Jump to content
UNRV Ancient Roman Empire Forums
Sextus Roscius

What Religion Are You?

What Religion are you  

54 members have voted

  1. 1. What Religion do you practice

    • Christianity
      22
    • Judaism
      0
    • Islam
      2
    • Traditional Roman Religion
      6
    • Other Polytheistic Religion
      2
    • Atheism
      22


Recommended Posts

I always wanted to get a general idea of what religion this site is compraised of. This is simply a poll, not a debate. So just state your religion or a comment on the data. I ask for no furthur contributions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RomanoCeltic. A bit Roman, a bit Celtic, and a bit thrown in for good measure. I don't really follow any system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm Christian. My parents told me I was a Catholic but I consider myself just a Christian, I personally don't care much for denominations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

im roman catholic...but i dont really believe everything that goes with catholicism so i guess im jsut christian..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was baptized & confirmed a Methodist Christian.

 

In fundamental, philosophical belief I would say I'm closest to a Scientific Deist.

 

However in spirituality I am very Greco-Roman Polytheist. Hermes/Mercurius is my presiding deity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was heavily indoctrinated as a Christian, but now I'm neither Christian or atheist, because both would presume something unknown, so I'm agnostic. I really don't care for any religious belief.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't personally consider atheism a religion. Though there are militant atheists who focus so aggressively on discrediting the faith of others that they act as if atheism is a religion in itself, I am an atheist simply because (as the definition goes) I am without theism. For me being an atheist is not about closing one's mind to possibilities but rather simply requiring proof of the existence of deities before I believe in it. Is that agnosticism... I don't honestly know, nor do I generally concern myself about it (unless of course someone wants to bring it up here =P)

 

I'll try to explain this further hopefully without angering anyone :) To me, religion is a creation of humanity in order to explain the unknown. (the development of customs and religious law as a tool to govern or control the population is related of course but I don't personally think it was the original intention of religion.) As such, I see religion as evidence of man's natural curiosity and even arrogance. We are naturally opposed to the notion that something cannot be explained. Religion helps to fill the gaps left by the holes in that ability to explain. Even with enormous advancements in scientific study as compared to the ancient world, there is still an endless supply of the unexplainable. Perhaps its an assumption that because of our natural intelligence (comparable to other lifeforms known on this planet anyway) it is therefore simply impossible that things are unexplainable. If there is not an answer for some mystery, the human tendency has always been that it certainly could not be because we are not 'smart' enough to figure it out, so it must be because some other worldly power created it. I just personally think that there are things in the universe that we may never understand and don't need to. Why does the universe have to have a point of creation? The big bang theory may be as ridiculous as creationism. Why can't it just always have existed and it is simply impossible for us to ever understand it. Perhaps this is arrogance in itself that I refuse to accept a notion that there are beings either overseeing the existence of humanity or simply creating and ignoring (when I clearly cannot prove or disprove it), but without evidence I see no reason to make the assumption that there are omnipotent beings, deities and such.

 

So maybe that sounds much more like agnosticism or some other such thing rather than strict atheism, I honestly don't know. But since I truly do not believe in the existence of gods, then I guess by definition I am an atheist despite my willingness to concede that I don't have any answers to refute the beliefs of others (nor do I really want to refute those beliefs). Like that great popular culture icon popeye said, "I yam what I yam" :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was christened Anglican so I guess in theory I'm a christian. I however, think God has a name, and that is Charles Darwin...!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Me Personaly, i'm an Atheist. Hardcore now, I beleive that the only purpose in religion is (like PP said) to explain the unexplainable, however I have faith that everything can be explained by scientific thought, and to follow practices of religion in the meanwhile would simply be a hindrance to furthur advances of science and finding the true answer. Religion in terms of morals and ethics is positive, but I beleive (and practice) firm morals and ethics without beleif in my duty to a higher power, other than rightousness.

 

Though in a sense, atheist is a religion, a religion is simply a belief about how things work, and one can find that atheism in terms of what one who practices it does and how one practices it will vary just as much as a religion. The only thing lacking in atheism is organized groups who come together to speak about the meaning of atheism, which is profoundly useless in my opinion. Therefore in my mind atheism is a religion, a religion without a deity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with PP--atheism is not a religion. It's not even a whole philosophy. It's just one position, but one that opens up so many other philosophical issues (e.g., if there's no divine punishment, why be moral?) that it's an awfully fundamental position.

 

As for the difference between agnosticism and atheism, I think there is a major and important difference: whether one believes it is possible that there is an omnipotent/omniscient/creator (i.e., one or more beings with godly properties) or whether one believes it is impossible. As an atheist, my opinion is that a being that is both omnipotent and omniscient is impossible, in the same way that it's impossible for something to be both A and non-A at the same time and in the same respect. If a being is capable of doing anything, then it is capable of learning; but if it is capable of learning, then it is not all-knowing; therefore, there cannot be a being that is simultaneously omniscient and omnipotent. QED.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am roman catholic and pretty comfortable with it, I am happy to believe in what i believe but on the other hand leave those that believe in other things alone, because I am not a missionary, well ok i am on a mission, but to get me to elysium in the end ;)

 

cheers

viggen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Map of the Roman Empire

×