# What is your religion?



## baroque flute (Jul 21, 2004)

This is just out of curiosity.  I am a Christian, and my religion is important to me. But I can't stand the kind of snobs by that name who treat people of other religions like they're just a bunch of primitive savages who don't know anything at all, and won't have anything to do with them except to "witness" DOWN THEIR NOSES!!!! :angry: :angry:
(Come on folks, ALL of us are PEOPLE, not "souls" who exist solely for your brownie points!!!)


----------



## Nox (Jul 22, 2004)

...apparently religion and politics are two topics guarenteed to start 'fights' (not to mention world wars!)...LOL...


----------



## baroque flute (Jul 21, 2004)

I didn't post this topic to start a war... !!! But then I suppose some two people might decide to turn it into one.  I hope not!


----------



## oistrach13 (Jul 14, 2004)

don't worry about the war thing, daniel won't let that happen B) 

besides, we're all civilized people (at least I hope so).

you're obviously an nice person (and civilized B) )

It was a nice question, I am a muslim myself. as any muslim would tell you, religion is very important to us, because somewhat like buddhism, islam also includes a "way-of-life" meaning its a very hands-on religion, not something you just ponder about when you have nothing to do.

I am prepared to answer any questions anyone has (as I think I am the only muslim on this forum), and I mean "any question" about islam.

we are very tolerant and moderate people towards others, and one of the most quoted sayings by mohammad is "let there be no coercion in religion".

did I mention we also adore christ?


----------



## baroque flute (Jul 21, 2004)

Yes, I know that Muslims recognize Jesus as a prophet. They are also known for their morality. And I won't let the actions of a few radicals give me a stereotype of all muslims!! I hate stereotypes! I don't mind associating with people of other religions, especially not on something like a music forum.  (Even though I am definitely not easily led as far as my own personal beliefs go). My main preference here is that the others like CLASSICAL music, and not be beligerent or hot-headed--which is why I'm here. B)


----------



## Quaverion (Jul 20, 2004)

I am an atheist. I actually thought about this a lot, and I came up with a small theory. Those who aren't really interested shouldn't read below:

1. All matter always reacts under patterns. For example, if hydrogen gas is let into a room full of oxygen, water will form under normal circumstances. This will ALWAYS be the case. This is just one example. The simpler the matter, the easier the pattern is to spot, since matter always does the simplest thing possible. This is the first reson for my being an atheist. I think if sometimes matter behaved differently, then there may be a supreme being in control of it.

2. I believe the Big Bang created all matter the universe. One extremely small point of almost infinite mass explodes. I believe this because if this were to have happened, if the world had started out in a single point, which is an almost perfect pattern, then the patterns would multiply as the world grew.

3. Matter tries to keep a pattern going. This is why humans reproduce, and try to stay alive. This is why trees have seeds and flower every spring. If you look around you, you will see millions of patterns. Night and day, the seasons, cars, people grass, etc. I think if a supreme being stepped into line somewhere, the pattern would be broken.

4. Humans are one of nature's ultimate pattern-keepers. We invented mass production, we reproduce like crazy, and we always try to copy others. One guy puts on a cool looking shirt and everyone else does the same. Soon, the style is this cool shirt. This is just one of billins of little patterns we do not even think about in our everyday lives.

I'm NOT trying to make you become atheists. I am just explaining my reasoning, and hope that none of you take it to heart like many have before. My own mother gets really mad when I even speak of such things to her.



P.S.
dear oistrach13, are you really oistrach?


----------



## becky (Jul 19, 2004)

I'm a christian. I'm active in my church (not only do I go on Sundays, but I participate in groups, ministry and charity, too.) I go to a Methodist church, but I was raised in a Baptist church. I am comfortable in most Prostestant churches.


----------



## baroque flute (Jul 21, 2004)

Thanks for sharing, Quaverion!  As can be expected, I cannot agree at all, but I believe that everyone should be treated with ALL the respect due them as PEOPLE, regardless of their religious beliefs. What I feel is the very most important is that we love others as much as we love ourselves. But that is a universal ethic that people all over the world with widely varied beliefs know is right and necessary. This is made evident by the fact that this ethic is common to all the world's major religions. 

Becky, thanks for sharing too--that's great!  I don't know if it was from things you said or not, but somehow I was able to guess correctly about both of you. :lol:


----------



## Quaverion (Jul 20, 2004)

I'm glad you think that way. I, too, believe that we should all act kindly toward people. I believe in ways to behave, but not the common reason. I think if one were to look only at how I behaved and not what I believed, they would take me as a very strict Buddhist.


