"belief "or "religion"

[TizaNabi]

Without going into "My G-D is bigger than your G-D, mine will do this to you " stuff since its foolish. Islam and Judaism are NOT religions but "faiths". Says so in the bible (kidding).

Wikipedia whom someone used as a source is only a helping guide they themselves state. I am listed as able to edit (I edited a bit on the "Hookah" page) and you can too if you are over 18.???

Wikipedia is a large source of great general knowledge constantly being arranged and changed. I spend at least 10 hours a week reading it, as I used to with my brother as a young wee lad did plow through the encyclopedias.
But ask any practicing Moslem or Jew, the 2 are Beliefs. Belief which guides your life as the word of the Infinate One. A belief which leads to service. In Judaism, "service" without joy and happiness is not service but servile and is wrong.

I am not saying that Islam and Judaism are better, they are just not religions. Though if a person would ask me which religion I am I would have to in order to communicate with him answer his question with "I am of the Jewish Belief".

Is the American Dollar $ a "religion"? doesn't it state "In G-D we trust"? This means for a blank piece of paper the store you are giving a $100 piece of paper is backed up with gold . The store owner believes that the government of the USA willback it up.
Is money his religion? That's another ball game in a different stadium.
I think I will list the american dollar in wikipedia under religions, and wait for them to take away my right to edit. Edited September 15, 2008 by TizaNabi

[gaia.plateau]

A religion is an organized system of beliefs, and contextually implicit of a lifestyle choice. In using the word belief, we're suggesting that we understand something to be true, but that we may with evidence be made to believe otherwise. In using the word religion, we're suggesting that our organized system of beliefs largely determines our choices and has significant influence over our lives; they don't change without some cathartic experience.

By the way, god bless you for mucking around with Wikipedia. I try to make at least one perverse and twisted, but extremely subtle edit on a random page every week, sometimes I'll do 20 in a day. Information should not be democratic. Edited September 15, 2008 by gaia.plateau

[TizaNabi]

Saying that a certain faith "must" be a religion is like saying that making and sharing good love is plain old fornication.

[gaia.plateau]

Firstly... I never said that "faith MUST be a religion". But I will say now that I believe that faith MUST be superstition, though I want to qualify that by adding that superstition is not necessarily a negative or harmful thing. (I'll further qualify by adding that I mean faith in the religious context, that being faith in some intangible and intelligent god, not faith in a friend, or in an idea.)

And well, it is fornication, assuming you're not recognized by your Mosque/Church/Synagogue as being wed. But that doesn't mean it can't be more to you personally, as an individual. In the same way, if you're Hindu or Jewish or whatever, that is a religion, and in the same way it doesn't mean that it can't be more to you personally.

The facts are that Judaism, Hinduism, Christianity, Islam, Sikhism, and Animism are structured and organized enough as systems of beliefs to be classified as religions. If you want to talk about Taoism, Buddhism, and Jainism, to give three examples, I think those could certainly be argued to be more like lifestyles for some people, and more like religions for others. And maybe you're an agnostic, and you take little bits from Judaism and Islam and apply them to your life, and that I suppose you could call taking or sampling a faith without prescribing to the religion. To directly refute your statement, "Islam and Judaism are NOT religions but 'faiths'", I believe that it is more accurate to say that "Islam and Judaism are religions by which through personal subscription and devotion we can choose to have faith."

At any rate, I think that you and perhaps myself as well are getting too hung up on semantics. Meaning is more important.

Saying that a certain faith "must" be a religion is like saying that making and sharing good love is plain old fornication.

Edited September 15, 2008 by gaia.plateau

[TizaNabi]

Firstly... I never said that "faith MUST be a religion". But I will say now that I believe that faith MUST be superstition, though I want to qualify that by adding that superstition is not necessarily a negative or harmful thing. (I'll further qualify by adding that I mean faith in the religious context, that being faith in some intangible and intelligent god, not faith in a friend, or in an idea.)

And well, it is fornication, assuming you're not recognized by your Mosque/Church/Synagogue as being wed. But that doesn't mean it can't be more to you personally, as an individual. In the same way, if you're Hindu or Jewish or whatever, that is a religion, and in the same way it doesn't mean that it can't be more to you personally.

The facts are that Judaism, Hinduism, Christianity, Islam, Sikhism, and Animism are structured and organized enough as systems of beliefs to be classified as religions. If you want to talk about Taoism, Buddhism, and Jainism, to give three examples, I think those could certainly be argued to be more like lifestyles for some people, and more like religions for others. And maybe you're an agnostic, and you take little bits from Judaism and Islam and apply them to your life, and that I suppose you could call taking or sampling a faith without prescribing to the religion. To directly refute your statement, "Islam and Judaism are NOT religions but 'faiths'", I believe that it is more accurate to say that "Islam and Judaism are religions by which through personal subscription and devotion we can choose to have faith."

