Profile
Search
Register
Log in
Paganism
View previous topic | View next topic >

Post new topic Reply to topic
Strange Famous Forum > Social stuff. Political stuff. KNOWMORE

Author Message
Jesse



Joined: 02 Jul 2002
Posts: 6166
Location: privileged homeless
 Reply with quote  

Micranot wrote:
Which is precisely why agnosticism is so much better than athiesm.


Ignoring what a fatuous statement that was... I paid lip service to agnosticism for a long, long time. I decided that since I don't have much faith in the ultimate possession by man of absolute truth (i.e. filters are inescapable and indispensible), I must therefore be agnostic since I didn't KNOW FOR ABSOLUTE CERTAIN THERE WAS NO GOD.

Eventually, I got tired of this politically correct posturing. I realized the truth one day was that whether I had ultimate proof of anything or not, I simply did not have a scrap of doubt within me, for any practical purpose, that God or any form of supernature was wholly invented and mythical.

So I accepted the truth about myself. I believe there is no God. I'm not gonna bust anyone's ass over it, but I'm not going to misrepresent myself either.

firefly wrote:
And. . . OF COURSE THERE ARE SIMILARITIES IN CHRISTIANITY AND PAGANISM. If you look you will find similarities in all the religions. I see more similarities then contradictions.


That's no coincidence, my friend. There are two ways to convert a population to a new religion... quelling dissidence through violent means, and subtle infiltration via compromise. If you let the pagans keep their spring feast, only switch the key words around on them, they're not likely to mind as much as if you forbid it outright.

sleeklegend wrote:
God isn't "all around us" or "nature"

God is everything. Every possible thing you could think of...it is the concept of LIFE...and everything it entails. And it is either recognized, or denied by people...and it exists whether we take time to feel it intuitively or not. Is it that "oceanic feeling"? Yes, I think so.


Well it's certainly good of you to clear that up. I know there has been quite a bit of confusion and indeed disagreement on this whole "what is God" for some time now, and I'm sure I speak for everyone when I say we appreciate your final, definitive answer on the subject.

Moving along, can you please tell us what causes hiccups?

hugh grant's hooker wrote:
jesse - i dont think we should question a person's desire for religion. in any way. if we should, then what else should we question?


How about absolutely anything and everything? I'm very pro-question. I certainly don't begrudge anyone asking questions about my life or my choices, unless it's done in a condescending or somehow otherwise unkind manner (which is an issue unto itself). Questions, discussion and even debate are means of sharing perspectives and information. I see this as beneficial to everyone.


Quote:

if it doesnt hurt you, then let them do it. dont discourage them. let them try it, if it doesnt work out, then let them just as easily walk away from it. it their personal thing, we dont have the right to question it.


I'm not big on this MYOB stuff, honestly.


Quote:

if they say they want to try a religion that requires killing shit and stealing or something crazy like that, then by all means stop them. but i dont think this is the case with most people.


I'm not big on this not-in-my-backyard stuff, honestly.


Quote:

and as far as christianity being linked with paganism... it shouldnt be. the joining comes from ignorance.


Well, yes and know. Perhaps a combination of ignorance and design. But then, in MY view, the entire history of that faith and every other is steeped in such manipulations. I don't see why you should reject the pagan synthesis and accept Vatican II (if you do) or accept Jesus' reform of Judaism such as it was. Why draw such an arbitrary line?


Quote:

easter shouldnt have a bunny or eggs, they dont have shit to do with a resurection.


Shouldn't/schmouldn't, mister we-don't-have-the-right. Maybe I'm not celebrating the purported resurrection. Maybe I'm celebrating my family and chocolate.


Quote:

christmas shouldnt have a tree or santa claus and reindeer... they dont have shit to do with jesus' birth. and it shouldnt even be in december, most christian sects place the actual birth around september 16th.


Details, details. So what? Surely the lovable Peanuts gang has taught us that such petty details as three months or aluminum decorations have nothing at all to do with The True Meaning Of Christmas?


