Here's something I want to talk about: the founder of Judaism did not practice what we would recognise as Judaism. The "founder" of Christianity (I don't think Christianity even in AD 100 was quite what his vision was) did not practice anything that we would recognise as Christianity, and seemed to only go to the temple of the dominant religion at the time (ie go to church) when he wanted to prove a point about how jacked up the people running it were (to school them in their own class at age 12 and to throw out money lenders in his 30's). The founder of Buddhism would hardly recognise his teachings through the million posthumously written works by other people and Buddhist temples built around the various schisms that occured through history.
I'll give it to Islam -- Muhammad declared a Jihad against the predominantly Christian middle east and beheaded the captives he took after his first victorious battle, when Islam became a real thing. He wrote the Koran and followed what was in it. This founder definately practiced what would be recognisable as Islam.
So aside from Islam, which is doing a good job of staying true to its founder's intent (it's relatively new, and Muslims kept good records), why the move towards organised religion? If we wanted to be Christ like, we would never pray in public, and rarely go to Church. We would spend all of our time with our friends. This is just an example, but I really don't understand a lot of why religion is still around today as an organised event. I'm most familiar with Christianity, and when I try to match up what goes on in the church and what people swear is in "da book", it makes me scratch my head. Especially the specialized communities within the church that practice stuff that was made up by a priest a couple hundred years ago. I don't get why it's still a thing! Everyone is literate now, and the bible has been translated into clear plain English.
Religion Matters: Take 3
-
ttf_harrison.t.reed
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:58 am
-
ttf_MoominDave
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
A couple of thoughts:
1) I think you're a bit hung up on the idea of Bible-as-definition-of-Christianity. It's an easy place to go to, sure - there it is, all written down in black and white. But taking it as a definitional primer - that's not as widespread as I hear you implying that it is. For many Christians it is less relevant than this. And the reasons are obvious - if you do treat it in that way, you end up in all sorts of contradictory places. Maybe I have mistaken you a bit here - after all, your argument is in fact that Christianity has moved from its roots - just pointing out that the Bible doesn't necessarily show those roots.
2) Islam is getting on for as widespread as Christianity (1.6bn vs 2.2bn people), and getting on for as old (1400 vs 2000 years). And while it does have organised blocks of power within it, there is no centralised figure with the individual clout of the Pope (1.2bn Catholics); it has in general tended to be run on a community-by-community basis, a connected network of cells if you like. It's not entirely clear to me whether you're falling into this trap or not (you didn't write a lot about it), but there are huge numbers of Muslims out there that would be horrified to be associated with jihad. But noting that Islam-as-barbarism is a popular narrative right now, I thought it best to counter any possibility of it. There are always political leaders that see in religion a useful tool to make good people do bad things (as the proverb goes), and there are some right troublemakers putting Islam to that purpose right now. Most users of Islam are horrified by this too.
But there is a unifying influence in Islam which is absent in Christianity, and it does centre around the holy book - the recitative chanting of the Koran which is taught to schoolchildren. It must be chanted in the original unaltered Arabic (even if the children don't know that language). Imagine if in places were Christianity has state endorsement, people had to learn the Bible by rote chanting in Hebrew or Aramaic!
Other examples - well, it'll tend to the modern. Scientology's very close to its original conception. Mormonism pretty much. It also very much depends on where subsequent political leaders that helped popularise the ideas wanted to take them - a lot of people would argue that Christianity as a whole owes more to Paul than to Jesus, for example. But it's constantly evolving - e.g. modern US-style fundamentalist conservative stuff is almost the diametric opposite to what the Bible records Jesus as preaching - a gospel for neoliberal economists and gun rights activists.
1) I think you're a bit hung up on the idea of Bible-as-definition-of-Christianity. It's an easy place to go to, sure - there it is, all written down in black and white. But taking it as a definitional primer - that's not as widespread as I hear you implying that it is. For many Christians it is less relevant than this. And the reasons are obvious - if you do treat it in that way, you end up in all sorts of contradictory places. Maybe I have mistaken you a bit here - after all, your argument is in fact that Christianity has moved from its roots - just pointing out that the Bible doesn't necessarily show those roots.
2) Islam is getting on for as widespread as Christianity (1.6bn vs 2.2bn people), and getting on for as old (1400 vs 2000 years). And while it does have organised blocks of power within it, there is no centralised figure with the individual clout of the Pope (1.2bn Catholics); it has in general tended to be run on a community-by-community basis, a connected network of cells if you like. It's not entirely clear to me whether you're falling into this trap or not (you didn't write a lot about it), but there are huge numbers of Muslims out there that would be horrified to be associated with jihad. But noting that Islam-as-barbarism is a popular narrative right now, I thought it best to counter any possibility of it. There are always political leaders that see in religion a useful tool to make good people do bad things (as the proverb goes), and there are some right troublemakers putting Islam to that purpose right now. Most users of Islam are horrified by this too.
But there is a unifying influence in Islam which is absent in Christianity, and it does centre around the holy book - the recitative chanting of the Koran which is taught to schoolchildren. It must be chanted in the original unaltered Arabic (even if the children don't know that language). Imagine if in places were Christianity has state endorsement, people had to learn the Bible by rote chanting in Hebrew or Aramaic!
Other examples - well, it'll tend to the modern. Scientology's very close to its original conception. Mormonism pretty much. It also very much depends on where subsequent political leaders that helped popularise the ideas wanted to take them - a lot of people would argue that Christianity as a whole owes more to Paul than to Jesus, for example. But it's constantly evolving - e.g. modern US-style fundamentalist conservative stuff is almost the diametric opposite to what the Bible records Jesus as preaching - a gospel for neoliberal economists and gun rights activists.
-
ttf_harrison.t.reed
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:58 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
I guess the biggest one for Christianity is that Jesus is quoted in the Gospels as promoting private prayer, and he condemns the Pharisees for praying in public and making an ordeal out of their religion.
Pondering on this, the idea of baptists and protestants speaking in tongues, Mormans going on conversion missions, any cathedral, the knights of Columbus, etc, seems about as non-WWJD as you can get without actively breaking the "two" commandments.
Pondering on this, the idea of baptists and protestants speaking in tongues, Mormans going on conversion missions, any cathedral, the knights of Columbus, etc, seems about as non-WWJD as you can get without actively breaking the "two" commandments.
-
ttf_Baron von Bone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
-
ttf_Baron von Bone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
Quote from: MoominDave on Dec 06, 2015, 03:09AM ... a lot of people would argue that Christianity as a whole owes more to Paul than to Jesus, for example. But it's constantly evolving - e.g. modern US-style fundamentalist conservative stuff is almost the diametric opposite to what the Bible records Jesus as preaching - a gospel for neoliberal economists and gun rights activists.
I suspect this is the crux of what Harrison T is talking about. It's certainly the most clear manifestation of what he describes in any case.
I suspect this is the crux of what Harrison T is talking about. It's certainly the most clear manifestation of what he describes in any case.
-
ttf_Baron von Bone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
Quote from: harrison.t.reed on Dec 06, 2015, 04:00AMI guess the biggest one for Christianity is that Jesus is quoted in the Gospels as promoting private prayer, and he condemns the Pharisees for praying in public and making an ordeal out of their religion.
Pondering on this, the idea of baptists and protestants speaking in tongues, Mormans going on conversion missions, any cathedral, the knights of Columbus, etc, seems about as non-WWJD as you can get without actively breaking the "two" commandments.
Most Baptists would be scandalized at being accused of speaking in tongues, and they're a subset of Protestants. I suspect you're thinking about Pentecostals and Charismatics rather than Baptists and Protestants there. But what you're talking about is a pretty basic and deep difference between conservative and liberal Christianity, though to make that binary is only a rhetorical device and would need a whole lot of nuance and explanation in order to delve into it (I'll have to generally defer on the current landscape though--it's been more than 20 years since I was directly involved in all that kinda thing).
There are of course a lot of parallels between religion and politics (and of course also many who don't make a distinction, just like fundamentalist Islam).
Pondering on this, the idea of baptists and protestants speaking in tongues, Mormans going on conversion missions, any cathedral, the knights of Columbus, etc, seems about as non-WWJD as you can get without actively breaking the "two" commandments.
Most Baptists would be scandalized at being accused of speaking in tongues, and they're a subset of Protestants. I suspect you're thinking about Pentecostals and Charismatics rather than Baptists and Protestants there. But what you're talking about is a pretty basic and deep difference between conservative and liberal Christianity, though to make that binary is only a rhetorical device and would need a whole lot of nuance and explanation in order to delve into it (I'll have to generally defer on the current landscape though--it's been more than 20 years since I was directly involved in all that kinda thing).
There are of course a lot of parallels between religion and politics (and of course also many who don't make a distinction, just like fundamentalist Islam).
