Which Religion?

DapperGent

Judaism for me. They seem to be the best at ignoring their own religion but I guess they've had the most practice.

OK-Cancel-Apply

Gun to my head to pick a religion? Hmmmm.. Satanism. Sounds cool.

Overheal

Banjo the Clown - God of Puppets!

rainbow kirby

Apart from Pastafarianism, I'd probably go with Buddhism.

aidan24326

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

It may as well be a fun religion if you have to have one.

I was thinking that too. Catholicism is just so boring. I think either something peaceful and zen-like, say buddhism, or just be a crazy islamic fundamentalist planning a mission to blow up the white house or something.

Or find a religion where god's instructions are to live a life of pure hedonism!

Sangre

Greek Mythology. I want my gods to have some balls. The whole thing is like a heavenly soap opera.

Galvasean

Sangre wrote: »

Greek Mythology. I want my gods to have some balls. The whole thing is like a heavenly soap opera.

You say that now. But when Zeus comes after your wife?

Sangre

I'd be flattered.

Galvasean

Sangre wrote: »

I'd be flattered.

And most likely sent on an all expenses paid trip to Hades

studiorat

Sufi-Mystic.

AtomicHorror

Galvasean wrote: »

Atheism

- because if you ask many of the posters over in the Christianity forum they will tell you it is a religion.

Or better yet 'Scientism'! :pac::eek::eek::D:eek:

I knew J C was someones's sock puppet!

WooPeeA

"There is one truth, the wise know it is called by different names."

I don't know who say that but I really like that quote. I try to treat all religions equally as there's no proof for anything.

But yeah, I believe in "something".. Or as the Ruqaiyyah Waris Maqsood (islamic writer) said:

Unless something is caused it does not exist. Everything in our universe is caused. Something therefore must be caused it. Whatever that cause was, that we may call God, even if we have no idea of that God is.

Unless something is moved by forces acting upon it, it does not move. Everything in the universe is in motion. Whatever it was that activated the whole lot, that may we call God.

Call it God, Allah, Supreme Being etc.. I think there must be something. And I believe in that our destination is not only "be born only to be death" as that would be a joke.. Of course I'm not sure that I'm right because I have no proofs (and no proofs against as well), but I hope for that.

I'm not a member of any religion and I'm not planing to become one. I don't even know is there name for people like me, but I found agnosticism as the closest description for myself.


+ I try to study all religions. I'm interested in that. Not to "find the only truth" as I'm not going to change my point of view on things but because there's many wise stories and morals in all religions. It can really help you become a better man. You'd be surprised how Christianity and Islam are similar to each other and that there would be no Christianity and Islam if there would be no Judaism etc...

CerebralCortex

toiletduck wrote: »

Origin for me, all hail the Ori!

Hallowed be the Ori.

Zillah

WooPeeA wrote: »

I don't know who say that but I really like that quote. I try to treat all religions equally as there's no proof for anything.

Me too!

I try to direct the same level of amused scorn at all religions. Sometimes I am weak though. For example, I have a habit of being more cruel to Christianity, Islam and Scientology, while letting others, such as the Jews and Jainists to get off easy.

I must learn to be better. Balance in all things.

Edit: I edited the wrong post. *slow clapping*

DanCorb

Galvasean wrote: »

Atheism

- because if you ask many of the posters over in the Christianity forum they will tell you it is a religion.

Then ask them will they fight for us to have tax exempt status, because that would be fair and non-discriminatory right? Their opinions on atheism as a religion might suddenly change.

WooPeeA

DanCorb wrote: »

Then ask them will they fight for us to have tax exempt status, because that would be fair and non-discriminatory right? Their opinions on atheism as a religion might suddenly change.

Good point!!

Galvasean

DanCorb wrote: »

Then ask them will they fight for us to have tax exempt status, because that would be fair and non-discriminatory right? Their opinions on atheism as a religion might suddenly change.

Wouldn't mind getting a tax break for doing sweet F all.

pH

Zillah wrote: »

I try to direct the same level of amused scorn at all religions. Sometimes I am weak though. For example, I have a habit of being more cruel to Christianity, Islam and Scientology, while letting others, such as the Jews and Jainists to get off easy.

I'll tell you who gets off real easy ... Buddhists that's who. I know, I know fellow atheists and all that but they really believe in a lot of nonsense.

I remember a couple of years ago watching a travel documentary, not sure who it was, but they visited a Buddhist monastery high in some mountains, that got snowed in and cut off for a large portion of every year. Care guess who lived there? 'Celibate' monks and young boys. The thing was, this was shown at the height of the catholic priest/institutional abuse scandals here in Ireland and the US, and yet the presenter gushed romantically about this lifestyle. To him (and I suspect 99% of viewers) these monks were obviously above any suspicion mainly because of this romantic view we have, but I can't see any reason why a Buddhist monk should behave any differently to a Catholic priest.

Dades

I'm sure our Buddhist mod Asiaprod will be along at some stage to comment!

pH wrote: »

I can't see any reason why a Buddhist monk should behave any differently to a Catholic priest.

The two cultures are like chalk and cheese. No need to tar them with the occasional horny old priest brush. :pac:

pH

Dades wrote: »

I'm sure our Buddhist mod Asiaprod will be along at some stage to comment!
The two cultures are like chalk and cheese. No need to tar them with the occasional horny old priest brush. :pac:

This is exactly what I mean, there's a knee-jerk reaction to defend Buddhists which I really find hard to understand. As a religion it suffers from exactly the same faults as all the others.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4551715.stm
http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_2387139,00.html

etc. etc.

Asiaprod

Dades wrote: »

I'm sure our Buddhist mod Asiaprod will be along at some stage to comment!

Happy to try to answer any questions.

