/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.3721422]

So where did your brush with religion leave you? Are you a believer? Personally it was the most mentally exhausting period of my life and I am glad that it is over, yet I would do the exact same thing again in a heartbeat.

[Anonymous No.3721425]

>>3721422

This is a literature board.

[Anonymous No.3721428]

>>3721425
Indeed. Don't play dumb.

[Anonymous No.3721432]

I'm Jewish.

I always will be.

[Anonymous No.3721434]

>>3721432
Are you consciously Jewish?

[Anonymous No.3721436]

The spirit is real, metaphysics is empty sophistry, and grace is the thing that happens when you're not quite looking at it. Somewhere around there is where it left me...but of course it's never really left me.

[Anonymous No.3721453]

>>3721422
Oh god OP.

>did laugh

My 'brush' was a 3 yeah academic pursuit - it lead to other things - agree to doing it again in a heartbeat.

But fuck... what a rollercoaster.

[Anonymous No.3721460]

>>3721432
Because it's a race.

[Anonymous No.3721461]

I'm a spinozist.

[Anonymous No.3721468]

I was raised by a grandmother who was a typical Republican type Christian. Loved Pat Robertson, voted mostly on abortion and so forth. It wasn't a happy childhood.

I'll admit that I still have a chip on my shoulder because of it. I certainly did when I lost all religion at 17. I'm trying to let go though

[Anonymous No.3721470]

I was raised Catholic, started questioning around 13, eventually just became an atheist. Religion always felt too dogmatic and constricting; I remember I went to a Buddhist service as part of a class and I found that meditation was relaxing, but as soon as the woman there started trying to direct the meditation, it felt stale.

I guess in the end I realized that no one can try to direct you mentally better than yourself

[Anonymous No.3721471]

I just assumed that people will never really come to an agreement on something based entirely on faith.

Then I realized that means we shall never come to an agreement on anything.

[Anonymous No.3721481]

>>3721470
>atheism
>not dogmatic

0.001/10

[Anonymous No.3721486]

I was raised without any religion. My family celebrated the Christian holidays because my uncles and aunts did.

My mother raised me to be a moral relativist, unintentionally.

Now, the closest thing I have to a worldview or outlook is absurdist.

[Anonymous No.3721502]

I've met God a few times, he's a nice guy. He just wants to be friends with you. He doesn't want to be "examined" or "tested" by you.

[Anonymous No.3721504]

i've never believed in any higher being, also never felt the need too.

[Anonymous No.3721505]

I was raised agnostic. Became a militant atheist in my teens. Became a not-asshole atheist in my adulthood.

[Anonymous No.3721507]

I wasn't raised in a religious family. My dad is atheistic I believe (he hasn't mentioned God) while the rest of my family does believe in lots of stuff. I believed in God when I was a kid but I can't recall the point of "clairvoyance". I don't really care whether there is a God or not so religion isn't one of my concerns.
What I hate the most is people caring so much about it, like Ricky Gervais. That faggot is like the opposite of the Pope, bashing religion 24/7. It's one preachy asshole.

[Anonymous No.3721530]

>>3721481
please, tell me the expectations, ceremonies, and traditions of atheism

[Anonymous No.3721535]

>>3721530
dog·mat·ic (dôg-mtk, dg-)
adj.
2. Characterized by an authoritative, arrogant assertion of unproved or unprovable principles.

[Anonymous No.3721554]

>>3721486
White upper-middle class CIS male suburbanite born in the 1990s whose edges are bleeding everyone dry

[Anonymous No.3721552]

No religious indoctrination as child other than Sunday school once in a while with Catholic neighbor. Went to Bible camp one year with him. Absolutely no inclination to become religious, passive observer of religion and politics.

Recent events have turned me into an amateur theologian with a specific interest in the occult and Catholic church,specifically the Jesuit Order. The state of Israel. Freemasonry.

Some interesting books I've read.

Vatican Assassins, author Eric Phelps is devout Christian and encourages readers to follow suit, outlines the history of the Jesuits, well researched.

The Secret History of the Jesuits - Edmund Paris

The Vatican's Holocaust - Avro Manhattan

The Two Babylons - Alexander Hislop

Behold a Pale Horse - William Cooper

>>3721502
>He
Abrahamic indoctrination as child detected.

