This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for tinyford
#1 Edited by TinyFord (467 posts) - - Show Bio

Gandhi said: "I would be a Christian if it wasn't for Christians"

Now obviously Christianity is not the only religion in the world so this includes all.

Would you be a Christian, Muslim, Hindu, budhist, african religions, scientologist, creationist...

If the people of those religions actually inspired you by the way they lived?

Avatar image for armiv2
#2 Posted by ARMIV2 (10054 posts) - - Show Bio

It was people from Christianity that seriously damaged my perspectives on it. It would take Christ himself to un-jade me.

Avatar image for cruelestashley
#3 Posted by cruelestashley (4028 posts) - - Show Bio

Nope.

Avatar image for just_banter
#4 Posted by just_banter (10177 posts) - - Show Bio

Nah, it would take evidence. But, I guess then it wouldn't be faith based, so I guess that wouldn't truly count.

Avatar image for dshipp17
#5 Edited by dshipp17 (3604 posts) - - Show Bio

I guess I'd really have to think about this question a bit, as in my case, it's sort of a good question for me. I'm not really sure that anyone actually inspired me to be a Christian or, on the other hand, someone very strongly inspired me to be a Christian so far back in my past that I can't remember. But, as it stands, at the moment, I'm not a Christian because of inspiration from another person or persons. My spirit and soul (or, something inside me) are truly tuned into Christianity.

@just_banter said:

Nah, it would take evidence. But, I guess then it wouldn't be faith based, so I guess that wouldn't truly count.

There is plenty of evidence; what, did someone tell you that there was no evidence, so you just settled on it and believed it? Perhaps, your in-laws have raised you to believe that there's lack of evidence for Christianity? Because, you could not have seriously looked on your own, as a Google search would lead you to more evidence than one could handle before you even reached the third page. You could get stuck on a website or two that tell you there's not evidence, but, a truly objective search would also lead to a search of the opposing opinion/position about evidence for Christianity (e.g. and evidence is all over this website as presented in the religion thread and some other threads, as provided by me and others; you could not have even looked through the comparatively little evidence on just this website in a few threads). Please realize, just wanting there to be no evidence is not the same as there actually being no evidence. If you're not taking the objective approach to view a side and the opposing side, than it's more of a case of wanting there to be no evidence, which is extremely biased and subjective, and, having that, you should refrain from making gross generalizations, as if they're fact somehow.

Avatar image for dadivineking
#6 Posted by DaDivineKing (43624 posts) - - Show Bio

I wouldn't follow the hocus pocus mumbo jumbo regardless.

Avatar image for sirdrprofessor
#7 Posted by SirDrProfessor (1479 posts) - - Show Bio

Nope, you don't have to be religious to be a good person or live a good life. I am fine with how I am.

Avatar image for lvenger
#8 Posted by lvenger (31206 posts) - - Show Bio

Nope, you don't have to be religious to be a good person or live a good life. I am fine with how I am.

Avatar image for alextheboss
#9 Edited by AlexTheBoss (8094 posts) - - Show Bio

No

Avatar image for erik_soong
#10 Posted by Erik_Soong (1078 posts) - - Show Bio

Comic books are the only fiction I have time to obsess over, so no.

Avatar image for darth_nimrod
#11 Posted by Darth_Nimrod (1084 posts) - - Show Bio

No.

Avatar image for nightsky86
#12 Edited by NightSky86 (191 posts) - - Show Bio

I'm disappointed, I thought there'd be a more challenging question, there are already religious people who inspire me, but that's got nothing to do with their faith. It would take evidence of a supreme being to tempt me to become religious, however this is an interesting point

@just_banter said:

Nah, it would take evidence. But, I guess then it wouldn't be faith based, so I guess that wouldn't truly count.

Avatar image for just_banter
#13 Posted by just_banter (10177 posts) - - Show Bio

@dshipp17: What? Lmao, nobodies ever pressured me to be religious (well, nobody from my own family, anyway), and nobody has ever pressured me not to be. I did research it myself, and it's not something I'm interested or want to put my faith into.

I've seen the arguments, and I've seen the 'evidence,' and I don't agree with either of them. That's not the point of this thread though, so I'd rather not derail it.

Avatar image for dshipp17
#14 Edited by dshipp17 (3604 posts) - - Show Bio

@dshipp17: What? Lmao, nobodies ever pressured me to be religious (well, nobody from my own family, anyway), and nobody has ever pressured me not to be. I did research it myself, and it's not something I'm interested or want to put my faith into.

I've seen the arguments, and I've seen the 'evidence,' and I don't agree with either of them. That's not the point of this thread though, so I'd rather not derail it.

