Guest natsarim Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 Hello all, Just happened upon this site today. I am a former christian/churchmember. I have a "religion" but it is certainly not xianity. Went to the general theological issues section of the forum, hoping that I could discusss theology with current Christians. I've been disappointed. Looks more like this is a place for atheists to mock and ridicule current christians. From what I have understood of the forum, the Lions Den or the Coliseum is the place for that, correct? Or am I mistaken? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taphophilia Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 Hello all, Just happened upon this site today. I am a former christian/churchmember. I have a "religion" but it is certainly not xianity. Went to the general theological issues section of the forum, hoping that I could discusss theology with current Christians. I've been disappointed. Looks more like this is a place for atheists to mock and ridicule current christians. From what I have understood of the forum, the Lions Den or the Coliseum is the place for that, correct? Or am I mistaken? Well, we are not all Atheists. The site is to support Ex-Christians, but Christians always show up, so in order to debate us and not disrupt the other forums as much there's The Lion's Den, for no holds barred and The Colloseum for more on topic debates. By the way, what is natsarim? Why does it seem like Messianic Christianity? What's the difference? Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwc Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 Just happened upon this site today. I am a former christian/churchmember. I have a "religion" but it is certainly not xianity. Went to the general theological issues section of the forum, hoping that I could discusss theology with current Christians. I've been disappointed. Looks more like this is a place for atheists to mock and ridicule current christians. From what I have understood of the forum, the Lions Den or the Coliseum is the place for that, correct? Or am I mistaken? The topics sort of ebb and flow over time. Right now people aren't doing any serious discussions I guess...but that depends what your definition of serious is. Sometimes even a silly subject can lead somewhere you never thought it would and sometimes a serious topic derails. But, we're mainly ex-c's, like Taph said, so lots of mocking occurs. Feel free to post up a topic or two though. Depending on what it is you might be surprised on what we have to bring to the table. Don't expect us to praise your god or anything though...that's not going to happen anytime soon. We also have a mix of folks here. Atheists, agnostic, polytheists, some xians and just a strange mix really. Anyhow, welcome aboard (if you decide to stay). mwc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
currentchristian Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 Hello all, Just happened upon this site today. I am a former christian/churchmember. I have a "religion" but it is certainly not xianity. Went to the general theological issues section of the forum, hoping that I could discusss theology with current Christians. I've been disappointed. Looks more like this is a place for atheists to mock and ridicule current christians. From what I have understood of the forum, the Lions Den or the Coliseum is the place for that, correct? Or am I mistaken? Never heard of Natsarim before. Googled the term and learned a little. Interested to know more of your views, if you want to post about them. -CC in MA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurisaz Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 Looks more like this is a place for atheists to mock and ridicule current christians. From what I have understood of the forum, the Lions Den or the Coliseum is the place for that, correct? Or am I mistaken? The rare brand of christian who is still reasonable is generally welcome here. Granted that some will *cough cough* tempt her kindness for a while... but we do have some well-respected believers here. (I'd like to point to a certain someone as a prime example, but not only does that someone delurk somewhat rarely now, but she's also become atheist since then... ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest natsarim Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 Natsarim are simply the adherents to the oldest "religion". They pre-date occultists, atheists, Judaisim and Christianity. Not saying this in an effort to offend anyone--particularly christians, but all other religions have taken litttle "bits and pieces" of the true faith, and missed the rest of it. Peace to all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YDOAPS Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 Natsarim are simply the adherents to the oldest "religion". They pre-date occultists, atheists, Judaisim and Christianity. Not saying this in an effort to offend anyone--particularly christians, but all other religions have taken litttle "bits and pieces" of the true faith, and missed the rest of it. Peace to all. How does it predate atheism? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StewartP Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 Natsarim are simply the adherents to the oldest "religion". They pre-date occultists, atheists, Judaisim and Christianity. Not saying this in an effort to offend anyone--particularly christians, but all other religions have taken litttle "bits and pieces" of the true faith, and missed the rest of it. Peace to all. Because obviously older = better I've just started a new religion. It is called Petrographism. It is based on the worship of bison and cave bears and we try and capture the spirits of our totem animals by painting them on walls. I believe it is the oldest religin and thus trumps yours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antlerman Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 Natsarim are simply the adherents to the oldest "religion". They pre-date occultists, atheists, Judaisim and Christianity. Not saying this in an effort to offend anyone--particularly christians, but all other religions have taken litttle "bits and pieces" of the true faith, and missed the rest of it. Peace to all. How does it predate atheism? Good question. Nothing predates being an atheist. Ask any child before they're taught a belief if they know who God is? But he did say "true faith", and atheism isn't a belief system. The problem I have with his comment about "true faith" is a rather presumptive and borderline arrogant statement like that. How can someone support that? New Ager's like to claim the ancient origins of their beliefs, but when looked at academically, there is no support for that and its rather just a mish-mash of glitzy bits of various faiths, all submerged in a vat of modern mythology that makes it appealing to the religious consumer market. The one true sign of wisdom is the abandonment of finding the "one true faith". There's as many truths as there are humans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
currentchristian Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 Natsarim are simply the adherents to the oldest "religion". They pre-date occultists, atheists, Judaisim and Christianity. Not saying this in an effort to offend anyone--particularly christians, but all other religions have taken litttle "bits and pieces" of the true faith, and missed the rest of it. Peace to all. Because obviously older = better I've just started a new religion. It is called Petrographism. It is based on the worship of bison and cave bears and we try and capture the spirits of our totem animals by painting them on walls. I believe it is the oldest religin and thus trumps yours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JGJ@ReligionisBullshit Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 I think he is just confusing "oldest religion" with "oldest name for the followers of Christ." In that case, he should be Jewish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lycorth Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 Atheism predates all religions, since our earliest ancestors had no known belief in any god. It is also the most natural of beliefs, since no one is born believing in any god. But, more accurately, it would be "non-theism" as Atheism is a more developed idea. Nonetheless, god-belief of any sort is not instinctive, but learned, hence having no belief in any gods is the most "natural" or "oldest" way to go. We just got rid of one cultist, and now another one comes to replace him? We're getting an awful lot lately... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sage Nabooru Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 Atheism predates all religions, since our earliest ancestors had no known belief in any god. It is also the most natural of beliefs, since no one is born believing in any god. But, more accurately, it would be "non-theism" as Atheism is a more developed idea. Nonetheless, god-belief of any sort is not instinctive, but learned, hence having no belief in any gods is the most "natural" or "oldest" way to go. I wouldn't say that. Early humans obviously left few records, and by the time they did they did have religion. But we cannot say for certain what their religious inclinations, if any existed, were. The same goes for children. I can't really say that children actively believe in a God if they have never been taught about one - it's just something that never really occurs to them, not because they do not feel any spiritual side but rather that that Nintendo is so damn intriguing. It's hard to say what the exact beliefs of unbiased children are. They're not exactly scientific, either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lycorth Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 I tend to lean more towards views expressed by those like Antlerman, who propose that humans didn't even bother with religion until tools and other things were developed that permitted people more free time, and pondering things during that free time led to speculating about gods and eventually developing religions. It just doesn't make sense to me that people would believe about things they haven't been taught or know things that they haven't either discovered or had the time to invent. Religion per-se is certainly not a problem, but neither do I think it is intrinsic to humanity. Kind of like romance fiction - it's not problematic in and of itself, but it's just another creation of ours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