-
ttf_Baron von Bone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
-
ttf_John the Theologian
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:49 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
Quote from: Baron von Bone on Dec 06, 2015, 09:00AM
Most Baptists would be scandalized at being accused of speaking in tongues, and they're a subset of Protestants. I suspect you're thinking about Pentecostals and Charismatics rather than Baptists and Protestants there. But what you're talking about is a pretty basic and deep difference between conservative and liberal Christianity, though to make that binary is only a rhetorical device and would need a whole lot of nuance and explanation in order to delve into it (I'll have to generally defer on the current landscape though--it's been more than 20 years since I was directly involved in all that kinda thing).
There are of course a lot of parallels between religion and politics (and of course also many who don't make a distinction, just like fundamentalist Islam).
Byron is correct that there needs to be lots of nuance. The media tends to blur all sorts of groups that really should be distinguished. There are multiples varieties of conservative theological groups and conservative political groups. There is certainly overlap at various points but nuances are necessary to distinguish and failure to do so can often result on serious misunderstandings.
Most Baptists would be scandalized at being accused of speaking in tongues, and they're a subset of Protestants. I suspect you're thinking about Pentecostals and Charismatics rather than Baptists and Protestants there. But what you're talking about is a pretty basic and deep difference between conservative and liberal Christianity, though to make that binary is only a rhetorical device and would need a whole lot of nuance and explanation in order to delve into it (I'll have to generally defer on the current landscape though--it's been more than 20 years since I was directly involved in all that kinda thing).
There are of course a lot of parallels between religion and politics (and of course also many who don't make a distinction, just like fundamentalist Islam).
Byron is correct that there needs to be lots of nuance. The media tends to blur all sorts of groups that really should be distinguished. There are multiples varieties of conservative theological groups and conservative political groups. There is certainly overlap at various points but nuances are necessary to distinguish and failure to do so can often result on serious misunderstandings.
-
ttf_ronkny
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:58 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
Quote from: Baron von Bone on Dec 06, 2015, 09:00AM
Most Baptists would be scandalized at being accused of speaking in tongues, and they're a subset of Protestants. I suspect you're thinking about Pentecostals and Charismatics rather than Baptists and Protestants there. But what you're talking about is a pretty basic and deep difference between conservative and liberal Christianity, though to make that binary is only a rhetorical device and would need a whole lot of nuance and explanation in order to delve into it (I'll have to generally defer on the current landscape though--it's been more than 20 years since I was directly involved in all that kinda thing).
There are of course a lot of parallels between religion and politics (and of course also many who don't make a distinction, just like fundamentalist Islam).
You mean "conservative and liberal" Protestantism. Not Christianity. Many Roman Catholics that are conservative and are far different from conservative Christians.
Most Baptists would be scandalized at being accused of speaking in tongues, and they're a subset of Protestants. I suspect you're thinking about Pentecostals and Charismatics rather than Baptists and Protestants there. But what you're talking about is a pretty basic and deep difference between conservative and liberal Christianity, though to make that binary is only a rhetorical device and would need a whole lot of nuance and explanation in order to delve into it (I'll have to generally defer on the current landscape though--it's been more than 20 years since I was directly involved in all that kinda thing).
There are of course a lot of parallels between religion and politics (and of course also many who don't make a distinction, just like fundamentalist Islam).
You mean "conservative and liberal" Protestantism. Not Christianity. Many Roman Catholics that are conservative and are far different from conservative Christians.
-
ttf_TromPhysics
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
Quote from: ronkny on Dec 09, 2015, 09:07AMYou mean "conservative and liberal" Protestantism. Not Christianity. Many Roman Catholics that are conservative and are far different from conservative Christians.
I certainly agree that often Conservative Catholics hold quite different views from Conservative Protestants (particularly Evangelicals as far as I can tell), but by definition they are not 'far different from conservative Christians'. Catholics are Christians, along with the Protestants, and therefore contribute to the definition of what a Conservative Christian is.
I certainly agree that often Conservative Catholics hold quite different views from Conservative Protestants (particularly Evangelicals as far as I can tell), but by definition they are not 'far different from conservative Christians'. Catholics are Christians, along with the Protestants, and therefore contribute to the definition of what a Conservative Christian is.
-
ttf_ronkny
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:58 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
Quote from: TromPhysics on Dec 09, 2015, 09:26AMI certainly agree that often Conservative Catholics hold quite different views from Conservative Protestants (particularly Evangelicals as far as I can tell), but by definition they are not 'far different from conservative Christians'. Catholics are Christians, along with the Protestants, and therefore contribute to the definition of what a Conservative Christian is.
I differentiate because bvb belittles conservative Christians. See some of the previously locked threads. But it's never Catholics. It's always Protestants. So since he has started all the religious bashing threads, it's in that context that I wrote that. I agree though with your sentiment.
I differentiate because bvb belittles conservative Christians. See some of the previously locked threads. But it's never Catholics. It's always Protestants. So since he has started all the religious bashing threads, it's in that context that I wrote that. I agree though with your sentiment.
-
ttf_timothy42b
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:57 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
Quote from: ronkny on Dec 09, 2015, 09:07AMYou mean "conservative and liberal" Protestantism. Not Christianity. Many Roman Catholics that are conservative and are far different from conservative Christians.
The conservative end of the Protestant denominations have always held that Catholics are not Christian.
Some have gone so far as to invent a shadow revisionist history in which Baptists coexisted secretly with the Catholic Church since the first disciples.
However don't forget these same conservatives maintained that LDS was a cult, until they voted for an LDS presidential candidate, and suddenly Mormonism became mainstream Christianity.
The conservative end of the Protestant denominations have always held that Catholics are not Christian.
Some have gone so far as to invent a shadow revisionist history in which Baptists coexisted secretly with the Catholic Church since the first disciples.
However don't forget these same conservatives maintained that LDS was a cult, until they voted for an LDS presidential candidate, and suddenly Mormonism became mainstream Christianity.
-
ttf_Radar
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:01 pm
Religion Matters: Take 3
Quote from: harrison.t.reed on Dec 06, 2015, 01:00AMHere's something I want to talk about: the founder of Judaism did not practice what we would recognise as Judaism. The "founder" of Christianity (I don't think Christianity even in AD 100 was quite what his vision was) did not practice anything that we would recognise as Christianity, and seemed to only go to the temple of the dominant religion at the time (ie go to church) when he wanted to prove a point about how jacked up the people running it were (to school them in their own class at age 12 and to throw out money lenders in his 30's). The founder of Buddhism would hardly recognise his teachings through the million posthumously written works by other people and Buddhist temples built around the various schisms that occured through history.
I'll give it to Islam -- Muhammad declared a Jihad against the predominantly Christian middle east and beheaded the captives he took after his first victorious battle, when Islam became a real thing. He wrote the Koran and followed what was in it. This founder definately practiced what would be recognisable as Islam.
So aside from Islam, which is doing a good job of staying true to its founder's intent (it's relatively new, and Muslims kept good records), why the move towards organised religion? If we wanted to be Christ like, we would never pray in public, and rarely go to Church. We would spend all of our time with our friends. This is just an example, but I really don't understand a lot of why religion is still around today as an organised event. I'm most familiar with Christianity, and when I try to match up what goes on in the church and what people swear is in "da book", it makes me scratch my head. Especially the specialized communities within the church that practice stuff that was made up by a priest a couple hundred years ago. I don't get why it's still a thing! Everyone is literate now, and the bible has been translated into clear plain English.
I don't think we can conclude from the Bible that Christ didn't go to temple on a regular basis. There are a few stories in the Bible about what happened on several occasions when he did go, but you can't conclude that those were the only times he went.
Mathew 26 (NIV Version):
"26 While they were eating, Jesus took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to his disciples, saying, Take and eat; this is my body.
27 Then he took a cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, Drink from it, all of you. 28 This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. 29 I tell you, I will not drink from this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in my Fathers kingdom.
30 When they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives."
Communion and Hymns sounds like most Christian church services that I attend.
I wouldn't disagree that there are Christian Churches out there that are doing things that may not be in line with Christ's intent, but I don't think that coming together in prayer, worship, and sacrament (ie: going to "Church") would be something he would disapprove of. Christ also said in the Bible Mathew 18:20 "For where two or three gather in my name, there am I with them." I don't believe that you have to go to church to be saved, but you would have a hard time convincing me that going to church (gathering in fellowship, prayer, and worship as a group) was not something that Christ intended for us to do.
I'll give it to Islam -- Muhammad declared a Jihad against the predominantly Christian middle east and beheaded the captives he took after his first victorious battle, when Islam became a real thing. He wrote the Koran and followed what was in it. This founder definately practiced what would be recognisable as Islam.
So aside from Islam, which is doing a good job of staying true to its founder's intent (it's relatively new, and Muslims kept good records), why the move towards organised religion? If we wanted to be Christ like, we would never pray in public, and rarely go to Church. We would spend all of our time with our friends. This is just an example, but I really don't understand a lot of why religion is still around today as an organised event. I'm most familiar with Christianity, and when I try to match up what goes on in the church and what people swear is in "da book", it makes me scratch my head. Especially the specialized communities within the church that practice stuff that was made up by a priest a couple hundred years ago. I don't get why it's still a thing! Everyone is literate now, and the bible has been translated into clear plain English.