Well, disagreeing with the clear and present evidence wouldn't make your perspective so, that there is no evidence supporting Christianity; it just means that you want there to be no evidence, a different thing entirely. And, it's not putting your faith into something, the evidence is just measurements and tangible findings, meaning, something that physically exists has been found multiple times. But, claiming that a dinosaur existed 65 million years ago, actually is not something that actually exists, physically; no one knows if anything was here 65 million years ago.

Avatar image for beast_mode999
#15 Edited by Beast_mode999 (2306 posts) - - Show Bio

I believe in a higher power so really don't know if that counts as religious

But I'd probably be Buhddist

Avatar image for supremegeneration
#16 Posted by SupremeGeneration (5094 posts) - - Show Bio

Comic books are the only fiction I have time to obsess over, so no.

Avatar image for grayhold
#17 Posted by Grayhold (122 posts) - - Show Bio

Nope.

Avatar image for captainmarvel4ever
#18 Posted by CaptainMarvel4Ever (9662 posts) - - Show Bio

I'm already religious

Avatar image for zetsumoto
#19 Posted by Zetsumoto (15939 posts) - - Show Bio

@dshipp17 said:
@just_banter said:

@dshipp17: What? Lmao, nobodies ever pressured me to be religious (well, nobody from my own family, anyway), and nobody has ever pressured me not to be. I did research it myself, and it's not something I'm interested or want to put my faith into.

I've seen the arguments, and I've seen the 'evidence,' and I don't agree with either of them. That's not the point of this thread though, so I'd rather not derail it.

Well, disagreeing with the clear and present evidence wouldn't make your perspective so, that there is no evidence supporting Christianity; it just means that you want there to be no evidence, a different thing entirely. And, it's not putting your faith into something, the evidence is just measurements and tangible findings, meaning, something that physically exists has been found multiple times. But, claiming that a dinosaur existed 65 million years ago, actually is not something that actually exists, physically; no one knows if anything was here 65 million years ago.

Tons of religions in the world. But yea, yours is the one that has ALL the evidence and the ONLY one that's correct. All the other people who think their religions have evidence have been blinded by bias. You are the only true objective one.

Avatar image for arkbound
#20 Posted by Arkbound (839 posts) - - Show Bio

pretty much these

Nah, it would take evidence. But, I guess then it wouldn't be faith based, so I guess that wouldn't truly count.

@armiv2 said:

It was people from Christianity that seriously damaged my perspectives on it. It would take Christ himself to un-jade me.

Avatar image for spareheadone
#21 Posted by SpareHeadOne (2218 posts) - - Show Bio

I am a Gnostic type Christian.

I would become a Hindu if I thought I would get anything more out of it. As it stands, I am just enjoying learning about Hinduism and seeing how it relates to my own faith and practice.

Avatar image for klaa2
#22 Edited by Klaa2 (170 posts) - - Show Bio

I might adopt some of their practices and morals, but not their faith itself. I already try to treat others the way I want to be treated and I also like the Muslim saying "Trust in Allah but tie up your camel." so I already do some of that.

Avatar image for Pokeysteve
#23 Posted by Pokeysteve (11303 posts) - - Show Bio

My opinion on religion has 100% nothing to do with other people. The whole point is thinking for myself.

Avatar image for giliad_
#24 Edited by GIliad_ (4219 posts) - - Show Bio

I already sold my religion and smoked the profits... I'd probably just do it again

Avatar image for skrskr
#25 Posted by Skrskr (676 posts) - - Show Bio

no, just show me an actual miracle that can be repeated in a testable place and I'll convert then and here.

I just need evidence

Also just because people live a good righteous lifestyle through their religion doesn't mean I can't do the same without it.

Avatar image for doofasa
#26 Edited by Doofasa (587 posts) - - Show Bio

@lvenger said:
@sirdrprofessor said:

Nope, you don't have to be religious to be a good person or live a good life. I am fine with how I am.

Avatar image for mrhamwallet
#27 Posted by MrHamWallet (3194 posts) - - Show Bio

"But, claiming that a dinosaur existed 65 million years ago, actually is not something that actually exists, physically; no one knows if anything was here 65 million years ago."

Yea fossil records aren't physical evidence of Dinosaurs existence. Anyone who knows anything would know they were put there by Satan to trick us.

"#4 Posted by just_banter (9803 posts) - 4 days, 21 hours ago - Show Bio

Nah, it would take evidence. But, I guess then it wouldn't be faith based, so I guess that wouldn't truly count."

Pretty much this.

Avatar image for dshipp17
#28 Edited by dshipp17 (3604 posts) - - Show Bio

@mrhamwallet said:

"But, claiming that a dinosaur existed 65 million years ago, actually is not something that actually exists, physically; no one knows if anything was here 65 million years ago."

Yea fossil records aren't physical evidence of Dinosaurs existence. Anyone who knows anything would know they were put there by Satan to trick us.