[Anonymous No.3721559]

went to Presbyterian church every sunday as a child, gradually stopped going in my early teens, never made a concrete decision on whether I believe in God or not, got on with my life.

[Anonymous No.3721562]

My family wasn't particularly religious but I grew up in a very conservative, religious small town so it was impossible not to be constantly under the influence of that sort of culture. When I was a preteen/early-teen I remember always feeling guilty after masturbating, every single time, which of course meant a shitload of guilt. The sense of relief when I stopped thinking God hated me for jerking off was phenomenal, and looking back I'm not sure how I managed to make it through that period with my mental health intact (and maybe I didn't).

To briefly describe my overall spiritual journey: I was initially a Christian and took that as the natural way to be, everyone was a Christian after all. In my mid-to-late teens I went through my reactionary phase and out of that became a deist for awhile, then I drifted more toward agnostic, and now I'm a nihilist.

[Anonymous No.3721563]

>>3721530
I take it you haven't met a militant atheist before? I was one myself before I realized what an absolute prick I was being. Of course, this was during my teenage years and was swiftly outgrown. I'm part of the agnostic master race, now. Feels good, man.

[Anonymous No.3721567]

Both of my parents are ministers. I've grown up with religion all of my life. Was forced to go to church until I was in high school. Never went after that except on Christmas. Honestly never given it much thought. Just never believed. Tried to get into Buddhism, but I got bored. Guess I'm just not meant for religion.

[Anonymous No.3721594]

Religion has always been a nonissue in my life/family life. I just recently found out my parents are atheists and I'm 24 years old. Not that it surprised me, I mean, how many religious families completely ignore all religious thought/activity/discussion for 20+ years? It was just strange to hear them flat out state it after such a long silence on the matter. I guess they figured they would let me believe whatever I wanted to believe. Not that it really made any difference. I was completely oblivious to the whole thing as a kid, despite having some friends who grew up in "strict" Christian households. To me it was just one of those weird things that other families do, and you just follow suit when everyone closes their eyes and bows their head at the dinner table, but secretly peaking around at the people who seem so committed to this strange ritual that's keeping you from eating, or the next morning grudgingly accompanying them to this big, sterile building full of strange odors and somber adults, and trying to keep quiet while thinking of everything in the world but the actual purpose of this event.

By the time I was old enough to actually consider it intelligently, there didn't really seem to be anything to consider. It just isn't a part of my life.

[Anonymous No.3721601]

I'm from the deep south, so obviously my family is pretty religious. It was never a big deal for me growing up besides having to go to church during the brief time I lived with my gran. My mom's a pretty devout Christian, but she never made us go to church or anything, and far as I can tell, she doesn't give two shits that I don't give two shits about her god.

[Anonymous No.3721614]

Raised christian conservative while not being allowed to listen to secular music and having most of media consumption heavily monitored for anti-christian messages which is why I mostly read books since they were harder for my parents (mother mostly) to judge (who would have guessed 1984 or the Giver would have had such strong sexual themes). I gravitated more towards alternative takes on the religion as main stream Christianity in the US really turned me off and almost went into the ministry myself. It was only a few years ago when I had an argument with a pastor over a specific piece of scripture that I started to realize that both our interpretations were essentially correct and that if a singular truth could not derived this whole thing was probably bunk. I stopped going to church so much and did my own reading until I just didn't believe anymore. I had about a month of being militant until I met some other atheists and they annoyed the hell out of me.

I used to think that I would have chosen to raised the same way and had no idea how I would raise my own children without a church element. Now I realize I was restricted by guilt and fear of eternal consequence to not experience a lot of things like dating, parties, drugs, and general high school mischief that I feel like I missed out on now. The things I got from church I could have had from elsewhere and probably met a more a diverse group of people since I also went to a private christian high school. Not to mention it fucked up my view of sex and that I will now have a permanent riff between me and my parents whenever I finally tell them I'm an atheist. So, no, I wouldn't do it again. It was a lot of wasted time not reading real literature and retarding my understanding of biology. I'm still not fully aware of those things which I believe that are totally false and were indoctrinated in me and those which are true.

I'm just pretty much dead set on raising my kids to think for themselves.

