A deity and an idol are to different things.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Religion
Collapse
X
-
-
An Idol can mean more than a few things. Sorry, about the copy and pasting but I don't feel like typing a lot.
Spoiler:
1:a representation or symbol of an object of worship; broadly:a false god
2 a:a likeness of something bobsolete:pretender, impostor
3:a form or appearance visible but without substance <an enchanted phantom, a lifeless idol — P. B. Shelley>4:an object of extreme devotion <a movie idol>; also:ideal 25:a false conception :fallacy
While a deity...
Spoiler:
1 a:the rank or essential nature of a god :divinity bcapitalized:god
1, supreme being
2:a god or goddess <the deitiesof ancient Greece>
3ne exalted or revered as supremely good or powerfulLast edited by jagger916; 02-11-2010, 03:59 PM.
Comment
-
Yes, I understand those definitions. I suppose it would be better worded to say that while deities are not considered idols, they are/can be idolized. Also, an idol can also be a representation of said deity, so could one worship an idol and still worship a deity all at once?
Ex. Virgin Mary statues, crucifixes, shrines to Ganesh or Shiva
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sina View PostBut to add to the mature and civil discussion, in the opinion of ye faithful, what is the difference between a cult and a religion?sigpic
Comment
-
Eh, I don't think being religious makes you an idiot Gene. I certainly like to think I'm not one. Then again, I don't consider a cult to not be a religion, unless of course it uses brain washing or other abusive methods to get and maintain worshipers, or when the leader is lying to his followers for his own benefit.
Comment
-
I don't think being religious makes anyone an idiot per se. I just can't see how anybody could be religious and not be one (qualified below). Maybe idiot is too harsh a word, but I really think that if someone believes everything a religion says unquestioningly, then they can't be too bright. Religions need people to believe things without evidence, and even in the face of contradicting evidence. And in my opinion, then yes, anyone who follows this hook line and sinker isn't thinking for themselves, ergo, isn't thinking.
Now I know you're a clever man Darkmoon. I know you have a degree in Archaeology which is testament to your intelligence. And I suspect that you've evaluated the evidence for and against the core beliefs of your religion (I don't actually know which. I'd be curious to know. If I remember correctly you said it was a rather ancient branch of a standing religion. If you don't want to publicise your beliefs that's fine). If you've evaluated the evidence and come to the conclusion that it is the truth, then I'm in no better a position to say it's not after I've evaluated the same evidence. There's no way to resolve the two, but agree to disagree, and that we're each satisfied we've looked at the evidence. I know that alot of people are personally spiritual (and don't identify themselves with a major church), and they reach this point after something happens to them that changes how they evaluate evidence.
What I mostly have a problem with is when children are inculcated into religions. The heredity of belief is something that a whole lot of extant religions have in common, and I think that there's a very good reason for it. I think children should be taught to think freely and evaluate evidence, and then if they come to the conclusion that a divine being created the universe, then that's fine.
In writing all this, I realise that I've said that I can't understand how someone could be religious and not be one (an idiot), and yet above, said that if they were introduced to it as a child then they'd know nothing else, and so possibly couldn't help it. I guess that someone would have to know that they had the ability to think for themselves before they could make up their own mind. If this was denied them, then yes, they could be religious, and never even pondered the questions of life, the universe and everything. And ultimately I think situations like this are sad, though are entirely the product of a religion.sigpic
Comment
-
Originally posted by Darkmoon View PostThen again, I don't consider a cult to not be a religion, unless of course it uses brain washing or other abusive methods to get and maintain worshipers, or when the leader is lying to his followers for his own benefit.
(Oh, and sorry for the double posts, I can't do multi-quotes. I'm a little dumb about that sort of thing. )
Comment
-
My mom sometimes blames other Religions for the problems the world faces now...But wouldn't that mean people of other Religions blame her religion for problems? Such as the war in the holy land and such? Very interesting view on things...humans have a need to point the finger at someone/thing...why not be other religions/races/countries
Comment
-
Originally posted by A.K.47 View PostSpeaking of religion, its about married couple. What if one of the two parties have different religion? Should one abandoned the other and go with the other party's religion? or just go their separate ways on that part. Also what of their children?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Lilith View PostIssues arising from these situations are the reason some religions discourage or forbid their followers to marry outside the faith. With christians it's referred to as, "unequally yoking yourself". Honestly, adding religious intolerance to a relationship tends to ruin it. I have two friends who lost their partners because they didn't believe in God and their prospective partners did. I think both should just accept each other's ideas and not worry about it. As for the children, the children shouldn't be forced into either religion. The parents should teach them about many ideas and encourage them to find their own paths. That way there is no brainwashing and no arguing. That way everyone can find their own way and be happy.
Religion effects how people see things growing up...it gives them a death(afterlife) to worry about as well..heaven and such...
Comment
Comment