----------



## 009 (Jul 16, 2004)

> *2. I believe the Big Bang created all matter the universe. One extremely small point of almost infinite mass explodes. I believe this because if this were to have happened, if the world had started out in a single point, which is an almost perfect pattern, then the patterns would multiply as the world grew*


There was a discussion on Max and Dan's site : Musical Horizonz regarding 'Nothingness'- Is it a thing at all...Very interesting thread, u guys ought to check it out.
So Quaverion, u believe in the singularity theory as opposed to the 'many worlds' hypothesis?
Me too.  Do u think it's possible for a general cohesion between these two standing theory?
That the big bang occured as a singularity, and a random event of the 'many worlds' hypothesis, and possibly t=0 then... I never believe that t=0. :blink:


----------



## Quaverion (Jul 20, 2004)

Actually, since I believe matter reacts the same always, then I do not believe in chance, therefore I do not believe in a different world for every chance taken. It is an interesting theory, though. Have you ever heard of "The Golden Compass" book of the "His Dark Materials" trilogy? These are the ABSOLUTE BEST books of all time!  They are all based around the many worlds theory. There will be a movie trilogy by NEW Line Cinema ate the end of 2005. If you've never heard of them, you MUST look them up ASAP and read them all. They are kind of hard to get into at the start because they start out in another world, but at chapter 3 you're addicted! Our world comes into play later... B)


----------



## oistrach13 (Jul 14, 2004)

the only thing you were talking about that I actually recognized was the big bang part :blink: 

you know, nobody seems to ask himself, that tiny speck of infinite mass, where did it come from?  

I didn't mention that muslims believe in the big bang. it was mentioned in the quran 1400 years ago B) (that and alot of other things, like nebulae and the formation of stars and planets from that dust thing  ).

pretty cool for a 1400 year old book :mellow: (more like 1420)


----------



## 009 (Jul 16, 2004)

> *nobody seems to ask himself, that tiny speck of infinite mass, where did it come from?*


Yes...it is an intriguing , enigmatic wonder... It's always stated that they came from an explosion of infinite energy...?
The many world hypothesis has been ruled out way looonngg time ago, but it's definately worth considering it a second time. Since, the big bang is an event of infinite energy( as much as that of the black hole)...then where did it come from? Did it evolved out of the singularity? Or did it escaped through another dimension? I think that's pretty possible... :blink: 
It scares me to think of things like this. It makes u doubt your very exsistence. 
There was once that I was reading about the many world hypothesis and so on...when one peculiar thought suddenly popped up. U know how Albert Einstein believed in time travel...which I think is highly possible, IF u're able to travel faster than the speed of light.... 
And if time mapping is possible( how one point of time, when folded like a piece of paper, escaped the time factor and make its way through another dimension at velocity faster than light. )...then can it be that we are a mere reflecion of what had been going on maybe some thousands or millions years ago in another dimension?...Weird... I stopped thinking about these sort of things when I left school...now Max's site got me thinking about it again. :blink:


----------



## Quaverion (Jul 20, 2004)

I don't think time travel possible at all. If you think about it, when you're riding a bike, the things going on around you seem slower than normal. In a car, they seem a lot slower, and light speed would seem to make time ALMOST stop. But I think light speed is where a sort of asymtote starts. I really don't think that time would go backward if you went faster, it would just stay almost still.

Also, speaking of oistrach13's question about where the point of matter came from, there is a theory that has evidence to back it up that says that all mater in the universe is attracting and in a few billion trillion years the Big Crunch will occur, and the whole pattern will start over again.

B)


----------



## The Angel of Music (Jul 24, 2004)

I am a Christian too  But I am not super religous.


----------



## Quaverion (Jul 20, 2004)

> _Originally posted by The Angel of Music_@Jul 30 2004, 08:14 PM
> *I am a Christian too  But I am not super religous.
> [snapback]925[/snapback]​*


That is good. I think no matter what one is (atheist, christian, buddhist, etc.) I think it is best to have _some_ doubt so that you are always open to new ideas. The only people I can't stand are othodox followers of a belief. My next door neighbours are like that. They won't let their children learn about evolution in science class, or anything like that. They teach them that Adam and Eve were real and wont let them be submitted to any other sort of teachings. Of course, if they did find proof that Adam and Eve _were_ the first humans, and that God is real, I would change in a second.


