Ill-prepared to spread religious dogma

[arraamis]

This thread isn't for the purpose of bursting anyone's religious bubble - but only to make a statement, based on observations on the www and in real life.

Dogma is the established belief or doctrine held by a religion, ideology or any kind of organization: it is authoritative and not to be disputed, doubted or from which diverged.

This constant crusade adopted by many of those entrenched in religious dogma, of challenging those who have become Atheists - Should cease and desist.

For the most obvious reason - many so-called Christians, Catholics, Muslims and {Insert Religion Here} do not know enough about the very religion they claim as their own, to adequately address the theoretical questions offered by Atheists.

Most Atheists, I have found, to be very well studied - Meaning they have challenged what was presented to them and sought to clarify\verify thoroughly the content. Which lead them eventually to a greater understanding of many particular religious beliefs and the systems that govern them.

Those who have accepted religion and are active in a singular sect should at the very least, know and fully understand what they claim to believe. Not only from what is given by the accepted authoritative source, but also from a historical perspective. That way, when they attempt to spread their belief system, they are knowledgeable about the FACTS and can debate the contradictions and irregularities within their own system effectively.

But, when those who have conviction based on word of mouth, only, and they attempt to spread that which they do not have a comprehensive understanding - then you not only diminish your status, but also the status of your belief system. For, if your belief system can only produce intermediate representatives, ill-equipped to spread all but a very basic understanding - then you should cease and desist at once.

For there is nothing worst than an individual attempting to teach others how to play the piano, when they themselves, cannot even play a tune.

What's my freakin point ???

Believe it or not ..... I already made it.

[squealpiggy]

This thread isn't for the purpose of bursting anyone's religious bubble - but only to make a statement, based on observations on the www and in real life.

Dogma is the established belief or doctrine held by a religion, ideology or any kind of organization: it is authoritative and not to be disputed, doubted or from which diverged.

This constant crusade adopted by many of those entrenched in religious dogma, of challenging those who have become Atheists - Should cease and desist.

For the most obvious reason - many so-called Christians, Catholics, Muslims and {Insert Religion Here} do not know enough about the very religion they claim as their own, to adequately address the theoretical questions offered by Atheists.

Most Atheists, I have found, to be very well studied - Meaning they have challenged what was presented to them and sought to clarify\verify thoroughly the content. Which lead them eventually to a greater understanding of many particular religious beliefs and the systems that govern them.

Those who have accepted religion and are active in a singular sect should at the very least, know and fully understand what they claim to believe. Not only from what is given by the accepted authoritative source, but also from a historical perspective. That way, when they attempt to spread their belief system, they are knowledgeable about the FACTS and can debate the contradictions and irregularities within their own system effectively.

But, when those who have conviction based on word of mouth, only, and they attempt to spread that which they do not have a comprehensive understanding - then you not only diminish your status, but also the status of your belief system. For, if your belief system can only produce intermediate representatives, ill-equipped to spread all but a very basic understanding - then you should cease and desist at once.

For there is nothing worst than an individual attempting to teach others how to play the piano, when they themselves, cannot even play a tune.

What's my freakin point ???

Believe it or not ..... I already made it.

I think all of this can be avoided if these idiots just stopped proselytizing their stupid superstitions and damn well kept it to themselves.

[-Blackout-]

This thread isn't for the purpose of bursting anyone's religious bubble - but only to make a statement, based on observations on the www and in real life.

Dogma is the established belief or doctrine held by a religion, ideology or any kind of organization: it is authoritative and not to be disputed, doubted or from which diverged.

This constant crusade adopted by many of those entrenched in religious dogma, of challenging those who have become Atheists - Should cease and desist.

For the most obvious reason - many so-called Christians, Catholics, Muslims and {Insert Religion Here} do not know enough about the very religion they claim as their own, to adequately address the theoretical questions offered by Atheists.

Most Atheists, I have found, to be very well studied - Meaning they have challenged what was presented to them and sought to clarify\verify thoroughly the content. Which lead them eventually to a greater understanding of many particular religious beliefs and the systems that govern them.

Those who have accepted religion and are active in a singular sect should at the very least, know and fully understand what they claim to believe. Not only from what is given by the accepted authoritative source, but also from a historical perspective. That way, when they attempt to spread their belief system, they are knowledgeable about the FACTS and can debate the contradictions and irregularities within their own system effectively.

