Christian- Depending on who you ask, some would say that I fall on the liberal side of Christianity while others would say that I'm more Fundamentalist. It just depends on what the doctrine is.  I guess I would be a modeate Christian.  I'm non-denominational, though I do wish to find a denomination that I'm comfortable with one day.  It's not really important to me though so I don't really sweat it.  I guess if I really had to come "close" to one, it would probably Independent Fundamental Baptist.  To somewhat get the "scope" of where I stand on the Christian wavelength, here a little bit of what I do or don't believe:

I affirm the Trinity (as does most Christians).

I believe in Easy Believism and vehemently reject Lordship Salvation.

I believe in Etenal Security (OSAS).

As of right now, I reject the teachings of Calvinism (especially Limited Atonement)

I believe in a Post Tribulation rapture.

I believe in Beliver's baptism.

I am a King James Onlyist.

I could go on, but I'll stop there before I put people in a snorefest.   

Im an agnostic theist , I just cant believe that all these happen out of random luck...

Atheist. It kinda happens when you have access to science resources from early childhood.

Quote from: Tossu-sama on March 01, 2014, 02:04:39 AM
Atheist. It kinda happens when you have access to science resources from early childhood.

Hmmm. . . I had science class, went on field trips to science museums, etc. in elementary school, my mom made me watch Bill Nye the Science Guy on TV during summer vacations, I was in the most advanced Chemistry and Biology classes when I was in high school, and was considering studying science in college. I am not Atheist.

People who aren't Atheists aren't always stupid and ignorant.

Old topic but on that I missed so I'll do it now.  Better late than never, story of my life......

Christian....

I'm a LaVeyan Satanist. I thought I was an atheist until I realized I'm a god.

Quote from: Tossu-sama on March 01, 2014, 02:04:39 AM
Atheist. It kinda happens when you have access to science resources from early childhood.

I was raised in a fundamentalist Christian home in Texas, home schooled, and sent to take classes a t the "Institute" for Creation "Research".

I am also an atheist with regards to all concepts of gods to which I have become acquainted.
In the beginning it wasn't the science, but the religion itself, that forced me into atheism.

I specifically remember one of the first things that just seemed absurdly wrong to me was that during the old testament god supposedly (acting through his prophets of course) orders the murder of all of a neighboring city, with the exception of it's virgin women for the men to "keep for themselves".

A knowledge of science isn't required for atheism toward christianity, just a knowledge of christianity.

-Anna

Agnostic

I'm a Deist. I believe in a creator of the universe. I don't believe in any of the organized religions.
As Yul Brynner said in a movie about an Incan or Mayan empire running  from another group. (Both practiced human sacrifice) Look around you and see what God created you don't have to do that.

Quote from: AnnabellaA knowledge of science isn't required for atheism toward christianity, just a knowledge of christianity.

Nice.

This isn't the right place for it, but I can imagine a forum on which that would be a great sig line.

No clear affiliation.  I tend toward a lot of Western Gnostic/Esoteric ideas (hence the icon, the ankh which I equate with the Rosy Cross), with some ideas from Buddhism, Taoism, Manicheanism, and various other beliefs thrown in.  However, I'm also not against science as a way of knowing and I often fall back on Aristotle to ground myself even though I'm more of a Platonist or Pythagorean at heart.

I look new-agey because I wear semiprecious stones (I nearly always wear a pendant of lapis lazuli) but I only wear them because they're pretty.

I don't have a specific belief in God but I think I have some clue as to what God might be if They exist.  I have a strong draw to the Divine Feminine, and my initials invoke Her name as revealed in the Zohar.  At times I have felt that a Goddess might manifest to me in the form of a mother fox if I were to see Her.  I get emotional when I hear Schubert's Ave Maria and have some affection for the Virgin Mary because she resonates as a transcendent mother goddess but I do not consider myself Catholic after any fashion.  Being perfectly honest with myself, this could be purely just a longing for a mother figure after dealing with a very abrasive and narcissistic biological mother.

I'm very cordial to the idea of reincarnation considering I've had verifiable memories of what appear to be past lives, but I'm always wary of believing it 100% because there are other explanations possible (not all of them scientific or based on Aristotelian logic).  I believe divination is a way of tapping into the parts of your mind and thoughts that are normally off-limits from plain, linear logic but I don't know if there's anything to it beyond that.

I guess most of all, I just want to find something I can believe in solidly and settle there, but so far nothing suits the bill.  Attempts to work out a coherent philosophy of my own have always been shown up by something new that completely challenges everything, so I'm trying to learn the ins and outs of nondualism to see if I can reconcile some of the seemingly contradictory nature of reality.

Quote from: Rose City Rose on August 16, 2014, 03:37:38 AM
No clear affiliation.  I tend toward a lot of Western Gnostic/Esoteric ideas (hence the icon, the ankh which I equate with the Rosy Cross), with some ideas from Buddhism, Taoism, Manicheanism, and various other beliefs thrown in.  However, I'm also not against science as a way of knowing and I often fall back on Aristotle to ground myself even though I'm more of a Platonist or Pythagorean at heart.