"#4 Posted by just_banter (9803 posts) - 4 days, 21 hours ago - Show Bio

Nah, it would take evidence. But, I guess then it wouldn't be faith based, so I guess that wouldn't truly count."

Pretty much this.

"Yea fossil records aren't physical evidence of Dinosaurs existence. Anyone who knows anything would know they were put there by Satan to trick us."

Fossil records standing on their own wouldn't be evidence that dinosaurs existed 65 million yearsago.Clearly. this date is being questioned more so than the existence of dinosaurs, from a reading of this statement.No one really questioned the existence of dinosaurs in that statement, although a case may be maybe to even question their existence, based on the sheer number of fossil remains that would be expected of an entire species; that should be quite a few, as opposed to what, about 150-500 remains?

Avatar image for mrhamwallet
#29 Posted by MrHamWallet (3194 posts) - - Show Bio

@dshipp17: "Fossil records standing on their own wouldn't be evidence that dinosaurs existed 65 million yearsago.Clearly. this date is being questioned more so than the existence of dinosaurs, from a reading of this statement."

The date is not necessarily entirely accurate, it's a question of hundreds of millions of years.

"No one really questioned the existence of dinosaurs in that statement, although a case may be maybe to even question their existence,"

Yea...a really, really bad case.

"based on the sheer number of fossil remains that would be expected of an entire species; that should be quite a few, as opposed to what, about 150-500 remains?"

I'm not entirely sure how many fossils have been found if I'm honest. However, considering we're the only species to ever look for them, we haven't been looking for all that long in the grand scheme, there's a budget for the research, and finding them is time consuming, expensive and incredibly difficult I'd say whatever number we have of them probably makes sense. Strange how not one of them is in the wrong order either...

Avatar image for dshipp17
#30 Edited by dshipp17 (3604 posts) - - Show Bio

@mrhamwallet said:

@dshipp17: "Fossil records standing on their own wouldn't be evidence that dinosaurs existed 65 million yearsago.Clearly. this date is being questioned more so than the existence of dinosaurs, from a reading of this statement."

The date is not necessarily entirely accurate, it's a question of hundreds of millions of years.

"No one really questioned the existence of dinosaurs in that statement, although a case may be maybe to even question their existence,"

Yea...a really, really bad case.

"based on the sheer number of fossil remains that would be expected of an entire species; that should be quite a few, as opposed to what, about 150-500 remains?"

I'm not entirely sure how many fossils have been found if I'm honest. However, considering we're the only species to ever look for them, we haven't been looking for all that long in the grand scheme, there's a budget for the research, and finding them is time consuming, expensive and incredibly difficult I'd say whatever number we have of them probably makes sense. Strange how not one of them is in the wrong order either...

"The date is not necessarily entirely accurate, it's a question of hundreds of millions of years."

Than, if you think it could be even longer (e.g. double or triple, from this non-specific statement), than you're really demonstrating a very clear, independent lack of dating understanding and chemistry of a biological life forms; I know what larges parts of the internet says, but, that doesn't make it so.

"Yea...a really, really bad case."

Nan, I think it's a really good case, understanding it from a scientific description.

"I'm not entirely sure how many fossils have been found if I'm honest. However, considering we're the only species to ever look for them, we haven't been looking for all that long in the grand scheme, there's a budget for the research, and finding them is time consuming, expensive and incredibly difficult I'd say whatever number we have of them probably makes sense. Strange how not one of them is in the wrong order either..."

I'm not getting that you understand many of the intricacies involved in fossil discovery here; from what you seem to be saying, not enough effort has yet been put into finding fossils; but, that is not the correct interpretation, knowing the intricacies involved in fossil discovery as described by the opposing side.

Loading Video...

Avatar image for mrhamwallet
#31 Posted by MrHamWallet (3194 posts) - - Show Bio

@dshipp17: "Than, if you think it could be even longer (e.g. double of triple, from this non-specific statement), than you're really demonstrating a very clear independent lack of dating understanding and chemistry of a biological life forms; I know what larges parts of the internet says, but, that doesn't make it so."

Nope, my scientific knowledge of the subject matter is probably similar to your ability to write clear sentences with correct words. This is not meant as am insult btw, but this paragraph makes little sense and incorrect words are used.

"Nan, I think it's a really good case, understanding it from a scientific description."

Living in a free country (I'm assuming) you are more than welcome to waste your time researching and debating whether or not Dinosaurs ever existed, just not with me.

"I'm not getting that you understand many of the intricacies involved in fossil discovery here;"

Nope I'm not a paleontologist and I'd say your knowledge of the subject is probably a whole lot closer to mine that it is an experts.

