Is it normal to want to ignore certain parts of religion but still adhere?

88% Normal
31 Comments

I often think about the many things I've grown up with in religion (I'm Christian by the way). There is a part that says to obey my religion because in the end it will be beneficial, and then there are the thoughts that say just "do what you want who cares what God thinks". I'm almost torn between the two. I don't want to seem like I'm self-centered, yet it's stupid that I can't do the things I want to do that I think are normal and non-harmful (such as having a gay relationship). Some parts of my religion I think make logical sense and others do not. Has anyone gone through this before to think this is normal?

Voting Results
88% Normal
Based on 42 votes (37 yes)
Help us keep this site organized and clean. Thanks!
[ Report Post ]
Comments ( 31 )
  • desmond1990
    10 years ago

    For a start, there's LOTS of bs in any religion. If you're christian, do you believe that the world was created in 6 days? Do you believe that snakes talk, that virgins give birth and that water can be turned into wine? Do you believe in the story of Noah's ark?.. Most rational people don't believe in this sort of thing, but when questioned "Do you believe that the world was created in 6 days." They'll avoid the question and say "I'm a christian, so I believe in what the bible says."

    Honestly, I think most religious people feel like they want to pick and choose, but they feel guilty and think that they have to believe in everything or nothing at all.

    My advice would be to believe what YOU believe. Be spiritual. If you believe in a god, then fine. If you believe in Jesus, then fine.. if you don't believe in Noah's ark, then good!.. Just believe in what makes sense to YOU.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    3
    3
      -
    • suckonthis9
      10 years ago

      Great advice!

      Be nothing, be archaic.

      'Spirits' do not exist in this Universe, or in any other Universe. Everything, in this Universe, and in every other Universe, including space, has Physical properties. If something does not have any Physical properties, then it simply does not exist.

      If you would like to refute this, then please describe any Physical property of this so-called 'spirit'.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      0
      0
        -
      • Leviathanel
        10 years ago

        also look at quantum physics. things can pop in and out of existence. where do they go? how can they come back? it's baffling. if something ceases to exist how the flying fuck does it come back from non-existence.

        so yes things without physical properties do exist but we are unable to detect them.

        Comment Hidden ( show )
        0
        0
          -
        • suckonthis9
          10 years ago

          They don't 'go' anywhere.
          It is simply a fundamental property of the Universe.

          These spontaneous patentations, in reality, do not occur in the Massenergy Realm. We sometimes do, however, observe their effects in the Massenergy Realm.
          In reality, they occur only in the Quark Realm.

          Synonym discussion: evident manifest patent distinct obvious apparent plain clear mean readily perceived or apprehended. evident implies presence of visible signs that lead one to a definite conclusion <an evident fondness for sweets>. manifest implies an external display so evident that little or no inference is required <manifest hostility>. patent applies to a cause, effect, or significant feature that is clear and unmistakable once attention has been directed to it <patent defects>. distinct implies such sharpness of outline or definition that no unusual effort to see or hear or comprehend is required <a distinct refusal>. obvious implies such ease in discovering that it often suggests conspicuousness or little need for perspicacity in the observer <the obvious solution>. apparent is very close to evident except that it may imply more conscious exercise of inference <for no apparent reason>. plain suggests lack of intricacy, complexity, or elaboration <her feelings about him are plain>. clear implies an absence of anything that confuses the mind or obscures the pattern <a clear explanation>.

          Note: The newly coined term 'patentation', would probably be better to describe what it is that I'm trying to relate.

          Comment Hidden ( show )
          0
          0
            -
          • Leviathanel
            10 years ago

            very informational. thank you for the lesson. time for me to do some studying.

            Comment Hidden ( show )
            0
            0
      • Leviathanel
        10 years ago

        just because something isn't discovered yet doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. I agree with you though. but as an agnostic I also can not ignore the fact that there may be some sort of force at hand here.

        but I also believe that with amazing science said force will probably be able to be discovered one day.

        Comment Hidden ( show )
        0
        0
          -
        • suckonthis9
          10 years ago

          Incorrect.

          All of these so-called 'forces', do not exist in reality. These are all inventions in some human's mind, and do not exist in nature.

          The only real 'force', that does exist, is gravity. But gravity is not a 'force'. It is, quite simply, a curvature of space, caused by the presence of massenergy and quarkenergy in space.

          Comment Hidden ( show )
          0
          0
            -
          • Leviathanel
            10 years ago

            i'm not mentioning any of the silly forces that people make up. all i'm saying is there probably are some forces, energies, which we have not discovered yet.

            I believe if god truly does exist then it is probably possible to actually discover it.