I don't think we can conclude from the Bible that Christ didn't go to temple on a regular basis. There are a few stories in the Bible about what happened on several occasions when he did go, but you can't conclude that those were the only times he went.
Mathew 26 (NIV Version):
"26 While they were eating, Jesus took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to his disciples, saying, Take and eat; this is my body.
27 Then he took a cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, Drink from it, all of you. 28 This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. 29 I tell you, I will not drink from this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in my Fathers kingdom.
30 When they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives."
Communion and Hymns sounds like most Christian church services that I attend.
I wouldn't disagree that there are Christian Churches out there that are doing things that may not be in line with Christ's intent, but I don't think that coming together in prayer, worship, and sacrament (ie: going to "Church") would be something he would disapprove of. Christ also said in the Bible Mathew 18:20 "For where two or three gather in my name, there am I with them." I don't believe that you have to go to church to be saved, but you would have a hard time convincing me that going to church (gathering in fellowship, prayer, and worship as a group) was not something that Christ intended for us to do.
-
ttf_Radar
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:01 pm
Religion Matters: Take 3
Quote from: harrison.t.reed on Dec 06, 2015, 04:00AMI guess the biggest one for Christianity is that Jesus is quoted in the Gospels as promoting private prayer, and he condemns the Pharisees for praying in public and making an ordeal out of their religion.
Pondering on this, the idea of baptists and protestants speaking in tongues, Mormans going on conversion missions, any cathedral, the knights of Columbus, etc, seems about as non-WWJD as you can get without actively breaking the "two" commandments.
The verse regarding praying in public you are referring to is Mathew 6:5 ""And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full."
This verse is really about People praying in public for the purpose of being seen by others (showing off how devout they are in a public place), this isn't about a group of believers coming together in prayer as a community, for a common purpose.
Pondering on this, the idea of baptists and protestants speaking in tongues, Mormans going on conversion missions, any cathedral, the knights of Columbus, etc, seems about as non-WWJD as you can get without actively breaking the "two" commandments.
The verse regarding praying in public you are referring to is Mathew 6:5 ""And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full."
This verse is really about People praying in public for the purpose of being seen by others (showing off how devout they are in a public place), this isn't about a group of believers coming together in prayer as a community, for a common purpose.
-
ttf_ronkny
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:58 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
Quote from: timothy42b on Dec 09, 2015, 09:51AMThe conservative end of the Protestant denominations have always held that Catholics are not Christian.
Some have gone so far as to invent a shadow revisionist history in which Baptists coexisted secretly with the Catholic Church since the first disciples.
However don't forget these same conservatives maintained that LDS was a cult, until they voted for an LDS presidential candidate, and suddenly Mormonism became mainstream Christianity.
Correct.
Mormonism is not Christian although they do believe it n Jesus Christ as the son of God. They don't believe in the Trinity.
We voted for Romney because he's a good honest man. Didn't make Mormonism main stream Christianity.
Some have gone so far as to invent a shadow revisionist history in which Baptists coexisted secretly with the Catholic Church since the first disciples.
However don't forget these same conservatives maintained that LDS was a cult, until they voted for an LDS presidential candidate, and suddenly Mormonism became mainstream Christianity.
Correct.
Mormonism is not Christian although they do believe it n Jesus Christ as the son of God. They don't believe in the Trinity.
We voted for Romney because he's a good honest man. Didn't make Mormonism main stream Christianity.
-
ttf_BillO
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:58 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
I won't dwell here past this one post, but will just add that I believe the religious vs. atheist argument can never be won and what path led to that.
I actually first went to university to study theology. I was born and raised a 'good' Irish Catholic. However, I had had my eyes opened wide in my first year when the theology faculty wanted to drum me out for asking the 'wrong' questions. I was told that questions such as mine were not to be tolerated, especially when posed in earshot of the faithful. When I asked, then, what was the purpose of a higher education in theology I was told it was to learn the doctrine, build my faith and blind myself to all doubt.
What were my questions, you might ask? Nothing too earth shattering. I just brought up in lectures and discussion groups some points in the scriptures that seemed to be contradictory or unnecessarily punitive and violent to me, and I merely sought clarification. I'm not going to go into them as most have already been pointed out in the religious discussions in this forum. I was barely able to retain my academic standing and my chance for an education as the dean of teleological studies wanted me ruined. He wanted desperately to make an example of me. How Christian of him (seriously).
In any case, after much negotiation and pleading to better equipped minds, I moved over to the faculty or arts and sciences and pursued a double major in physics and mathematics. The whole affair, as i said, opened my eyes immensely. As they were fond of saying in theology, it was a revelation, and a completely polar re-evaluation. I dedicated most of my spare time over the next year or two looking into the bulk of the other major religions of the world and I found similarities I never dreamed existed, and not in a 'good' way. What I found was they were all fraught with inconsistencies and downright contradiction and in most cases the promotion of evil-doing against those that choose not to believe in that particular faith.
I could not reconcile the horrid mixtures of supposed 'good' with the internal inconsistency and the evil, wrathful vengeance. To sum up most religions you just need to say "Do what I tell you to do and ask no questions or you will suffer the most horrible things you can imagine". Essentially you are required to relinquish any responsibility for your own life.
So, to make a long story short, I am now a 'devout' atheist. For a while after my revelation, I was an active atheist, trying my best to help the religious to see the error of their ways. To no avail, and it really made me feel like I was doing the same thing I had been forced to despise. I quickly learned that, for the inquiring and intelligent mind, the most effective deterrent to religion was religion itself. Those that drink to cool-aid (so to speak) are truly beyond redemption.
To those that take up the role of the active atheist, I applaud you, but I also warn you that you will save no one that won't save themselves in the long run. I feel you waste your time.
And to those that hearken in blind faith unquestioningly to a religious doctrine that was created by, ah... best not to ask, and thereby forego taking responsibility for your own life and condition. Well, more power to you, you'll need it. I hope that it is a sufficient way to fulfill your life. I promise I will not burden you by trying to dissuade you. I know youre doing your best.
Now, sorry for the interruption. Please, back to your regular activities here.
I actually first went to university to study theology. I was born and raised a 'good' Irish Catholic. However, I had had my eyes opened wide in my first year when the theology faculty wanted to drum me out for asking the 'wrong' questions. I was told that questions such as mine were not to be tolerated, especially when posed in earshot of the faithful. When I asked, then, what was the purpose of a higher education in theology I was told it was to learn the doctrine, build my faith and blind myself to all doubt.
What were my questions, you might ask? Nothing too earth shattering. I just brought up in lectures and discussion groups some points in the scriptures that seemed to be contradictory or unnecessarily punitive and violent to me, and I merely sought clarification. I'm not going to go into them as most have already been pointed out in the religious discussions in this forum. I was barely able to retain my academic standing and my chance for an education as the dean of teleological studies wanted me ruined. He wanted desperately to make an example of me. How Christian of him (seriously).
In any case, after much negotiation and pleading to better equipped minds, I moved over to the faculty or arts and sciences and pursued a double major in physics and mathematics. The whole affair, as i said, opened my eyes immensely. As they were fond of saying in theology, it was a revelation, and a completely polar re-evaluation. I dedicated most of my spare time over the next year or two looking into the bulk of the other major religions of the world and I found similarities I never dreamed existed, and not in a 'good' way. What I found was they were all fraught with inconsistencies and downright contradiction and in most cases the promotion of evil-doing against those that choose not to believe in that particular faith.
I could not reconcile the horrid mixtures of supposed 'good' with the internal inconsistency and the evil, wrathful vengeance. To sum up most religions you just need to say "Do what I tell you to do and ask no questions or you will suffer the most horrible things you can imagine". Essentially you are required to relinquish any responsibility for your own life.
So, to make a long story short, I am now a 'devout' atheist. For a while after my revelation, I was an active atheist, trying my best to help the religious to see the error of their ways. To no avail, and it really made me feel like I was doing the same thing I had been forced to despise. I quickly learned that, for the inquiring and intelligent mind, the most effective deterrent to religion was religion itself. Those that drink to cool-aid (so to speak) are truly beyond redemption.
To those that take up the role of the active atheist, I applaud you, but I also warn you that you will save no one that won't save themselves in the long run. I feel you waste your time.
And to those that hearken in blind faith unquestioningly to a religious doctrine that was created by, ah... best not to ask, and thereby forego taking responsibility for your own life and condition. Well, more power to you, you'll need it. I hope that it is a sufficient way to fulfill your life. I promise I will not burden you by trying to dissuade you. I know youre doing your best.
Now, sorry for the interruption. Please, back to your regular activities here.
