This is what the majority of users want, so we acquiesce. We will have to watch the religious threads religiously (:P) to ensure that nothing too bad comes out of it. Nobody wants too heated a debate

I don't think it would be a good idea, just askin for trouble in my opinion.

The one time only that I will post on this subject. On this subject 'spirited debate' can very quickly become something much worse. I am not in favor of 'debating' this subject.

However, if you choose to have it, may I suggest an additional rule. You CANNOT say to another 'You are wrong'. Religion is very personal and should be treated such.

Just my 2 cents.

However, I've said many times to people that "I believe/think you are wrong" and they never took any mind to it. It's all right for me to think whatever I want to on here... as long as it isn't in opposition to the forums themselves, and as long as I don't dislike Avatar. ;)

In debating, however, you can't technically say "You are wrong" when talking about another person's faith because debating is about colliding facts about certain principles, like doctrine, religious history, interpretation, etc. The term "You're wrong" automatically comes by itself to the opposing side, meaning if there's anyone to say something is wrong about their beliefs concerning factual cases, it is the opposition that will figure this out (hopefully, if they have an open mind).

I've debated countless times on a slew of subjects over the course of about six years, and the only time someone "loses" a debate on the internet is when one side concedes to being in the wrong. I've seen it before many times from my opponent, and I've admitted many times that I was in the wrong. Such debating has shaped my knowledge and thought-process concerning bunches of subects.

However, on religious matters it is indeed possible to prove someone wrong, but only so far as difference in doctrine (backed by facts), difference in interpretation (backed by common sense or lexicon roots), difference in historical events (backed by accounts and/or historians), difference in scientific evaluation (backed by scientific observation, obviously), and many other factual differences. Difference in systemic belief is not an option to debate. If I want to be a Christian and another wants to be an atheist, so be it. That's not the issue. The issue is, what makes more sense? That's where the fun comes in.

Of course, "what makes more sense" doesn't apply to every religion. Most of the time it's about evidence concerning the other religion's prophecies. But this is why I want to keep most religious discussion (if not all) within the confines of each. As I've said, Christians debating Christians (as in Catholic vs. Protestant) is much easier than Hindus debating Muslims. They're just... too different. Anyone who says all religions are the same are either ignorant, or just-plain stupid. Hopefully ignorant, because ignorance can be fixed. Stupid is forever.


Also, on a side note, the primary reason I want this to be allowed is because I might slip up sometimes in a discussion and veer to the religious side. I don't want that to be a problem. If religious debates/dicussions are allowed, I don't have to worry about "slipping up". ;)

Nooooo religion here!!!!!!

If there's going to be any religious debates, Im staying out of them.

One can't really debate about religion, because in the end, it's about belief, blind trust to something regardless of what might or might not be considered "reasonable".

Debates usually have to lead somewhere, but when people debate about religion, one can never really prove or disprove the involvement of the divine, because that's the very point of believing in something. We don't need to believe that 2+2=4, because we can prove this by universally accepted mathematical rules, whereas religious topics can never be proven either way, due to their fundamental nature of being something intangible.

And this is coming from a person who really, really likes to debate about pretty much anything, especially controversial subjects, but what's the point in debating about something, when it always comes down to just believing in something just for the sake of believing in it?

I'm not in any way against debating about it, since I think that debates are pretty much one of the most efficient ways to increase one's knowledge about the world. But in cases like these, there's always the danger of things getting a bit too personal, seeing as religion is, and always will be, something personal, and whenever people fall back to the argument about just believing in it, the only real way to address those arguments, is to drag it all down to personal level, and that never ends well.

In the end, I'd encourage people to talk and debate about religion, because nothing should be considered 'too touchy', because that's the way these problems always come about, if some things are not allowed to open discussion. I know I'm sort of going all over the map here with this post, but it's because I know that these things usually don't end up all that well, when stubborn people like myself engage in a debate about something that cannot be solved.

Most (if not all) religious discussions going on now are either about showing how much more logical one belief is over the other, or educating/correcting others about what one's belief actually dictates (if there's a misconception surrounding something).

I would agree that part of building community and bridges of understanding must therefore allow mature discussion and exploration of Truth in all it facets, and religion and spiritual beliefs are an intrical part of whom we are as individuals and influence greatly much of our responses not only to Avatar but to life as a whole.

If in discussing these facets we can agree to at least be open and receptive to that others have differing opinions and tolerant, meaning we can agree to disagree, than such discussions can be quite illuminating and promote greater understanding of others and their beliefs.

I for one enjoy learning and appreciating Truth and Light no matter in what lamp it appears or garden it blooms, seeking to understand the greater aspects of the spiritual no matter the source it comes from. Attachment to the outer forms and practices of religions and spirituality can in fact become an impediment to ones own personal growth. But in freeing oneself from preconcieved ideas and notions, and is that not what so many of our discussions are about in the essence of what Avatar has awakened, we discover a myriad of 'truths' and beauty that are in unity and harmony across humanity's various cultural, religious, and spiritual diversity. If our 'cup is full' of self there is no room for this process to take place. If we think that we are 'right' and everyone else is 'wrong' than this becomes the greatest obstacle on the path of seeking unity. And unity is necessary if we are to reach the truth, for truth in truth is one!

...That's not really true most of the time, though.

You can seek "unity" all you want, but you can never fully interpret what "truth" is without some sort of basis for it. And even then, some facets of the said religion/belief might not be agreed upon by others, even when you know in your heart that it's true. Some things cannot be reconciled without giving examples of "why" or "how", and if you can't prove something, your belief is automatically in question, which makes it absolutely impossible to compromise what you believe with someone else's argument.

In other words, you can claim to "keep an open mind" all you want, most people have an established belief system that they know in their hearts to be the absolute truth. You can't... change that. Ever.

That's why I revert back to my previous post, most discussions on religion here are either about correcting a misconception on a belief, or showing how logical one belief may be over the other. Simple.

Isn't that really the point of all religions, belief that doesn't need any proof? Because if there were proof, there wouldn't be any need to believe now would there?

But how can there by any misconceptions, if everyone believes that they are right, and you can't change that? And since when does logic have anything to do with belief?

I mean proof surrounding something historical, or something claimed to be fact that is testable.

By "misconceptions" I meant misconceptions about what someone else may believe as opposed to what the other thinks the other person believes (as in, one person understood a teaching incorrectly).

By logic, I mean any given item in the said religion that can be shown to be true using only logic. Certain religions have logical teachings. While not everything can be solved in any belief, some things can be. :)

Well that's certainly a major problem with pretty much anything these days. But that's partly due to the vague nature of anything religious, because they are so open to interpretation, so you can't really fault people for understanding things differently and making up their own minds.

Well I've never had any specific interest in any religion, so I know nothing of any tidbits of trivia, or anything else for that matter. Religions do not really offer any answers, they only raise more questions, so they do not really hold any practical value.

Asking questions got me into becoming a theist, actually. Asking questions about religions and learning about them would help in finding out the true nature of their existence. You can't just say they hold no value, yet admit simultaneously that you have no knowledge about religion. ;) You should look into these things. You have to look first before you truly understand.

But as far as I can tell from many discussions going on*, religion (specifically Christianity) has always been regarded on ToS as guilty until proven innocent, which makes me quite angry... Although I try my absolute best not to show it.

Heh, and so does rapunzel. :grolleyes:

*(and have gotten this from many already including a few moderators/admin)