            Comment Hidden ( show )
            0
            0
              -
            • suckonthis9
              10 years ago

              Incorrect.

              You missed the point, entirely.
              There are no 'real' forces, in the Massenergy Realm, or in the Quark Realm (meaning anywhere in this Universe, or in any other Universe). What we describe as 'forces', can be much more simply described as a simple curvature of space.

              What we describe as 'energy', is, in reality, different quantum-relativistic forms of massenergy and quarkenergy, relative to 'normal' massenergy (massenergy forms which we experience in our everyday lives, including ourselves).

              We have 'discovered' it. I am the first person to understand this. We were all incorrect, myself included.

              I will use a loose analogy:
              Imagine that you are billions of times smaller than a bacterium. You, and everything and everyone else you know, have spent your entire existence, near the centre of the surface of a piston, in an internal combustion engine. The engine has 'always' been running, but it is known that it is running slightly faster over long periods of time.
              Everyone who lives there, perceives themselves to be 'standing still', although scientific study has proven otherwise. It appears to most everyone that the cylinder walls are moving reciprocally, relative to themselves, which is the commonly held (but mistaken belief).
              We have done some exploration, such as drilling into the piston head, but this is less than one atom in depth. We speculate (correctly) that there must be a connecting rod and crankshaft, but most people dismiss this skeptically, pointing out that without lubrication, the system would seize, because of friction.
              We have also explored a very small part of the intake and exhaust systems, but find it 'impossible' to explore further into these systems.
              We do not perceive the cyclical nature of the four-stroke engine (intake, compression, ignition [power-stroke], and exhaust), as these are occurring far too quickly for our senses, and are 'normal' to us, but we do understand these principles.

              What I have 'discovered', is a very small opening in the exhaust manifold. I have been able to exit the inside of the engine, and alight on a fender.
              Now I can see how this entire engine system works. But more than that, I can also see that it is part of a vehicle, which is travelling down the road!

              Which 'deity' are you speaking about?

              Comment Hidden ( show )
              0
              0
      • Jfdp
        10 years ago

        Maybe for the benefit of all of us it would be best if you could go "suck on it"

        Comment Hidden ( show )
        0
        0
    • oreoiscream
      10 years ago

      Yeah I have made a critical change in my beliefs past few days and decided that I actually am gay. For this being said, gays are not accepted in Christianity or many other faiths as a whole. But I don't care because that's the way I am and only certain parts of the bible make sense. I agree with you that the talking snake and noah's ark seems to be all strange, but I also find that some parts of the bible could have happened.

      Oh well I don't think this is a good idea to start discussion on religion. To be honest I think that it is fine to pick and choose because after all it's my life and not god's.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      0
      0
  • anti-hero
    10 years ago

    You certainly wouldn't be the first to pick and choose which parts of a religion you want to follow. But what is the point of doing something if you are not going to do it right?

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    3
    3
  • suckonthis9
    10 years ago

    If you choose to ignore certain facts, then you are ignorant.

    Not only are you ignorant, but you're also very confused.

    The deity was called Jehovah. Jehovah is now deceased.
    What would Jehovah have thought?

    You have used a term which divides yourself and others from people who also believe in the the teachings of Abraham. This term also divides you and others from people who have other religious beliefs, as well as dividing yourself and others from people who are not religious. Use of this term might be offensive to some people, whether they are religious, or whether they are not religious.

    Why are you creating division in society?

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    1
    1
      -
    • Leviathanel
      10 years ago

      shhhh if religious people studied their religion enough they'd start to realise how much the beliefs have changed since the first time their god was invented.

      I always said the best way to turn a Christian atheist is to get the to read the bible. and I mean the whole thing. actually I think Christians are obliged to read the whole thing and less than 1% (statistic pulled out of my ass) probably do.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      0
      0
        -
      • Leviathanel
        10 years ago

        if religious people were inquisitive then there would be no religious people.

        a lot of people would rather accept things as "it just that way it is" rather than actually trying to understand them.

        it's a lot easier to say the sky is blue because of god instead of appealing to science to find out why.

        Comment Hidden ( show )
        0
        0
    • _Molotov_Cocktail_
      10 years ago

      Jehovah will come again in glory, with a bible in one hand and a Molotov cocktail in the other.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      0
      0
        -
      • robbieforgotpw
        10 years ago

        Please do not make light of the Creator

        Comment Hidden ( show )
        0
        0
    • Anonymous Post Author
      10 years ago

      How at all is this offensive? I see people all the time choose what they think is right and what is wrong. And how am I ignorant if I am aware of the facts which maybe even disputed as facts? Oh and I know the term which is, and I'll offend you now because I am what I am, secular morality. How does this concept make others squeamish? You're probably one of the voters that said this isn't normal anyway so I shouldn't be surprised.