[Anonymous No.3721636]

>>3721422

My religious interests are heavily related to be literary interests. I am pretty into the reconstructionist asatru movement; which is essentially norse paganism. But "reconstructionism" voids out any images you get when you think of a modern "pagan". There is (almost) zero emphasis on worship of gods, or magic, or any of that bullshit. It's all about learning about the culture and practices of the pre-christian northern europeans; and this involves quite a bit of reading. The eddas, which are fairly well known, are surprisingly difficult to read (at least certain translations, anyway), but give a rich insight to not only mythology, but ethics as well.

Then there are the sagas. There are hundreds of these, with only a percentage of them having been translated into english. These can be incredibly interesting (family feuds over shit shit leading to wars, etc) to mundane, trivial bullshit.

It's like trying to piece together a society through the literature they left behind, after it's been translated. It leaves a lot of unanswered questions.

[Anonymous No.3721652]

Raised non-religious, my family was the kind of family that went to church on Christmas and Easter and marked down "Christian" on surveys but then didn't do anything with it besides that. My mom seemed to claim it not because she really believed but because it's simply what people do. My dad grew up Muslim and then renounced it and now he's just anti-religion but he tends to stay out of any kind of serious conversation anyway so he's more of a continual neutral presence.

I grew up mainly non-religious with an incredibly vague understanding of who Jesus is and an even vaguer concept of who God is. This wasn't helped by the fact that I didn't actually pursue any kind of theological knowledge at all, I mainly just went with what other people in my life said about religion, be it positive or negative, and allowed that to influence me. Of course that path eventually lead me to rather mild atheistic convictions. Gotta say it was a real shock when I actually read the Bible for myself and began some theological research and realized that:
1) The things that most people believe about Jesus/God/Holy Spirit are often either misguided or flat out wrong.
2) The things that most people believe about religion in general are often either misguided or flat our wrong.

As I began thinking for myself and following my own studies I slowly began to ease out of the atheist phase at around 14, only to settle comfortably into an incredibly lukewarm version of Christian beliefs. I then shifted back into atheism but quickly realized that at the very least, there had to be some form of higher power out there and I never really fully believed in the non-existence of one even when I did claim to be atheist. I then went back to lukewarm Christian, which eventually developed into something resembling an actual Christian, to where I am now where I would consider myself to be fairly devout in Christian convictions and still working with God on becoming more devout in my actions.

[Anonymous No.3721659]

>>3721652
>but quickly realized that at the very least, there had to be some form of higher power out there and I never really fully believed in the non-existence of one even when I did claim to be atheist. I then went back to lukewarm Christian

That doesn't really make sense to me. I mean, you'd think that if there was a higher power that created the universe, he'd have such a huge playground to fuck around with he wouldn't really give too many shits about some little blue dot orbiting a yellow sun, you know?

[Anonymous No.3721666]

Was raised Christian, went through a huge soul crushing breakdown throughout middle school and early high school, around the middle of high school started questioning my faith. I always had a passion for the spiritual though, it was mostly that I felt the church I was going to wasn't satisfying a certain intellectual curiosity. I also didn't like the idea that everyone who didn't accept Jesus died on the cross for their sins went to hell, even if they lived a good life according to Christian values. I believed I could find a good, inspired message from practically anyone of any religion, even if they didn't have a religion. The problem was that this wasn't something my church taught. It wasn't really hard to leave the church when I felt like it wasn't offering me anything anymore because I was actually a huge loner in all my youth groups. I remember just going to listen to a sermon and just sitting on a couch every Sunday with my headphones on waiting for the pastor to get ready while everyone hung out with their friends. I actually can't remember having made a single friend at any church I went to growing up.

I started to feel like Jesus cared more about people living a good, moral life than people accepting his death, I felt like while the Bible had truth in it, it couldn't be all there was to read that could help me be a better person. Long story short, started studying Islam for awhile, didn't know what kind of Muslim I wanted to be, eventually decided that Shi'ite Islam and Sufi mysticism were the teachings that spoke best to me and how I had come to see a lot of the world already. I felt like they offered the middle ground between religions I was looking for and balanced passion and devotion with moral and ethical discipline. There are definitely things I wish I had done differently or sooner in the past, but I feel like a lot of my confusion and struggle was necessary to arrive where I am now, and I wouldn't want that to change.

captcha: Dervish erismed

[Anonymous No.3721684]

Well, let's see...