----------



## baroque flute (Jul 21, 2004)

I agree with you, Quaverion, that ignorance is not the way to pass on values. My parents probably seemed to onlookers like they were teaching through ignorance, but in reality they were just fed up with how the SCHOOL SYSTEM teaches through ignorance, by only allowing one side to be taught. My parents taught both sides, and then when we were teens they let us research for ourselves about both sides. I have always been a "prove it to me" type, big time.  So for me the reason I believe Christianity is because I have researched both sides for myself, and found convincing proof of Christianity. 

Great question, oistrach13! You can keep pushing the beginning farther and farther back, but eventually you have to deal with the fact that the very first bit of matter could not have created itself, nor could it have exploded itself.


----------



## Quaverion (Jul 20, 2004)

You have a point there. Matter cannot have created itself. However, I read a really interesting article that talked about how scientists did a very small duplication of the big bang. They had created a small floating ball made up of only leptons and other subatomic particles. I don't remember what had happened after it exploded though, but it did explode itself.


----------



## oistrach13 (Jul 14, 2004)

yes, it exploded, but where did it come from in the first place :blink: 


I don't know, the whole concept resembles someone putting a seed, and having that grow into a universe (metaphorically speaking)

its like god took out a piece of dust from his pocket, threw it into nothingness, and voila, big bang :mellow:


----------



## Quaverion (Jul 20, 2004)

> _Originally posted by oistrach13_@Aug 2 2004, 10:08 AM
> *its like god took out a piece of dust from his pocket, threw it into nothingness, and voila, big bang :mellow:
> [snapback]1049[/snapback]​*


Yes, I suppose that is possible. However, I think the universe was just always there. I think the idea of "new" came from new arrangements of matter, but matter just has always existed, and people try to find a reason why matter exists and they find God. However, I could be wrong. There is really no way to tell, which is what bugs me so much. <_<


----------



## baroque flute (Jul 21, 2004)

> _Originally posted by oistrach13_@Aug 2 2004, 03:08 PM
> *yes, it exploded, but where did it come from in the first place :blink:
> I don't know, the whole concept resembles someone putting a seed, and having that grow into a universe (metaphorically speaking)
> 
> ...


Thank you for sharing your ideas.  You know, I had always thought that explosions destroy things, rather than create them. But if you have examples of complex, intricate design that was created by explosions, I would be very interested to see them.  It seems to be a law of nature that explosions tend to destroy rather than create, and that is why I personally do not believe in the big bang. For instance, if you were to take the tiny intricate pieces of a Swiss watch and shake them up (or explode them), would they come together to make a working watch? But even watches are far less intricate than living things.


----------



## oistrach13 (Jul 14, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Rhadamanthys_@Aug 2 2004, 09:37 PM
> *I think the universe was just always there.*


well, where did it come from?


----------



## oistrach13 (Jul 14, 2004)

> _Originally posted by baroque flute_@Aug 3 2004, 05:35 AM
> *Thank you for sharing your ideas.  You know, I had always thought that explosions destroy things, rather than create them. But if you have examples of complex, intricate design that was created by explosions, I would be very interested to see them.  It seems to be a law of nature that explosions tend to destroy rather than create, and that is why I personally do not believe in the big bang. For instance, if you were to take the tiny intricate pieces of a Swiss watch and shake them up (or explode them), would they come together to make a working watch? But even watches are far less intricate than living things.
> [snapback]1091[/snapback]​*


well, that's where god comes in


----------



## Quaverion (Jul 20, 2004)

> _Originally posted by baroque flute_@Aug 2 2004, 10:35 PM
> *For instance, if you were to take the tiny intricate pieces of a Swiss watch and shake them up (or explode them), would they come together to make a working watch? But even watches are far less intricate than living things.
> [snapback]1091[/snapback]​*


The big bang happened in a very large space with zero gravity except for itself. Matter attracted matter easier than it does on Earth because all matter is attracted to Earth. Also, there were literally trillions of different kinds of matter created in the big bang, which is not the amount in a Swiss Army watch. One kind of matter was carbon, which, because of the makeup of the atom, can bond with almost anything. This is why all life forms are make up mostly of carbon, so that they can react more intricately with their surrounding environments. However, if you did blow up a watch in a perfect vacuum with no other matter or forces except the watch, it would come back together again. but not in watch form. <_<


