaning. I believe in one God--I definitely would not say that I believe in none!


 
Spirituality needs matter to exist and there is no spirit without matter. Spirit is the time when matter begins to think about itself, the time when matter becomes conscious and even self-conscious.

I’d rather believe in Egyptian, Greek and Animist gods etc. than share post-platonic, Judeo-Christian visions of a somehow One God (albeit I think that any Christianism is a closet polytheism or a mixture of pagan gentile and jewish beliefs and that Mosaic Israelites were not monotheists but “henotheists”: they believed there were several gods but only one deserved their worship). That is to say: I’d rather believe in a supernatural being who had some kind of corporeal form than in a totally transcendent, immutable, eternal, almighty and omniscient being, which looks to me more like the nail needed to prevent an ideologic painting to fall down.

I’d rather believe in a dreadful god of fertility with a penis and a vagina and who lived in Mars than in an intelligence and will previous to any matter and independent from it. I hate to contradict the Bible, but I suspect that in the beginning was a rather purposeless being… The Word came much, much afterwards.

I believe in spirit as the inmaterial place where imagination, ideas, misconceptions, prejudices, reasoning, culture and sense grow and that at least human beings share. We live in a spiritual world. However, spirit is just a reflection which can’t transcend this world. I don’t deem ideas to be self-sufficient, nor can be any spiritual thing (including an hypothetic person with no corporeal part). Gods exist in our minds and we have used them as cultural devices to explain the world and to dominate it. I believe in all gods as creatures of our common imagination (so, I could be one of Cuchuflete’s pluriphoneytheists). They are social beings and they can be very real, even in our post-modern societies. Reason is so weak against such creatures…

On the other hand, the history of the awakening of reason from the dream of myth has been accompanied by the attempts to unify the vision of the world under a hierarchy of ideas and values having a God (Zeus, Jahve, Ahura Mazda…) in the top of them. It has been easier to reach atheism through historic monotheisms than through historic polytheisms (the ancient world labelled early Christians as atheists and it makes sense, since in a pagan polytheist view of the World, a person who worshipped a God that had no physical attributes would be very close to an atheist). In part, it’s easier to behead one God than to behead no end of them. Furthermore, atheism is a theism. With no theism, there’s no atheism. Atheism takes the monotheist hierarchy and decapitates it. So, an atheist can remain as one of Cuchu’s Bogusmonotheists, collapse in nihilism or else try to find a new head for the body of the dead God.

Sorry, I cannot vote in the poll because it makes no sense to me. God being literature, all possibilities are valid and none of them are.


----------



## ampurdan

Religion is a polysemic word, it can mean 1) a system of moral and supernatural beliefs held by some human institutions or organizations or also 2) the personal relation one have with spiritual beings or realities which transcend this world.

I tend not to be religious in the second sense but my religion in the first sense still influences my life.


----------



## .   1

I have just had a quick squiz at the Collins that defines athiest and agnostic thus;
*agnostic *_n _a person who holds that knowledge of a Supreme Being, Ultimate Cause, etcetera is impossible
*atheist *_n _rejection of belief in God or gods
I think that the terms of the poll are not quite clear as to the distinction between atheist and agnostic but I will go with agnostic as being close enough for an immovable object versus an implacable force discussion.
I am quite happy for people to believe in whatever they believe in in this respect byt I contend that such knowledge is without logical base and therefore unarguable.  It either is or it is not on a personal, case by case basis.

.,,


----------



## Chazzwozzer

I consider myself deist who believes in a God and no religion, but I sometimes feel myself more an agnostic.


----------



## maxiogee

I find I cannot accept the existence of an interventionist God - one who created the universe from without it, and who is 'involved' in the lives of "the birds of the sky".

I'm undecided about the existence of "a God" - but finding less and less reason (and no evidence) to believe in one.


----------



## danielfranco

I believe there is The One God, and that we all search for him. Some do it through religion. Others explore alternate routes.
The tricky part is once you find Him/Her/It/They/whatever you think is the answer, what do you do about it?


