Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Established 2003
TOUAMB: Wandering off topic since the early 21st Century

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 9   Go Down

Author Topic: Religion Content from Name Thread  (Read 20849 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Ben-San

  • -=Ray=-
  • Tiny cans of Dr Pepper: 164
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1259
  • Two-Fisted Detective
    • View Profile
Re: Religion Content from Name Thread
« Reply #30 on: July 05, 2006, 09:57:54 pm »

Unless these threads are somehow shaking your faith, I can't see how this should be a problem for you.

I have no problem with the absurdity of my articles of faith from a logical standpoint being pointed out. However, it bothers me when people I like start claiming that articles of faith are invalidated as articles of faith because they have been invalidated as articles of historical or scientific fact in much the same way that it bothers me when people I like start claiming that heat is the product of molecules rubbing together and producing friction - and in both cases, I explain why it doesn't work that way and answer questions that are offered.

Note that the "answers" I'm offering are about the distinction between faith and logic. I am not saying that any of the answers of my belief are the right ones; obviously I believe that many of them are, but as I have stated there is no logical way to prove it. My beef here is solely about a misunderstanding (and a common one among rationalists and religious types alike) about what faith is and what purpose it serves.

Plus it kind of bugs me when people start saying that having irrational faith is itself something worth mocking. I don't have a pu$$y but I don't mock people for having them.

(p.s. I hear a spelunking party tried to map out the interior of Dawg's irrational faith in an omnipotent creator and got lost for a week.)
(p.p.s. if it's not clear, that was a repurposed Gina's Hoo-Hah Joke.)
Logged

AlohaDawg

  • Moderator
  • LAZARUS, Tasseled Loafer of the Powerful
  • Tiny cans of Dr Pepper: 79
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 4184
  • Crawlin' back to prosperity
    • View Profile
Re: Religion Content from Name Thread
« Reply #31 on: July 05, 2006, 10:15:32 pm »

And I think we can all agree that it's just fine and dandy for you to believe whatever you choose.  It only becomes a problem when you become indignant because people start mocking the absurdity of it. 

I think it's fine and dandy to be black, or gay, or disabled but I think it's perfectly legitimate to be indignant when anyone mocks what they perceive as the absurdity of these states of being.

Paul, you are proceeding from the premise that it's a given that faith is absurd. And you don't know that, you've said as much in previous posts. If you aren't willing to acknowlege the possibility that there is a REASON behind faith, at least ponder the possibility that there is a PURPOSE to faith being a part of many people worldwide's 'human condition'.

Logged

misterqueue

  • Sick Fuck
  • VIP
  • R I S O T T O ?
  • *
  • Tiny cans of Dr Pepper: 25
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 2011
  • I can do anything I want. And so can you.
    • View Profile
    • A Reason for Diseasin'
Re: Religion Content from Name Thread
« Reply #32 on: July 05, 2006, 11:34:09 pm »

I think it's fine and dandy to be black, or gay, or disabled but I think it's perfectly legitimate to be indignant when anyone mocks what they perceive as the absurdity of these states of being.

The problem with your argument here is that, well I suppose some would argue gay is a choice, being black or "disabled" is not something you choose to be.  Having a belief is, generally, something you choose (or at least seek to refine).

I'll argue against Scientologists' beliefs all day long for example and not feel bad about it.  Would I not help a Scientologist?  Would I not befriend a Scientologist?  No.. because they are people and I do not judge people themselves on what they believe.

Maybe jough put it in a certain humor context, but I don't think there really was "mocking" going on.  It does bother me a little bit that when you post something no one gets all uppity about it, but when we're discuss our viewpoints you play the victim card.  Maybe I'm misreading into this, but man, "we was discussin'"  your viewpoint is always welcome.
Logged
So it's satire, is it?  Well that changes everything!

Lockjaw is serious times.