----------



## baroque flute (Jul 21, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Rhadamanthys_@Aug 3 2004, 08:42 PM
> *The big bang happened in a very large space with zero gravity except for itself. Matter attracted matter easier than it does on Earth because all matter is attracted to Earth. Also, there were literally trillions of different kinds of matter created in the big bang, which is not the amount in a Swiss Army watch. One kind of matter was carbon, which, because of the makeup of the atom, can bond with almost anything. This is why all life forms are make up mostly of carbon, so that they can react more intricately with their surrounding environments. However, if you did blow up a watch in a perfect vacuum with no other matter or forces except the watch, it would come back together again. but not in watch form. <_<
> [snapback]1114[/snapback]​*


First of all, a big bang CREATING trillions of different kinds of matter???? Gaseous explosions cannot create heavier elements.

I forgot about the fact that it was said to be in a perfect vacuum. However, in a perfect vacuum, it is impossible for matter to explode itself. It is one of the laws of physics that a vacuum can neither contract nor expand.

Also, it is another law of physics that in a vacuum, gases cannot clump together. It can't even clump together on earth.

Another interesting point is DNA. Science has proven the information in a DNA code, the information that is needed for it to be life, is enrypted. There is a built-in decoder but it also is encrypted. All forms of reproduction provide the decoder from the previously existing cell, but to begin with, there is nothing to decode it. There had to be a first cause that had the capability to deocde the first set of encrypted DNA, or there would not have been life.


----------



## Quaverion (Jul 20, 2004)

> _Originally posted by baroque flute_@Aug 5 2004, 12:24 AM
> *First of all, a big bang CREATING trillions of different kinds of matter???? Gaseous explosions cannot create heavier elements.
> 
> I forgot about the fact that it was said to be in a perfect vacuum. However, in a perfect vacuum, it is impossible for matter to explode itself. It is one of the laws of physics that a vacuum can neither contract nor expand.
> ...


It was not gas, it was an almost infinitely dense point of matter, which is like the opposite of gas. Anyway, the sun (a gas) does it all the time. Plus, matter can explode itself, if all of the gravity in the entire universe is pushing on one tiny point the size of a pencil tip, it will implode then explode. Einstein talked about this, how matter can change into pure energy under the right conditions. This is what happened. Also, the DNA encryption thing just illustrates my "patterns" theory.

Maybe if people are getting too riled up by this, we should stop this thread. I don't want to make any enemies here... :lol:


----------



## Nox (Jul 22, 2004)

I find that over the years, the art of polite debate has disappeared...if everyone agrees to disagree and everyone stays polite...then we create an interested discourse...

...if everyone is scared to say anything...well then...it's boring...

...but everyone has to tacitly agree to be respectful...otherwise the debates turns into a flaming session...which is totally useless...


----------



## Quaverion (Jul 20, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Nox_@Aug 5 2004, 11:45 AM
> *I find that over the years, the art of polite debate has disappeared...if everyone agrees to disagree and everyone stays polite...then we create an interested discourse...
> 
> ...if everyone is scared to say anything...well then...it's boring...
> ...


Very well said, Nox. I totally agree. I am not the one who gets angry, though. I don't think I've ever really been angry at anyone for what they believed in in my life. However, some people do get pretty angry when you disagree with everything they believe in. I don't know if anyone out there is that type or not though. I just think that if one is going to base their entire life on a belief, they should carefully consider it before accepting it, and also talk to other who believe differently.


----------



## baroque flute (Jul 21, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Rhadamanthys_@Aug 5 2004, 08:00 PM
> *Very well said, Nox. I totally agree. I am not the one who gets angry, though. I don't think I've ever really been angry at anyone for what they believed in in my life. However, some people do get pretty angry when you disagree with everything they believe in. I don't know if anyone out there is that type or not though. I just think that if one is going to base their entire life on a belief, they should carefully consider it before accepting it, and also talk to other who believe differently.
> [snapback]1244[/snapback]​*


I totally agree with you here, Rhadamanthys! So many people, whether Christians or Judaists or atheists or whatever, never bother to find out whether their core beliefs are true or even reasonable. They just believe whatever they are told. (And many of them try to get others to shut up and believe what they tell them too.) It is extremely important to be open and not just to talk with people who believe differently (you might not get the whole picture that way), but to thoroughly and carefully research everything.

Anyway, I suppose I did sound riled. I wasn't though.  The only time I've ever been riled because someone disagrees with me is when I meet up with people who advocate blowing children limb from limb with nuclear bombs, when they haven't done anything (and a couple other things like that). <_< If it was a debate on that topic maybe I would need to close it off, but anyway it's not. 