----------



## caballoschica

buddingtranslator said:


> I'm definitely agnostic verging on atheist. I don't want to go into a debate, as this isn't the place, but God cannot rationally exist.



I repeat that exact quote above.


----------



## gaer

. said:


> *agnostic *_n _a person who holds that knowledge of a Supreme Being, Ultimate Cause, etcetera is impossible


That's a very narrow definition and one that I don't agree with.

Let's say, for instance, that I have no personal knowledge of "God". From that I remain agnostic, simply saying that I don't know if God exists or not.

Do I conclude from this that others who claim to have such knowledge are deluded? Wrong? Maybe. Maybe not.

If I have not had personal experiences that convince me that something is true, that does not lead me to the arrogant conclusion that the experiences of others are false. Maybe they are. Maybe I'm the one who has "missed it".

Agnosticism covers a lot of ground. What's the difference between feeling ALMOST sure that there is no God—and almost believing that there is one?

If you count yourself as a person who believe on God, what does it mean if you doubt for one second? One minute? One day? Once in a while?


----------



## fenixpollo

. said:


> *agnostic *_n _a person who holds that knowledge of a Supreme Being, Ultimate Cause, etcetera is impossible
> *atheist *_n _rejection of belief in God or gods


 These definitions are at odds with the popular definitions. I think most people who chose _agnostic_ in this poll consider themselves to be _non-believers_, as gaer describes, not _disbelievers_.  I think that your definitions from Collins both apply to atheists, not agnostics.

Bumper sticker seen in a catalog: 
_I'm a Militant Agnostic
I don't know, and you don't, either!_


----------



## fuzionman1997

I'm an atheist. Science and technology have been far more effective in explaining worldly phenomena to me than any god because they have enabled those phenomena to be proven through the process of experimentation, while religion has relied largely on old myths, legends and superstitions. Until it is possible to prove those legends through the scientific process, I don't think I could believe in any of them.


----------



## LV4-26

I don't know exactly where I am. I guess I'm halfway between an agnostist and a (Christian) monotheist. I'd say I'm a believer with huge doubts. So maybe my vote should be split in two. 
I tend to agree with those posters who said their god has "little use for religion*". However I do have a passionate interest for the Scriptures. Not only because I suspect (remember where I stand) they are "inspired" but also because I find they offer a suprisingly accurate insight on sociology of all times.
______________________
* Religion? I'm still waiting for the Church to "know what this means "_I desire mercy and not sacrifice_" (Matthew 12:7). The doctrine seems to keep lots of traces of a sacrificial interpretation of the books.


----------



## michita

Most of people have theirs parents religion: I do, but I don't belive of any god.


----------



## maxiogee

michita said:


> Most of people have theirs parents religion: I do, but I don't belive of any god.



I agree that most parents raise their children in the faith of the parents, and that the concept of a Catholic child or a Muslim child is ridiculous. We need to make a conscious choice of our own before we can be truly termed a member of any faith.

However, to say that you have your parent's religion but don't believe in any god is to contradict yourself, unless your parents call themselves humanists and term that a 'religion' - which many would argue against.


----------



## cuchuflete

Linguistic aside--  Is "God" countable, or is that an anthropomorphic imposition?


----------



## maxiogee

cuchuflete said:


> Is "God" countable?



The polytheists think so - I have a collection of reproductions of carved keystones from one of the main civic buildings in Dublin. The are the heads of the 'Gods' of our major(?) rivers - we had a prodigal polytheism in Ireland years ago. The Greeks were only trottin' after us.

And anyway, there are monotheists who would insist that 'their' singular god is different from any other singular god - this would lead one to believe if one side believes in god A, and another believes in god B, then we are in a plural situation - even if one of them is a false god.

Linguistic aside - if a particular god doesn't exist is it countable?


----------



## cuchuflete

Logical aside-  What if "God(s)" use a different grammar than
humanoids, and terms such as countable, plural, singular do not exist?