-
ttf_drizabone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:22 pm
Religion Matters: Take 3
Hi BillO
I'm one of the guys involved in the Read da Book (RdB) thread (the other regular contributor is a mathematical atheist or vice-versa too) and I'm also someone who thinks that Real Christianity is defined by da book. In RdB we've just got to Exodus, so haven't covered much, but we've definitely noticed that the protagonists get to question God. Unfortunately some christians have missed that bit, but its there, so its very much a part of christianity.
Martin
I'm one of the guys involved in the Read da Book (RdB) thread (the other regular contributor is a mathematical atheist or vice-versa too) and I'm also someone who thinks that Real Christianity is defined by da book. In RdB we've just got to Exodus, so haven't covered much, but we've definitely noticed that the protagonists get to question God. Unfortunately some christians have missed that bit, but its there, so its very much a part of christianity.
Martin
-
ttf_ronkny
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:58 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
Quote from: BillO on Dec 09, 2015, 07:40PMI won't dwell here past this one post, but will just add that I believe the religious vs. atheist argument can never be won and what path led to that.
I actually first went to university to study theology. I was born and raised a 'good' Irish Catholic. However, I had had my eyes opened wide in my first year when the theology faculty wanted to drum me out for asking the 'wrong' questions. I was told that questions such as mine were not to be tolerated, especially when posed in earshot of the faithful. When I asked, then, what was the purpose of a higher education in theology I was told it was to learn the doctrine, build my faith and blind myself to all doubt.
What were my questions, you might ask? Nothing too earth shattering. I just brought up in lectures and discussion groups some points in the scriptures that seemed to be contradictory or unnecessarily punitive and violent to me, and I merely sought clarification. I'm not going to go into them as most have already been pointed out in the religious discussions in this forum. I was barely able to retain my academic standing and my chance for an education as the dean of teleological studies wanted me ruined. He wanted desperately to make an example of me. How Christian of him (seriously).
In any case, after much negotiation and pleading to better equipped minds, I moved over to the faculty or arts and sciences and pursued a double major in physics and mathematics. The whole affair, as i said, opened my eyes immensely. As they were fond of saying in theology, it was a revelation, and a completely polar re-evaluation. I dedicated most of my spare time over the next year or two looking into the bulk of the other major religions of the world and I found similarities I never dreamed existed, and not in a 'good' way. What I found was they were all fraught with inconsistencies and downright contradiction and in most cases the promotion of evil-doing against those that choose not to believe in that particular faith.
I could not reconcile the horrid mixtures of supposed 'good' with the internal inconsistency and the evil, wrathful vengeance. To sum up most religions you just need to say "Do what I tell you to do and ask no questions or you will suffer the most horrible things you can imagine". Essentially you are required to relinquish any responsibility for your own life.
So, to make a long story short, I am now a 'devout' atheist. For a while after my revelation, I was an active atheist, trying my best to help the religious to see the error of their ways. To no avail, and it really made me feel like I was doing the same thing I had been forced to despise. I quickly learned that, for the inquiring and intelligent mind, the most effective deterrent to religion was religion itself. Those that drink to cool-aid (so to speak) are truly beyond redemption.
To those that take up the role of the active atheist, I applaud you, but I also warn you that you will save no one that won't save themselves in the long run. I feel you waste your time.
And to those that hearken in blind faith unquestioningly to a religious doctrine that was created by, ah... best not to ask, and thereby forego taking responsibility for your own life and condition. Well, more power to you, you'll need it. I hope that it is a sufficient way to fulfill your life. I promise I will not burden you by trying to dissuade you. I know youre doing your best.
Now, sorry for the interruption. Please, back to your regular activities here.
Sorry to hear that. You were lead astray. I think you'll be back someday.
I actually first went to university to study theology. I was born and raised a 'good' Irish Catholic. However, I had had my eyes opened wide in my first year when the theology faculty wanted to drum me out for asking the 'wrong' questions. I was told that questions such as mine were not to be tolerated, especially when posed in earshot of the faithful. When I asked, then, what was the purpose of a higher education in theology I was told it was to learn the doctrine, build my faith and blind myself to all doubt.
What were my questions, you might ask? Nothing too earth shattering. I just brought up in lectures and discussion groups some points in the scriptures that seemed to be contradictory or unnecessarily punitive and violent to me, and I merely sought clarification. I'm not going to go into them as most have already been pointed out in the religious discussions in this forum. I was barely able to retain my academic standing and my chance for an education as the dean of teleological studies wanted me ruined. He wanted desperately to make an example of me. How Christian of him (seriously).
In any case, after much negotiation and pleading to better equipped minds, I moved over to the faculty or arts and sciences and pursued a double major in physics and mathematics. The whole affair, as i said, opened my eyes immensely. As they were fond of saying in theology, it was a revelation, and a completely polar re-evaluation. I dedicated most of my spare time over the next year or two looking into the bulk of the other major religions of the world and I found similarities I never dreamed existed, and not in a 'good' way. What I found was they were all fraught with inconsistencies and downright contradiction and in most cases the promotion of evil-doing against those that choose not to believe in that particular faith.
I could not reconcile the horrid mixtures of supposed 'good' with the internal inconsistency and the evil, wrathful vengeance. To sum up most religions you just need to say "Do what I tell you to do and ask no questions or you will suffer the most horrible things you can imagine". Essentially you are required to relinquish any responsibility for your own life.
So, to make a long story short, I am now a 'devout' atheist. For a while after my revelation, I was an active atheist, trying my best to help the religious to see the error of their ways. To no avail, and it really made me feel like I was doing the same thing I had been forced to despise. I quickly learned that, for the inquiring and intelligent mind, the most effective deterrent to religion was religion itself. Those that drink to cool-aid (so to speak) are truly beyond redemption.
To those that take up the role of the active atheist, I applaud you, but I also warn you that you will save no one that won't save themselves in the long run. I feel you waste your time.
And to those that hearken in blind faith unquestioningly to a religious doctrine that was created by, ah... best not to ask, and thereby forego taking responsibility for your own life and condition. Well, more power to you, you'll need it. I hope that it is a sufficient way to fulfill your life. I promise I will not burden you by trying to dissuade you. I know youre doing your best.
Now, sorry for the interruption. Please, back to your regular activities here.
Sorry to hear that. You were lead astray. I think you'll be back someday.
-
ttf_growlerbox
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
Quote from: ronkny on Dec 09, 2015, 09:36PMSorry to hear that. You were lead astray. I think you'll be back someday.
What an arrogant and spiteful response.
What an arrogant and spiteful response.
-
ttf_MoominDave
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
Quote from: drizabone on Dec 09, 2015, 09:33PMHi BillO
I'm one of the guys involved in the Read da Book (RdB) thread (the other regular contributor is a mathematical atheist or vice-versa too) and I'm also someone who thinks that Real Christianity is defined by da book. In RdB we've just got to Exodus, so haven't covered much, but we've definitely noticed that the protagonists get to question God. Unfortunately some christians have missed that bit, but its there, so its very much a part of christianity.
Martin
Yes, they do quite often seem to have a marked lack of deference in their interactions with him as reported in the narrative so far. "But do you really mean that?" has been surprisingly common. I agree with Martin that it would be great if more Christians were as questioning about their religious instructions.
Bill, you don't fancy taking a turn with a chapter or two, do you? The more the merrier...
I'm one of the guys involved in the Read da Book (RdB) thread (the other regular contributor is a mathematical atheist or vice-versa too) and I'm also someone who thinks that Real Christianity is defined by da book. In RdB we've just got to Exodus, so haven't covered much, but we've definitely noticed that the protagonists get to question God. Unfortunately some christians have missed that bit, but its there, so its very much a part of christianity.
Martin
Yes, they do quite often seem to have a marked lack of deference in their interactions with him as reported in the narrative so far. "But do you really mean that?" has been surprisingly common. I agree with Martin that it would be great if more Christians were as questioning about their religious instructions.
Bill, you don't fancy taking a turn with a chapter or two, do you? The more the merrier...
-
ttf_timothy42b
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:57 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
Quote from: BillO on Dec 09, 2015, 07:40PM
To those that take up the role of the active atheist, I applaud you, but I also warn you that you will save no one that won't save themselves in the long run. I feel you waste your time.
Thank you for sharing your personal history.
(I guess I should call it "testifying."
)
I doubt active atheists are a threat to anyone's faith. I know I've been part of these discussions for years. I remain a believer though of course the hard core dismiss any of us moderates as unbelievers.
I know nothing BvB has said has ever bothered me. But interactions with the literalists do- I find it very hard to retain faith after talking with John, e.g.
To those that take up the role of the active atheist, I applaud you, but I also warn you that you will save no one that won't save themselves in the long run. I feel you waste your time.
Thank you for sharing your personal history.
(I guess I should call it "testifying."
)I doubt active atheists are a threat to anyone's faith. I know I've been part of these discussions for years. I remain a believer though of course the hard core dismiss any of us moderates as unbelievers.
