INTP Discussion Forum > Flamethrower > How to find the right religion

Posted by: NGene Feb 6 2004, 12:59 PM

I was killing time at Emode (ok, I'll admit it, I wasn't killing time, I was wasting it

) and something that their Religion Test told me made me almost jump off my chair. It says like this:

QUOTE

Ever wonder if you're practicing the right religion for your beliefs, or if there's a faith out there that's really right for you? It's possible you might be compatible with more than one religion since many religions share similar takes on certain subjects. In fact, it's possible that you're more compatible with religions other than the one you believe in.

And the test's title says: "The Religion Test - Find the Faith That Fits Your Beliefs"

As a truth-seeking INTP, I almost started boiling when I saw this blatant ignorance. So, finding the right religion means that if you, for example, believe the universe was sneezed out of the nose of the Great Green Arkleseizure, you won't try to find out if the statement is true - you'll try to find a religion that teaches like that. Then you can be happy belonging to the religion that fits the beliefs you already had.

Now... do we have a problem here? Of course if be think all the religions are just as good (or bad) this kind of behavior wouldn't be ignorance. But if we think there are only few religions that are closer to The Truth™ it would be blatant ignorance to select the religion according to what seems the nicest, not what seems to be the closest to the truth.

Yes, I know the tests at Emode are mostly for entertainment, but I'm wondering if they really think I'm so stupid I'd pay them $4.95 for getting a detailed report of what are the top ten religions that fit my values of open-mindedness. I actually started thinking the test gave me "open-mindedness" as a result because it was unable to decide which religion would fit me best.

Posted by: irishwhistle Feb 6 2004, 08:58 PM

And I thought the one I found for political parties was generalizing. I mean, I took it, and it gave me Constitution, then Libertarian, then Republican, which pleased me more than if Republican came out on top, but I guess it annoys me that there's always somebody who thinks everyone fits into one of several fixed sets of data. The Meyers-Briggs has the merit of pointing out that you do vary in personality and my not fit wholly into one group. Helps you to do the work yourself.

Actually, I was quiz hunting yesterday and found some lovelies which I shall post above.

Posted by: Vagabond Feb 6 2004, 11:37 PM

Religion is a personal matter. Not in the terms of secrecy, that is not what I mean; I just seriously doubt it if there is any religion out there that would pretty much cover my ideas. Then again, when it comes to ideas, we are mostly talking about philosophy and not religion; when you try to analyse why and how etc, you are philosophising (I wonder if this term I just used actually exists

) Religion is about faith. I guess that is why so many INTPs are atheists - we cannot put our finger on it and explain it rationally. So, for me - yes, I use my thinking feature to find a logical "figure" for God. It doesn't totally fit in any official religions. I try to get as close to the truth as I can using reason, because I believe everything in nature has a logical consistence. And so I can logically explain why I believe what I believe

Now OK... in the case that I am dead wrong in my conclusions, it's OK. If God proves to be something totally against what I believe, it is OK too. I can always be a non-worshiper.
Now E-mode telling me I should be a Buddhist, or a Catholic etc is totally stupid, as I think practically every religion has reasonable points as well as irreasonable ones.

Posted by: Odyssey Feb 14 2004, 05:28 AM

Well, ya know... I actually think that the religion test's a great idea [I'm taking it right now to see], but it will become obvious that my view of religion is pretty casual. I see religion and spirituality both as ways to insert meaning into life, and whichever religion does that best for a specific person seems ideal to me, as long as the religion doesn't distort 'known' Truths like science too much. If other people need to sacrifice knowledge of some Truth (prob. unknowingly) in order to gain the benefits some religions can give, that's okay with me as long as it doesn't interfere with those of us who do care about Truth.

Of course, having a huge INFP lean, I'm motivated almost as much towards Meaningfulness as Truth. Therefore, the above paragraph may be a bit irrational, but it works for me as far as I can tell right now. Counter logic/opinions are welcome; I need feedback in forming my personal philosophy.

~Odyssey

Posted by: misspadfoot Feb 17 2004, 04:33 AM

I'm not all that interested in the Emode tests; I've taken them all before. Besides, for the most part, I'm not all that interested in religion. I don't think any of them are as authoritative as they claim to be. You ask religious people, "How do you know that you have it right?" and they say something like "I just do, I can feel it" (to which I point out that Buddhists and Muslims can probably "feel it" too) or "I don't; this is what I choose to believe."

I don't understand "belief." How can you choose to believe something? Is it because the ideas are nice and loving and they appeal to you on an emotional level? That doesn't make them any more true. But searching for truth through faith, prayer and spirituality seems even less reliable. I guess I'm too much of a T.