----------



## michita

maxiogee said:


> I agree that most parents raise their children in the faith of the parents, and that the concept of a Catholic child or a Muslim child is ridiculous. We need to make a conscious choice of our own before we can be truly termed a member of any faith.
> 
> However, to say that you have your parent's religion but don't believe in any god is to contradict yourself, unless your parents call themselves humanists and term that a 'religion' - which many would argue against.


 
I don't think that it's a contradiction, because I was baptisted and you have to apostate to don't belong to catholic feath.


----------



## maxiogee

If there's only one God then it won't need grammar for references to itself - 

Psychological aside - If a monotheistic God speaks to itself is it mentally unwell?

- and if there's many Gods then there's bound to be a plural - how else would they take sides against each other? Surely all 'species' have outcasts - or am I being anthropomorphic?


----------



## cuchuflete

Mutichou said:


> My parents baptized me when I was a little child. So I'm catholic, aren't I?



Do you practice the Catholic religion and consider yourself a believer in its teachings?  Did you understand the baptism, its significance, and knowingly agree to it?


----------



## cuchuflete

maxiogee said:


> Psychological aside - If a monotheistic God speaks to itself is it mentally unwell?  No--just seeking to converse with someone who understands it, and doesn't try to describe it in petty human terms.


----------



## michita

maxiogee said:


> If there's only one God then it won't need grammar for references to itself -
> 
> Psychological aside - If a monotheistic God speaks to itself is it mentally unwell?
> 
> - and if there's many Gods then there's bound to be a plural - how else would they take sides against each other? Surely all 'species' have outcasts - or am I being anthropomorphic?


As an Irish you are, you know that celtic tradition had many others gods. Well, I can't express my opinion in English as I express in Spànish, but I'll tray to. I can understand the belived in god or gods in primitive men, because they have to explain themselves what happened around them every day. But, I think that the reason of religions is the fear to death. If you realize all religion promise eternal life, in one or other way. Ones because of reencarnation, others because theirs souls go to heaven. There will always have religions, because death is something that no many cultures can accept.


----------



## don maico

agnostic ! In other words I havent a clue!I do, however accept that other people have the right to believe in an omniscient being if it brings order and structure to their lives. I do not, though, believe they have the right to ram their beliefs down the throats of others nor they have the right to assume their "God"is the only right one to believe in.Atheists, by the same token, do not have the right to assume that everyone who believes in a God or spiritual matters is somehow stupid or misled. In other words  live and let live.


----------



## michita

don maico said:


> agnostic ! In other words I havent a clue!I do, however accept that other people have the right to believe in an omniscient being if it brings order and structure to their lives. I do not, though, believe they have the right to ram their beliefs down the throats of others nor they have the right to assume their "God"is the only right one to believe in.Atheists, by the same token, do not have the right to assume that everyone who believes in a God or spiritual matters is somehow stupid or misled. In other words live and let live.


 
Te voy a contestar en español, porque veo que lo hablas y yo me expreso mejor. Para empezar, yo vivo y dejo vivir. El hecho de que exprese mi opinión no tiene nada que ver con que considere estúpidos a los demás. De hecho, yo creo en cosas en las que muchos, que se consideran religiosos, parecen no creer, como son la libertad, los derechos humanos y la justicia. ¿Eres tú el único que no ha visto comulgar a un ser tan despreciable como Pinochet, mientras cometía todo tipo de atropeyos contra sus semejantes? ¿Dónde estaban las enseñanzas de Jesucristo en esos curas que le daban la comunión?


----------



## maxiogee

don maico said:


> I do not, though, believe they have the right to ram their beliefs down the throats of others nor they have the right to assume their "God"is the only right one to believe in.Atheists, by the same token, do not have the right to assume that everyone who believes in a God or spiritual matters is somehow stupid or misled. In other words  live and let live.



Atheists have rarely been known to use compulsion, or threats of violence, to gain acceptance of their views.

Admittedly there are those who do "protest too much" - such people don't do atheism any favours. Richard Dawkins has gone overboard recently - his latest book is good, but the promotional appearances he is putting in to back it are often arranged to be confrontation and condemnatory.