Quote:

holloween... well, christians dont have any right to be involved in this at all.


Samhain, maybe, but "All Hallow's Eve/Day" was erected upon the spot resevered therefore to celebrate the SAINTS of the catholic church. So uh... that's pretty christian.


Quote:

for instance catholicism. that shit isnt even christianity anymore. they admittedly make their own rules up.


errrr not quite. They offer their interpretation, much as anyone might... it's just that they're the centuries-old institution for doing so. They certainly do not "make their own rules up" - they extrapolate from scripture, much in the fashion of the marginal commentaries that make up the Jewish Talmud.

They are pretty much the straightest line you can take to any connection to the original traditions that the Christian faith consists of... I'm not saying they're right (I differ with them on several points, such as abortion, homosexuality and the existance of God whatsoever), but they don't just roll the dice.


Quote:

yet still, when a priest fucks a little boy everybody blames christianity.


Oh, I don't think so. Who have you heard saying "It's that damn Jesus putting them up to it! See here in Matthew where he says "Thou shalt not suffer the little children to sit on my lap and touch me that way?"?" People blame the institution, sure... but it seems to me that you're already drawing a line between your concept of "christianity" and any particular institution.


Quote:

and same with native american shaman being lumped with pagans. a shaman would be pretty upset if you accused them of being pagan.


Maybe so. Just like how he might be upset if you called him a redskin. Derogatory as it may be, the word was coined to encompass religions not a part of the Judeo-Christian tradition, or the Big Three (Islam calls them "The People Of The Book"). It has had derogatory connotations and it has had neutral connotations, traditionally... only very recently (on the relative scale of such things as religions) has it been imbued with favourable connotations, and only more recently still has it been considered a particular kind of religion that might exclude anything but those noted Big Three.

Sorry, Native American shaman, but if you are not a Christian, and you are not a Jew, and you are not a Muslim, you are a pagan. That's just what the word means.


Quote:

that was the cause of a lot of deaths in native americans over the years. when they tried to practice their own religion they were accused of paganism or satanism and they were killed or thrown in prison.


Well fucking right, yes, because colonial settlers are not historically known for their reverence shown towards indigenous (or at least previously settled) cultures. What is your point, that the "pagan" epithet was a slander in their case only, and that although killing or imprisoning pagans is a fine thing to do, the native americans were wrongfully identified as such and THAT'S where the problem lay? I highly doubt that's what you're saying. So... what is the precise point in this paragraph?


Quote:

that shit isnt even old news, it didnt stop until around '78. thats far too recently to still be killing off native americans.


What, precisely, stopped in 1978? Homicide against native americans (god how i hate that imprecise, patronizing term)? Intolerance towards them? I doubt that. Institutionalized persecution? Inasmuch as it's ever stopped, I'd put it well ahead of 1978. Inasmuch as it hasn't, well, it hasn't.

What is it that you're saying happened for the last time in the late seventies?

killedbysharks wrote:
Excersizing cause you want to look good for summer, rather than excersizing to feel good and be healthy for yourself.


Um... what if you want to look good in the summer... for yourself?

Reggie wrote:
practicing agnostics must constantly search for answers to the infinite number of questions concerning the very world around them


Um, practising agnostics must constantly maintain a lack of certainty, that's all. What you're describing are INQUISITIVE agnostics. ^_^

----


whooo boy... I am the smartest motherfucker on earth...
Post Thu May 01, 2003 4:03 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
hugh grants hooker
Guest




 Reply with quote  

everything i said was lost on you.

i didnt say YOU shouldnt have bunnies on easter or a tree on christmas. i'm saying that those things shouldnt be associated with the christian religion. because they arent. many churches even consider them to be building false idols with santa and a bunny.