At any rate, I think that you and perhaps myself as well are getting too hung up on semantics. Meaning is more important.

Saying that a certain faith "must" be a religion is like saying that making and sharing good love is plain old fornication.

You are quite right about most of what you said here, but how do you take Taoism,Jainism and Buddhism (isms) as something separate?
I don't take a little bit from all religions or even a few. I agree that
the 3 you listed are "a way of life" and THAT is what I meant as "faith".The word in Hebrew is Emmunah which means belief and also crafting as a craftsman would craft a piece of wood into a fine table. Emmunah is also the basis for the word "Emmanuel" which means "G-D is with us". Since I am what is semmantically called "Ultra Othodox Jew" (yuch- ouch) of the Chasidic Hasid for more years than you can count as you may see the photo we refer to Judaism only as a way of life. As Ian Anderson of Jethro Tull sings "He's not the kind of G-D we have to wind up on Sunday" "My G-D" in Aqualung. Its a whole relationship with the Infinate Creator which starts from the moment we wake up until we go to bed and even continues during sleep. Eating with the thought that you are to use the nourishment the creator gave to serve, to keep the Creator's created human body healthy in mind and spirit and to lift the Holy Sparks in the food whether it be mineral sparks, vegetable sparks or animal sparks that fell to the universe which infinately expands since the time of what some people today call the "Big Bang". Now the Big Bang is referred to as TzimTzum in Hebrew and this is explained and written down in the time period of around 110 A.D. . It was revealed in writing but was an oral tradition since the Torah was given 3788 years ago.
I promise after this to drop the subject but if the 3 disiplines or ideas or practices can be referred to and are known not to be actual religions than let me add Judaism since it might be different than you think. I would add Islam also. anyways my G-D promises not to beat up your G-D and He/She is no better or worse or richer or smarter. He/She might be upset a little that the New York Yankees will probably not get to the playoffs in the MLB. Edited September 15, 2008 by TizaNabi

[gaia.plateau]

You are quite right about most of what you said here, but how do you take Taoism,Jainism and Buddhism (isms) as something separate?

Because for many Taosists, Buddhists and Jains there is no structure or order to what they believe, they don't believe in divine intelligence or in destiny, and they don't perform rituals. I adopted the Taoist attitude for several years, and it still influences me now, though I've been agnostic since birth. For Taosists, Buddhists and Jains that more or less believe in all the scriptures pertaining to their classification, do believe in divine intelligence and/or in destiny, and perform rituals, it's fair to call them religious.

Here's are a few easy rules of thumb. Do you actively worship? You're religious. Do you believe that there is some form of energy that intelligently created the world and/or decides our fate? You're religious. Do you believe in an afterlife specific to one belief system? You're religious.

I promise after this to drop the subject but if the 3 disiplines or ideas or practices can be referred to and are known not to be actual religions than let me add Judaism since it might be different than you think. I would add Islam also.

Now note that I didn't say that Buddhism, Taoism and Jainism are not religions. I said that it can be argued that some practicioners of these beliefs are not religious, or are not practicing a religion.

I've studied Judaism and Islam fairly extensively, and I'd like to hear any explicit explanation for how they are not religions, but Christianity is. How do you differentiate between the Abrahamic religions and say that one is a religion, and the other two are not? If you believe in an infinite creator, that's usually a systematic belief that you were taught, that in your community was expected of you believe, and worship in a temple or some such, and it therefore follows that you practice a religion.

It strikes me that you might just had a problem with the word religion, or the idea of religion in the context of modern times. If that's the case, you may as well call the idea of religion "Gooba Dooperdatum Kaplah", if you're going to exchange the label with "faith" or "belief". You're just arguing semantics, which is irrelevant in any situation.