I know nothing BvB has said has ever bothered me. But interactions with the literalists do- I find it very hard to retain faith after talking with John, e.g.
-
ttf_Baron von Bone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
Quote from: BillO on Dec 09, 2015, 07:40PMI won't dwell here past this one post, but will just add that I believe the religious vs. atheist argument can never be won and what path led to that.Is it about winning? What constitutes a win, anyway? Is it about better understanding or does it take conversion (deconversion) for a score?
Eh?
Quote from: BillO on Dec 09, 2015, 07:40PMI actually first went to university to study theology. I was born and raised a 'good' Irish Catholic. However, I had had my eyes opened wide in my first year when the theology faculty wanted to drum me out for asking the 'wrong' questions. I was told that questions such as mine were not to be tolerated, especially when posed in earshot of the faithful. When I asked, then, what was the purpose of a higher education in theology I was told it was to learn the doctrine, build my faith and blind myself to all doubt.
What were my questions, you might ask? Nothing too earth shattering. I just brought up in lectures and discussion groups some points in the scriptures that seemed to be contradictory or unnecessarily punitive and violent to me, and I merely sought clarification. I'm not going to go into them as most have already been pointed out in the religious discussions in this forum. I was barely able to retain my academic standing and my chance for an education as the dean of teleological studies wanted me ruined. He wanted desperately to make an example of me. How Christian of him (seriously).
In any case, after much negotiation and pleading to better equipped minds, I moved over to the faculty or arts and sciences and pursued a double major in physics and mathematics. The whole affair, as i said, opened my eyes immensely. As they were fond of saying in theology, it was a revelation, and a completely polar re-evaluation. I dedicated most of my spare time over the next year or two looking into the bulk of the other major religions of the world and I found similarities I never dreamed existed, and not in a 'good' way. What I found was they were all fraught with inconsistencies and downright contradiction and in most cases the promotion of evil-doing against those that choose not to believe in that particular faith.
I could not reconcile the horrid mixtures of supposed 'good' with the internal inconsistency and the evil, wrathful vengeance. To sum up most religions you just need to say "Do what I tell you to do and ask no questions or you will suffer the most horrible things you can imagine". Essentially you are required to relinquish any responsibility for your own life.Interesting ... I expect seminary experiences vary dramatically. If you'd gone to the Golden Gate Baptist Theological Seminary I suspect you'd've had an experience much less corrupted by dogmatism, believe it or not (it's the "liberal" Southern Baptist seminary--or at least it was back in the '80s). If you went to Liberty then the dogmatism of your actual experience would have probably seemed pale and watered down by comparison.
Quote from: BillO on Dec 09, 2015, 07:40PMSo, to make a long story short, I am now a 'devout' atheist. For a while after my revelation, I was an active atheist, trying my best to help the religious to see the error of their ways. To no avail, and it really made me feel like I was doing the same thing I had been forced to despise. I quickly learned that, for the inquiring and intelligent mind, the most effective deterrent to religion was religion itself. Those that drink to cool-aid (so to speak) are truly beyond redemption.That's a very common sentiment amongst apostates. What relatively little research there seems to be on conversion and apostasy indicates very strongly that apostasy is about critical consideration, usually over a long period of time, and conversion (to religion) is all about personal sentiments and passions, often in the spur of the moment. As with seminary experiences there's a great deal of variation (and a lot of testimonial information is dubious because of the way human memory works, particularly in regard to something the memory owner has invested in).
It's in upheaval for the moment (switching from one forum back to another from which it had been separated), but you might enjoy the discussion on The Sam Harris Forum (it was the Project Reason Forum for a long time, which is more pretentious but still better than a Grand Leader/Poobah kinda thing, which seems weird to me). There's also The Religious Forums, which is actually very diverse and often interesting.
Quote from: BillO on Dec 09, 2015, 07:40PMTo those that take up the role of the active atheist, I applaud you, but I also warn you that you will save no one that won't save themselves in the long run. I feel you waste your time.There's a lot of discussion on that. People will rarely admit to being influenced or may even be unaware of it when they are, and there's almost always a dig in and double down response (just a human thing). But at the same time books and arguments/discussions and such are often cited by converts and apostates as major influences. And there are also other worthy goals to discussion than to get others to see things your way, much less all the way.
Quote from: BillO on Dec 09, 2015, 07:40PMAnd to those that hearken in blind faith unquestioningly to a religious doctrine that was created by, ah... best not to ask, and thereby forego taking responsibility for your own life and condition. Well, more power to you, you'll need it. I hope that it is a sufficient way to fulfill your life. I promise I will not burden you by trying to dissuade you. I know youre doing your best.Yeah, intellectual irresponsible dogmatism is kinda hard to take, and that's amped up by an order of magnitude when arrogance and judgmentalism based upon it are added (which is frequently of course--lack of insight and consideration kinda favor that basic range of attitudes). We get that in here a lot lately ... yeah. Unfortunate, but there's some good discussion amidst the noise and brain wreckage. In the late aughts there was a precipitous drop in the signal to noise ratio, and it hasn't gotten back to the "good ol' days" as yet, so I can't really argue that religious topics here on OTF are very worthwhile. It's obvious they could be but for the weeping and wailing and general histrionic tantrums that result from not coddling certain sets of dogma.
Quote from: BillO on Dec 09, 2015, 07:40PMNow, sorry for the interruption. Please, back to your regular activities here.Please feel free to drop back in, just to check things out if nothing else. We had a brief and kind of anemic respite to the "good ol' days" recently, but it hasn't yet brought back the cadre of genuinely interested and interesting former participants. They gave up in disgust long ago and may not be very inclined to stop back by, unfortunately. There may be a window here though, because while it's been quiet ... well, it's been quiet--little to no weeping and wailing and histrionic tantrums. That's been nice, but it's also been quiet in regard to a signal, sadly. Still a vast improvement, but it's a vast improvement to an idle, so we'll have to see what happens after idling for a while (there may or may not be a brief resurgence of histrionics due to your post and this response, but if the pattern holds it will be brief ... or even/hopefully non-existent, which may be a good sign of the potential for this topic in the near future).
Eh?
Quote from: BillO on Dec 09, 2015, 07:40PMI actually first went to university to study theology. I was born and raised a 'good' Irish Catholic. However, I had had my eyes opened wide in my first year when the theology faculty wanted to drum me out for asking the 'wrong' questions. I was told that questions such as mine were not to be tolerated, especially when posed in earshot of the faithful. When I asked, then, what was the purpose of a higher education in theology I was told it was to learn the doctrine, build my faith and blind myself to all doubt.
What were my questions, you might ask? Nothing too earth shattering. I just brought up in lectures and discussion groups some points in the scriptures that seemed to be contradictory or unnecessarily punitive and violent to me, and I merely sought clarification. I'm not going to go into them as most have already been pointed out in the religious discussions in this forum. I was barely able to retain my academic standing and my chance for an education as the dean of teleological studies wanted me ruined. He wanted desperately to make an example of me. How Christian of him (seriously).
In any case, after much negotiation and pleading to better equipped minds, I moved over to the faculty or arts and sciences and pursued a double major in physics and mathematics. The whole affair, as i said, opened my eyes immensely. As they were fond of saying in theology, it was a revelation, and a completely polar re-evaluation. I dedicated most of my spare time over the next year or two looking into the bulk of the other major religions of the world and I found similarities I never dreamed existed, and not in a 'good' way. What I found was they were all fraught with inconsistencies and downright contradiction and in most cases the promotion of evil-doing against those that choose not to believe in that particular faith.
I could not reconcile the horrid mixtures of supposed 'good' with the internal inconsistency and the evil, wrathful vengeance. To sum up most religions you just need to say "Do what I tell you to do and ask no questions or you will suffer the most horrible things you can imagine". Essentially you are required to relinquish any responsibility for your own life.Interesting ... I expect seminary experiences vary dramatically. If you'd gone to the Golden Gate Baptist Theological Seminary I suspect you'd've had an experience much less corrupted by dogmatism, believe it or not (it's the "liberal" Southern Baptist seminary--or at least it was back in the '80s). If you went to Liberty then the dogmatism of your actual experience would have probably seemed pale and watered down by comparison.
Quote from: BillO on Dec 09, 2015, 07:40PMSo, to make a long story short, I am now a 'devout' atheist. For a while after my revelation, I was an active atheist, trying my best to help the religious to see the error of their ways. To no avail, and it really made me feel like I was doing the same thing I had been forced to despise. I quickly learned that, for the inquiring and intelligent mind, the most effective deterrent to religion was religion itself. Those that drink to cool-aid (so to speak) are truly beyond redemption.That's a very common sentiment amongst apostates. What relatively little research there seems to be on conversion and apostasy indicates very strongly that apostasy is about critical consideration, usually over a long period of time, and conversion (to religion) is all about personal sentiments and passions, often in the spur of the moment. As with seminary experiences there's a great deal of variation (and a lot of testimonial information is dubious because of the way human memory works, particularly in regard to something the memory owner has invested in).