----------



## karuna

maxiogee said:


> Atheists have rarely been known to use compulsion, or threats of violence, to gain acceptance of their views.



Not really. Communists used to blow up churches in the USSR and many people had died in prisons for their religious (non-atheistic) views. And even today your religious views can often lead to persecution in China.


----------



## panjabigator

> Originally Posted by *cuchuflete*
> Are there agnostic or atheistic religions? Or religions based on indifference to the question of whether or not gods exist?



  Jainism is an atheistic religion.  They do not believe in God but rather a cycle of life and death.  It's complicated.  I should really do some research.


I have yet to vote.  I am in accordance with the view point that religion causes a lot of blunders.  Too much dogma sometimes.  I sometimes wonder if God really cares, and if our methods of interpreting God are at all what was expected.  Off topic.


I don't know how to vote.  Religion tells me that I am a monotheist, however Indian tradition has me going to Hindu mandirs (temples) and prostrating myself in front of them as well.  Does this make me a polytheist?  I don't think so because Hindu's view deities as different forms of worshipping God, whether male or female.  I am really more of a spiritual type of guy, but I'll raise my children in the same faith I was raised in.  Awareness (of other faiths).


----------



## don maico

maxiogee said:


> Atheists have rarely been known to use compulsion, or threats of violence, to gain acceptance of their views.
> 
> Admittedly there are those who do "protest too much" - such people don't do atheism any favours. Richard Dawkins has gone overboard recently - his latest book is good, but the promotional appearances he is putting in to back it are often arranged to be confrontation and condemnatory.


oh I have seen one or two others . Their arrogance is breathtaking. It seems that some people need to believe in "certainties" whether religious, secular or scientific , they just have that mindset and can never accept they might just be wrong.i prefer to sit on the fence and adopt a "wait and see" position. I donmt rule out the possibility of life after because for one thing I dont believe in ends or nothingness which to me are just concepts rather I like to accept the possibility of change because everything changes moment by moment .


----------



## don maico

panjabigator said:


> Jainism is an atheistic religion.  They do not believe in God but rather a cycle of life and death.  It's complicated.  I should really do some research.
> 
> 
> I have yet to vote.  I am in accordance with the view point that religion causes a lot of blunders.  Too much dogma sometimes.  I sometimes wonder if God really cares, and if our methods of interpreting God are at all what was expected.  Off topic.
> 
> 
> I don't know how to vote.  Religion tells me that I am a monotheist, however Indian tradition has me going to Hindu mandirs (temples) and prostrating myself in front of them as well.  Does this make me a polytheist?  I don't think so because Hindu's view deities as different forms of worshipping God, whether male or female.  I am really more of a spiritual type of guy, but I'll raise my children in the same faith I was raised in.  Awareness (of other faiths).


Buddhists dont belive in a God either. They have no understanding of such a being rather they believe in a universal truth they call Dharma


----------



## don maico

michita said:


> Te voy a contestar en español, porque veo que lo hablas y yo me expreso mejor. Para empezar, yo vivo y dejo vivir. El hecho de que exprese mi opinión no tiene nada que ver con que considere estúpidos a los demás. De hecho, yo creo en cosas en las que muchos, que se consideran religiosos, parecen no creer, como son la libertad, los derechos humanos y la justicia. ¿Eres tú el único que no ha visto comulgar a un ser tan despreciable como Pinochet, mientras cometía todo tipo de atropeyos contra sus semejantes? ¿Dónde estaban las enseñanzas de Jesucristo en esos curas que le daban la comunión?


Por favor no fue necesario contestar a mi pues yo no te mande ese post singularmente. Fue para todos.


----------



## maxiogee

karuna said:


> Not really. Communists used to blow up churches in the USSR and many people had died in prisons for their religious (non-atheistic) views. And even today your religious views can often lead to persecution in China.



What you say is true. But "communists" are not necessarily atheists - and often the actions of a person can be divorced from their religious beliefs.

