U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Merry Christmas!
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-15-2008, 11:13 PM
 
Location: San Gabriel Valley, CA
12,605 posts, read 12,912,793 times
Reputation: 8455

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dieter View Post
What a ridiculous assumption. I know you believe in a God, therefore I can say that you are religious. How many Gods? If you only believe in one, you're a monotheist. What is the nature of the God? Did he create our universe and go about his merry way, having nothing further to do with it? Then you're a form of deist.

I never said a spiritual person must subscribe to some extant religion. In fact, I said that spirituality and religion are two different things. I will, however, continue to know that you are religious by definition, and that my knowledge of semantics is clearly amazing.

"I know you believe in a God, therefore I can say that you are religious."

For the third time, no, you know that I believe in a God; therefore you can say that I am spiritual.

You may (think you) know something of semantics, and that's fine; what you need a little brushing up on, apparently, are the definition of religious and the definition of spiritual.

Good luck with all that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-15-2008, 11:59 PM
 
552 posts, read 718,576 times
Reputation: 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerZ View Post
"I know you believe in a God, therefore I can say that you are religious."

For the third time, no, you know that I believe in a God; therefore you can say that I am spiritual.

You may (think you) know something of semantics, and that's fine; what you need a little brushing up on, apparently, are the definition of religious and the definition of spiritual.

Good luck with all that.
There are several internet dictionaries you could look up "religious" in, in case you do not own one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2008, 11:05 AM
 
5,108 posts, read 7,765,237 times
Reputation: 3460
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerZ View Post
"I know you believe in a God, therefore I can say that you are religious."

For the third time, no, you know that I believe in a God; therefore you can say that I am spiritual.

You may (think you) know something of semantics, and that's fine; what you need a little brushing up on, apparently, are the definition of religious and the definition of spiritual.

Good luck with all that.
This post speaks volumes, thank you JerZ for making this point.
There is a world of difference between "spiritual" and "religous."
Believing in god is yet another other set or subset, and doesn't necessarily go with either of the above.

It is really disrespectful to put labels on other people based on who or what we "think" they are. They only labels that carry weight are the labels a person may choose to use on themself.

Thank you all posting for taking the time to listen to what people are saying and in the process expanding your understanding of these concerns.

Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 03-17-2008 at 12:09 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2008, 11:11 AM
 
5,108 posts, read 7,765,237 times
Reputation: 3460
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dieter View Post
I will, however, continue to know that you are religious by definition, and that my knowledge of semantics is clearly amazing.
To persist in calling someone "religous" when they have repeatedly asked you not to use that phrase and provided an alternative tag instead is extremely disrepectful. It shows a lack of regard for the person and the concern. We grow in understanding and respect towards one another when we listen, truly listen to what the person is saying. When we don't, a different agenda becomes clear, and includes a clear disregard for someone else's views.

The only thing you are an authority on is your own self.
No one is ever an expert or authority on another human being.

And for the record, your posts show that you do not understand the differences and distinctions between "religion" and "spiritual practice" and if or whether belief in a god is also present.

Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 03-17-2008 at 12:07 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2008, 12:16 PM
 
5,108 posts, read 7,765,237 times
Reputation: 3460
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dieter View Post
I said that the belief in God is fundamentally a religious belief. You do not need to follow an organized religion to be religious, you simply need a religious philosophy. You may say you have no religious philosophy, but if you believe in some kind of God you will fall into at least one of them.
No, that is not true at all.
Plenty of people believe in gods of one kind or another and stay as far away from religion and "religous philosophy" as possible! I am one of them. Your statement shows an incomplete understanding of how "religion" or "religious philosophy" are very different from a wide range of many other ways of participating in spiritual experience. Believing in god has nothing whatsoever to do with religion in my own experience.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2008, 02:09 PM
 
552 posts, read 718,576 times
Reputation: 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by DimSumRaja View Post
No, that is not true at all.
Plenty of people believe in gods of one kind or another and stay as far away from religion and "religous philosophy" as possible! I am one of them. Your statement shows an incomplete understanding of how "religion" or "religious philosophy" are very different from a wide range of many other ways of participating in spiritual experience. Believing in god has nothing whatsoever to do with religion in my own experience.
You aren't one of them, it's strange how people have this delusion of creativity or something when it comes to these matters as if they and they alone thought up some idea that they believe is not only right but unclassifiable.

You and that other person seem to be stuck on the idea that being religious is the same as having a religion. It is not.

You two believe in God, therefore I can say that you're both religious. The simplest definition of the word "religious" is (paraphrased): "the belief in a God or deity."

If a homosexual doesn't like being called "gay" it doesn't mean he isn't. Our preferred labels aren't the only correct ones.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2008, 02:13 PM
 
Location: San Gabriel Valley, CA
12,605 posts, read 12,912,793 times
Reputation: 8455
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dieter View Post
You aren't one of them, it's strange how people have this delusion of creativity or something when it comes to these matters as if they and they alone thought up some idea that they believe is not only right but unclassifiable.
That's the second time you've brought up the "creativity" angle (the first time I answered you facetiously with, "I am creative!"). Why are you so worried about me and DimSum thinking we're creative? Why is that a touchy spot for you? Just curious.

You seem REALLY worried and concerned about, and aggravated by, the fact that we won't call ourselves religious by your definition. That's curious too. That's something that you might rather want to explore within yourself--why these things would bug you so much.