I don't take a little bit from all religions or even a few. I agree that
the 3 you listed are "a way of life" and THAT is what I meant as "faith".The word in Hebrew is Emmunah which means belief and also crafting as a craftsman would craft a piece of wood into a fine table. Emmunah is also the basis for the word "Emmanuel" which means "G-D is with us". Since I am what is semmantically called "Ultra Othodox Jew" (yuch- ouch) of the Chasidic Hasid for more years than you can count as you may see the photo we refer to Judaism only as a way of life. As Ian Anderson of Jethro Tull sings "He's not the kind of G-D we have to wind up on Sunday" "My G-D" in Aqualung. Its a whole relationship with the Infinate Creator which starts from the moment we wake up until we go to bed and even continues during sleep. Eating with the thought that you are to use the nourishment the creator gave to serve, to keep the Creator's created human body healthy in mind and spirit and to lift the Holy Sparks in the food whether it be mineral sparks, vegetable sparks or animal sparks that fell to the universe which infinately expands since the time of what some people today call the "Big Bang". Now the Big Bang is referred to as TzimTzum in Hebrew and this is explained and written down in the time period of around 110 A.D. . It was revealed in writing but was an oral tradition since the Torah was given 3788 years ago.
anyways my G-D promises not to beat up your G-D and He/She is no better or worse or richer or smarter. He/She might be upset a little that the New York Yankees will probably not get to the playoffs in the MLB.

Firstly... I never said that "faith MUST be a religion". But I will say now that I believe that faith MUST be superstition, though I want to qualify that by adding that superstition is not necessarily a negative or harmful thing. (I'll further qualify by adding that I mean faith in the religious context, that being faith in some intangible and intelligent god, not faith in a friend, or in an idea.)

And well, it is fornication, assuming you're not recognized by your Mosque/Church/Synagogue as being wed. But that doesn't mean it can't be more to you personally, as an individual. In the same way, if you're Hindu or Jewish or whatever, that is a religion, and in the same way it doesn't mean that it can't be more to you personally.

The facts are that Judaism, Hinduism, Christianity, Islam, Sikhism, and Animism are structured and organized enough as systems of beliefs to be classified as religions. If you want to talk about Taoism, Buddhism, and Jainism, to give three examples, I think those could certainly be argued to be more like lifestyles for some people, and more like religions for others. And maybe you're an agnostic, and you take little bits from Judaism and Islam and apply them to your life, and that I suppose you could call taking or sampling a faith without prescribing to the religion. To directly refute your statement, "Islam and Judaism are NOT religions but 'faiths'", I believe that it is more accurate to say that "Islam and Judaism are religions by which through personal subscription and devotion we can choose to have faith."

At any rate, I think that you and perhaps myself as well are getting too hung up on semantics. Meaning is more important.

Saying that a certain faith "must" be a religion is like saying that making and sharing good love is plain old fornication.

Edit: by the way, for my part I won't take offense if you use the word 'God' or 'god' and 'infinite' has three Is. Edited September 15, 2008 by gaia.plateau

[TizaNabi]

You are quite right about most of what you said here, but how do you take Taoism,Jainism and Buddhism (isms) as something separate?

Because for many Taosists, Buddhists and Jains there is no structure or order to what they believe, they don't believe in divine intelligence or in destiny, and they don't perform rituals. I adopted the Taoist attitude for several years, and it still influences me now, though I've been agnostic since birth. For Taosists, Buddhists and Jains that more or less believe in all the scriptures pertaining to their classification, do believe in divine intelligence and/or in destiny, and perform rituals, it's fair to call them religious.

Here's are a few easy rules of thumb. Do you actively worship? You're religious. Do you believe that there is some form of energy that intelligently created the world and/or decides our fate? You're religious. Do you believe in an afterlife specific to one belief system? You're religious.

I promise after this to drop the subject but if the 3 disiplines or ideas or practices can be referred to and are known not to be actual religions than let me add Judaism since it might be different than you think. I would add Islam also.

Now note that I didn't say that Buddhism, Taoism and Jainism are not religions. I said that it can be argued that some practicioners of these beliefs are not religious, or are not practicing a religion.

I've studied Judaism and Islam fairly extensively, and I'd like to hear any explicit explanation for how they are not religions, but Christianity is. How do you differentiate between the Abrahamic religions and say that one is a religion, and the other two are not? If you believe in an infinite creator, that's usually a systematic belief that you were taught, that in your community was expected of you believe, and worship in a temple or some such, and it therefore follows that you practice a religion.

It strikes me that you might just had a problem with the word religion, or the idea of religion in the context of modern times. If that's the case, you may as well call the idea of religion "Gooba Dooperdatum Kaplah", if you're going to exchange the label with "faith" or "belief". You're just arguing semantics, which is irrelevant in any situation.