Posted by: Vagabond Feb 17 2004, 11:58 PM

QUOTE (misspadfoot @ Feb 17 2004, 06:33 AM)

I don't understand "belief." How can you choose to believe something? Is it because the ideas are nice and loving and they appeal to you on an emotional level? That doesn't make them any more true. But searching for truth through faith, prayer and spirituality seems even less reliable. I guess I'm too much of a T.

Well, as I have been saying, I would be considered as an heretic by my church (or any church, for that matter). I agree with you, I also am unable to just choose something to believe in, just because it seems more appealing. So, as a natural weirdo that I am

, I have tried to find logical explanations in religion, as well as logical flaws and gaps in the lacking of god. I have drawn my own conclusions and formed my personal theory on god, which I don't actually claim to be correct, just a logical effort to approach the truth. I do not believe that you can have a religion only by believing without searching; this might be a way for some people, but I think you can always get there using logic. I guess my beliefs are more of a philosophy than a religion then; but it is fine by me, as I don't think there is only black and white - most things in life are gray the way I see it. In all cases, I think searching and thinking over theories can only do good, no matter where it ends up.

Posted by: Chamoisee Mar 7 2004, 07:26 AM

That is what I thought the first time I saw that test, too. I was disgusted. If the point of religion is to have a higher meaning and a God, but you can then choose what you want it to mean and what you'd like to believe, why bother with the concept of god in the first place? AFAIC religion is all about telling people what they wanted to hear in the first place, so now that I think about it, perhaps the test wasn't so far off the mark after all.

Posted by: Bard Mar 27 2004, 07:45 AM

Religion is like a glove... Can't remember who said that. In any case, or in mine perhaps, religion is just an excuse to do/be good. In that, Buddhism, as a lifestyle rather than a religion, seems to be a methodical choice. Personally, I'm agnostic, but still practice many teachings of Siddhartha simply because they have withstood the "Test of Time", and to this day still blatantly prove that they work. Maybe someone will get something out of this. Just trying to get my foot in the door.

Posted by: jayvan001 Apr 25 2004, 01:26 AM

I don't think that all the answers are in religion or lifestyles like Christianity or Buddhism or Islam, but its a start along a path. However, for most, its the fear from the deviation from the path that breeds the fanaticism and this is what causes the close mindedness and the problems. If more of the believers of these doctrines were more open-minded instead of closed minded I think that the would see eye to eye. I guess the persecution from others in their faiths gets in the way along with the fear of hell and eternal damnation, etc.

As far as truth, I'm just looking for what's right for me. I really don't care how it relates to anyone else anymore. All I care about is if I can live with looking at the reflection in the mirror at the end of the day, not answering to some higher being.

Its still nice to know that there's still money to be made in religion. $4.95 per test x how many tests I wonder?

Jay

Religion is necessary to a point to establish order but when taken to the point of fanaticism it becomes a plague, after that it becomes comic.
--Me

Posted by: Division56 Apr 25 2004, 01:29 AM

Well, I'm a slightly anti-religion atheist.................................

Posted by: misspadfoot Apr 25 2004, 02:58 AM

I am, too, though I try not to be. I actually read a list by some apologetic group about "You know you're a fundie atheist if..." It was so aggravating and ill-informed! I wondered if those people had ever heard of Occam's Razor!

I know some great sites for you, though. PM me if you'd like the links.

Posted by: grokkfried Apr 25 2004, 03:10 AM

My favourite teacher was a physicist that worked for Exxon. She told me that a lot of the physicists out there aren't only doing it for a career, etc. but also because they are looking for god. I just thought I'd throw that into the mix.

Posted by: Division56 Apr 25 2004, 03:24 AM

Frankly, it's hard not to be anti-religion and be an atheist. When you look at it through a secular view-point it seems like such a waste of resources.

Posted by: misspadfoot Apr 26 2004, 12:33 AM

QUOTE (grokkfried @ Apr 25 2004, 03:10 AM)

Well, to jump on the bandwagon, I'll give my favorite teacher's opinion

She's also a physics teacher, and she says the only reason she believes in God - or a spiritual realm at all - is because of music. I can definitely identify with that (see spiffy new avatar

) but I like to be careful around things like that (i.e. music determining religion) because I know some people who have taken the idea too far. I consider myself an atheist because I dislike basically any organized religion. I think I believe in a spiritual realm, but I subject it to a lot of rational scrutiny. I'm not sure if that realm includes a "God" or not. But mainly, I don't care to find out too much about my "spirit" when my mind fascinates me so much already

Posted by: Division56 Apr 26 2004, 12:39 AM

You sound like either an agnostic or a deist............................

Although some people call what you say "weak atheism".

Posted by: int Apr 26 2004, 03:42 AM

I am an atheist and anti-religion. I know the two can be mutually exclusive, but I'll admit that I don't always see it that way.