      Don't understand what you mean by creating a division in society when this whole website does that.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      0
      0
        -
      • RomeoDeMontague
        10 years ago

        This is what most Christians do. Everyone worships in there own way. Why do you think everyone broke from the Cathloc church? Ever heard of King Henry?

        Comment Hidden ( show )
        0
        0
  • q1w2e3
    10 years ago

    Who sets what is good and what is evil? I mean the standards. If its up to people they will legalize anything, because as the time passes, people and societal norms will be changing.

    Having sexual relations with animals and with own children (incest) might be wrong to you now. But do you know that certain parties in Europe is calling for the legalization of incest now? Their reason is, as long as the child is more than 18 years of age, incest is ok.

    So think about it. The rules in religion is there for a reason. You might not see them as harmful but it's quite deadly to society in general.

    I'm Muslim by the way.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    1
    1
      -
    • suckonthis9
      10 years ago

      Who sets what is 'good', and what is 'evil', are the people who first coined these terms, and later people who publish dictionaries.

      Proto-Germanic / ubilaz

      Etymology

      From Proto-Indo-European *upélos (“evil”, literally "going over or beyond (acceptable limits)"), from Proto-Indo-European *upo, *up, *eup (“down, up, over”).

      Alternative etymology relates *ubilaz to Proto-Indo-European *wep- (“bad”), making it cognate with Old Irish fel (“bad”), Hittite (huwap(p)-/hup(p)-, “to mistreat”).

      Proto-Germanic / gōdaz

      Etymology

      From Proto-Indo-European *gʰedʰ- (“to unite, be associated, suit”).

      You have used a term which divides yourself and others from people who also believe in the the teachings of Ibrahim. This term also divides you and others from people who have other religious beliefs, as well as dividing yourself and others from people who are not religious. Use of this term might be offensive to some people, whether they are religious, or whether they are not religious.

      Why are you creating division in society?

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      1
      1
    • Leviathanel
      10 years ago

      siblings fucking in Europe has never hurt anybody anywhere. and how is it our place to say who other people are allowed to fall in love with? if they decide to have mutant babies then they will pay the price with the heartache that comes from having sick children.

      and no people can come up with what is right and wrong without law or religion. I was completely atheist at one point in my life and I never thought about raping or murdering and that's a LOT more than can be said about crazy-ass religious people.

      I bet most murderers are religious atheists are too scared of death which means ceasing to exist to them not joining allah up in the sky for a hookah party.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      0
      0
  • Verity
    10 years ago

    Most religious people do otherwise the contradictions would send them mad!

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
  • [Old Memory]
    10 years ago

    To pick and choose cancels out the whole point. You may as well do whatever you want, and drop the tag of "religion" seeing as you're doing whatever in the first place. You pick out what part to follow, so it's obviously something you would be doing anyway regardless, otherwise you wouldn't have chosen it.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
  • dandan1960
    10 years ago

    It's not right, but it's normal.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
      -
    • Leviathanel
      10 years ago

      if your god exists he did not make life easy. and I bet he left some hurdles in that book of pornography you call the bible.

      I think you tripped over every single one.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      0
      0
        -
      • dandan1960
        10 years ago

        Your right I have tripped over many hurdles if that's your analogy for following the bible to perfection. There was no hate or bigotry intended in my comment.

        Comment Hidden ( show )
        0
        0
    • Leviathanel
      10 years ago

      the only thing that is not right is your shitty bigotry and hate.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      0
      0
  • Jfdp
    10 years ago

    You have to realise alot of stuff in the bible is abstratctual, in Old Hebrew "Adam" is a collective known for men in general, and "Eva" is a collective known for women in general, the word that "sou" is derived from in modern times, actually means "mind" in the proper translation.
    Its small things like these that put a whole new spin on things and can actually make some scenes out of the bible make more sense.

    Also, we all know how every event in history has a dozen retellings based on who you ask, and do keep in mind that the bible was put down by human beings who unconsciously put in their own interpretations here and there, add onto that the thousands of translations it has gone through over the centuries and the chopping and changing of it by the Romans just before they made it their state religeon, youve got a text that might be radically different than the actual event

    I tend to take most bible stories with a pinch of salt, its the overall message i think you should follow

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
      -
    • Leviathanel
      10 years ago

      wtf no adam and eve did not represent all men and women they represented two specific people who had their fucking age of death recorded along with all of their sons and daughters and all their sons and daughters.

      they lived to be like 800 years old. I fuck you not go read the bible yourself.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      0
      0