Doc

  • Growing Cucumbers of Impressive Dimensions
  • Writer's Workshoppers
  • Philippe is standing on it.
  • *
  • Tiny cans of Dr Pepper: 1408
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 5017
  • an emergency backup pug
    • View Profile
Re: Religion Content from Name Thread
« Reply #33 on: July 05, 2006, 11:39:29 pm »

While I can understand AD's point of view on discussions like this given previous happenings and goings on I think the religious content of this thread has had more to do with the humour and irrationality in the system more than in any particular religion itself. I mean we came from the hoops one has to jump through to get married in a particular church and ended up mainly with stories of the weird knee jerk reactions people were exposed to in religious schools.
Even Jough's science experiment is funny because of how his teachers reacted to it rather than a mocking 'haha see the host does not look like skin cells'.
Summary: Be cool, we all love y'all and we can talk of human foibles caused by spiritual beliefs without attacking the beliefs themselves.
Now that that's out of the way I've got some brilliant Toaist jokes...

That holy atoms thing makes me want to bring on my own righteous fire though, talk about abusing a position of trust.
Logged
Inev: 'A lot of things are ridiculous if you think about them long enough, you know?'

Ben-San

  • -=Ray=-
  • Tiny cans of Dr Pepper: 164
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1259
  • Two-Fisted Detective
    • View Profile
Re: Religion Content from Name Thread
« Reply #34 on: July 06, 2006, 12:03:06 am »

That holy atoms thing makes me want to bring on my own righteous fire though, talk about abusing a position of trust.

Yeah, here we are trusting God to make the universe observable and quantifiable and that fuck*ng guy pulls out invisible fuck*ng atoms!
Logged

jough

  • God's Own Dick
  • Administrator
  • Philippe is standing on it.
  • Tiny cans of Dr Pepper: 948
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 6871
  • If you've got the time, we've got El Guapo.
    • View Profile
    • poetry archives
Re: Religion Content from Name Thread
« Reply #35 on: July 06, 2006, 12:18:51 am »

WHAT KIND OF A GOD WOULD ALLOW INVISIBLE ATOMS?

I do try to understand faith and do sometimes wish that reason and believability did not interfere with my ability to believe in all sorts of crazy shit that makes no sense and seems to have no basis for making sense to anyone other than the reason that "it's the way I was raised."

I honestly did not think that anyone could possibly believe the shit they were teaching us in Catholic school.  I kept thinking "Oh come on.  There's no way you believe that!  Seven days?  So God isn't all powerful - he's just faster than the rest of us?  Three beings in one?  Why not seven?"

Ben-San

  • -=Ray=-
  • Tiny cans of Dr Pepper: 164
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1259
  • Two-Fisted Detective
    • View Profile
Re: Religion Content from Name Thread
« Reply #36 on: July 06, 2006, 12:24:02 am »

I do not have scientifically-tested proof that Catholic schooling has destroyed more people's faith than any other single institution on the planet, but empirical observation has put it pretty far up a posited ladder.
Logged

CortJstr

  • Mod Squad
  • Philippe is standing on it
  • Tiny cans of Dr Pepper: 338
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 9820
  • Which gives us AN EXCUSE TO DRINK!
    • View Profile
Re: Religion Content from Name Thread
« Reply #37 on: July 06, 2006, 12:43:02 am »

I honestly did not think that anyone could possibly believe the shit they were teaching us in Catholic school.  I kept thinking "Oh come on.  There's no way you believe that!  Seven days?  So God isn't all powerful - he's just faster than the rest of us?  Three beings in one?  Why not seven?"


This is a perfect example of Catholic schools teaching non-dogma. As I understand it the dogma is that the 7 days of creation is a metaphor, as days didn't even exist yet. But so many people are taught that it's literally 7 24-hour periods.
Logged

AlohaDawg

  • Moderator
  • LAZARUS, Tasseled Loafer of the Powerful
  • Tiny cans of Dr Pepper: 79
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 4184
  • Crawlin' back to prosperity
    • View Profile
Re: Religion Content from Name Thread
« Reply #38 on: July 06, 2006, 12:54:13 am »


Maybe jough put it in a certain humor context, but I don't think there really was "mocking" going on.  It does bother me a little bit that when you post something no one gets all uppity about it, but when we're discuss our viewpoints you play the victim card.  Maybe I'm misreading into this, but man, "we was discussin'"  your viewpoint is always welcome.