I don't want to wax philosophical too much, but if you examine anything you ultimately end up at the point of having to accept something for the way it is or not accept it. Religion isn't the only thing based on faith. Being a math major, I've learned that deep down at its core, there are certain axioms about math which can't be proven yet are accepted to be true. And without these, all higher level math is impossible.

Anyway, proselytizing religions bug me. I'm cool with others believing whatever they want, as long as it doesn't hurt me or the ones I love. Don't force your ideas on me, please.

It's okay to pick and choose ideas you like. Personally, I don't know much about many world religions. I've only been exposed to Christianity, really, and glancing blows from a smattering of others. But I do agree with it being wrong to kill other people and so on. This is the message of several religions I imagine, yet that does not make me part of them. I'm happy being beholden to no one but myself.

I did see an interesting video the other day online postulating that many Christians detest non-believers because they feel rejected. The idea is any believers' faith is actually a psychological crutch which becomes part of their psyche. And so, to not accept their god is the rejection of part of them. And people don't like being rejected. It feels bad. Hence, the negative behavior.

[Anonymous No.3721691]

>>3721684
examples of said axioms? i've been reading kant and what you're saying accords with his ideas of mathematics as 'synthetically' based. everyone itt should read critique of pure reason, by the way.

[Anonymous No.3721692]

>>3721563
>implying agnosticism isn't the worst intellectual cop-out imaginable

[Anonymous No.3721693]

>>3721659

Well if we're talking about it from the agnostic "pretty sure there's something out there but not sure what" perspective then I would say that we really don't have the knowledge needed to be taking stabs at what exactly a higher power was and wasn't concerned with. Back when I subscribed to the agnostic school of thought I genuinely had no idea what was going on, all I knew was that the idea that there was nothing and then all of a sudden BOOM nothing exploded and then there were a ton of somethings floated around made approximately zero sense. Of course I know today that that's not quite what the Big Bang theory entails but the point remains that getting something from nothing doesn't compute, which is why I had issues with the atheistic thought process. Actually if I had to put a label on my beliefs back then, I probably would've identified most with a vague idea of Aristotle's "Unmoved Mover" concept.

However, if we're talking about the Christian theology, which I do currently subscribe to, then I would say that God isn't really considered with the physical aspects of things. So little blue dot, large red dot, or medium sized yellow dot, whatever, it makes no difference. God's primarily concerned with the people He's made.

[Anonymous No.3721696]

>>3721693
floating*

[Anonymous No.3721704]

>>3721693
>Of course I know today that that's not quite what the Big Bang theory entails but the point remains that getting something from nothing doesn't compute, which is why I had issues with the atheistic thought process.

"Something from nothing" is a reductionism and not what the Big Bang Theory states. I wish I could go into greater detail, but I will have to paraphrase for the sake of this post since I'm not a physicist, but there are plenty of books written by physicists on the subject.

Basically, a more accurate way of describing the theory would be that there was "a something that BOOM exploded into everything."

I'd also like to point out that you don not have to believe in the Big Bang Theory to be an atheist, you simply have to not believe in gods.

Also, I'd like to draw attention to the fact that you still have the "something from nothing" problem with God because what created God?

And finally, if God isn't part of the physical aspect of things, then how is he able to interact with the physical world?

I hope this post did not come off as antagonistic, this was not my intent

[Anonymous No.3721714]

>>3721691
The fundamental theorem of arithmetic has its proof begin by induction, that is, you induce the behavior of the numbers.

It's a big no-no in math to say this works because it looks like it should, but that's exactly what we have here...

[Anonymous No.3721725]

>>3721704
>I'm not a physicist
Yeah, that part was obvious, you assclown. Go back to feel threads, at least you're an expert at that.

[Anonymous No.3721728]

>>3721704

I wasn't talking about the Big Bang Theory being the "something came from nothing" bit, which I is why I added
>I know today that that's not quite what the Big Bang Theory entails
at the end. What I meant was that eventually, when you pull back far enough in the non-theological ideas on the origin of the universe, you get to the point where either someone claims that something was created from nothing or something somehow managed to create itself. Neither of which makes sense.