as far as catholics being the straightest line. thats a laugh.
right off the top of my head you got dogmatic laws. anything the pope says is made into the church doctrines. you CANT do that. the bible gives the ONLY guidelines in that religion.
matter of fact what the hell is the pope doing? the bible says nobody is to come between god and his people NO mediator.
also, why do they pray to the 'mother mary'. NO. the bible says not to do this. thats why jesus was martyred. so there is NO mediator.
there are only 2 levels of hierarchy (sp) in christianity.
level 1: god
level 2: everything else

nothing in between.


and as far as me being 'against paganism'. check back on the thread man.
I am the one who gave this guy the info for him to look into paganism.


why did you harsh me for not wanting shit questioned, then when i said question people with harmful intentions you came at me for that?
you contradicted yourself.

and NO. you shouldnt question people who arent harming you. no matter what they do. weather its religion, sexuality, their speech, or how they spend their time. if it doesnt hurt you, then it shouldnt bother you.

if you want to learn about it, go read about it. dont question people.
Post Thu May 01, 2003 5:19 pm
 
Jesse



Joined: 02 Jul 2002
Posts: 6166
Location: privileged homeless
 Reply with quote  

hugh grants hooker wrote:
i didnt say YOU shouldnt have bunnies on easter or a tree on christmas. i'm saying that those things shouldnt be associated with the christian religion. because they arent. many churches even consider them to be building false idols with santa and a bunny.


Well I used myself as an example, but.. well okay, I'll concede that for the moment. The false idol stuff is pretty pedantic, though. Nobody worships Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny.


Quote:

as far as catholics being the straightest line. thats a laugh.


I imagine it is. You've been pumped up with a strong anti-Catholic propaganda/spin session, as you yourself said.


Quote:

right off the top of my head you got dogmatic laws. anything the pope says is made into the church doctrines.


Er, where do you get this insider tidbit? Maybe you should check out some info on the Catholic church that wasn't specifically assembled to ugly it up.


Quote:

you CANT do that. the bible gives the ONLY guidelines in that religion.


Yeah and the Bible was written in a quarter dozen ancient languages, not to mention analogies and parables.


Quote:

matter of fact what the hell is the pope doing? the bible says nobody is to come between god and his people NO mediator.


Yeah, what was with that Jesus fella? And hey, who let that "Paul" guy into the Bible? It seems to me that Leviticus was pretty presumptuous too...


Quote:

also, why do they pray to the 'mother mary'. NO. the bible says not to do this. thats why jesus was martyred. so there is NO mediator.
there are only 2 levels of hierarchy (sp) in christianity.
level 1: god
level 2: everything else

nothing in between.


Christianity's a big concept, man. You're clearly identifying some particular interpretation as "true". I mean I guess everyone does that for themselves, but you certainly are applying it universally.


Quote:

and as far as me being 'against paganism'. check back on the thread man.
I am the one who gave this guy the info for him to look into paganism.


As far as you being "against paganism" I uh never said anything of the sort. What are you referring to here?


Quote:

why did you harsh me for not wanting shit questioned, then when i said question people with harmful intentions you came at me for that?
you contradicted yourself.


Um... are you still talking to me? Can you come with a quote or something? What did I say?


Quote:

and NO. you shouldnt question people who arent harming you. no matter what they do. weather its religion, sexuality, their speech, or how they spend their time. if it doesnt hurt you, then it shouldnt bother you.

if you want to learn about it, go read about it. dont question people.


Why does something have to bother you for you to question it?
Post Thu May 01, 2003 5:50 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
duke_city



Joined: 05 Jul 2002
Posts: 3208
Location: San Diego,CA
 Reply with quote  

Almost every single thing in the non-Apocryphal bible has been verified scientifically and historically to be true. The time consistancy alone is enough to open eyes.

http://www.africanaquatics.co.za/_christian/_articles/authenticity_of_the_bible.htm

I like these words I took from the website.

