This "religion" really speaks to me. I am agnostic, but after researching them, i think I finally think I found a religious group that I would feel comfortable in.
You are missing the whole point. it is supposed to be a gathering of religions.
I was simply questioning the UU approach to dogma. Different Unitarian churches approach the cohesiveness of different religions in different ways. But it seems like they would all have to endorse one of those two options I listed. I was trying to show that the very notion of bringing together different religions for religious worship is either inconsistent or self referentially incoherent.
"Religion" ... See the quotes? The whole point is to learn tolerance and knowledge ...
I don't see why we can't count this as a genuine religion. They accept and actively worship a deity. They accept certain dogmas (some accept all). And they use certain holy scriptures for guidance with their worship and their dogma.
The term church, doesn't have to be just christian
I wasn't using the fact that they call them churches to support my claim that they're quite Christian. But the fact is that the Unitarian movement was formed from the Christian church. From what I understand, even the services themselves are formatted like a Christian service. I mean, are there mats facing Mecca for those who pray in more Islamic traditions?
You might even consider UU a meta-dogma, telling us which dogmas we should and should not accept. Again, they could adopt all of them, I just couldn't that information on their Website. Either way, a meta-dogma is a dogma all the same. And it's one, much like many religions, that inconsistent or incoherent.
I was simply questioning the UU approach to dogma. Different Unitarian churches approach the cohesiveness of different religions in different ways. But it seems like they would all have to endorse one of those two options I listed. I was trying to show that the very notion of bringing together different religions for religious worship is either inconsistent or self referentially incoherent.
So, in other words, you think it's foolish to try and create a interfaith religious group? Even when the people who join are obviously open minded to begin with?
I don't see why we can't count this as a genuine religion. They accept and actively worship a deity. They accept certain dogmas (some accept all). And they use certain holy scriptures for guidance with their worship and their dogma.
A grouping of religions. Everyone brings their beliefs to the table. Undoubtedly there is a basic or bare bones scripture, but it's supposed to be gathered from other beliefs.
I wasn't using the fact that they call them churches to support my claim that they're quite Christian. But the fact is that the Unitarian movement was formed from the Christian church. From what I understand, even the services themselves are formatted like a Christian service. I mean, are there mats facing Mecca for those who pray in more Islamic traditions?
You might even consider UU a meta-dogma, telling us which dogmas we should and should not accept. Again, they could adopt all of them, I just couldn't that information on their Website. Either way, a meta-dogma is a dogma all the same. And it's one, much like many religions, that inconsistent or incoherent.
They don't say which dogmas to believe and not to believe, they discuss all of them. That is the whole point. Maybe down south a church might have a slight focus on Christianity(which i would avoid this, if possible)but they for sure don't say " this dogma is BS, but this isn't" the whole point is not to do that. And honestly, the most incoherent thing I am seeing is your last paragraph...
I wasn't using the fact that they call them churches to support my claim that they're quite Christian. But the fact is that the Unitarian movement was formed from the Christian church. From what I understand, even the services themselves are formatted like a Christian service. I mean, are there mats facing Mecca for those who pray in more Islamic traditions?
From the one I went to it was structured like a Christian service. inside the church was adored with just Christian symbols and imagery, no other religions. They did have a small bookstore off to the side of the entrance that offered new age products and books on Buddhism.
For a church claiming to be accepting all beliefs I was underwhelmed.
When talking about gnosticism and agnosticism, you should probably start linking people to you video. It really does a good job of clearing things up.
This "religion" really speaks to me. I am agnostic, but after researching them, i think I finally think I found a religious group that I would feel comfortable in.
Don't worry too much about the church and what it teaches. Just make sure you aren't morally against whatever it is they are teaching.
The important thing is that you enjoy the church and the people around you.
I have never been very religious, but I ended up going to a church for a while. I can't remember what kind of church it was, but there were a lot of people my age and me and some of my friends there would play volleyball and just hang out. There was music, pool tables, and all kinds of fun things there.
Don't worry too much about the church and what it teaches. Just make sure you aren't morally against whatever it is they are teaching.
The important thing is that you enjoy the church and the people around you.
I have never been very religious, but I ended up going to a church for a while. I can't remember what kind of church it was, but there were a lot of people my age and me and some of my friends there would play volleyball and just hang out. There was music, pool tables, and all kinds of fun things there.