It's in upheaval for the moment (switching from one forum back to another from which it had been separated), but you might enjoy the discussion on The Sam Harris Forum (it was the Project Reason Forum for a long time, which is more pretentious but still better than a Grand Leader/Poobah kinda thing, which seems weird to me). There's also The Religious Forums, which is actually very diverse and often interesting.
Quote from: BillO on Dec 09, 2015, 07:40PMTo those that take up the role of the active atheist, I applaud you, but I also warn you that you will save no one that won't save themselves in the long run. I feel you waste your time.There's a lot of discussion on that. People will rarely admit to being influenced or may even be unaware of it when they are, and there's almost always a dig in and double down response (just a human thing). But at the same time books and arguments/discussions and such are often cited by converts and apostates as major influences. And there are also other worthy goals to discussion than to get others to see things your way, much less all the way.
Quote from: BillO on Dec 09, 2015, 07:40PMAnd to those that hearken in blind faith unquestioningly to a religious doctrine that was created by, ah... best not to ask, and thereby forego taking responsibility for your own life and condition. Well, more power to you, you'll need it. I hope that it is a sufficient way to fulfill your life. I promise I will not burden you by trying to dissuade you. I know youre doing your best.Yeah, intellectual irresponsible dogmatism is kinda hard to take, and that's amped up by an order of magnitude when arrogance and judgmentalism based upon it are added (which is frequently of course--lack of insight and consideration kinda favor that basic range of attitudes). We get that in here a lot lately ... yeah. Unfortunate, but there's some good discussion amidst the noise and brain wreckage. In the late aughts there was a precipitous drop in the signal to noise ratio, and it hasn't gotten back to the "good ol' days" as yet, so I can't really argue that religious topics here on OTF are very worthwhile. It's obvious they could be but for the weeping and wailing and general histrionic tantrums that result from not coddling certain sets of dogma.
Quote from: BillO on Dec 09, 2015, 07:40PMNow, sorry for the interruption. Please, back to your regular activities here.Please feel free to drop back in, just to check things out if nothing else. We had a brief and kind of anemic respite to the "good ol' days" recently, but it hasn't yet brought back the cadre of genuinely interested and interesting former participants. They gave up in disgust long ago and may not be very inclined to stop back by, unfortunately. There may be a window here though, because while it's been quiet ... well, it's been quiet--little to no weeping and wailing and histrionic tantrums. That's been nice, but it's also been quiet in regard to a signal, sadly. Still a vast improvement, but it's a vast improvement to an idle, so we'll have to see what happens after idling for a while (there may or may not be a brief resurgence of histrionics due to your post and this response, but if the pattern holds it will be brief ... or even/hopefully non-existent, which may be a good sign of the potential for this topic in the near future).
-
ttf_ddickerson
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
BillO, let me get this straight.
Your trombone instructor told you about needing a new shiny trombone and you bought a beauty shiny model from China, and found out it was pure junk, and now you think that all shiny trombones from China are a rip off. And, just to be sure you don't get stuck again, you vowed never to play trombone again. Is that about right?
Your trombone instructor told you about needing a new shiny trombone and you bought a beauty shiny model from China, and found out it was pure junk, and now you think that all shiny trombones from China are a rip off. And, just to be sure you don't get stuck again, you vowed never to play trombone again. Is that about right?
-
ttf_Baron von Bone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
Quote from: ddickerson on Dec 10, 2015, 06:43AMBillO, let me get this straight.That's not what you're doing though. You're just using a spin that makes you feel as if you're actually addressing an actual problem, only it's a problem of your own invention. That's not valid criticism, it's a complaint that you don't like the way BillO's story went and feel the need to re-frame it into a version that suits you rather than one that simplifies or analogizes the story accurately, so you can still feel right.
Appropriate (reasonably representative/accurate) analogies would be more like The Emperor's New Clothes and/or Stone Soup ... stories like that.
Another reason your simile fails is obvious if you think beyond the current move. Do you accept other religions as if they were just other horns in your analogy? Would you say that your religion is a Bach while others are Conns or something else, or would you say that the other "instruments" actually don't work? When you don't think in binary terms it quickly becomes clear that you agree with Bill0 regarding other religions, just not your own. Your analogy requires binary thinking to even make sense, and when you consider it any more completely at all the objection applies to you just as well as Bill0, and there's a lot more question as to whether it actually applies to Bill0 when you do that than whether it applies to your own position.
Appropriate (reasonably representative/accurate) analogies would be more like The Emperor's New Clothes and/or Stone Soup ... stories like that.
Another reason your simile fails is obvious if you think beyond the current move. Do you accept other religions as if they were just other horns in your analogy? Would you say that your religion is a Bach while others are Conns or something else, or would you say that the other "instruments" actually don't work? When you don't think in binary terms it quickly becomes clear that you agree with Bill0 regarding other religions, just not your own. Your analogy requires binary thinking to even make sense, and when you consider it any more completely at all the objection applies to you just as well as Bill0, and there's a lot more question as to whether it actually applies to Bill0 when you do that than whether it applies to your own position.
-
ttf_ronkny
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:58 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
Quote from: Baron von Bone on Dec 10, 2015, 12:27PMThat's not what you're doing though. You're just using a spin that makes you feel as if you're actually addressing an actual problem, only it's a problem of your own invention. That's not valid criticism, it's a complaint that you don't like the way BillO's story went and feel the need to re-frame it into a version that suits you rather than one that simplifies or analogizes the story accurately, so you can still feel right.
Brilliant! What a break through! Amazing!
Brilliant! What a break through! Amazing!
-
ttf_timothy42b
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:57 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
Quote from: ddickerson on Dec 10, 2015, 06:43AMBillO, let me get this straight.
Your trombone instructor told you about needing a new shiny trombone and you bought a beauty shiny model from China, and found out it was pure junk, and now you think that all shiny trombones from China are a rip off. And, just to be sure you don't get stuck again, you vowed never to play trombone again. Is that about right?
This is kind of sad.
I think you could have chosen a different approach. I wish you had.
You are talking to an atheist who left the faith not so much because of logic or evidence, but an emotional reaction to meeting Christians who were harsh and judgmental.
And your comment is harsh and judgmental.
If you want to make a difference, you have be more welcoming.
Your trombone instructor told you about needing a new shiny trombone and you bought a beauty shiny model from China, and found out it was pure junk, and now you think that all shiny trombones from China are a rip off. And, just to be sure you don't get stuck again, you vowed never to play trombone again. Is that about right?
This is kind of sad.
I think you could have chosen a different approach. I wish you had.
You are talking to an atheist who left the faith not so much because of logic or evidence, but an emotional reaction to meeting Christians who were harsh and judgmental.
And your comment is harsh and judgmental.
If you want to make a difference, you have be more welcoming.
-
ttf_Baron von Bone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
Quote from: timothy42b on Dec 10, 2015, 01:02PMThis is kind of sad.
I think you could have chosen a different approach. I wish you had.
You are talking to an atheist who left the faith not so much because of logic or evidence, but an emotional reaction to meeting Christians who were harsh and judgmental.
And your comment is harsh and judgmental.
If you want to make a difference, you have be more welcoming.
If you want to appease your own moral comfort though--to feel validated (like the vast majority of popular religious apologetics), it's a perfectly sound strategy ... if you can do it far better anyway, or if you're comfortable with almost all of your sensory array remaining underground all the time.
I think you could have chosen a different approach. I wish you had.
You are talking to an atheist who left the faith not so much because of logic or evidence, but an emotional reaction to meeting Christians who were harsh and judgmental.
And your comment is harsh and judgmental.
If you want to make a difference, you have be more welcoming.
If you want to appease your own moral comfort though--to feel validated (like the vast majority of popular religious apologetics), it's a perfectly sound strategy ... if you can do it far better anyway, or if you're comfortable with almost all of your sensory array remaining underground all the time.
-
ttf_growlerbox
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
Quote from: timothy42b on Dec 10, 2015, 01:02PMYou are talking to an atheist who left the faith not so much because of logic or evidence, but an emotional reaction to meeting Christians who were harsh and judgmental.
BillO is clearly able to speak for himself, but it seemed to me that the harsh and judgmental treatment was merely the trigger for a re-evaluation of the logic and evidence (or lack thereof) that underlay the closed-mindedness of the "scholars" under whom he attempted to study.
You know, just like abandoning music because of a Chinese trombone
. (See what you made me do, ddickerson -- I hate emoticons!)
BillO is clearly able to speak for himself, but it seemed to me that the harsh and judgmental treatment was merely the trigger for a re-evaluation of the logic and evidence (or lack thereof) that underlay the closed-mindedness of the "scholars" under whom he attempted to study.
You know, just like abandoning music because of a Chinese trombone
. (See what you made me do, ddickerson -- I hate emoticons!)-
ttf_drizabone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:22 pm
Religion Matters: Take 3
Are there questions that a physics student could ask of their physics professors that would get the same sort of response as the BillO got from his theology professors?