currentchristian Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 Atheism predates all religions, since our earliest ancestors had no known belief in any god. It is also the most natural of beliefs, since no one is born believing in any god. But, more accurately, it would be "non-theism" as Atheism is a more developed idea. Nonetheless, god-belief of any sort is not instinctive, but learned, hence having no belief in any gods is the most "natural" or "oldest" way to go. We just got rid of one cultist, and now another one comes to replace him? We're getting an awful lot lately... I don't know about this analysis. It seems that religion is found in every culture throughout time. Religion, and a belief is "something out there" seems to be universal and quite natural to humanity. You are right that no one is born believing in any specific god. But no one is born liking chocolate or cats or science, either. This is all learned behavior, or at the very least acquired by means of exposure. Seems to me that theism is much more natural for humanity than atheism. This doesn't mean there's a god or that belief in a god makes sense, but that desire for a god is as natural to humanity as desire for sex. -CC in MA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lycorth Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 Again, I defer to the postulation in my previous post. I tend to agree that only a people with enough time on their hands had the luxury of considering gods. No one is pre-programmed from birth to assume they are any gods - these things are taught. But unlike other taught behaviors, like how to clothe ourselves, it isn't necessary for human survival or for the development of humans morals or culture. Even if it isn't so, and non-theism/Atheism doesn't predate Theism, the latter still isn't necessary, and can be done away with. Even today, it exists mostly on personal choice, and still lacks an arbitrary foundation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Japedo Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 I don't know about this analysis. It seems that religion is found in every culture throughout time. Religion, and a belief is "something out there" seems to be universal and quite natural to humanity. You are right that no one is born believing in any specific god. But no one is born liking chocolate or cats or science, either. This is all learned behavior, or at the very least acquired by means of exposure. Seems to me that theism is much more natural for humanity than atheism. This doesn't mean there's a god or that belief in a god makes sense, but that desire for a god is as natural to humanity as desire for sex. -CC in MA Yes Religions perhaps can be found in early civilizations , but Religion is but a manmade set of dogmas. Before a person is indoctrinated with the garden Varity of gods and rituals, they have no theism hence are atheists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antlerman Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 Seems to me that theism is much more natural for humanity than atheism. This doesn't mean there's a god or that belief in a god makes sense, but that desire for a god is as natural to humanity as desire for sex. Welcome back CC. You raise an interesting question about the possible potential in humans for something that religious belief fills. I would disagree with your wording above when you say that a "desire for a god is as natural to humanity as desire for sex". It may be a desire for "something", but a god specifically, I can't agree with that. I'm really focused on the language perspective lately so I'll go there again here. What does "a god" symbolize? Those sorts of things people seem to be attracted to. However, we shouldn't make the mistake that what we today look for in the symbol "God", is the same things the earliest cultures sought. Just because they had a religion, doesn't mean it tasted the same way, or that they were seeking the same things you do. In fact you can probably be certain they weren't. Therefore, it is unsupported to say that everyone has a "natural" desire for "god". It is an interesting question though that anthropologists look into all the time. My simple view on it is simply this: language. God is language. People all have a desire to relate to their environment in order to understand and control it. God used to be the language of science when none existed; he was also the language of social order, eventually of personal meaning, and so on. So, I guess in today's context people "desire" meaning, and "god" is one of many language signs that can be used for that end. People desire something, but it may or may not fit to use the god symbol, especially in such a world of such diverse ideas and ways to describe things, from science to personal fulfillment. They don't desire god, per se, anymore than they do music, or poetry, or a good steak. They desire a greater sense of themselves through whatever language fits them best. Oh well.... another conversation. (BTW, I would be very pleased to have you jump in on this thread over here with your thoughts for me: http://www.ex-christian.net/index.php?show...=14091&st=0 ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wertbag Posted January 16, 2007 Share Posted January 16, 2007 What would you call someone, in modern days, who has heard about religion and gods but has decided it is of no interest? Kind of agnostic due to apathy... this seems to be the catagory that most of my friends fall into, they have no religion and they'd rather change the subject than even talk about anything supernatural. Most people I know seem to put religion in the boring catagory along with politics, weather and hair styles of hollywood stars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mythra Posted January 16, 2007 Share Posted January 16, 2007 Natsarim are simply the adherents to the oldest "religion". Ahh. So you worship the sun? Not only is that the oldest known religion, but it was also quite universal, with evidence that it was practiced in Egypt, Mesopotamia, and Greece. The sun was also worshipped by the Aztecs, Incas, and Druids. That's it for me. It's 0 degrees here right now. I'm headed for Tahiti to get some of that old time religion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