But, when those who have conviction based on word of mouth, only, and they attempt to spread that which they do not have a comprehensive understanding - then you not only diminish your status, but also the status of your belief system. For, if your belief system can only produce intermediate representatives, ill-equipped to spread all but a very basic understanding - then you should cease and desist at once.

For there is nothing worst than an individual attempting to teach others how to play the piano, when they themselves, cannot even play a tune.

What's my freakin point ???

Believe it or not ..... I already made it.

Arraamis, these are all very good points. It's similar to the question I asked not long ago. I find it naive and ignorent that so called believers and some Atheists for that matter choose to put their name to something or disregard something in which they do not fully understand.

It's no longer the 15th century people should educate themself if they say they're a part of something. This being a boxing site, it's as if I called myself a devoted hardcore Ali fan even though all I knew of him is what someone, somewhere told me.
Not good enough.

You give not only yourself, but the very religion you support a bad name if you don't know the text you're trying to debate. Hypocrites in my eyes.

We owe ourself to atleast study these things IF we find atheism or religion an important part of our life. Also I would add that religous people should be familiar with science and atheism and look at it with some objectivity. How can you disregard it otherwise?

We're all trying to find answers but Personal opinions about something you really know nothing about will gain you nothing.

[Freelancer]

This thread isn't for the purpose of bursting anyone's religious bubble - but only to make a statement, based on observations on the www and in real life.

Dogma is the established belief or doctrine held by a religion, ideology or any kind of organization: it is authoritative and not to be disputed, doubted or from which diverged.

This constant crusade adopted by many of those entrenched in religious dogma, of challenging those who have become Atheists - Should cease and desist.

For the most obvious reason - many so-called Christians, Catholics, Muslims and {Insert Religion Here} do not know enough about the very religion they claim as their own, to adequately address the theoretical questions offered by Atheists.

Most Atheists, I have found, to be very well studied - Meaning they have challenged what was presented to them and sought to clarify\verify thoroughly the content. Which lead them eventually to a greater understanding of many particular religious beliefs and the systems that govern them.

Those who have accepted religion and are active in a singular sect should at the very least, know and fully understand what they claim to believe. Not only from what is given by the accepted authoritative source, but also from a historical perspective. That way, when they attempt to spread their belief system, they are knowledgeable about the FACTS and can debate the contradictions and irregularities within their own system effectively.

But, when those who have conviction based on word of mouth, only, and they attempt to spread that which they do not have a comprehensive understanding - then you not only diminish your status, but also the status of your belief system. For, if your belief system can only produce intermediate representatives, ill-equipped to spread all but a very basic understanding - then you should cease and desist at once.

For there is nothing worst than an individual attempting to teach others how to play the piano, when they themselves, cannot even play a tune.

What's my freakin point ???

Believe it or not ..... I already made it.

When faced with a skeptic, a *religious debate* turns into a never ending disscution that leads absolutely nowhere. Regardless of how knowledgeable one is of his religion's history, dogma and so on everything halts at the point of faith.

As even Squeal said some time ago in other words, religion requires that big compromise of believing the words of a prophet with little to no proof. In the end people can discuss all they want but atheists will always want the proof and the men of faith won't need it.

I always looked at religion as a way to progress individualy, I couldn't care less what other people's belief system is or if they don't have one. As long as they don't force it upon me.

[ILLuminato]

This thread isn't for the purpose of bursting anyone's religious bubble - but only to make a statement, based on observations on the www and in real life.

Dogma is the established belief or doctrine held by a religion, ideology or any kind of organization: it is authoritative and not to be disputed, doubted or from which diverged.

This constant crusade adopted by many of those entrenched in religious dogma, of challenging those who have become Atheists - Should cease and desist.

For the most obvious reason - many so-called Christians, Catholics, Muslims and {Insert Religion Here} do not know enough about the very religion they claim as their own, to adequately address the theoretical questions offered by Atheists.

Most Atheists, I have found, to be very well studied - Meaning they have challenged what was presented to them and sought to clarify\verify thoroughly the content. Which lead them eventually to a greater understanding of many particular religious beliefs and the systems that govern them.

Those who have accepted religion and are active in a singular sect should at the very least, know and fully understand what they claim to believe. Not only from what is given by the accepted authoritative source, but also from a historical perspective. That way, when they attempt to spread their belief system, they are knowledgeable about the FACTS and can debate the contradictions and irregularities within their own system effectively.

But, when those who have conviction based on word of mouth, only, and they attempt to spread that which they do not have a comprehensive understanding - then you not only diminish your status, but also the status of your belief system. For, if your belief system can only produce intermediate representatives, ill-equipped to spread all but a very basic understanding - then you should cease and desist at once.

For there is nothing worst than an individual attempting to teach others how to play the piano, when they themselves, cannot even play a tune.

What's my freakin point ???

Believe it or not ..... I already made it.

My problem with opinionated Atheists is....if you think God doesn't exist so much, why talk about it? Why not leave it alone?

I mean, if I walked onto an alien planet which worshipped like, an invisible XM Radio satellite, but I think it's not there, I won't go around saying, ITS NOT THERE. Not only because I would have better things to do, but it would create a challenged side more passionately convicted in belief. As long as atheism exists, passionate religious will too.

[squealpiggy]

Religion is essentially supported by argument from emotion, not from logic. Any attempt to use logic to argue a religious concept is doomed from the beginning because it is inherently absurd.

People are religious because it feels right to them, not because there is some objective observation which supports religion as truth.

In any case isn't attempting to apply human logic to the question of the supreme being automatically blasphemous?

[ILLuminato]

Religion is essentially supported by argument from emotion, not from logic. Any attempt to use logic to argue a religious concept is doomed from the beginning because it is inherently absurd.

So you're saying that both ways? Any attempt to use logic to argue about a religious concept?

I believe you can use some logic in supplement to faith. It's not too hard, either. I've done it on here plenty of times.

[Freelancer]

Religion is essentially supported by argument from emotion, not from logic. Any attempt to use logic to argue a religious concept is doomed from the beginning because it is inherently absurd.

People are religious because it feels right to them, not because there is some objective observation which supports religion as truth.

In any case isn't attempting to apply human logic to the question of the supreme being automatically blasphemous?

People can use logic to debate society and human related teachings of a certain religion but logic falls flat in an atempt to prove the existence of a superior being and its involvment on Earth, especially one conected to specific dogmas.

That's where human ego comes to play and people start to offend and get offended. IMO logic isn't all that it's made out to be, it's a process of trial and error perfected by us during the course of our existence. It's supposed to be full proof but if we go out of the box and consider our perception a tad limited, even the most absurd idea can have a small percentage of truth to it.

[Cuauhtémoc1520]

When faced with a skeptic, a *religious debate* turns into a never ending disscution that leads absolutely nowhere. Regardless of how knowledgeable one is of his religion's history, dogma and so on everything halts at the point of faith.

As even Squeal said some time ago in other words, religion requires that big compromise of believing the words of a prophet with little to no proof. In the end people can discuss all they want but atheists will always want the proof and the men of faith won't need it.

I always looked at religion as a way to progress individualy, I couldn't care less what other people's belief system is or if they don't have one. As long as they don't force it upon me.

You are right but there are a couple of problems with this.

#1 - One of the basic tenants of the major religions, well Christianity and Islam specifically is to "spread the word". Meaning you are to share what you believe with others. I think most Atheist take that as someone shoving their beliefs down your throat but it's as simple as saying no thank you or putting up a sign that you don't want people to come to your door.

#2 - Faith is one of the major parts of believing. You cannot believe without faith because God can't be proven scientifically, this is true.

What I laugh about when it comes to Atheists is, they are all for spirituality, self healing, meditation or anything that empowers the body with the mind.

Studies have shown time and time again that people of faith live longer, are healthier and even make a better living. Now for the sake of this argument I will say that God doesn't exist and is a figment of someone's mind a long time ago but if he/she/it helps people deal with life, live longer, have more discipline, keep a family together etc.....Then whats the difference between any of those methods I mentioned before to help yourself with?

I think Atheists have become as aggressive as the religious fanatics they are obsessed with. No longer is it enough to just say they don't believe in God, now they have to try and prove it and humiliate and insult people who do.

[Cuauhtémoc1520]

People can use logic to debate society and human related teachings of a certain religion but logic falls flat in an atempt to prove the existence of a superior being and its involvment on Earth, especially one conected to specific dogmas.

That's where human ego comes to play and people start to offend and get offended. IMO logic isn't all that it's made out to be, it's a process of trial and error perfected by us during the course of our existence. It's supposed to be full proof but if we go out of the box and consider our perception a tad limited, even the most absurd idea can have a small percentage of truth to it.

Very well said..............