And you could generalise that for any academic area: are there questions that an X student could ask of their X professor that would get a similar response, where X can be for example, biology, chemistry, rocket science, history, english lit, ...
NB I didn't mean anything by that particular question : just wrote down the first one that I thought would be an example of a ridiculous question
And you could generalise that for any academic area: are there questions that an X student could ask of their X professor that would get a similar response, where X can be for example, biology, chemistry, rocket science, history, english lit, ...
NB I didn't mean anything by that particular question : just wrote down the first one that I thought would be an example of a ridiculous question
-
ttf_Baron von Bone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
Quote from: drizabone on Dec 10, 2015, 03:32PMAre there questions that a physics student could ask of their physics professors that would get the same sort of response as the BillO got from his theology professors?
And you could generalise that for any academic area: are there questions that an X student could ask of their X professor that would get a similar response, where X can be for example, biology, chemistry, rocket science, history, english lit, ... Are you equating religion with science in some sense here? In any case you're gonna to need to explain how this is relevant to Bill0's post ... or whoever's post you were responding to.
Quote from: drizabone on Dec 10, 2015, 03:32PMNB I didn't mean anything by that particular question : just wrote down the first one that I thought would be an example of a ridiculous questionNB?
And you could generalise that for any academic area: are there questions that an X student could ask of their X professor that would get a similar response, where X can be for example, biology, chemistry, rocket science, history, english lit, ... Are you equating religion with science in some sense here? In any case you're gonna to need to explain how this is relevant to Bill0's post ... or whoever's post you were responding to.
Quote from: drizabone on Dec 10, 2015, 03:32PMNB I didn't mean anything by that particular question : just wrote down the first one that I thought would be an example of a ridiculous questionNB?
-
ttf_Bruce the budgie
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:58 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
Nota Bene
Latin for "HEY!!! Listen up! Pay attention, here!", only maybe a smidge not so strident.
Latin for "HEY!!! Listen up! Pay attention, here!", only maybe a smidge not so strident.
-
ttf_timothy42b
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:57 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
Quote from: drizabone on Dec 10, 2015, 03:32PMAre there questions that a physics student could ask of their physics professors that would get the same sort of response as the BillO got from his theology professors?
Certainly. There is academic elitism in play in both situations. In the seminary it appears there was an added religious defensiveness. It can be hard to separate which is the major impetus.
On the other hand, very few students lose their faith in the laws of physics, though they may abandon the program for business or social work.
Certainly. There is academic elitism in play in both situations. In the seminary it appears there was an added religious defensiveness. It can be hard to separate which is the major impetus.
On the other hand, very few students lose their faith in the laws of physics, though they may abandon the program for business or social work.
-
ttf_drizabone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:22 pm
Religion Matters: Take 3
Quote from: Bruce the budgie on Dec 10, 2015, 05:19PMNota Bene
Latin for "HEY!!! Listen up! Pay attention, here!", only maybe a smidge not so strident.
I was just adding a clarification, as I my questions often raise questions and not answers.
Latin for "HEY!!! Listen up! Pay attention, here!", only maybe a smidge not so strident.
I was just adding a clarification, as I my questions often raise questions and not answers.
-
ttf_drizabone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:22 pm
Religion Matters: Take 3
Quote from: Baron von Bone on Dec 10, 2015, 05:13PMAre you equating religion with science in some sense here? In any case you're gonna to need to explain how this is relevant to Bill0's post ... or whoever's post you were responding to.
NB?
Actually yes. I was wondering if there was a general principal that applies to all areas of enquiry, and education, as Tim noticed. Are there some questions and ideas that are not acceptable in areas other than theology, or is theology the only area that exhibits this characteristic?
Or is my question ridiculous?
NB?
Actually yes. I was wondering if there was a general principal that applies to all areas of enquiry, and education, as Tim noticed. Are there some questions and ideas that are not acceptable in areas other than theology, or is theology the only area that exhibits this characteristic?
Or is my question ridiculous?
-
ttf_Bruce the budgie
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:58 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
Quote from: drizabone on Dec 10, 2015, 07:25PMI was just adding a clarification, as I my questions often raise questions and not answers.
Yeah, sorry. My "translation" was a bit OTT.
Back to the topic of a question to a physics prof that would prompt them to want to drum the student out of the program (after slicing off their buttons, as is tradition) I'm having a hard time thinking of one. I remember one professor keeping his equanimity in the face of a truly inane question about an exam problem that had been essentially a freebie. It was something about a unit circle and variables being determined but uncorrelated, which had been explained in class with many a nudge and wink.
Insisting on grounding the qualia of consciousness in quantum mechanics is the best I can come up with. Trying to drag philosophy into a physics class might do it. Still, I imagine the kid would have to be really tendentious and disruptive to become persona non grata over something like that.
I'm all eyes; got any examples to show?
Yeah, sorry. My "translation" was a bit OTT.
Back to the topic of a question to a physics prof that would prompt them to want to drum the student out of the program (after slicing off their buttons, as is tradition) I'm having a hard time thinking of one. I remember one professor keeping his equanimity in the face of a truly inane question about an exam problem that had been essentially a freebie. It was something about a unit circle and variables being determined but uncorrelated, which had been explained in class with many a nudge and wink.
Insisting on grounding the qualia of consciousness in quantum mechanics is the best I can come up with. Trying to drag philosophy into a physics class might do it. Still, I imagine the kid would have to be really tendentious and disruptive to become persona non grata over something like that.
I'm all eyes; got any examples to show?
-
ttf_ddickerson
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
Quote from: timothy42b on Dec 10, 2015, 01:02PMThis is kind of sad.
I think you could have chosen a different approach. I wish you had.
You are talking to an atheist who left the faith not so much because of logic or evidence, but an emotional reaction to meeting Christians who were harsh and judgmental.
And your comment is harsh and judgmental.
If you want to make a difference, you have be more welcoming.
I certainly didn't think it was harsh and judgmental, and apologize for it coming out that way. MyBad.
I think you could have chosen a different approach. I wish you had.
You are talking to an atheist who left the faith not so much because of logic or evidence, but an emotional reaction to meeting Christians who were harsh and judgmental.
And your comment is harsh and judgmental.
If you want to make a difference, you have be more welcoming.
I certainly didn't think it was harsh and judgmental, and apologize for it coming out that way. MyBad.
-
ttf_Baron von Bone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
Quote from: drizabone on Dec 10, 2015, 07:37PMActually yes. I was wondering if there was a general principal that applies to all areas of enquiry, and education, as Tim noticed. Are there some questions and ideas that are not acceptable in areas other than theology, or is theology the only area that exhibits this characteristic?That's why I asked you about equivalency. I suspect if you look into how religion and the subjects you mentioned differ and how they're similar you'll find the answer to your question. Of course that may just be stating your purpose for writing that post.
My initial thought is that the general principle would be judgment of a subject's veracity based upon what it claims and teaches, particularly in terms of the internal consistency/compatibility of those claims and teachings, as well as their credibility based upon epistemic merits. That's gonna pose some pretty basic problems for comparing religion and science at all, and all the more, I think, for comparing them in a way that's derived of some meaningful equivalency in terms of your question about Bill0's testimonial post (as I understand your question I don't think there is such an equivalency or likely even a connection through which to measure the consistency of the theoretical standard you're seeking to examine).
Quote from: drizabone on Dec 10, 2015, 07:37PMOr is my question ridiculous?I suspect it's just a kind of categorical confusion. I think you're trying to compare apples and orangutans to find some kind of double standard for those who approve of the one and not the other. As I pointed out to DD, you're also probably going to run into problems if you don't think in binary terms--consider only one religion and ignore the fact that Christians are tacitly rejecting other faiths, which presents them with the very same questions and issues regarding those rejected faiths (if there really are any left after more thorough consideration ... and I realize--or at least strongly suspect--you're just kinda tossing this idear out there, not presenting what you think is a solid case of some sort or even a clear issue).
My initial thought is that the general principle would be judgment of a subject's veracity based upon what it claims and teaches, particularly in terms of the internal consistency/compatibility of those claims and teachings, as well as their credibility based upon epistemic merits. That's gonna pose some pretty basic problems for comparing religion and science at all, and all the more, I think, for comparing them in a way that's derived of some meaningful equivalency in terms of your question about Bill0's testimonial post (as I understand your question I don't think there is such an equivalency or likely even a connection through which to measure the consistency of the theoretical standard you're seeking to examine).
Quote from: drizabone on Dec 10, 2015, 07:37PMOr is my question ridiculous?I suspect it's just a kind of categorical confusion. I think you're trying to compare apples and orangutans to find some kind of double standard for those who approve of the one and not the other. As I pointed out to DD, you're also probably going to run into problems if you don't think in binary terms--consider only one religion and ignore the fact that Christians are tacitly rejecting other faiths, which presents them with the very same questions and issues regarding those rejected faiths (if there really are any left after more thorough consideration ... and I realize--or at least strongly suspect--you're just kinda tossing this idear out there, not presenting what you think is a solid case of some sort or even a clear issue).