People speak of Stalin having been an atheist - does that mean  that all his evil actions were down to his lack of belief in a God? Hitler was a Christian, does this mean that his evil was due to his Christianity?

China persecutes any groups which it sees as a threat to the state's authority.


----------



## michita

Of course I don't belive that all these people actions were due to religion. But, how many wars have been done in the name of any god?


----------



## speedier

Most of them michita!

And how many threads have reached 100 postings I wonder.


----------



## michita

speedier said:


> Most of them michita!
> 
> And how many threads have reached 100 postings I wonder.


I can't ask you the last question. In the Spanish forum there are many, maybe for the latin temperament


----------



## speedier

michita said:


> I can't ask you the last question. In the Spanish forum there are many, maybe for the latin temperament


 
One of these days I will venture there (when my Spanish gets a little better 

Oh, and there are no gods in my religion.


----------



## don maico

michita said:


> Of course I don't belive that all these people actions were due to religion. But, how many wars have been done in the name of any god?


 too many.But that doesnt make God wrong, just human beings.Los conquistadores tried to eliminate Pachamama


----------



## cuchuflete

After this little interlude into what people think is good, and bad, and why.........

kindly return to the thread topic.

Thank you.

Moderator team


----------



## karuna

panjabigator said:


> I don't know how to vote.  Religion tells me that I am a monotheist, however Indian tradition has me going to Hindu mandirs (temples) and prostrating myself in front of them as well.  Does this make me a polytheist?  I don't think so because Hindu's view deities as different forms of worshipping God, whether male or female.



My experience is that most Indians are _shaktas_ – believing in one God but worshiping God's _shakti_, or God's power that is represented by various female Deities. But there are many variations in these practices and there can be no end to philosophical discussions either. 

From wikipedia:


> Shaktas do not believe in denominations, and believe that these ideas of classification are a very Christian way of classification.


That has been my experience too. It is not fair to try to put _shaktas_ into such categories as monotheist, polytheist or pantheist. They are not polytheists because they believe in one God, but not really monotheists either because many believe that God's shakti is more worshipable/merciful/powerful than God Himself. And definitely not pantheist because nature is completely different category in their worldview. And the term "Hindu" is often too broad because there can be Hindu Christians, or Hindu atheists. Why don't we call them simply _shaktas?_


----------



## panjabigator

Very interesting Karuna.  I like the idea of just calling them shaktas.  As it is, Hindusism is very diverse in India, and you can't just draw a fine line as to where one begins and another ends.  Practices are shared by many different groups.  I am Sikh, but this has not restricted me to sharing practices with Hinduism.


----------



## Bonjules

Polytheism, it would seem, was/is a much healthier
concept, since more specific. If there was a god (or various gods) for the Earth (land, sea, skies with all the plants and creatures in them) - how would we dare offending it/them by poisoning everything with such frivolity and zest?

(The reason for this is of course that most of us (as was pointed out earlier), at least in the 'developed'(?) countries are really worshipping Mammon, no matter what our spiritual ramblings or our professed relationships with God)
Happy Holidays


----------



## forza lebanon

I am muslim and I believe in my god "Allah". There is no god but "Allah", and "Allah" had created every thing in this life. 
For example : could any one of us live whithout water, food? If the rain did not fall how could be our life? blablabla....

So surely Allah is the only one, he has no father or son. With all my rerpect to the Christian religion.

Thank you so much.


----------



## Poetic Device

I've always thoght about this... In Christianity, there is one God, correct? Then you have Jesus, who is his SON. From what I have seen and come to understand, Christians worship Jesus right along with God. Therefore, does this mean that Christianity is an example of polytheism?


----------



## Poetic Device

michita said:


> Of course I don't belive that all these people actions were due to religion. But, how many wars have been done in the name of any god?


 
They say they are in the name of God, however what God would want you to kill your fellow man?  Aren't there a slew of religions that teach "turn the other cheek"?