"Anyone who denies that these books are factual and genuine, must therefore doubt all historical literature written in the last 3 millennia, because there is not a single historical document that has anywhere near the scientific credentials that the Bible has as being authentic"

Brian
Post Thu May 01, 2003 6:04 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Jesse



Joined: 02 Jul 2002
Posts: 6166
Location: privileged homeless
 Reply with quote  

dallasbboy wrote:
Almost every single thing in the non-Apocryphal bible has been verified scientifically and historically to be true. The time consistancy alone is enough to open eyes.


Nothing in the history of the universe has been verified scientifically and historically to be true. That's not what science DOES. This is a common, fundamental misunderstanding of science.

And let's not forget that um even forgetting what I just said, NO IT HASN'T.


Quote:

"Anyone who denies that these books are factual and genuine, must therefore doubt all historical literature written in the last 3 millennia, because there is not a single historical document that has anywhere near the scientific credentials that the Bible has as being authentic"


Um yes, I think it behooves everyone to doubt all historical literature written at any time at all, especially when it's extremely vague and being explained to you by people with agendae to serve.
Post Thu May 01, 2003 6:17 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
hugh grants hooker
Guest




 Reply with quote  

jesse, you're mistaking your own opinions and rumors to be facts.

the bible in nearly every translation has proven to say the same thing. the king james version is missing 3 books. but you can get bibles with those books too now. and they are the same as almost all other bibles in the world.

instead of telling me about 'brainwashing' bullshit. how about you look up the pope's role in the cult.
i was catholic for about 2 years. its complete bullshit.
they have lines to memorize and repeat at the priest's will "and with you..." blah blah blah, they pray to the wrong person, they tell all their sins to some old guy who tells them how to cleanse themselves. haha
look up 'dogma'. it should explain a thing or two to you.
...and i dont mean the Kevin Smith movie.

...and dont put words in my mouth, i never said i was pumped full of propaganda

being a false idol doesnt have to mean that people worship something. its anything used to take attention from god. santa does this well.

languages, parables, and analogies? what? there is this part in there with 10 commandments. its really straight forward. basically idiot proof. but most people overlook it, because it seems too simple. but those are it. the ONLY things christians are commanded to do. everything else is merely suggestions for making it easier to not 'go astray'.

who was jesus? jesus was GOD in human form. the trinity, heard of it? the father, son, and holy ghost. one entity existing simultaneously on 3 levels.
its all in that bible book. haha

its not all a 'concept'. see: commandments. there are basic rules which are not open for interpretation.


Quote:

What, precisely, stopped in 1978? Homicide against native americans (god how i hate that imprecise, patronizing term)? Intolerance towards them? I doubt that. Institutionalized persecution? Inasmuch as it's ever stopped, I'd put it well ahead of 1978. Inasmuch as it hasn't, well, it hasn't.
What is it that you're saying happened for the last time in the late seventies?



a thing called the "freedom of religion act". until '78 native americans were openly killed for practicing their religions.


Quote:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
yet still, when a priest fucks a little boy everybody blames christianity.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Oh, I don't think so. Who have you heard saying "It's that damn Jesus putting them up to it! See here in Matthew where he says "Thou shalt not suffer the little children to sit on my lap and touch me that way?"?" People blame the institution, sure... but it seems to me that you're already drawing a line between your concept of "christianity" and any particular institution.



i hear this quite often "just another reason i dont believe in religion especially christianity.". i believe, maybe i'm wrong, but i think randomsurge even said something to this effect a couple times on here.

and NO, native americans are not pagan.
you are basing this on the christian or muslim definition of pagan.
thats basing one religion on another. silly.
paganism is religion based on nature and environment.
native american religions were based on gods (creators/masters).

and whats wrong with the term 'native american'?
Post Thu May 01, 2003 7:02 pm
 
duke_city



Joined: 05 Jul 2002
Posts: 3208
Location: San Diego,CA
 Reply with quote  

Jesse wrote:

Nothing in the history of the universe has been verified scientifically and historically to be true. That's not what science DOES. This is a common, fundamental misunderstanding of science.