As to thinking I came up with an idea, I can't speak for DimSum, but for myself I can say that I don't think I came up with this idea at all. For me, God just "is"--not classifying God isn't some idea I invented. It too just "is". I'm sure millions have also had this idea, but by its very nature the idea would not translate into a firm religion of its own...hence, the non-religious part. Just because the "idea" isn't assigned a religion doesn't mean I don't think anyone else has ever thought it. Why would it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2008, 03:47 PM
 
5,108 posts, read 7,765,237 times
Reputation: 3460
your definition of religion and what you are calling "religIous philosophy" is very simplistic and also inaccurate. PERIOD. just because "it's all the same to you" merely reveals your ignorance in the matter, and as judged by the posts here and repetition of the same thing over and over, also your unwillingness to adjust that narrow inaccurate view (for whatever personal agenda or motive or personal reasons you may have)

you may not see the difference, but if people to whom you apply the label inform you differently, then that is some education available for you if you choose to avail yourself of that and thus become better informed. There is a difference between an Internet dictionary, and the actual use among living people, and there can be a great deal of nuance and difference and charge involved depending on the cultural and social climate and circumstances.

it's like I'm white and over the decades people in America who are of African descent have commented on the various labels white people put on them, and the ones they choose for themselves: we have seen labels like "colored" and "Negro" and "black" and "African American" come and go. According to your internet dictionary they probably all describe the same racial characteristics so you could say "hey all the same what's the big deal"

but they take on very different meanings and nuance, and can show varying levels of disrespect and offensiveness depending on when and how they are used.

the people whose word carries the most weight are the people in the group being described, and even within a group individuals may have strong preference and aversion. THAT NEEDS TO BE RESPECTED, even though to a white person they may all "look alike" or "mean the same thing." It is one thing to misuse a label out of an initial ignorance, but to continue to intentionally and repeatedly and with flagrant disregard for offended parties, keep on using such a label....well then that is a deliberate act of disrespect, arrogance, and with an intent to act offensively.

what do we think of most people who continue to call African Americans by the derogatory terms "colored" "Negro" or other non-printable phrases? It is a deliberately insulting act, and we consider such people racist, biggots, and worse.

I hope you are able to see this analogy.

And it is helpful to be honest with yourself about what is your motive....both in life and in this thread.....is it to "prove someone else wrong" or "one-upmanship" or "deliberate insult" or "show your superiority" or is it to "build understanding" or "expand your knowledge" or "increase harmony" or "increase knowledge of how people live in this world"

Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 03-17-2008 at 04:21 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2008, 04:15 PM
 
552 posts, read 718,576 times
Reputation: 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by DimSumRaja View Post
your definition of religion and what you are calling "religIous philosophy" is very simplistic and also inaccurate. PERIOD. just because "it's all the same to you" merely reveals your ignorance in the matter, and as judged by the posts here and repetition of the same thing over and over, also your unwillingness to adjust that narrow inaccurate view (for whatever personal agenda or motive or personal reasons you may have)

you may not see the difference, but if people to whom you apply the label inform you differently, then that is some education available for you if you choose to avail yourself of that and thus become better informed. There is a difference between an Internet dictionary, and the actual use among living people, and there can be a great deal of nuance and difference and charge involved depending on the cultural and social climate and circumstances.

it's like I'm white and over the decades people in America who are of African descent have commented on the various labels white people put on them, and the ones they choose for themselves: we have seen labels like "colored" and "Negro" and "black" and "African American" come and go. According to your internet dictionary they probably all describe the same racial characteristics so you could say "hey all the same what's the big deal"

but they take on very different meanings and nuance, and can show varying levels of disrespect and offensiveness depending on when and how they are used. I hope you are able to see this analogy.

the people whose word carries the most weight are the people in the group being described, even though to a white person they may all "look alike." It is one thing to misuse a label out of ignorance, but to continue to intentionally and repeatedly and with flagrant disregard for offended parties, keep on using such a label....well then that is a deliberate act of disrespect, arrogance, and with an intent to act offensively.

what do we think of most people who continue to call African Americans by the derogatory terms "colored" "Negro" or other non-printable phrases? It is deliberately insulting act.

I have not once defined religion, nor have I gone into any specifics about "religIous philosophy". For someone who claims not to be a Christian, you sure can design fallacious arguments with the best of them.

My supposed "Internet dictionary" (as if there is only one [and I have none in real life either]) is definitely a better source for a word's definition than "living people". "Living people" aren't walking, talking dictionaries of political correctness. Like you said, there are many people out there that still use racial slurs against the wishes of the offending communities.

The word "religious" is NOT an offensive one. If you take offense, it's YOUR misunderstanding of the word's meaning. It is not my job to tip toe around your ignorance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2008, 04:36 PM
 
5,108 posts, read 7,765,237 times
Reputation: 3460
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dieter View Post
The word "religious" is NOT an offensive one. If you take offense, it's YOUR misunderstanding of the word's meaning. It is not my job to tip toe around your ignorance.
The label "religious" is offensive to many people and I am one of them.
You are doing a superb job in this thread, however, of advertising your own lack of regard, unwillingness to listen with an open mind, and lack of respect for views that differ from your own.

The purpose of the racial analogy is that YOU are one of "those people" who continues to use offensive slurs. It is equally offensive to me. And it is equally aggressive of you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $89,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top