On another note: As a musician, I can understand where your intructor is coming from, misspadfoot. But I would ask her if she's paying much attention to the thought process that leads her to that "higher level of thought" where she thinks/feels she's realting to The Deity, because it can be very deceiving, in my thoughts.

Posted by: smIsle May 13 2004, 04:38 AM

I was thinking about this the other day.

I consider religion to be what you personally believe or disbelieve. under that definition EVERYONE has a religion, and everyone's is different. Mostly because no church can specify everything that someone ought to think, feel, do etc (and if there is it's called a cult

).
Anyway, I find most churches to be annoying because of the amount of control they feel they need over their congregations. (not just churches though... I suppose that's another INTP trait:))

Most churches seem like they are just a social gathering for likeminded people. Like joining a club or something.

Posted by: Lovechild May 13 2004, 02:36 PM

(atheist + antireligion)++

Posted by: ApostateAbe Jul 11 2004, 06:20 PM

I just met you guys and already I love you.

Posted by: paladinoflunaria Jul 12 2004, 04:43 AM

I am an atheist; a philosopher.

The relativism in most Religions really irks me. The Truth is what's important. It doesn't matter how it makes you feel or how it makes me feel, it is only the fundamental concept that has any worth.

Take Buddhism for example. One can believe in reincarnation, karma, that anyone has actually reached Nirvana, and that Siddartha's words carry weight, but the belief is not important. It's the ideas and concepts found in Buddhism that are important.
I shall quote from Buddhist scripture:

QUOTE

Malunkyaputta said to the Lord: "Sir, as I was meditating, this thought entered my mind: 'These speculative views about whether the world is infinite or whether the world is finite, whether it is both infinite and finite, whether it is neither infinite nor finite; these speculative views about whether the soul is the same as the body or different from it; these speculative views about whether the Tathagata exists after death or whether he ceases to exist, or whether he both exists and does not exist, or whether he neither exists nor does not exist - these views are not explained by the Lord, they are set aside, ignored.' Sir, if you do not explain these views for me, I will leave this training. If you know the answers to these questions, you should explain them to me. And if you don't, then it would be honest to say so."

"But Malunkyaputta, did I ever say to you: 'Come, be my disciple, and I will answer all these questions for you'?"

"No, sir."

"Then, did you ever say to me: 'I will become your disciple only if you answer all these questions'?"

"No, sir."

"So, who are you and what is your complaint, you foolish man? If one were to say that they would not become my disciple until all these views had been explained, he might be dead before it could be done. It is as if a man had been shot by a poisoned arrow and his friends might get a doctor to help him. And he might say: 'Wait! I do not want the arrow removed until I know the name of the man who shot it, what caste he is, whether he is short or tall, fat or thin. I do not want the arrow removed until I know whether the bow that shot the arrow was a spring bow, a crossbow or a longbow. I do not want the arrow removed until I know whether it was made from reed, wood or bamboo, or whether the head of the arrow was a calf-tooth head, an ordinary head, a jagged head or an iron head.' Long before all these questions could be answered, that man would be dead. In the same way, if someone were to say that they would not become my disciple until all these questions about whether the world is infinite or not were answered, they might be dead before it could be done.

"Living the holy life could not be said to depend upon whether the world is infinite or not, whether it is both infinite and finite, whether it is neither infinite nor finite. Living the holy life could not be said to depend upon whether the soul is the same as the body or different from it, and so on. Whether the world is infinite or not, there is birth, there is aging, there is dying, there is grief, sorrow, suffering, lamentation and despair, and it is for the ending of this that I teach. Therefore, understand as not explained what has not been explained by me, and understand as explained what has been explained by me. And what has not been explained by me? All these speculative views that you ask about. And why? Because it is not connected with the goal, it is not fundamental to the holy life, it does not conduce to letting go, giving up, stilling, calming, higher knowledge, awakening, or to Nirvana. And what has been explained by me? The Four Noble Truths. And why? Because it is connected with the goal, it is fundamental to the holy life, it does conduce to letting go, giving up, stilling, calming, higher knowledge, awakening, and to Nirvana."

This quote was taken from www.buddhanet.net, if anyone has any interest in further reading.

I, also, am not a person who believes in things. I regard ideas as logical or illogical- truth or untruth. Reincarnation and karma are logical, taken from the Buddhist anatman context. And what the Buddha said on suffering and how to remove it are true so far as I have observed and intuited. Impermanence, a fundamental idea of Buddhism, can't be denied (I like ideas with this quality), and thanks to the middle path, a follower shouldn't become obsessed with the philosophy nor should he become intellectually lazy (develop blind faith). This is good for me, because both zeal and faith are for the naive. Buddhism is very logical, and is more of a philosophy than a religion, so it's good in my book. Any system with qualities like this are also ok in my book.