I don't take a little bit from all religions or even a few. I agree that
the 3 you listed are "a way of life" and THAT is what I meant as "faith".The word in Hebrew is Emmunah which means belief and also crafting as a craftsman would craft a piece of wood into a fine table. Emmunah is also the basis for the word "Emmanuel" which means "G-D is with us". Since I am what is semmantically called "Ultra Othodox Jew" (yuch- ouch) of the Chasidic Hasid for more years than you can count as you may see the photo we refer to Judaism only as a way of life. As Ian Anderson of Jethro Tull sings "He's not the kind of G-D we have to wind up on Sunday" "My G-D" in Aqualung. Its a whole relationship with the Infinate Creator which starts from the moment we wake up until we go to bed and even continues during sleep. Eating with the thought that you are to use the nourishment the creator gave to serve, to keep the Creator's created human body healthy in mind and spirit and to lift the Holy Sparks in the food whether it be mineral sparks, vegetable sparks or animal sparks that fell to the universe which infinately expands since the time of what some people today call the "Big Bang". Now the Big Bang is referred to as TzimTzum in Hebrew and this is explained and written down in the time period of around 110 A.D. . It was revealed in writing but was an oral tradition since the Torah was given 3788 years ago.
anyways my G-D promises not to beat up your G-D and He/She is no better or worse or richer or smarter. He/She might be upset a little that the New York Yankees will probably not get to the playoffs in the MLB.

Firstly... I never said that "faith MUST be a religion". But I will say now that I believe that faith MUST be superstition, though I want to qualify that by adding that superstition is not necessarily a negative or harmful thing. (I'll further qualify by adding that I mean faith in the religious context, that being faith in some intangible and intelligent god, not faith in a friend, or in an idea.)

And well, it is fornication, assuming you're not recognized by your Mosque/Church/Synagogue as being wed. But that doesn't mean it can't be more to you personally, as an individual. In the same way, if you're Hindu or Jewish or whatever, that is a religion, and in the same way it doesn't mean that it can't be more to you personally.

The facts are that Judaism, Hinduism, Christianity, Islam, Sikhism, and Animism are structured and organized enough as systems of beliefs to be classified as religions. If you want to talk about Taoism, Buddhism, and Jainism, to give three examples, I think those could certainly be argued to be more like lifestyles for some people, and more like religions for others. And maybe you're an agnostic, and you take little bits from Judaism and Islam and apply them to your life, and that I suppose you could call taking or sampling a faith without prescribing to the religion. To directly refute your statement, "Islam and Judaism are NOT religions but 'faiths'", I believe that it is more accurate to say that "Islam and Judaism are religions by which through personal subscription and devotion we can choose to have faith."

At any rate, I think that you and perhaps myself as well are getting too hung up on semantics. Meaning is more important.

Saying that a certain faith "must" be a religion is like saying that making and sharing good love is plain old fornication.

Edit: by the way, for my part I won't take offense if you use the word 'God' or 'god' and 'infinite' has three Is.

So why do they fly prayer flags, or the hand twirler for prayer isn't that "ritual"?

[SimplexCoda]

All im going to say about this is this: Where do jewish people worhsip? Temple. What people of other faiths worship as the same temple as the jewish people on a daily or weekly basis? Im not here to start a flaming session, but I can say this: you dont see catholics at a baptist church regular and vise versa and im willing to bet the same is true for jewish temples. So where im headed with this is they have their own temple, so what does that mean to you?

BTW why are you afraid to spell the word God or god? we can a civil discussion on these forums and not be afraid of the use of such a word. Just because you use the word doesnt mean your using it in such a way as to offend someone. Edited September 23, 2008 by SimplexCoda

[clibinarius]

Rants deleted. Edited September 25, 2008 by clibinarius

[gaia.plateau]

But of course information should be democratic. If it wasn't, how would any silly old beliefs such as the world being flat get proven wrong? However, information should always be able to fall on where it came from. Good information, short of hucksters, can not be responsibly argued with. But that's still democratic.

Besides, when people's beliefs and knowledge are seen as under someone else's-that's where fascism is.

This kind of thinking is exactly why Fox News is considered a credible journalistic source, and why the Bush/Harper administrations are still in power.

The majority of people believing something to be true does not make it true. For hundreds of years, the majority of people in Western civilization believed that the world is flat. Was that true? Did they up and decide one day to change their mind, and democratically elect that the world was then become spherical? (To uncharacteristically answer my own question, a clear douche-move), no, they absolutely did not; instead it was proven, through evidence, that the world is round.

Case in point. Did you know that while smoking hookah, "Optimum air-flow may be achieved by vaginally inhaling the smoke"? SOURCE. There's your democracy of information.

[TheScotsman]

Gaia, that makes my head hurt. I'm not sure why. (or maybe it's just after effects of nuke & pave day on 6 windoze craputers)How did it go from G*d to faux news, and labial pufferage in a single post? that has to be some sort of record.

[gaia.plateau]

Scots, I believe that was actually a five-post transition.

Mind you the labial puffage was entirely spontaneous and acute.