What are you talking about? I haven't made a comment about the religious content of anyone's posts in this thread yet. And I don't think I've said anything about being a victim either. I just want people to be somewhat considerate because some posts come across as hostile.

My point to Paul, and those who do not include their faith as a core element of their identity have difficulty understanding this, is that it is not, as you say, a choice. It is, in my case, WHO I AM. So general mockery of these things is generally mockery of me. I realize this is difficult for some people to understand. Please consider this. Maybe I'm extra-sensitive about this but some of the wordsmithing around here goes beyond playful jabs at religion.

Now, this time around, I was more concerned about the fact that the original thread strayed into what we mutually agreed was not supposed to appear in threads without some kind of indication, due to the fact that it's unpleasant for some people. So the thread is split and play continues. And I'm doing my best to avoid specific commentary on religious points made here.
Logged

misterqueue

  • Sick Fuck
  • VIP
  • R I S O T T O ?
  • *
  • Tiny cans of Dr Pepper: 25
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 2011
  • I can do anything I want. And so can you.
    • View Profile
    • A Reason for Diseasin'
Re: Religion Content from Name Thread
« Reply #39 on: July 06, 2006, 01:18:17 am »

My point to Paul, and those who do not include their faith as a core element of their identity have difficulty understanding this, is that it is not, as you say, a choice. It is, in my case, WHO I AM. So general mockery of these things is generally mockery of me. I realize this is difficult for some people to understand. Please consider this. Maybe I'm extra-sensitive about this but some of the wordsmithing around here goes beyond playful jabs at religion.

Well then I apologise if I misconstrued your statements.  These things happen with text only communication.

It sure is who you are, and I respect that feeling.  However, at the same time you made a choice of that on some level.  I can assure you however, that (and again I don't think we were "Mocking" anything really) criticism (even playfull criticism) is not directed at you personally, but at the general idea.  I have, in all honesty, tried to walk eggshellish on this issue really because I think you're a good guy and I don't want you to feel like I'm attacking you personally.  Hell, we'd probably never ever be on the same side of a picket line but that doesn't mean I like you any less.

So, to conclude, sorry if I misconstrued. 
Logged
So it's satire, is it?  Well that changes everything!

Lockjaw is serious times.

jough

  • God's Own Dick
  • Administrator
  • Philippe is standing on it.
  • Tiny cans of Dr Pepper: 948
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 6871
  • If you've got the time, we've got El Guapo.
    • View Profile
    • poetry archives
Re: Religion Content from Name Thread
« Reply #40 on: July 06, 2006, 01:22:26 am »

My point to Paul, and those who do not include their faith as a core element of their identity have difficulty understanding this, is that it is not, as you say, a choice. It is, in my case, WHO I AM. So general mockery of these things is generally mockery of me.

Yeah, this is pretty much bullshit.  You may be a Christian, but you are not Christianity.  Just because you believe in something doesn't make it part of who you ARE.  No one is born with a religious belief.  It's not part of your being.

Now whether it's a *choice* or not is of course debatable.  You may feel that you could not be anything but what you are, which of course isn't really true either - but that's a long "nature vs. nurture" debate that is beside the point here - but again, beliefs are malleable and changing for most people, yourself likely included (if you have always believed the same things without any question then let me know).

I can't help but believe that anyone who says they've never ever questioned their faith is just flat-out lying to me, because I can't believe anyone lacks any kind of sense of wonder or curiosity that they would blindly follow anything that was prescribed to them.

Quote
Maybe I'm extra-sensitive about this but some of the wordsmithing around here goes beyond playful jabs at religion.

Oh, I wasn't trying to be playful.  I am genuinely interested in the subject, though, and am not going to discount any possibilities no matter how ridiculous they seem to me.  However, I'd be very much surprised if there was a God who was just like the one described in the Judea-Christian bible (either testament).

Quote
And I'm doing my best to avoid specific commentary on religious points made here.

Why is that?  I think we can discuss religion without trying to force our views on each other. 