And let's not forget that um even forgetting what I just said, NO IT HASN'T.



Quite possibly the stupidest thing I have ever heard anyone type. Contrary to your own self perception of the aloof erudite thinker, you often come across as a complete idiot sometimes arguing semantics to death whilst missing the entire heart of the matter. This being one of them.

Brian
Post Thu May 01, 2003 7:37 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
creeper



Joined: 14 Mar 2003
Posts: 15
 Reply with quote  

I feel that religion is really important. People seem to need something to believe in and guidelines to follow. I personally don't go for any organized religion. I feel that beliefs and practices are a personal thing. Organized religion generalizes too much.
Post Thu May 01, 2003 8:27 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
Jesse



Joined: 02 Jul 2002
Posts: 6166
Location: privileged homeless
 Reply with quote  

hugh grants hooker wrote:
jesse, you're mistaking your own opinions and rumors to be facts.


^_~


Quote:

the bible in nearly every translation has proven to say the same thing.


Well it's pretty beside the point but "proven"? Who proved it? What are you basing that statement upon?

And in any event, I didn't say that different translations of the Bible aren't more or less consistant except when it comes to certain ambiguous words, particularly in the Hebrew. I said uh... actually what the hell were you responding to with that? My thing about interpretations? There's a hell of a lot more to that than what the words each mean on their own... it's more about what they all mean together, or in reasonably-sized groupings.


Quote:

the king james version is missing 3 books. but you can get bibles with those books too now. and they are the same as almost all other bibles in the world.


Missing three books!? The Bible is a collection of transcribed oral traditions and then various manuscripts from different sources. It's missing a lot more than three books... it's missing everything from the RG Veda to the latest John Grisham! It's missing everything that wasn't selected to appear in the collection. There are more than three books that used to be grouped in with the writings that now constitute the Bible as most people know it... I mean the thing is just selected ancient texts along a certain tradition, it's not exhaustive.


Quote:

instead of telling me about 'brainwashing' bullshit. how about you look up the pope's role in the cult.


When did I say you were brainwashed?


Quote:

i was catholic for about 2 years. its complete bullshit.


My very sweet and dear motherfucking friend, I was catholic for FIFTEEN YEARS, with sunday school, confirmation classes and everything. I also came to the conclusion that it's, as you say, complete bullshit, but don't you DARE presume to take an authoritative fucking tone with me on this matter.

Whooooo look... now it's me getting heated. Ha ha.


Quote:

they have lines to memorize and repeat at the priest's will "and with you..."


Actually the Catholic service is laid out canonically and all of those things are scheduled fairly precisely for years in advance. The only editorial decisions a Catholic priest really gets to make is in his own sermon. So it's not exactly "at the priest's will".

Anyway dude, it's a religious ritual. What's your point?


Quote:

they pray to the wrong person,


So do fucking Hindus, smart guy. That is to say - says YOU.


Quote:

they tell all their sins to some old guy who tells them how to cleanse themselves. haha


Ha ha ha! You're right that is a riot! And man, you know they get their heads wet and call it "baptism"! Ha hahahaa! And like, the Priest wears basically a fucking dress! Ah h ahahaha! Did you know they used to do the service in LATIN!? Like what is that? Oh, right... IT'S A RELIGION YOU DON'T SUBSCRIBE TO. That explains why you think it doesn't make sense.

Get it?


Quote:

look up 'dogma'. it should explain a thing or two to you.


okay, um...

dog·ma (dōgm, dg-)
n. pl. dog·mas or dog·ma·ta (-m-t)
1. A doctrine or a corpus of doctrines relating to matters such as morality and faith, set forth in an authoritative manner by a church.
2. An authoritative principle, belief, or statement of ideas or opinion, especially one considered to be absolutely true. See Synonyms at doctrine.
3. A principle or belief or a group of them: “The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present” (Abraham Lincoln).

[Latin, from Greek, opinion, belief, from dokein, to seem, think. See dek- in Indo-European Roots.]

God, I see it now. You're totally right. Dogma, man. Far out. It only describes every set of principles in the world. Catholicism is so gay.

hugh grant's hooker wrote:
...and dont put words in my mouth, i never said i was pumped full of camel hormones until I grew a beautiful set of humps that I can't stop fondling


Point taken. Right on, man. From now I'll stop quoting you directly, and take to your practise of just responding to random concepts you never even said.


Quote:

being a false idol doesnt have to mean that people worship something. its anything used to take attention from god.


Cats are gonna ride my ass for being pedantic, I know, but we are actually discussing the definition of a word here... and you're wrong. That's not what the word "idol" means. An idol is (in a religious context) an instrument of worship. You don't really worship the idol per se, but you worship AT or THROUGH the idol. Lots of people define it differently, you say? That's true, because lots of people haven't got the faintest idea what the fuck they're talking about.


Quote:

languages, parables, and analogies? what? there is this part in there with 10 commandments. its really straight forward. basically idiot proof. but most people overlook it, because it seems too simple. but those are it. the ONLY things christians are commanded to do. everything else is merely suggestions for making it easier to not 'go astray'.


Oh I thought people tended to overlook it because practically the whole rest of the fucking book blatantly contradicts those tend commandments by example and decree. But yeah, maybe it is the "too obvious" thing. I guess they're compromising the clarity of their perception by reading more than one verse out of the whole Bible.


Quote:

who was jesus? jesus was GOD in human form. the trinity, heard of it? the father, son, and holy ghost. one entity existing simultaneously on 3 levels. its all in that bible book. haha


Um, only if you're Catholic. So is you is or is you ain't?


Quote:

its not all a 'concept'. see: commandments. there are basic rules which are not open for interpretation.


Language is effectively a code used to communicate between a transmitting point and a receptive point. It is encoded at one end, from impulses to words, and decoded at the other end. You can't not interpret something.


Quote:


Quote:

What is it that you're saying happened for the last time in the late seventies?

a thing called the "freedom of religion act". until '78 native americans were openly killed for practicing their religions.


I question here your definition of "openly".


Quote:


Quote:

Who have you heard saying "It's that damn Jesus putting them up to it! See here in Matthew where he says "Thou shalt not suffer the little children to sit on my lap and touch me that way?"?" People blame the institution, sure... but it seems to me that you're already drawing a line between your concept of "christianity" and any particular institution.

i hear this quite often "just another reason i dont believe in religion especially christianity.". i believe, maybe i'm wrong, but i think randomsurge even said something to this effect a couple times on here.


Blaming institutionalized religion and blaming christianity wholesale are not the same thing.


Quote:

and NO, native americans are not pagan.
you are basing this on the christian or muslim definition of pagan.
thats basing one religion on another. silly.


Dude, choke this down. The word was invented by a specific group to refer to everything that falls outside of that specific group. THERE IS NO NON-CHRISTIAN DEFINITION FOR THE WORLD "PAGAN". You may as well say that people from... oh, let's say Australia... can't be called "gaijin" in Japan because that would depend upon the Japanese definition of the word "gaijin" (it means foreigner). Well no fucking kidding.


Quote:

paganism is religion based on nature and environment.


Sorry, it just isn't. I mean, I know that there are many people who have a religion based on religion and environment and they are pagans and they identify themselves as such, but just because a horse is an animal doesn't mean an animal is a horse. On the other hand, it is fair to refer to such a movement as "Neo-Paganism" because it's a freshly coined term, and it has a fair analogous use of the root word.


Quote:

and whats wrong with the term 'native american'?


Well, it'd be better suited to a new topic since it has nothing to do with religion, but it's basically this: were you born in america? If the answer is yes, do you know what that makes you? It makes you a native american. The term is a carry-over from colonial times even moreso than "indian", because it was coined by people who were NOT, themselves, native american.

They're just other immigrants. True, they immigrated to america thousands of years before anyone else did, but no race originates here.

Obviously my dissatisfaction of the term is not a dis to anyone. I mean, I hope that's obvious.

Okay... time for me to go eat my words in the other forum, talking about how HGH is the one who gets heated too easily...
Post Fri May 02, 2003 9:11 am
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Jesse



Joined: 02 Jul 2002
Posts: 6166
Location: privileged homeless
 Reply with quote  

whoops forgot this one

dallasbboy wrote:
Jesse wrote:

Nothing in the history of the universe has been verified scientifically and historically to be true. That's not what science DOES. This is a common, fundamental misunderstanding of science.

And let's not forget that um even forgetting what I just said, NO IT HASN'T.



Quite possibly the stupidest thing I have ever heard anyone type. Contrary to your own self perception of the aloof erudite thinker,


When did I say I was aloof? Erudite yes, aloof not hardly.


Quote:

you often come across as a complete idiot sometimes arguing semantics to death whilst missing the entire heart of the matter. This being one of them.


Well yeah, I know I do. But you've got to understand - I care about language. I'm a rapper and a fan of rap for several reasons, a major one being that I have a consuming interest in vocabulary. So while I recognize that perhaps I can hit the semantic angle TOO hard, I do so because I consider a standardized lexicon CENTRAL to any discussion of complex issues. We all have to be hip to what the others mean, right? And that's all dictionaries are for, letting you know what someone is likely to mean by something. When people use words in a manner sharply contrary to their most established meanings, they only hamper their own expression. That's not really in anyone's best interests. I know that there is no ultimate truth of language, that it's all determined by consensus, ultimately... but that just means that it's important to detect the flow and pretty much go with it, rather than swimming against the current, which is not only frustrating to you but you get in the way of cats going the other direction.

Okay, um regardless of that, though, my "science" thing isn't really a semantic distinction, at its heart. It's more about human proccesses of discovery and determination, and what really constitutes "proof" or what the aim of experimentation really is...

...fuck my phone's ringing... it's work and I'm late... maybe I'll get back into this later, but to be honest I'm not really the best-qualified to explain what issue I took... which, come to think of it, is weak.
Post Fri May 02, 2003 9:21 am
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
hugh grants hooker
Guest




 Reply with quote  

Jesse wrote:

Missing three books!? The Bible is a collection of transcribed oral traditions and then various manuscripts from different sources. It's missing a lot more than three books... it's missing everything from the RG Veda to the latest John Grisham! It's missing everything that wasn't selected to appear in the collection. There are more than three books that used to be grouped in with the writings that now constitute the Bible as most people know it... I mean the thing is just selected ancient texts along a certain tradition, it's not exhaustive.



i got this far into your reply and began to laugh. then i realized something, i'm debating a religion with someone who obviously has no experience with or education in that religion. i'm sorry if i went over your head with all this.
okay i'll respond to this, and then i'm not reading anything else you write about religion until you educate yourself.

its missing 3 books. thats it.
the original version of the bible had 3 other books grouped with it, but they were mostly about adultery, and marriage. since king james had a mistress and wanted to downplay how wrong that was, he left these three books out of his translation.

why would grisham and veda be grouped with them? do god's followers believe that those writers are devinely inspired by god to write each word?
that is what decided what went into the bible. the christians believe that each and every word was inspired and guided by god.

and there werent more than 3 books that used to be lumped with those. the hebrew bible has exactly 3 books more than king james. maybe you're thinking of chapters or something. i dont know.

anyway, i've slowly stopped laughing. now i'm bored. good day.
Post Fri May 02, 2003 9:22 am
 
Jesse



Joined: 02 Jul 2002
Posts: 6166
Location: privileged homeless
 Reply with quote  

argh!

the worst cut of all!

indifference!

I'd like to flatter myself that the things you've failed to respond to have piled up so heavily that you just feel guilty continuing... but no, probably you just aren't all that invested in the argument. Fuck.

i hope SOMEBODY reads that shit. I spent forever on it.

I like how you decided I had no experience in Catholicism and quit reading on precisely the paragraph before I explained to you that I was in the church for most of my life.

I promise you did not go over my head at any time.
Post Fri May 02, 2003 9:37 am
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Nope



Joined: 23 Jan 2003
Posts: 1916
 Reply with quote  

Reggie wrote:
Just one thing for consideration: practicing agnostics must constantly search for answers to the infinite number of questions concerning the very world around them. To date, there has not been one absolute answer given to anything. People with faith, however, already have all of the answers to their satisfaction.


"answers"

you can be agnostic...accept your ignorance...and move on

there's no need to be looking for the answer the all these intrinsic questions when it's more than likely that you won't find them.

Like you said, there's no absolute answer to anything...there is not absolute truth

you can either go crazy over that...or be cool with it and move on

it's all about being strong minded...some people need to believe in stuff...that's cool.

But I don't think people realize that you can just not believe in anything...and not be some depressed, desperate maggot
Post Fri May 02, 2003 9:41 am
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
MessiahCarey



Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 10924
 Reply with quote  

hugh grants hooker wrote:
Jesse wrote:

Missing three books!? The Bible is a collection of transcribed oral traditions and then various manuscripts from different sources. It's missing a lot more than three books... it's missing everything from the RG Veda to the latest John Grisham! It's missing everything that wasn't selected to appear in the collection. There are more than three books that used to be grouped in with the writings that now constitute the Bible as most people know it... I mean the thing is just selected ancient texts along a certain tradition, it's not exhaustive.



i got this far into your reply and began to laugh. then i realized something, i'm debating a religion with someone who obviously has no experience with or education in that religion. i'm sorry if i went over your head with all this.
okay i'll respond to this, and then i'm not reading anything else you write about religion until you educate yourself.


Wow.

Why is it that most religious people always assume atheists are such just because they "don't know any better"? It's absurd.

For years I have looked into Christianity and its subsets trying to learn what I could from them (there are some damned good lessons in these books - it's just a shame people decide to worship shit instead of learn the important stuff from them...) I'm tired of everyone assuming that because someone doesn't BELEIVE a religion they obviously don't KNOW anything about it. Absurd.

I reject religions because I know what they say and I don't beleive it. That's a perfectly qualified stance, and certainly not grounds for an argument that says I don't know anything about religion...Jesse is very well versed in religion from my understanding.

And the fact is that most of the bible is an oral tradition (hey now!) - the lessons were spoken aloud for years before the first pen was put to parchment...and if you've ever played "telephone" in middle school you understand how that works....add to that the fact that there are no vowels in the original hebrew that the texts were written in and only a partial translation of the languages...the political motivations of each person that commissioned a revision (hundred years war anyone?) and all the other shit and I think it's relatively safe to assume that all the education in the world doesn't make it stand up any better.

I mean...I can be educated very well on the KKK, it still makes their ideology bullshit. Heh.

www.atheists-for-jesus.com

- Shane
Post Fri May 02, 2003 9:52 am
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Nope



Joined: 23 Jan 2003
Posts: 1916
 Reply with quote  

I don't see the point in being atheist (besides just shutting all that religion "bullshit" out)....you're rejecting religion because you see they dont' have the answers...so then you go to the extreme and say YOU have the answer

which is, there is no god

You basically have "faith" there is no god...as weird as that may sound

that "answer" of yours is no different from that of god-based religions

we're all ignorant...stop trying to play like you know anything

and if you're going to believe that you do...don't be an asshole about it

I don't impose my ignorance on you, do I?
Post Fri May 02, 2003 9:58 am
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address

Post new topic Reply to topic
Jump to:  
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
All times are GMT - 6 Hours.
The time now is Wed Oct 22, 2014 11:33 pm
  Display posts from previous:      


Powered by phpBB: © 2001 phpBB Group
Template created by The Fathom
Based on template of Nick Mahon