[clibinarius]

And if you're dumb enough to think vaginally inhaling smoke is the best way, go have fun. That's not my fault. I'd look at that, scratch my head, laugh, and look away. And by the way, your edit took four to get through and was dead in under 5 minutes and survived for a grand total of 8 (I didn't bother to add) showing that your argument AGAINST democratic knowledge...doesn't quite hold up to vigilance. Edited September 25, 2008 by clibinarius

[gaia.plateau]

your argument AGAINST democratic knowledge...doesn't quite hold up to vigilance.

Sure, let's talk about vigil.

http://www.wired.com/politics/onlinerights...08/wiki_tracker
http://wikiscanner.virgil.gr/
http://www.pocket-lint.co.uk/news/news.pht...s-editors.phtml

Have you taken your fingers out of your ears and/or stopped screaming "LALALALALALALA" yet? Nope? Well, here's more.

http://www.marketingvox.com/scanner-tool-u...a-edits-032244/
http://marianthacher.blogspot.com/2007/08/wiki-scanner.html

Winston Churchill said that "Democracy is the worst system of governance I can imagine", and yet so many narrow-sighted people are obsessed with applying it to the determination of factual information.

Well, not allowing the voting of a political party IS fascism, I hate to break it to you.

And allowing the drooling masses to decide what is and isn't true is devolution. The reason people vote for neo-convervatives and neo-liberals (which, by the way, any reputable political scholar will tell you are the closest Western ideologies to fascism, kthx) is because we've inherited a world where something seeming true is as good as being true. Hmmmm, to George, homsexuality is a disease. That must be true.

Sometimes democratic education is the only way to get things legal by the way (Scopes-Monkey)

Please explain to us how in any conceivable way Scopes was educating people through democratically-found notions. You're utterly arguing against your own position- in Scopes' time, nearly everyone believed contrary to what he taught.

I'm so drunk right now. Incredible concert tonight. Have to finish my presentation on the Armenian genocide for tomorrow morning (like 7 hours from now). Keep screaming LALALALALA until I'm done that kk? Night.

[clibinarius]

I've decided not to bother. Edited September 25, 2008 by clibinarius

[clibinarius]

Because in some strains of Islam and to many religious Jews, you're not even supposed to say God. Its not fear as much as it is tradition, and to some, religious commandments.

BTW why are you afraid to spell the word God or god? we can a civil discussion on these forums and not be afraid of the use of such a word. Just because you use the word doesnt mean your using it in such a way as to offend someone.
[/quote]

[Tuscani]

I really have no time in my busy life to even think about the R-word... ill just remain ignorant to it all until I see fit to make time or if I need a higher power.

[TheScotsman]

your argument AGAINST democratic knowledge...doesn't quite hold up to vigilance.

Sure, let's talk about vigil.

http://www.wired.com/politics/onlinerights...08/wiki_tracker
http://wikiscanner.virgil.gr/
http://www.pocket-lint.co.uk/news/news.pht...s-editors.phtml

Have you taken your fingers out of your ears and/or stopped screaming "LALALALALALALA" yet? Nope? Well, here's more.

http://www.marketingvox.com/scanner-tool-u...a-edits-032244/
http://marianthacher.blogspot.com/2007/08/wiki-scanner.html

Winston Churchill said that "Democracy is the worst system of governance I can imagine", and yet so many narrow-sighted people are obsessed with applying it to the determination of factual information.

Well, not allowing the voting of a political party IS fascism, I hate to break it to you.

And allowing the drooling masses to decide what is and isn't true is devolution. The reason people vote for neo-convervatives and neo-liberals (which, by the way, any reputable political scholar will tell you are the closest Western ideologies to fascism, kthx) is because we've inherited a world where something seeming true is as good as being true. Hmmmm, to George, homsexuality is a disease. That must be true.

Sometimes democratic education is the only way to get things legal by the way (Scopes-Monkey)

Please explain to us how in any conceivable way Scopes was educating people through democratically-found notions. You're utterly arguing against your own position- in Scopes' time, nearly everyone believed contrary to what he taught.

I'm so drunk right now. Incredible concert tonight. Have to finish my presentation on the Armenian genocide for tomorrow morning (like 7 hours from now). Keep screaming LALALALALA until I'm done that kk? Night.

More simply put, the problem with democracy is the people whom decide on an issue/candidate based on look or "feeling" rather than an informed evaluative POV. All you have to do is look at the people around you at any given stop-light to realize you are amidst a collection of creatures you definitely don't want deciding your future. Homosexuality is a capitol offense if your are in most of the mid east. Given the choice wouldn't you rather it be a disease than a reason to roll heads down the street?