currentchristian Posted January 16, 2007 Share Posted January 16, 2007 Seems to me that theism is much more natural for humanity than atheism. This doesn't mean there's a god or that belief in a god makes sense, but that desire for a god is as natural to humanity as desire for sex. Welcome back CC. You raise an interesting question about the possible potential in humans for something that religious belief fills. I would disagree with your wording above when you say that a "desire for a god is as natural to humanity as desire for sex". It may be a desire for "something", but a god specifically, I can't agree with that. I'm really focused on the language perspective lately so I'll go there again here. What does "a god" symbolize? Those sorts of things people seem to be attracted to. However, we shouldn't make the mistake that what we today look for in the symbol "God", is the same things the earliest cultures sought. Just because they had a religion, doesn't mean it tasted the same way, or that they were seeking the same things you do. In fact you can probably be certain they weren't. Therefore, it is unsupported to say that everyone has a "natural" desire for "god". It is an interesting question though that anthropologists look into all the time. My simple view on it is simply this: language. God is language. People all have a desire to relate to their environment in order to understand and control it. God used to be the language of science when none existed; he was also the language of social order, eventually of personal meaning, and so on. So, I guess in today's context people "desire" meaning, and "god" is one of many language signs that can be used for that end. People desire something, but it may or may not fit to use the god symbol, especially in such a world of such diverse ideas and ways to describe things, from science to personal fulfillment. They don't desire god, per se, anymore than they do music, or poetry, or a good steak. They desire a greater sense of themselves through whatever language fits them best. Oh well.... another conversation. (BTW, I would be very pleased to have you jump in on this thread over here with your thoughts for me: http://www.ex-christian.net/index.php?show...=14091&st=0 ) Good points, Antlerman. I go along with what you wrote. The desire is for something, a deeper meaning, etc., not necessarily a "god" as we view that concept today. The desire for something "bigger" or "higher" or "other" than human seems to be quite common, though. I'll check out that other site you reference. -CC in MA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
currentchristian Posted January 16, 2007 Share Posted January 16, 2007 What would you call someone, in modern days, who has heard about religion and gods but has decided it is of no interest? Kind of agnostic due to apathy... this seems to be the catagory that most of my friends fall into, they have no religion and they'd rather change the subject than even talk about anything supernatural.Most people I know seem to put religion in the boring catagory along with politics, weather and hair styles of hollywood stars. Good question. Many of my friends would fall into this category as well. Religion is not an issue of interest. Hard for me to understand, as I love the topic. But my nephew finds it hard to understand how I have no interest in football. To each his own. Likely the lack of interest in religion (apathetic agnosticism) will increase over time. -CC in MA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YDOAPS Posted January 16, 2007 Share Posted January 16, 2007 Good question. Many of my friends would fall into this category as well. Religion is not an issue of interest. Hard for me to understand, as I love the topic. But my nephew finds it hard to understand how I have no interest in football. To each his own. Likely the lack of interest in religion (apathetic agnosticism) will increase over time. -CC in MA "apathetic atheism" would be more appropriate. agnosticism is not a catagory on it's own. it is a modifier of (a)theism. the terms atheist and theist encompass every possibility. everything else is just a matter of modifiers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lycorth Posted January 16, 2007 Share Posted January 16, 2007 That's it for me. It's 0 degrees here right now. I'm headed for Tahiti to get some of that old time religion. Good one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest natsarim Posted January 18, 2007 Share Posted January 18, 2007 Never heard of Natsarim before. Googled the term and learned a little. Interested to know more of your views, if you want to post about them. -CC in MA Check out www.fossilizedcustoms.com. Basic beliefs that we hold are there. Peace to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts