Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
Asian countries like China, Japan, Thailand, Korea and Taiwan are highly Buddhist. Christianity hasn't really played any role in those countries.
Actually Korea I think is a lot more Christian than you might think. Last I checked it's more Christian than Buddhist, although largely of no religion.
But the point wasn't that those societies are majority Christian. It was more that Christianity can work, even have native forms, in those societies despite their being radically different than majority Christian nations. Hinduism exists in many societies as well, but mostly it's of people of Indian descent. Conversion to Hinduism happens, but it's mostly limited to pretty recent revival movements.
Quote:
Originally Posted by agnostic soldier
The many paganisms also endured for thousands of years, even longer than christianity has been around. Only a third of the world's population is christian and about a billion are muslim. That leaves three and a half billion that don't accept those religions. Why does Jehovah get more credibility than Kali or Vishnu, especially since Hinduism is so old that we don't even know whose its founder was.
It likely has no founder as we understand it. I wasn't meaning to slight Hinduism unduly. Obviously its endurance and its ability to say something meaningful to so many says something for it. However in many ways it is an artifact of a specific culture, or more accurately a family of cultures as India is very diverse, in a specific place.
Quote:
Originally Posted by agnostic soldier
The abrahamic don't hold more superiority just because they've endured in some cultures doesn't give more credibility to them being true.
Fine they're simply more important then. They say something more about the human condition in general because they/we have had to deal with humanity in wider terms and circumstances.
Quote:
Originally Posted by agnostic soldier
The abrahamic religions are also mostly only dominant in Western and Middle Eastern cultures.
And Latin Americans of partial indigenous cultural/genetic ancestry, and Southern Africans, and Filipinos, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by agnostic soldier
It isn't a flippant non answer nor is it condescending.
Okay maybe I oversold it. At base "which God" I guess is more of a question than any kind of answer or non-answer flippant or not. As a question it can be answered and moved on from. I think the idea of it as somehow meaning something other than "what are we discussing today" is what I meant by "flippant non-answer." If someone want to discuss cats and you asked "what kind?" that's not a particularly great or meaningful question, except in getting a focus. If you want it to make a point it doesn't really do that.
I'll concede this as I agree there are times I wish to discuss just a general notion of God rather than that of a specific religion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by agnostic soldier
It is rather arrogant to dismiss all other gods and claim that christianity is more superior just because it has endured in some cultures. Jehovah is no more superior than any other god, despite what many christians like to tell themselves.
If I believed that I wouldn't be Christian. Or if I ever believe that I would stop being Christian.
Other gods are fine or meaningful, but they are in some ways deficient or unreal.
The gods you name are either the personification of a natural phenomenon (thunder, dawn, etc) or are extremely cultural specific. If a God is real it seems sensible, I think, to believe it's not just real for one tribe in Nicaragua.
Why? You follow a god which has chosen a specific people to reward, if you believe certain interpretations of the Jewish Bible. Other than disappointment at being left out, I don't see that it's too much of a stretch for this idea to be true but slightly distorted by the big three monotheist beliefs. Could be that God only cares about his chosen people hiding out in the rain forests of South America. It's no more believable than any other random concept of god we're supposed to take on faith alone.
Quote:
Islam and Baha'i also have a universalizing vision of God.
All you're saying here is that god concepts which market to a diverse audience are going to be popular. No surprise there, but popularity doesn't tell us anything about truth.
Quote:
Also it's a tad condescending as it comes with the assumption that we don't there are other monotheistic, or just theistic, religions. Being a Christian isn't the same as having brain-damage as much as some might wish to indicate otherwise.)
As others pointed out, it's getting to the heart of how you choose one evidence-free faith based idea of god compared to another.
How do we know who our real Heavenly Father is? We find Him with our soul. People can mentally believe in Him every which way but Sunday, give Him all these different titles... but this mental belief will come up wanting... just as you've all been posting. Because our Father is soul... it's soul to soul interaction that comes into play here. And only by the development of our soul do we discover who He really is.
"God is Soul, and only Soul, which has in it all the attributes of Love and wisdom and thought for the welfare of His creatures. He is a thinking and seeing God, and all the energies of His Soul are used to make men better and happier. As is the natural father of the man a personal father, so is the Great Soul of God, a Personal Father to all his children; and men when they have the development of their souls in the Divine Love will know that God is personal - something more than an all enveloping energy or force or mere manifestation of His existence."
God and His Personality (http://tinyurl.com/ykq857q - broken link)
The contents from this website are in the public domain.
I think the fact that Hinduism and Buddhism are mainly found in Asian countries or how other religions seems to have stayed "regional" says more to how many Christian missionaries have travelled all over the world to spread their religion - while other religions have not. I don't think it has anything to do with which religions are applicable to more people - rather to which religion has been pushed upon more people. I think that followers of other religions feel that they are just as valid as Christianity. I'm sure they feel like their religion has all the answers and I'm sure their religion brings them peace of heart as well. I don't think any religion is more valid or more real than any other. I think certain religions are just more valid for certain people. And I think that this is perfectly fine.