----------



## michita

Poetic Device said:


> I've always thoght about this... In Christianity, there is one God, correct? Then you have Jesus, who is his SON. From what I have seen and come to understand, Christians worship Jesus right along with God. Therefore, does this mean that Christianity is an example of polytheism?


 
Well, they say that it's explain by the trinity mistery.


----------



## Poetic Device

I must have thought God said trians when he said brains and said "no thanks, I'll take the next one"....

I'm not following you for some reason.  How would that explain it?


----------



## fenixpollo

PD, I think michita is referring to the Trinity concept in the Catholic tradition, in which God is considered to be simultaneously God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit. I don't pretend to understand it, but it's not a polytheistic concept of 3 Gods, but rather a monotheistic concept in which God has 3 aspects which are distinct (but not separate).


----------



## michita

Poetic Device said:


> I must have thought God said trians when he said brains and said "no thanks, I'll take the next one"....
> 
> I'm not following you for some reason. How would that explain it?


 
It's something that you have to belive of by fealth.

I don't remember exactly something I was told many years ago, but it said something so:

There was Sant Austin walking allong a beach thinking about the Saint Trinity Mistery, and he stopped and made a hole in the sand. Then, an angel appears him and told him: it's easier that all the water of sea enters in that hole, than you understand the Saint Trinity Mistery.


----------



## michita

fenixpollo said:


> PD, I think michita is referring to the Trinity concept in the Catholic tradition, in which God is considered to be simultaneously God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit. I don't pretend to understand it, but it's not a polytheistic concept of 3 Gods, but rather a monotheistic concept in which God has 3 aspects which are distinct (but not separate).


 
Yes, I was trying to explain what I was told, but you explained it better than me.


----------



## michita

speedier said:


> One of these days I will venture there (when my Spanish gets a little better
> 
> Oh, and there are no gods in my religion.


 
Try just now. We use to help people who wants to learn.


----------



## Etcetera

maxiogee said:


> I agree that most parents raise their children in the faith of the parents, and that the concept of a Catholic child or a Muslim child is ridiculous. We need to make a conscious choice of our own before we can be truly termed a member of any faith.


I was baptised as an Orthodox, as were my parents. But my views are closer to the Catholic faith. My Mum likes the Catholic faith more, too. 
I don't really think I'll switch to Catholicism in the nearest future, but who knows.


----------



## maxiogee

Poetic Device said:


> I've always thoght about this... In Christianity, there is one God, correct? Then you have Jesus, who is his SON. From what I have seen and come to understand, Christians worship Jesus right along with God. Therefore, does this mean that Christianity is an example of polytheism?



The actual 'mechanics' of the Christian faith are not polytheistic, and not yet not the _ shakti_ as mentioned by karuna. The "father", "son" and "holy spirit" of Christianity are neither separate Gods, nor merely 'aspects' of the one God, but individual and different 'persons' within the one being.
I see the thinking behind Christianity as a reversal toward polytheism from the absolute monotheism of Judaism, by a Church which was spreading towards the more-numerously-polytheistic Greeks and Romans around the edges of the Mediterranean.

The elevated status of saints, and the all-but Goddess status of Mary are very close to the old-style polytheism of much of European "old" religions. The concept of a "patron saint of…" is surely a sop towards those who believed in a "god of…"?
I fail to understand the 'production' of saints which the late Pope was behind (he canonized more people than all of his predecessors during the last five hundred years). I have never understood the concept that there is one mediator between God and man, and yet people are encouraged, within Catholicism at least, to pray to these saints for intercession.


----------



## Poetic Device

Saints?  Patron saints?  Meaning people pray to human beings who were bestowed a special title?

I'm so conpuzzled


----------



## maxiogee

Poetic Device said:


> Saints?  Patron saints?  Meaning people pray to human beings who were bestowed a special title?
> 
> I'm so conpuzzled



Well, _ex-human beings_ to be precise. 