Very True. I am hoping I will find that enjoyment in the UU church I plan to check out eventually. I went to a couple of christian churches a while ago, and yeah lets just leave at I never went back. :/
I'd rather join these UU churches not for the many rhetorics and dogmas to believe in, but rather the many philosophies to feel, understand, and learn, in order to enlighten yourself better and to transcend into complete bliss. Shinto and Buddhism speaks to me in this way.
This has nothing to do with your belief in God just your knowledge, but it can influence your belief.
If the same 'knowledge' can lead you to two opposite belief systems, then how is agnosticism not a belief?
agnostic: "I don't know if there is or is not a God." gnostic: "I know there is or is not a God."
Forgive me if im reading you wrong, but these two people are saying exactly the same thing.
Furthermore, how do those beliefs translate into:
theist: "I believe God exists." atheist: "I do not believe God exists."
From saying there are two possibilities, they suddenly turn to an affirmed choice?
gnostic theist: "I know God exists so I believe in God." gnostic atheist: "I know God does not exist so I don't believe in God."
If you have knowledge of gods existence, it wouldnt fall under the category of belief anymore, and so you wouldnt need to give yourself a title. For example, i know that gravity pulls me towards the centre of the earth. This doesnt make me a gnostic gravitationalist. Basically im saying that how can you have a belief system (gnosticism) thats based on knowledge. If its based on knowledge its, by definition, not a belief system anymore.
Most atheists are agnostic atheists.
Judging by these forums i beg to differ. Most atheists on here are bloody militant.
Forgive me if im reading you wrong, but these two people are saying exactly the same thing.
You didn't read the 'don't' in the agnostic point of view.
Furthermore, how do those beliefs translate into:
gnosticism and agnosticism are not beliefs and are not the same than theist or atheist.
If you have knowledge of gods existence, it wouldnt fall under the category of belief anymore, and so you wouldnt need to give yourself a title. For example, i know that gravity pulls me towards the centre of the earth. This doesnt make me a gnostic gravitationalist.
Yes it does.
Basically im saying that how can you have a belief system (gnosticism) thats based on knowledge. If its based on knowledge its, by definition, not a belief system anymore.
Got it. It's not a belief system.
Judging by these forums i beg to differ. Most atheists on here are bloody militant.
Militant, yes. Saying they know if there is a god or not, no.
We can use all the knowlege we have at our disposal to show that gravity is, has, will, does, wont, pushes, pulls etc..
But Im agnostic in many ways, so I can readily doubt that gravity exists, it could be caused one of many many things, including the flying spaghetti monster is in the center of the earth with a million mouths all sunking in at the same time, but his mouths are different to just pulling in air and actually cause gravity. Crazy huh!
Prolly not true in the slightest and gravity prolly is very true an aw that jazz... but as I said, I am agnostic towards lots of things, and can easily step into the mindframe of "TeH matrix iz REAL" or "We create all matter with our own minds" or "Im part of an interstella experement"... This can have an effect on any of my current beliefs i.e. that there is no god, that there is no flying spag bog monster, that there is no matix OR intersteller experement and no, I am not the center of the universe crating myself. But I know these are, however unlikely, possible.
Im sure a Gnostic person wouldnt even question their own beliefs nearly as often as I do. Agnostic is not a belief, its a way of thinking to me.
You didn't read the 'don't' in the agnostic point of view.
I did read the dont. They are still saying the same thing though, just in a different way. I dont see how they differ in their beliefs at all if they both claim that it is possible if god exists or doesnt exist.
gnosticism and agnosticism are not beliefs and are not the same than theist or atheist.
Please enlighten me as to how anyone could obtain knowledge on gods existence/non existence. Until you do, im going to say its a belief in possibility, not something based on knowledge.
agnostic: "I don't know if there is or is not a God." gnostic: "I know there is or is not a God."
gnosticism and agnosticism are not beliefs and are not the same than theist or atheist.
Please enlighten me as to how anyone could obtain knowledge on gods existence/non existence. Until you do, im going to say its a belief in possibility, not something based on knowledge.
I never really thought about gnosticism to be honest. And I for myself would not have described agnosticism as not knowing about the existence/nonexistence of god; the definition I know of agnosticism is about the inability to prove existence or non-existence. Maybe putting it like that makes my point a little clearer. Like AnaLoGMunKy said right above, it has nothing to do with religious belief, it is a point of view. I like to think that even the pope could be agnostic. If someone is a theist or not is a whole different matter.
