I've noticed something interesting about religious discussions here...

That is exactly the problem! If more people understood the foundations of their religions there would be a lot less arguing about them.

Another great topic susieq...ah...religion..that ever controversial subject that gets us all hot under the collar sometimes...the truth of the matter I don't think there's really one religion out there that follows its own doctrines to the letter and many people who are followers of a particular religion don't really understand the true principles behind their own religion..I hate to say it but Christianity is probably big here at being at fault...by that I mean...maybe early Christians held steadfast to the principles Christ taught...but then led to "interpretations" of it by men straying so far from the original dogmas of it. If that weren't true then you wouldn't have so many variations of the Christian religion to begin with...and it all goes to the idea of the attitude ..my religion is better than yours concept...more wars have started that way to "defend" that religious viewpoint of being better...I have no qualms at all about anyones religion. I too was raised in a Christian environment, baptized Catholic, confirmed Protestant and I haven't completely abandoned my Christian beliefs either its just that I've embarked on another path that is fitting to my persona...that of being a follower of the pagan/wicca path...I would like to think I've never "attacked" anyone's beliefs nor I haven't come across anyone attacking mine (yet)---it's unfortunate that sometimes the more what would be considered the more fanatical sects of religion (and this could go for ANY religion, not just Christian) tend to be the most vocal and defensive...They say there's nothing worse than a "convert" --a person who leaves one religion to believe another cause then they tend to get "preachy"--I didn't "convert" to my path ...as I wasn't as I said completely abandoning my Christian views..but expanding them...I say this cause I also have studied Hinduism, and Buddhism..and blend all views and dogmas into what I believe in. But maybe when discussions go into Biblical facts or quoting another religion's sacred scriptures it could be that it doesn't get a rousing onslaught of responses because maybe some just don't want to listen to the facts..they rather believe in the "interpretation" of their religion as being one- hundred percent true--there's a difference I think--no?

Oh, you've hit the nail on the proverbial head!

Very good question and I think a lot of times we are to absorbed with our own beliefs to really hear the other person out and see their point of view.....or even allow them their point of view. This does not just happen with relgion....but quite often you get the same for voicing your opinion on any touchy subject.

Yea you're right. I think that happens because people are pay more attention to controversial discussions. For instance, look at the news. The bad news are always the ones that get more attention. It's messed up. It shouldn't be that way.

This about the most reasonable statement I've seen, very nice,( Shalom )

..I've asked myself this very question! why am I not more interested in the bible verse posts? And am actually trying to get myself to begin more discussions on scriptures or about scriptures.. as I have a few examples written in my notebook.. I guess I go to the debates because I see the world as in the grip of the worldview wars.. And I believe the worldview differences to be the 'frontlines' as to me one question is "do we deal with the world that is? or the world as we wish it were?" And that this question has large impact upon the lives which will be lived by my grandchildren.. and to me the other issue is, is it right to exclusively teach all children in the country that evolution theory is proven and/or fact.. This also greatly impacts life and the life of the country and if it's wrong, we (the country) could be making some "grave" mistakes.. Frontlines, I'm thinkin'.. :)

It is a very sensitive subject for most people. Tradition is inbred so deeply, that they cannot share open thoughts.

yea,well,my god can kick your gods ask,yep.my god is invisible and is all powerful and has no temples,churches,synagoges,etc. that can be destroyed,and did I say invisible,oh yea.

I have noticed that too. As a example I started a discussion of the HISTORY of the Catholic church. Only got 6 replies (you were one). Post something that is based on people's ideas or thoughts and you get many more replies. Have you recently posted such a discussion that didn't get many replies that I missed?

Since I joined mylot, I always make it a rule to avoid religious topics. I realized that no matter how we tried to voice out our opinion regarding our beliefs, there will always be a debacles or arguments. Its not for fear of posting my views but I rather show my respect to anyone regardless of their beliefs and religions.

I will join a religious discussion as long as it is respectful of religious differences, I do not like to bible bash so to speak, I honestly believe that is not how Christ conducted his teachings.

Unfortunately most people don't know the facts or history, especially off the top of their heads. I know for me, I know the general answer but need to research the specific facts. There are also the "bait" questions. I have fallen into this trap before. Somebody asked a question about why Catholics believe in the Assumption of Mary. I answered the question with the Scripture references and reasons behind the dogma. The person responded with a few choice words. They didn't really want to know why, they just wanted to start a useless argument.

Unfortunately several of the responses here assume that the facts of history are as absolute as the dogma the other assume it to be. Both of these opinions require faith. Its either faith that this historical text was recorded correctly or that the scripture was. Just as the "Church" repressed Galileo's discoveries pertaining to the Earth not being central, the scientific community once stated it had found "proof" that the Bible was false because Nineveh could not have existed. They stated that since it hadn't been found, and was supposedly so large, it must be just a parable in the Bible. Of course in the 19th century it was found beneath some mounds. I'm wary of anyone who states they have the "facts" on anything pertaining to religeon, as they can be just as in error as a rabid TV Evangelist.