>Big Bang not necessarily atheist

I was more referring to the general overview of atheistic thought in today's culture rather than the pure definition of atheism.

>what created God?

I believe God is eternal, a.k.a. the Unmoved Mover or the First Cause. At some point when you think about the origin of the universe I think only two things make sense: either the universe always existed, or something always existed that created the universe. I believe that based on nothing but logic alone, some kind of higher power is the only answer because that thing that always existed has to have the power to exist purely within itself. To be defined by nothing but itself.

One of the reasons why I believe Christianity to be the truth is because during God's meeting with Moses, Moses asks God who He is and God responds with "I am the I am." I believe this is essentially God eluding to the same philosophy I stumbled upon; that He was a Self-Existent being with all that that entails. That was one of the things that made me realize that the Bible was more than just some old documents scribbled out by a few farmers and goat herders two thousand years ago.

>And finally, if God isn't part of the physical aspect of things, then how is he able to interact with the physical world?

God's a part of the physical aspect of things, He's just not concerned with physical things. He doesn't get involved with the Earth because of it's size or it's color, is what I'm saying.

[Anonymous No.3721730]

I became a Reformed Christian during an existential crisis. I left eventually but I felt that the experience helped to me to progress intellectually and created in me a greater desire to read and learn. I now study philosophy (on my own) and am content.

[Anonymous No.3721731]

>>3721704
>I hope this post did not come off as antagonistic, this was not my intent

Nah dude you're good. Share your ideas openly and all that.

[Anonymous No.3721738]

looks like I'm the only Muslim here. Struggling right now. Exhausted really.

[Anonymous No.3721739]

>>3721691
Any axiom, in any system of logic. That's what an axiom *is* - a self-evident statement that cannot be proven in the system it is a part of. You can't have a system of logic without axioms.

[Anonymous No.3721740]

>>3721738
>looks like I'm the only Muslim here.

didn't see my post?

[Anonymous No.3721741]

>>3721738

What do you think of this article?

http://www.faithfacts.org/world-religions-and-theology/christianity-vs.-islam

Genuinely curious.

[Anonymous No.3721742]

>>3721714
>It's a big no-no in math to say this works because it looks like it should, but that's exactly what we have here...

Induction works on the natural numbers because it is axiomatically defined to work, that's a long way away from "well, it looks like it works".

[Anonymous No.3721743]

>>3721741

Not that anon, but I don't usually like those kinds of lists because they are usually biased towards one faith and take into account the broader spectrum of the religions they compare.

[Anonymous No.3721747]

>>3721743

don't take into account

[Anonymous No.3721748]

>>3721743

Oh this is almost certainly biased towards Christianity. But they actually use references out of the Qur'an to support their points, which is where my curiosity comes from. Because after reading that there's just no way that Islam could be legit in my mind.

[Anonymous No.3721749]

>>3721740
Ah Im sorry I missed it, just breezed over the thread.

[Anonymous No.3721750]

>>3721748

I'm also curious to hear a Muslim defend Islam though. I'm not completely closed-minded.

[Anonymous No.3721751]

>>3721741
That is quite the long article. Give me a few minutes to go over it.

[Anonymous No.3721752]

>>3721748
I didn't read the site, but yes Islam is ridiculous. If you thought Christianity was ridiculous, you'll have a ball with Islam. It's close to the level of insanity that is Mormonism.

[Anonymous No.3721755]

>>3721751

Not a problem, take your time.

[Anonymous No.3721759]

>>3721741
Alright I'm back. Noticed a few things. They mentioned fighting in islam and listed a long list of verses (without quoting them), leading a reader into believing all those verses are akin to "kill the infidel scum" because that's kind of where the author left off at. Just after looking up the first verse you see it's more passive "fight whoever picks fights with you but don't do immoral shit, and if they give up stop fighting them" (source: http://quran.com/2/190-193).). The immediate sentence the author writes after citing that verse (among a huge list of others) is "There are dozens of violent prescriptive statements like those above in the Quran. "

okay, I didn't feel like reading the rest after that. Also note when reading translations if "we" is used do not think of muslims as the we, god often refers to himself as we in the Quran.

Anything in particular you want to ask about that article? It's gigantic and the beginning didn't leave a good taste in my mouth.