The two cultures are like chalk and cheese. No need to tar them with the occasional horny old priest brush. :pac:

And that is going to be the main problem. There are vast differences between western attitude and eastern ones, vast cultural differences and differing ideals.

Zamboni

I'd go for Zoroastrianism

You get a cape and a mask and a sword and a horse and Catherine Zita Jones

Dades

pH wrote: »

This is exactly what I mean, there's a knee-jerk reaction to defend Buddhists which I really find hard to understand.

I wasn't defending Buddhists - I was lamenting the assumption that because the 'organisation' involves celibate priests and young boys that it is rife with abuse.

Whether it is actually is rife with abuse is moot - and up for debate!

Asiaprod

pH wrote: »

This is exactly what I mean, there's a knee-jerk reaction to defend Buddhists which I really find hard to understand. As a religion it suffers from exactly the same faults as all the others

I never spout Buddhism in this forum, however, I will make an exception, I hope this helps you understand Buddhism a little better

Buddhism is neither a religion in the sense in which that word is commonly understood, for it is not "a system of faith and worship owing any allegiance to a supernatural being."
In Buddhism there is not, as in most other religions, an Almighty God to be obeyed and feared. The Buddha does not believe in a cosmic potentate, omniscient and omnipresent. In Buddhism there are no divine revelations or divine messengers. A Buddhist is, therefore, not subservient to any higher supernatural power which controls his destinies and which arbitrarily rewards and punishes. Since Buddhists do not believe in revelations of a divine being Buddhism does not claim the monopoly of truth and does not condemn any other religion. But Buddhism recognizes the infinite latent possibilities of man and teaches that man can gain deliverance from suffering by his own efforts independent of divine help or mediating priests.
Buddhism cannot, therefore, strictly be called a religion because it is neither a system of faith and worship, nor "the outward act or form by which men indicate their recognition of the existence of a God or gods having power over their own destiny to whom obedience, service, and honor are due."
If, by religion, is meant "a teaching which takes a view of life that is more than superficial, a teaching which looks into life and not merely at it, a teaching which furnishes men with a guide to conduct that is in accord with this its in-look, a teaching which enables those who give it heed to face life with fortitude and death with serenity," or a system to get rid of the ills of life, then it is certainly a religion of religions.

In answer to your question on monks, rest assured, Buddhist monks and nuns are requires to abstain from all types of sexual behavior. There are no exceptions to this rule.

Zillah

Well, in fairness, Catholic priests are, I assume required to abstain from having sex with children.

Asiaprod

Unfortunately, neither group seem to obey those rules. It still remains a fact, that many, if not most, do follow the rules. The problem with Buddhism is that unlike the christian priests there is no overall boss or hierarchy to enforce that monks follow these rules. In addition, being a monk is often seen as a profession rather than a vocation. Anyone can start there own monastery and run it their own way. Culturally, monks are held in high esteem in Asia and not all of them are monks for the best of reason. Also, there is a tradition in many countries that the first born joins a monastery for a number of years to serve the monks, after which they are free to get on with their own live. Kinda of like spiritual conscription. Their is also a vast difference in how homosexuality, and sex in general, is viewed in the east. If I was to be asked what was the thing that struck me most when I first arrived here in asia it would have to be the different attitude to sex. No stigma here from organized religions at all. Sex is not a sin, it is to be enjoyed for its own sake.

Zillah

Asiaprod wrote: »

No stigma here from organized religions at all. Sex is not a sin, it is to be enjoyed for its own sake.

I knew there was a reason we were letting the Buddhists off easy.

maitri

Asiaprod wrote: »

rest assured, Buddhist monks and nuns are requires to abstain from all types of sexual behavior. There are no exceptions to this rule.

Wrong. you're forgetting the Tantric practices of some of the monks/nuns of Tibet.

As I have been told (don't know if it's true), after years and years of meditation a monk/nun might have tantric sex - (which is supposed to be a very different experience from "everyday"-sex) with a partner chosen for him/her - once or twice (though not until they both have reached a point of no craving/lust (sic!) yet no aversion - and only after the two have spent some weeks together). Then they return to celibacy.

Zombrex

maitri wrote: »

Wrong. you're forgetting the Tantric practices of some of the monks/nuns of Tibet.

As I have been told (don't know if it's true), after years and years of meditation a monk/nun might have tantric sex - (which is supposed to be a very different experience from "everyday"-sex) with a partner chosen for him/her - once or twice (though not until they both have reached a point of no craving/lust (sic!) yet no aversion - and only after the two have spent some weeks together). Then they return to celibacy.

I thought Sting invented all that :P

Asiaprod

maitri wrote: »

Wrong. you're forgetting the Tantric practices of some of the monks/nuns of Tibet.

As I have been told (don't know if it's true), after years and years of meditation a monk/nun might have tantric sex - (which is supposed to be a very different experience from "everyday"-sex) with a partner chosen for him/her - once or twice (though not until they both have reached a point of no craving/lust (sic!) yet no aversion - and only after the two have spent some weeks together). Then they return to celibacy.

Hi Maitri, the reason I do not agree with you is as follows. This type of practice is not seen to be the same as sex in general. This is spiritual sex conducted for a different purpose than procreation or gratification. It is Hindu-Vidic in basis and in addition it is conducted to honor the male and female Hindu gods. If you look into this a bit more you will also find that taking any pleasure from the act is seen as a failure and it takes place under the guidance of the participants Guru who watches it. Its not about sex, its about releasing energy together to experience a combining of energz one cannot experience on your own. This moves it out of the realm of general sex and into a ritualistic arena. Quite often it also includes no touching of any kind but is conducted symbolically, how this is done I dont know. It also pops up again in Tantric Yoga, something I know nothing off.
Its acceptance is very controversial and It is certainly not mainstream Buddhism which does not worship Gods and Goddesses.