"from what you seem to be saying, not enough effort has yet been put into finding fossils;"

Well that depends on the context, I'd say no it hasn't in the same way not enough effort has been put into finding cures for debilitating diseases (since apparently your God can't/won't cure them). Unfortunately we are a species who just love a good old fashioned bit of war, so we waste money on that instead of useful things.

"but, that is not the correct interpretation, knowing the intricacies involved in fossil discovery as described by the opposing side."

As I said it all depends on context, if we'd have managed to make everyone realise how obsolete and incorrect religions such as Christianity, Judaism and Islam are we'd probably (definitely actually) be much more advanced in every way. It's known as the dark ages for a reason.

Avatar image for dshipp17
#32 Edited by dshipp17 (3604 posts) - - Show Bio

@mrhamwallet said:

@dshipp17: "Than, if you think it could be even longer (e.g. double of triple, from this non-specific statement), than you're really demonstrating a very clear independent lack of dating understanding and chemistry of a biological life forms; I know what larges parts of the internet says, but, that doesn't make it so."

Nope, my scientific knowledge of the subject matter is probably similar to your ability to write clear sentences with correct words. This is not meant as am insult btw, but this paragraph makes little sense and incorrect words are used.

"Nan, I think it's a really good case, understanding it from a scientific description."

Living in a free country (I'm assuming) you are more than welcome to waste your time researching and debating whether or not Dinosaurs ever existed, just not with me.

"I'm not getting that you understand many of the intricacies involved in fossil discovery here;"

Nope I'm not a paleontologist and I'd say your knowledge of the subject is probably a whole lot closer to mine that it is an experts.

"from what you seem to be saying, not enough effort has yet been put into finding fossils;"

Well that depends on the context, I'd say no it hasn't in the same way not enough effort has been put into finding cures for debilitating diseases (since apparently your God can't/won't cure them). Unfortunately we are a species who just love a good old fashioned bit of war, so we waste money on that instead of useful things.

"but, that is not the correct interpretation, knowing the intricacies involved in fossil discovery as described by the opposing side."

As I said it all depends on context, if we'd have managed to make everyone realise how obsolete and incorrect religions such as Christianity, Judaism and Islam are we'd probably (definitely actually) be much more advanced in every way. It's known as the dark ages for a reason.

"Nope, my scientific knowledge of the subject matter is probably similar to your ability to write clear sentences with correct words. This is not meant as am insult btw, but this paragraph makes little sense and incorrect words are used."

I think the sentence very clearly conveys to you that you don't understand dating, if you think the remains could be even longer; and I even provided you with a video to help you with your understanding; as previously speculated, you're clearly not interested in educating yourself so that you can stop making these nonsensical generalizations that either you think are a joke or that you think are making you look somehow more advanced. Based on the generalization that you previously made, sparking my response, you clearly was insinuating some type of scientific knowledge of that subject matter.

"Living in a free country (I'm assuming) you are more than welcome to waste your time researching and debating whether or not Dinosaurs ever existed, just not with me."

Well, lacking the appropriate level of scientific knowledge on the subject matter, can you not see that you're quite ill-equipped to make such a speculative statement that a search would be a waste of time?

"Nope I'm not a paleontologist and I'd say your knowledge of the subject is probably a whole lot closer to mine that it is an experts."

No, it wouldn't be closer to yours at all; other than my scientific background, I think I'd have a clear advantage over you simply because I take the time to review a subject matter, especially when presented with the opportunities, as I just provided you. I provided you with a video from the opposing side, just now, and on several previous occasions, yet you refused to even look. From this behavior alone, I'd say that your knowledge just couldn't be as close as mine, as I would have taken the opportunity to just listen to educational material.

"Well that depends on the context, I'd say no it hasn't in the same way not enough effort has been put into finding cures for debilitating diseases (since apparently your God can't/won't cure them). Unfortunately we are a species who just love a good old fashioned bit of war, so we waste money on that instead of useful things."

Than, no, that wouldn't be one of the issues with fossil discovery and claiming the existence of entire species, as pointed out by the opposing side.

"As I said it all depends on context, if we'd have managed to make everyone realise how obsolete and incorrect religions such as Christianity, Judaism and Islam are we'd probably (definitely actually) be much more advanced in every way. It's known as the dark ages for a reason."

You're totally ill-equipped to make such a sweeping generalization, and this is gathered by your own omission, not just your statements that lack all semblance of informed specification. Simply because you can make jokes isn't the same as demonstrated knowledge, given your sweeping generalizations.

Avatar image for aimless
#33 Posted by Aimless (1742 posts) - - Show Bio

If said person gave me a good reason to follow a certain religion,then yes I would.

Just being an inspirational person isn't enough,there's atleast one inspirational person from each religion and it doesn't affect us.

Avatar image for renchamp
#34 Posted by Renchamp (6174 posts) - - Show Bio

Take it to the religion thread.

Moderator