Actually Korea I think is a lot more Christian than you might think. Last I checked it's more Christian than Buddhist, although largely of no religion.
But the point wasn't that those societies are majority Christian. It was more that Christianity can work, even have native forms, in those societies despite their being radically different than majority Christian nations. Hinduism exists in many societies as well, but mostly it's of people of Indian descent. Conversion to Hinduism happens, but it's mostly limited to pretty recent revival movements.
It likely has no founder as we understand it. I wasn't meaning to slight Hinduism unduly. Obviously its endurance and its ability to say something meaningful to so many says something for it. However in many ways it is an artifact of a specific culture, or more accurately a family of cultures as India is very diverse, in a specific place.
Fine they're simply more important then. They say something more about the human condition in general because they/we have had to deal with humanity in wider terms and circumstances.
And Latin Americans of partial indigenous cultural/genetic ancestry, and Southern Africans, and Filipinos, etc.
Okay maybe I oversold it. At base "which God" I guess is more of a question than any kind of answer or non-answer flippant or not. As a question it can be answered and moved on from. I think the idea of it as somehow meaning something other than "what are we discussing today" is what I meant by "flippant non-answer." If someone want to discuss cats and you asked "what kind?" that's not a particularly great or meaningful question, except in getting a focus. If you want it to make a point it doesn't really do that.
I'll concede this as I agree there are times I wish to discuss just a general notion of God rather than that of a specific religion.
If I believed that I wouldn't be Christian. Or if I ever believe that I would stop being Christian.
Other gods are fine or meaningful, but they are in some ways deficient or unreal.
I guess I can see what you mean by 'which god.' When discussing matters of religion with a believer, it would be better to discuss the god that the believer accepts. I'm still wondering though why you think christianity is superior because it has endured and spread to other cultures. For example, would you think the greek pantheon was more superior if it had spread to other cultures and endured in those places. I don't really see how this would make a religion more true than others.
I guess I can see what you mean by 'which god.' When discussing matters of religion with a believer, it would be better to discuss the god that the believer accepts. I'm still wondering though why you think christianity is superior because it has endured and spread to other cultures. For example, would you think the greek pantheon was more superior if it had spread to other cultures and endured in those places. I don't really see how this would make a religion more true than others.
That's what happens when you force a religion on others. Imagine we could all be followers of Odin. Just so happens that wasn't the God people shoved on others.
If you believe the statement is not a flippant non-answer that's just sort-of sad of you. People might be aware of other gods but reject them for a variety of valid or invalid reasons. Either way the "which God" response proves nothing and rarely adds anything to a conversation.
The fact that you don't understand the question doesn't mean that it's a 'flippant non-answer'.
Quote:
For another this is the kind of "A student ego" thing that many atheist seem to have. Your point is valid, I guess, because you say it is valid and are willing to use like "delusional" to those who disagree. As I don't properly see your brilliance, and I'm not giving you an A+ on your paper, you're going to stamp your feet at me. I can live with that.
That's the sound of laughter, not feet.
Quote:
Yeah yeah. You call entire belief systems shared by billions "delusional" and I'm the arrogant one
Riiiight. Because huge groups of people have never been wrong en masse before in history, ever. Uh huh.
You know all you have to do is come up with one piece of factual evidence that you're right and I'm wrong. I'm not the one that refuses to change her mind about something; I'd love to see any evidence you have for the existence of a god. Sh*t, you think it's all fun and games to go through life knowing that there's no afterlife? Do you realize how hard that was for me as a young teen to accept when I realized it? Puhleeze.
You act as if atheists disbelieve just to push your buttons, or to be different, or stubborn. Hell no. We're atheists because we're the ones that have opened our eyes and seen the gigantic feet of clay on your gods and religions. We've pulled aside the curtain and seen with our own eyes that the Great Oz is a farce, an illusion.
But you go on believing whatever you like. The only caveat I hope you'll abide by is that you keep your delusions out of government, out of laws, and away from ruling my life. I am a good person without your god and religion threatening me or cajoling me.
I don't think Mr5150 will ever get it with that mentallity. No matter how wrong, it is simply much easier to act like there is just one religion, one concept of god in the whole universe that everyone believes in than to ask "hold on, why do I believe in this god as opposed to someone else's?"
Mr5150, tell us why you are a christian as opposed to a jew, a muslim or a hindu? What's so special about your religion as opposed to the other ones? Because as far as non-theists can tell, every religion makes the same claims.
I'm just agreeing that "which god" is a bit of a flippant non-answer. Also it's a tad condescending as it comes with the assumption that we don't there are other monotheistic, or just theistic, religions.
That's simply not true, the point of the which god question is to prevent a debate from turning into a false dichotomy(ie there's either no god or it must be the christian one).
I'm sure christians hate it when they see a post from a muslim saying something along the lines of "the world is intricate, it uses the golden ratio, therefore Allah is the one true god and jesus was just a profet therefore everyone should use the quran and not the bible" or "astronauts find cool picture of a nebula, it's proof of Allah!!!" so why do we need to be subjected to the christian equivalent?
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.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