However, if you equate "disagreement about the nature of God" with "a personal attack against me" then the religion tag in the subject line is probably a good indicator of threads you should stay away from.  No reason to read things and bite your tongue just to get upset at us heathens, Dawg.

Plus, isn't passing judgment on people who don't believe in the same things you do a little anti-Christian anyway? ;)

AlohaDawg

  • Moderator
  • LAZARUS, Tasseled Loafer of the Powerful
  • Tiny cans of Dr Pepper: 79
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 4184
  • Crawlin' back to prosperity
    • View Profile
Re: Religion Content from Name Thread
« Reply #41 on: July 06, 2006, 01:23:17 am »

It's all good Q, I'm just amazed this kind of ruckus comes out while I'm trying specifically to NOT make overtly religious statements or to respond directly to the religious statements of others. I'm not mad at anyone, I'm not pissed off, I'm not feeling particulary self righteous and I haven't reached for my smitin' stick. I just want people to put themselves on my side of the fence for 30 seconds and understand why I have gotten that way in the past.

<><>

Jough, it's bullshit for you to dictate to me how I identify myself as a person. It's assy. I'm me and you can argue with that until you fall over; it won't change who I am. If there's nothing on the other side and you're there I'll tell you you were right.

As for why I'm avoiding commenting -  Why should I? Something you want to hear? Or just itching for a chance to give me some shit about my life and my faith? It's interesting that I am only defending myself in this thread. I haven't said anything that needs defending. No general statements, no challenges, just a statement about what I think about me. Sorry you don't like me. Take a number.

You've left me no incentive whatsoever to share anything else about what I believe; you've already rejected me as a person with the above statement. That I haven't made a religious statement or responded to others and still get abused is more than enough. Thanks.



« Last Edit: July 06, 2006, 01:36:34 am by AlohaDawg »
Logged

jough

  • God's Own Dick
  • Administrator
  • Philippe is standing on it.
  • Tiny cans of Dr Pepper: 948
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 6871
  • If you've got the time, we've got El Guapo.
    • View Profile
    • poetry archives
Re: Religion Content from Name Thread
« Reply #42 on: July 06, 2006, 02:02:19 am »

Jough, it's bullshit for you to dictate to me how I identify myself as a person. It's assy.

You can say you're a tugboat but that doesn't make it so, Dawg.  Your argument is like the right-wingers who say that if you criticize Bush then you must hate America.  It is a bullshit argument regardless of how you define yourself as a person.

Quote
If there's nothing on the other side and you're there I'll tell you you were right.

I'll take you up on that.  But keep in mind that if I'm right we're both fucked, so let's hope I'm wrong, huh?

Quote
As for why I'm avoiding commenting -  Why should I? Something you want to hear?

You're just making a big fuss about NOT commenting.  You're not going to comment.  Gee.  You want a cookie or something?  I don't do all sorts of things, but I don't post to the board every time I don't take a trip to India.

Subject: Trip to India
"Nope, NOT TODAY."

Quote
It's interesting that I am only defending myself in this thread. I haven't said anything that needs defending.

Well, it is interesting that you're being pre-emptively defensive.  No one's attacking you but you go out of your way to be a victim.  WTF?

Quote
Sorry you don't like me.

I never said I didn't like you!  See what I mean?  Every chance you get you take the martyr stance.

wombat

  • English-Speaking Pizza
  • Mod Squad
  • Dude since Knucklehead times
  • *
  • Tiny cans of Dr Pepper: 644
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12493
  • Yeah man, these are pugs, not some fuck*ng lolcat.
    • View Profile
Re: Religion Content from Name Thread
« Reply #43 on: July 06, 2006, 02:28:51 am »

I think it is a sound general rule that once people are breaking posts into that many separate quotes to reply to them, things are on the way to degenerating beyond reasonable discussion.... 

