fasting provides some peace and is also scientifically necessary.
i fast for my health, not for religious reasons.
i don't like fasting.
it gives me confidence to lead a more fruitful life
i do it sometimes as part of my religious beliefs.
i don't fast at all.
it's healthy too.
i'm an atheist.
to be honest, sometimes i get the feeling i'm the only one alive who occupies this peculiar lonely position, that is, having embraced an unnamed faith not because i have historically refrained from religion, but rather because religion has refrained from me. it has become much more productive for me to embrace the name of god, by hearing his words, and seeking to be as obedient as i can to his teachings and thereby giving definition to my personal faith, than to have it placed in a denominational category where it would be incumbent upon me to have my faith defined by others. at least this way, i am not tethered to institutional dogma, or to long-held traditional positions which have little chance of future review or inspection. my past scriptural training has been influenced by both jewish and christian sources, and it is there, in that space between them that i currently find myself, and it is at times a very lonely space. i don't see this faith as a combination of the two per se, but rather the logical progression of scriptural reason, when given an environment free from institutional doctrinal restraints. i have found it much easier and more beneficial to question god than to question man. i do think the personage who walked this earth 2,000 years ago was, and is the messiah, but i don't think either christianity or judaism has an accurate understanding of what was at the core of his ministry, or what he was about. in fact, i would go so far as to state that when the messiah comes, it will be a messiah with which christianity and judaism will not be familiar or expecting.
hold your horses, everyone. 1. first, the map is not quite inaccurate, in that as far as we can gather, man has always been religious (e.g., by analysis of burial sites, etc.), so the map should not begin with a 'neutral' color as if people had been 'unspoiled' by religion. 2. secondly, much of the spread of all faiths, including islam, was peacefully spread. people often saw something good in the new religion (buddhism and christianity in particular) which they wished to adopt for themselves. western culture and learning came from the rise of christian monasticism, for example. i am not disputing, of course, tensions that naturally arise as the borders (these are of course not consistent with national borders but between growing groups of believers) became more defined. this is, of course, precisely what is happening now with the so-called new atheism, which is becoming particularly aggressive. 3. thirdly, the attempt of both hitler and stalin to manipulate believers is (hopefully) not meant to be proof that their atrocities were motivated by a pious christianity! (i have already commented on these villains in other posts on this site, so will refrain here). 4. fourthly, to my knowledge, it was a palestinian politician who claimed that bush had told him to invade iraq. regardless, it would surely be an overstatement to argue that bush was attempting to convert iraq to christianity by the invasion, which would apparently be the point of linking this with the article about the timeline. indeed, many christian leaders (including, very prominently, pope john paul ii) condemned the war. 5. lastly, atheism produced more christian martyrs (those unwilling to deny their faith for political expediency) in the 20th century than were martyred in the other 19 centuries combined. this is particularly astounding given the very small percentage of atheists until the latter part of the century. perhaps state atheism should be added to the map? at least in this case, the borders are real and the wars were real wars.
because it is a tradition in our family.
i do not have a religion yet.
somehow, no one in my family does it, and i grew up like that. i don't think it's very important.
because i don't believe in a certain religion
only a day before christmas and easter, because of my personal belief
because it's a tradition
i see no point in doing this.
i feel like i need to.
i have no religion.
i don't believe that fasting contributes to my religious beliefs and improves my moral state before such religious festivals as christmas or easter.
because i am not a very religious person myself.
i don't think i have the willpower strong enough to do it on my own. and since no one in my family does it, i see no reason to do it myself.
i do not fast because there is no such tradition in our family.
i don't understand what this is for.
because that's a tradition in the family.
what is the point? i do not think it is necessary to waste your body in order to show your devotion to god.
i do not know why people have to fast. that is why i do not fast.
it has already become some kind of tradition, just like the celebrations themselves.