I was just surprised, because what you were saying contradicted what I have heard scientists say, and I was assuming that you believed what these particular scientists say whom I've heard out, in which case you would be full inconsistencies to say what you did say. It is amazing how easy it is to jump to conclusions!  Obviously, I am not familiar enough with exactly what you believe.

I will continue the debate later, when I next have time. I want to do a little research before saying more.


----------



## krishna (Aug 7, 2004)

Interesting thread... Anyway I'm a born again christian and have been since I was 19 (43 now).Everyone here is being very repectfull and polite .I think now is the best time to be posting this thread because of the small size of the site. I think if we had even 25 more humans here we would be having a problem with an "unexcepting of other religion" person. Maybe Daniel should start a Science thing were anyone interested can post?


----------



## Daniel (Jul 11, 2004)

Non music science? I could make a subforum like "fun".


----------



## baroque flute (Jul 21, 2004)

Well, I have a problem here, Rhadamanthus. I've debated evolutionists before, but your beliefs are different than any I've seen before. So I think I'm going to have to start at the beginning here, and find out what YOU believe about how the world began, because right now I don't know what premises I'm debating! If you're interested, that is, no pressure.


----------



## Quaverion (Jul 20, 2004)

I don't believe that the world began at all, but that it just is always has been and always will be. I believe the creation of the universe and our world as we know it started with the Big Bang, like I mentioned before. I know it is hard to even concieve of something always having been there, no start to it, but I think this is different. The world itself is just more of a "possibility" than a "something." I am always up for things like this, I just want to make sure noone is offended my what I say.


----------



## baroque flute (Jul 21, 2004)

Thanks, Rhadamanthus. I think that that is more rational than a belief that everything one day suddenly came from absolutely nothing. I believe in a God who always existed; you believe in a world that always existed. The debate, therefore, I guess is a discussion of the differences between these two.  My next question is which aspects of the world do you believe always existed?


----------



## Quaverion (Jul 20, 2004)

Could you give me an example of what you mean by apsects? I'm not sure I understand. Hey, maybe God is not an all powerful being, but a sort of "just fate." That could tie into my patterns theory, since that would involve fate, too.


----------



## Harvey (Jul 26, 2004)

Here's an idea from a stupid little kid (me):
We know that something can't come from nothing, and something can't become nothing.
So I'd think that something funky happened and now there's a crapload of antimatter somewhere. Where? I dunno. :huh:


----------



## Harvey (Jul 26, 2004)

And where God comes in...
From what I know, God could have made the universe five seconds ago.


----------



## Quaverion (Jul 20, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Harvey_@Aug 16 2004, 01:00 PM
> *And where God comes in...
> From what I know, God could have made the universe five seconds ago.
> [snapback]1548[/snapback]​*


You are correct in saying that if tie were to just stop now, and every pieces of matter and energy and vectors, etc. were to be recorded, and one had the ability to shift them every which way, one could send us back in "time" to this point at any time. You know what I mean?

Also, at the Big Bang, there is matter and antimatter. You seem to know about this. When that point of mater became so dense that the sort of "shell" of the subatomic particle broke and pure energy was released, matter and antimatter was created. When these two forms of matter react, pure energy is created again. Noone knows what happened to all of the antimatter that is supposed to balance out the real matter, we can't find it. Maybe because of this, after the next big bang the world will be a little bigger...


----------



## haziz (Sep 15, 2017)

None.................................................


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

haziz said:


> None.................................................


Not even a humanist?


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Agnostic, tending to atheism.


----------



## DeepR (Apr 13, 2012)

I believe in nothing other than what is currently agreed on by the scientific community. If that were to change, so does my belief. And if science doesn't have an answer, I sure as hell don't.


----------



## Guest (Oct 19, 2017)

If I were to be strictly truthful, I'd say I don't have one, because my daily life isn't lived with reference to the existence or non-existence of a supreme being. I don't actively 'worship' a belief or a non-belief.

If I were to characterise my daily life and the way I behave towards others - the most significant part of life unless you elect to be hermit or you're in the unfortunate position of having no other humans to interact with - I'd say I was a humanist. That is, having been baptised a Catholic and raised a Christian, I've set aside the significance of God in favour of the prime significance of man, and our "purpose" is his well-being.


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

This thread predates the current ownership of TC. It is, not acceptable under the current ToS and has been closed.


----------