Reasonable people can differ on whether this messageboard is a place to discuss religion but this is really no longer a discussion of religion.  I'd lock it but you both can unlock it so I guess I just have to trust to your good judgment.
Logged
What is this, the fuckin' Algonquin Round Table or some shit?  - Nabu

If you're going to change your life then you have to change it every day, not just the days the world isn't taking a shit on you. -Doc

linnea

  • VIP
  • Ocular Shenanigans
  • *
  • Tiny cans of Dr Pepper: 168
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 3332
    • View Profile
Re: Religion Content from Name Thread
« Reply #44 on: July 06, 2006, 02:50:03 am »

I find the disconnect between faith and the status quo disconcerting, to say the least. Christianity evolved as a small, peaceful sect and then hundreds of years later it had become the largest organized religion that was hellbent on oppression (see Spanish Inquisition, Dark Ages, etc.).

The sheer volume of history behind the church is staggering. And I don't deny that dogma has been refined and perverted for centuries. But the specific case of Christianity and violent dogma is really no different from any other faith or belief system or religion.

Personally, I am an Episcopalian. My pa was raised Roman Catholic and endured 12 years of nuns in Catholic School. My mom was raised Southern Baptist. As a result, they raised me with very little religion. I only went to church when I went with friends from school. Through the years I've looked at various faiths and tried my hand at several dozen. When I had to drop out of grad school, I was literally struggling with hell (when I was horribly depressed, my fiance had been shipped off to Iraq, etc.), something crazy/miraculous happened. I had a personal visitation.

I'm not going to go into it, but lot of my friends derided it as shrinks fuck*ng with me, or my depression, or whatever. But I do know that I was a staunch athiest who was well beyond my wit's end. As they say, there are no athiests in foxholes.  Life has not been easy or sweet since then (see the events leading up to my move to Alaska) but at least I feel like my life has purpose. Having faith doesn't immunize me from shitty things happening to me, but it gives me focus and meaning like nothing else has. Are other people focused and at the top of their game without faith? I don't know, because I can only speak from experience. My life has changed drastically since then.

And also, for the first time in my life, I've found something spiritual that I've stuck with. I chose to be baptized as an Episcopalian on January 6, 2003. We have a gay bishop and women leaders in the church. Personally, I refer to Jesus as "Baby Jesus" because it sounds a little more lighthearted and less "scary" than making a bold statment such as, "I love Jesus." I am not a saint. I'm not perfect, but I try to live a good life. I go out to the bars with my friends, and I cuss like a sailor and I sometimes repeat small town gossip. I've never been married. However, I volunteer about 10-20 hours per week doing Fire/EMS and caring for patients, and more time than that being involved with my community. I give money to progressive causes that I feel are worthy, such as women's organizations and Planned Parenthood. I volunteer on several boards, such as our local domestic violence shelter, our local library committee, and our local public broadcasting station. I feel like I am doing work for Baby Jesus when I try to help others. I go to church regularly and try to support our mission in Alaska and help our community. When disasters happen, like Hurricane Katrina, our church community dug into our own pockets to send some of our most experienced personnel to the Gulf coast for humanitarian work. Same thing for the mudslides in the Phillippenes and the earthquakes in Afghanistan and everything.

I am sure that there are righteous athiests who have also banded together to help in similar manners, but having an organized group like a church gives us focus to serve Christ's mission in the world, which is to help those less fortunate than us and to work for peace. Shit, your mileage may vary. You might not care about stuff like that. But I do, and my faith is a big part of it.

I'm not going to deny that weird arguments like how many angels can dance on the head of a pin are sheer folly. I don't care what other people think about the church or its history. There are lots of weird metaphors to describe the relationships between God and Humans. Such as God being the Father and we are his children but Christ is his only begotten Son; Christ being the Bridegroom and the Church his bride; or the Church being made up of the Body of Christ; the metaphor of Christ being the Good Shepherd and we are his flock; the trifecta  nature of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Spirit, etc. There's a lot of them. They all illustrate the fact that God loves us despite our constant failures to uphold the covenant.

Still, the religion debate all boils down to one thing:  Humans are fallible. Although we are supposed to maintain the church as the body of christ, it is still made up of individuals and organizations that are prone to human error, just like athiests, Hindus, Muslims, born-agains, Dan Savage, or burned ex-Catholics.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 9   Go Up