[Anonymous No.3721771]

>>3721759

To be honest I want to know whether or not these points on Islam are true:
>Muhammad married a child.
>Muhammad had a revelation from Allah that he could take his adopted son's wife as his own.
>Muhammad refers to the Holy Spirit as "Gabriel" occasionally when discussing Christianity in the Qur'an
>Qur'an permits beating your wife
>At the end of your life Allah weighs your good and bad deeds on scales to determine if you enter paradise or not
>Abrogation is an Islamic principle because Muhammad's later messages tended to conflict with his earlier ones.
>Muhammad had concubines.
>Muhammad was very wealthy.

Which of these are true and which are lies?

[Anonymous No.3721772]

>>3721748

>But they actually use references out of the Qur'an to support their points,

What bothers me about those kinds of articles though is that they are written by Christians who are assuming some kind of authority to say what "orthodoxy" or the "orthodox interpretation" is in regards to a religion that is not their own. Half the time, all they do is find the Islamic scholars who support the interpretation that will best prove their point. But of course, if some Muslim tries to pull a bunch of Bible verses that are of the same caliber, if not worse, they cry foul. I would never do this though, it just seems like a double standard though.

But yeah, what really bugs me is when those sort of articles on Islam talk about "Orthodoxy" because for one, there is no universally recognized central head of Islam that can issue proclamations of what ideas or people aren't orthodox like the Catholic Church or something and two, according to a lot of these articles that assume some right to say "Well, this is the 'orthodox' view of Islam," citing authorities I don't recognize, I'm not "orthodox" Muslim and neither are the scholars whom I follow. That bugs me.

[Anonymous No.3721773]

>>3721759

If Allah refers to himself as "We" then how is he one god?

[Anonymous No.3721775]

>>3721422
I felt my best during the day or so in which I was finally slipping out of it, but then I just went back to living, albeit a little more lazily and with worse posture.

[Anonymous No.3721779]

>>3721772

Honestly I think that a religion should be judged on what it's scripture is and nothing more. So someone trying to get a feel for what a religion is by using the Holy Book is completely legitimate. I don't think any religious sect that goes against it's own Holy Book is valid. Regardless of the article itself, this quote this idea up nicely:

>To get an understanding of Christianity and Islam, we consider irrelevant what Sally and Omar may improvise about their respective religions. Anybody can make up their own religion, for example, by taking from the Bible whatever they want and tearing out the pages they don't want. But this is disingenuous, hypocritical, eternally dangerous—and is probably heretical to whichever religion one claims allegiance. On what basis does one claim to know more about the religion than the founders of the religion themselves?

[Anonymous No.3721780]

>>3721773
Not him, but it is called a "majestic plural."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Majestic_plural

[Anonymous No.3721783]

>>3721780
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Majestic_plural

Thanks to the reply.

By the way to the Muslim dude, not trying to attack you. I'm genuinely curious and I want to learn more about Islam so I can make a proper judgement. Or get closer to a proper judgement. The reason why I'm asking for your opinion is because I don't fully take that article at face value.

[Anonymous No.3721784]

>>3721779
Holy Books are generally rather complicated and require much interpretive work. Talk about Christians "ripping pages out of the Bible" generally belies an ignorance of Christian exegesis and theology.

[Anonymous No.3721787]

>>3721784

I think how "complicated" a Holy Book is is very exaggerated in an attempt to support relativism.

[Anonymous No.3721789]

>>3721787
Do you know anything at all of the history of Christianity?

[Anonymous No.3721791]

>>3721789

I know a fair bit of it yeah. I think most of the "interpretations" were more politically or selfishly motivated rather than being motivated out of an actual desire for truth. Reading the Bible myself I can't really see where a lot of the confusion could come from either.

[Anonymous No.3721792]

>>3721791
>I interpreted it a certain way and this makes sense to me and I don't really see why anyone would feel otherwise without being politically motivated.

You're retarded. Go read some theology, please.

[Anonymous No.3721794]

>>3721792

Did I touch a nerve?

[Anonymous No.3721802]

>>3721792

Out of curiosity though, which passages do you find ambiguous? And I mean ambiguous to the point where you could decided that the Pope's words were always 100% correct without that being politically motivated.

[Anonymous No.3721804]

>>3721802
>could decided

Maybe I am retarded. Meant to type decide.