I look new-agey because I wear semiprecious stones (I nearly always wear a pendant of lapis lazuli) but I only wear them because they're pretty.

I don't have a specific belief in God but I think I have some clue as to what God might be if They exist.  I have a strong draw to the Divine Feminine, and my initials invoke Her name as revealed in the Zohar.  At times I have felt that a Goddess might manifest to me in the form of a mother fox if I were to see Her.  I get emotional when I hear Schubert's Ave Maria and have some affection for the Virgin Mary because she resonates as a transcendent mother goddess but I do not consider myself Catholic after any fashion.  Being perfectly honest with myself, this could be purely just a longing for a mother figure after dealing with a very abrasive and narcissistic biological mother.

I'm very cordial to the idea of reincarnation considering I've had verifiable memories of what appear to be past lives, but I'm always wary of believing it 100% because there are other explanations possible (not all of them scientific or based on Aristotelian logic).  I believe divination is a way of tapping into the parts of your mind and thoughts that are normally off-limits from plain, linear logic but I don't know if there's anything to it beyond that.

I guess most of all, I just want to find something I can believe in solidly and settle there, but so far nothing suits the bill.  Attempts to work out a coherent philosophy of my own have always been shown up by something new that completely challenges everything, so I'm trying to learn the ins and outs of nondualism to see if I can reconcile some of the seemingly contradictory nature of reality.

That is quite the philosophical/metaphysical resume.

I also am working to construct a model of reality which incorporates the subjective conscious mind without any manner of substance dualism. I think substance dualism is a violation of occam's razor. It is entirely possible to imagine that if all physical brains were destroyed that consciousness and all subjective experience might be eliminated. That actually forms the basis of my teleological outlook as mine is based in the prime importance of physical minds without which a universe truly would be meaningless.

The difficulty I think that many face is that it is far easier to posit an unknown panacea as an explanation for a phenomena than it is to hold your own philosophical feet to the fire in terms of interrogating the universe honestly. Substance dualism is such a panacea. It explains nothing, it merely acts as a "get out of jail free" card for those afraid that a naturalistic model of reality will swallow the concept of the soul and with it either their notion of self importance or hopes of immortality.

Integrated information theory is a decent candidate for explaining consciousness, and is I think far more plausible than arguments which merely add a new unexplained thing to the chain.

best of luck in your search,
Anna

Quote from: Annabella on August 17, 2014, 03:16:44 PM
That is quite the philosophical/metaphysical resume.

I also am working to construct a model of reality which incorporates the subjective conscious mind without any manner of substance dualism. I think substance dualism is a violation of occam's razor. It is entirely possible to imagine that if all physical brains were destroyed that consciousness and all subjective experience might be eliminated. That actually forms the basis of my teleological outlook as mine is based in the prime importance of physical minds without which a universe truly would be meaningless.

The difficulty I think that many face is that it is far easier to posit an unknown panacea as an explanation for a phenomena than it is to hold your own philosophical feet to the fire in terms of interrogating the universe honestly. Substance dualism is such a panacea. It explains nothing, it merely acts as a "get out of jail free" card for those afraid that a naturalistic model of reality will swallow the concept of the soul and with it either their notion of self importance or hopes of immortality.

Integrated information theory is a decent candidate for explaining consciousness, and is I think far more plausible than arguments which merely add a new unexplained thing to the chain.

best of luck in your search,
Anna

Agreed, I think Renee Descartes really FUBAR'd the debate over thought, substance, and existence with some very weak patches and Substance Dualism seems to be one of them.

My dilemma stems from the fact that it is undeniable from my view that the physical brain has some role in memory, judgment, and personality (Phineas Gage showed us that); it is the extent of that role, in light of memories and traits I have that appear to transcend physical death, that I'm trying to work out.  The seemingly contradictory statements "matter gives rise to mind" and "mind gives rise to matter" are prominent in my thoughts.

Quote from: Rose City Rose on August 18, 2014, 12:54:12 AM
Agreed, I think Renee Descartes really FUBAR'd the debate over thought, substance, and existence with some very weak patches and Substance Dualism seems to be one of them.

My dilemma stems from the fact that it is undeniable from my view that the physical brain has some role in memory, judgment, and personality (Phineas Gage showed us that); it is the extent of that role, in light of memories and traits I have that appear to transcend physical death, that I'm trying to work out.  The seemingly contradictory statements "matter gives rise to mind" and "mind gives rise to matter" are prominent in my thoughts.

To solve this problem, I actually tend to think of the mind as fully material. It's a tool your brain gives you, but it is not the core, or the heart of you. As an analogy, we have a mind and a soul, and they communicate, but are separate. Probably less clearly, we are an "I" and a "me", which are not the same.

As an example, I consider the very act of thinking. When you think, just who is listening to it?