My Catholic school makes us do religion in my senior years. Not religious much though, kind of agnostic...
Searching is good. I hope we all find the answer. Sometimes I suspect that even after I die, I won't be provided with all the answers. And I don't consider it a failure having died, still searching. I apologize if I came across as zealous or overbearing.
I just feel like Axs is too zealous in your secularism. Its your opinion to expess, and while I agree that blind faith is weak, I still feel like your arguments go too far sometimes (not in a politically correct sort of way, just invalid due to how far you push it).
As for Jesus, it depends on the faith. To me, he is completely human, but part of the sacred trinity, which is a divine mystery. I also believe (not my own personal creation/though obviously) that when we die and we go to heaven, hell or purgatory, you go in the human form you are.
All I'm doing is pushing a line of reasoning based on lack of evidence. Usually a line of reasoning is taken to a conclusion, not stopped half way. Have I said anything that is extreme or harsh? If so, I did not mean too, nor to offend, just to express my opinion.
I'm very
secular if we are talking about the separation of church and state, but to be a secularist does not mean you are not religious or spiritual. Conservative groups tend to use the word to imply a secularist is godless. When it comes to government, it should be godless as far as having the church run things. This country was founded on the concept of secularism because unlike Europe, they did not want the state being run by the Church. Those who describe themselves as "spiritual" typically are trying to separate themselves from organized religious dogma. That would be me and it sounds like a little bit like you.
As far as zealous, I'm prefer the word "diligent" and usually only with those who push traditional religious dogma within the forum. I'm not anti-religious, I'm pro-truth. If faith leads one to worship the Christian God or any God, I don't have a problem with that. The problem I have is when faith is promoted as truth, when the Bible is quoted as a standard for truth as if "it" is stated in the Bible, that is the only standard of truth that is needed. If you are looking for somekind of document that describes the case for God and heaven, the Bible is a very poor collection of stories to trumpet the logic for a spiritual world and our dominion under "God".
Does the Bible promote a good code to live by? The Ten Commandments are good, but other parts of the Bible (mostly the Old Testament) set a pretty terrible standard for modern humans and basically it is ignored. And the examples of God's punishment are an embarrassment. God is supposed to be the most intelligent, most loving, most forgiving, but he resorts to draconian punishment of the entire human race because Eve ate the forbidden fruit or have Noah build an arc so he can flood out all the bad people. They are highly suspect stories.
Regarding heaven, while I can't prove it, I suspect, I hope there is continued spiritual consciousness after physical death. From a philosophical standard, the odds seem to be in favor or it, but by no means assured. Everything else, the description of heaven/hell and a single divine ruler is all conjecture.