-
ttf_BillO
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:58 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
Folks, I had never intended to create this sort of a response. I honestly do not want to get too deeply drawn in, but there are posts here that deserve a reply. It's 12:40 a.m. my time right now and it's been a long day. Give me a few hours sleep and I'll see what I can do to sound back. But to tell you all the truth, my heart is no longer in the fight. I'm very comfortable with my decision these 35 or so years down the road. No regrets so far.
-
ttf_timothy42b
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:57 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
Quote from: ddickerson on Dec 10, 2015, 08:17PMI certainly didn't think it was harsh and judgmental, and apologize for it coming out that way. MyBad.
I was pretty sure you didn't intend it that way. Sometimes we don't realize how we will be seen from another perspective.
I was pretty sure you didn't intend it that way. Sometimes we don't realize how we will be seen from another perspective.
-
ttf_Baron von Bone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
Quote from: drizabone on Dec 10, 2015, 07:37PMActually yes. I was wondering if there was a general principal that applies to all areas of enquiry, and education, as Tim noticed. Are there some questions and ideas that are not acceptable in areas other than theology, or is theology the only area that exhibits this characteristic?Another note here ... the standards are very often altered when it comes to theology, but to accommodate rather than to reject. Very often when someone doesn't adjust standards in order to accommodate theology it's taken as being harsh because the accommodation is so ingrained in us sociologically and expected.
Quote from: drizabone on Dec 10, 2015, 07:37PMOr is my question ridiculous?I think you may have noticed what I'm pointing out, maybe just at the hazy periphery of your awareness, but practically socially and intellectually "autonomic" perceptions and responses like that are like perceptual jello you're trying to nail down to examine--not really easy until you figure out it needs to be isolated and frozen in order to do it (to stick with the analogy there).
Quote from: drizabone on Dec 10, 2015, 07:37PMOr is my question ridiculous?I think you may have noticed what I'm pointing out, maybe just at the hazy periphery of your awareness, but practically socially and intellectually "autonomic" perceptions and responses like that are like perceptual jello you're trying to nail down to examine--not really easy until you figure out it needs to be isolated and frozen in order to do it (to stick with the analogy there).
-
ttf_Baron von Bone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
Quote from: timothy42b on Dec 11, 2015, 04:49AMQuote from: ddickerson on Dec 10, 2015, 08:17PMI certainly didn't think it was harsh and judgmental, and apologize for it coming out that way. MyBad.I was pretty sure you didn't intend it that way. Sometimes we don't realize how we will be seen from another perspective.
And some are more and some less aware of reframing and its implications.
And some are more and some less aware of reframing and its implications.
-
ttf_Baron von Bone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
This one is perhaps even more important than the Dig In & Double Down schtick. Both are pretty universal and inherent aspects of The Human Experience--particularly important to critical thinking and religion, but pretty important things to understand for all kinds of reasons and regarding all kinds of paradigms ... and such.
-
ttf_drizabone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:22 pm
Religion Matters: Take 3
Well its just about that time again, so I thought I would take the opportunity to share what I think are the most relevant bible verses. From the venerable KJV :
Ezekiel 35:5-7King James Version (KJV)
Quote5 Because thou hast had a perpetual hatred, and hast shed the blood of the children of Israel by the force of the sword in the time of their calamity, in the time that their iniquity had an end:
6 Therefore, as I live, saith the Lord God, I will prepare thee unto blood, and blood shall pursue thee: sith thou hast not hated blood, even blood shall pursue thee.
7 Thus will I make mount Seir most desolate, and cut off from it him that passeth out and him that returneth.
Unfortunately no versions have Jedi, but I thought getting a couple of verses with sith and force in was pretty good.
And Happy Christmas everyone - I pray that you could all be convinced of the truth of the gospel. But have a great time anyway.
Ezekiel 35:5-7King James Version (KJV)
Quote5 Because thou hast had a perpetual hatred, and hast shed the blood of the children of Israel by the force of the sword in the time of their calamity, in the time that their iniquity had an end:
6 Therefore, as I live, saith the Lord God, I will prepare thee unto blood, and blood shall pursue thee: sith thou hast not hated blood, even blood shall pursue thee.
7 Thus will I make mount Seir most desolate, and cut off from it him that passeth out and him that returneth.
Unfortunately no versions have Jedi, but I thought getting a couple of verses with sith and force in was pretty good.
And Happy Christmas everyone - I pray that you could all be convinced of the truth of the gospel. But have a great time anyway.
-
ttf_ddickerson
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
Quote from: drizabone on Dec 13, 2015, 08:11PMWell its just about that time again, so I thought I would take the opportunity to share what I think are the most relevant bible verses. From the venerable KJV :
Ezekiel 35:5-7King James Version (KJV)
Unfortunately no versions have Jedi, but I thought getting a couple of verses with sith and force in was pretty good.
And Happy Christmas everyone - I pray that you could all be convinced of the truth of the gospel. But have a great time anyway.
Merry Christmas Drizabone! I'm like you; may all see the truth!
Ezekiel 35:5-7King James Version (KJV)
Unfortunately no versions have Jedi, but I thought getting a couple of verses with sith and force in was pretty good.
And Happy Christmas everyone - I pray that you could all be convinced of the truth of the gospel. But have a great time anyway.
Merry Christmas Drizabone! I'm like you; may all see the truth!
-
ttf_John the Theologian
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:49 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
Let me add my words of agreement to what Martin and Dusty have said. May the God of all grace enlighten your eyes to see the truth of this season.
-
ttf_MoominDave
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
A happy Yule to all of you, no matter what you call it, how you think of it, or what meaning you attach to it. Whoever wants to take the credit for the idea, taking a break from drudgery in the middle of the winter was a splendid plan...
-
ttf_drizabone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:22 pm
Religion Matters: Take 3
I had dinner at my friends home last night and noticed a poster on their dining room wall.
Thou shalt not commit logical fallacies
And that has a link to this site that warns you about self delusion and science scepticism.
I was horrified. They are conservative christians and home school their kids! Don't they know that this sort of thing is the thin end of the slippery wedge to destruction!
What's the world coming too
Thou shalt not commit logical fallacies
And that has a link to this site that warns you about self delusion and science scepticism.
I was horrified. They are conservative christians and home school their kids! Don't they know that this sort of thing is the thin end of the slippery wedge to destruction!
What's the world coming too
-
ttf_Baron von Bone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
There's your problem!
Uniquely severe right now to Islam--perhaps--but not even close to unique to Islam.
Uniquely severe right now to Islam--perhaps--but not even close to unique to Islam.
-
ttf_Baron von Bone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
I just found some more great Qualia Soup videos--got to look more into these.
Open-Mindedness (a long time favorite of mine)
Critical Thinking
The Burden of Proof
Putting Faith In Its Place
Lack of Belief in Gods
We could stand to post the Open-Mindedness and Critical Thinking videos every few days or so in the PP section!
There's also this longer one (40 min)--a talk given by Peter Boghossian:
Faith: Pretending to know things you don't know
Open-Mindedness (a long time favorite of mine)
Critical Thinking
The Burden of Proof
Putting Faith In Its Place
Lack of Belief in Gods
We could stand to post the Open-Mindedness and Critical Thinking videos every few days or so in the PP section!
There's also this longer one (40 min)--a talk given by Peter Boghossian:
Faith: Pretending to know things you don't know
-
ttf_Baron von Bone
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
Religion Matters: Take 3
This little exchange between Jesus & Mo is in here particularly apropos.
Yup.
The cartoonist's comments (a bit harshly stated perhaps, but such is the nature of this particular beast ... and of course it is amusing):
QuoteThe anniversary is tomorrow, but today's Wednesday so here's a comic. I do like the Charlie Hebdo cover, which has rubbed all the right people up the wrong way.
That's the thing about religious satire - it automatically delivers offence in the right dose: the amount of offence you take is exactly the amount you deserve.
And JFTR I don't think that applies in Drizabone's case (or maybe it does but as an anomaly, or some such). His prior request about the image of Jesus (rather "Jesus") is why today's cartoon is so apropos in here though.
Yup.
The cartoonist's comments (a bit harshly stated perhaps, but such is the nature of this particular beast ... and of course it is amusing):
QuoteThe anniversary is tomorrow, but today's Wednesday so here's a comic. I do like the Charlie Hebdo cover, which has rubbed all the right people up the wrong way.
That's the thing about religious satire - it automatically delivers offence in the right dose: the amount of offence you take is exactly the amount you deserve.
And JFTR I don't think that applies in Drizabone's case (or maybe it does but as an anomaly, or some such). His prior request about the image of Jesus (rather "Jesus") is why today's cartoon is so apropos in here though.