But yes, certain people are deemed to have lived lives of such holiness that they are 'known' to be in heaven (others may not have gotten there by the direct route!) and are available to intercede, on behalf of the living, with God.
From "Catholic Online"
*What is a patron saint?
*Patron saints are chosen as special protectors or guardians over areas of life. These areas can include occupations, illnesses, churches, countries, causes -- anything that is important to us. The earliest records show that people and churches were named after apostles and martyrs as early as the fourth century.

Recently, the popes have named patron saints but patrons can be chosen by other individuals or groups as well.​


----------



## Poetic Device

So, catholisism is a form of polytheism?  Can anyone dub a person as a saint?


----------



## maxiogee

Poetic Device said:


> So, catholisism is a form of polytheism?



No, I said that's how *I* see it.



Poetic Device said:


> Can anyone dub a person as a saint?


To the best of my knowledge there is now only one way to gain sainthood - by 'canonisation' by the Pope. This is the second of two stages. The fist being to be declared "Blessed" - beatification.
Long ago, when the Church was less in touch with its outposts, people would be considered 'locally' to be saints - a sort of 'sainthood by popular acclaim' - this is how Saint Patrick gained his status. As far as I know he has never been officially canonised.

These questions might best be answered for Poetic Device by someone more closely in touch with Catholicism than I.


----------



## Poetic Device

Actually, I think that does it.  Thank you.


----------



## michita

Etcetera said:


> I was baptised as an Orthodox, as were my parents. But my views are closer to the Catholic faith. My Mum likes the Catholic faith more, too.
> I don't really think I'll switch to Catholicism in the nearest future, but who knows.


 
However, I prefer the anglican beliefs, about the confession. I think thats't is very easy for Catholics to tell a priest their mistakes to be pardoned. I think that everybody should confess infront of God, or their conscience. Usually a right conscience use to be hurter than a priest and to submit to you conscience, you need'nt belive in any god.


----------



## María Archs

In Spain Catholicism is the predominat religion but most Spaniards are lay. We´re religious believers but not practising. So the pope is angry with us because we take no notice of the catholic rules: Divorce, abortion, homosexual marriage....
As far as I´m concerned I prefer the concience to any religion but I show respect for all religions thought sometimes I don´t understand the different believes and I don´t like fanatics.
Excuse me if I´ve made a mistake but my English makes sad.

Regards

María


----------



## Estiben

Poetic Device said:


> I've always thoght about this... In Christianity, there is one God, correct? Then you have Jesus, who is his SON. From what I have seen and come to understand, Christians worship Jesus right along with God. Therefore, does this mean that Christianity is an example of polytheism?



That is the classic concept of the Trinity: one God composed of three persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Personally, I don't think anyone has a handle on it. The way it is usually thought of by believers tends, I think, towards polytheism. I just think of it as one God manifesting himself in different ways, which makes me a bit of a heretic. It may be impossible to picture something that is, to us, self-contradictary, and I would rather err on the side of monotheism. After all, in the end there can be only one. (What was that silly movie?)


----------



## Akialuz

hm! interesting poll.  there a millions of gods.  but I only worship the One True God. 
~Akialuz


----------



## RAPHUS CUCULLATUS

Akialuz said:


> hm! interesting poll.  there a millions of gods.  but I only worship the One True God.
> ~Akialuz


 And of the one million, what number is yours?

Mine is number 348,429, and is the One True God.


----------



## maxiogee

Akialuz said:


> hm! interesting poll.  there a millions of gods.  but I only worship the One True God.
> ~Akialuz



How do you *know* that?

…and, if there are millions, why do you give the word 'one' a capital letter?


----------



## cuchuflete

Akialuz said:


> hm! interesting poll.  there a millions of gods.  but I only worship the One True God.
> ~Akialuz



I'm still waiting for the worshipper who believes in The One False God.  Because I have never seen such a person, I conclude that for every worshipper, their God is True.  I suppose that for the polytheists, all of their Gods are True.


----------



## Benjy

This thread has unfortunately wondered far from its home and like so many lost sheep is now currently stuck in the quagmire that is the search for The Truth. So before too many of us get sucked in I'm going to block off the entrance with my magical incantation of thread closing.


----------

