V
-
NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!
stonehart
Paranormal Adept
lol I have seen it first hand man.. the biz is full of crooks and shysters
V
Voyager
Guest
V
Voyager
Guest
V
Voyager
Guest
Jabbermocky
Paranormal Maven
Probably a tiny bit of "junk" history in this too -- but there you go -- what am I going to hell for it?
I was wondering though, it appears that there is a core group of you here that are hard-lined atheists; are you an homogeneous group? You appear to be of the same mind when it comes to the holy books of Christianity and Judaism, and as the "Abrahamic religion" term is used in the dialogue, by extension, Islam as well. As this is a paranormal forum, unless you have joined just to cheese-off those with damaged right-brains, your interests must extend beyond just questions of religion. Going back to spiritualism and the brain damaged spiritualist*, does this also mean that you are in agreement on such things as life after death, reincarnation, ancient alien theories, cryptozoology, UFOs etc. I could go read your individual posts elsewhere, but it would be interesting to know what attracted you to joining the Paracast Forum if not just to convert the uneducated. Just as a "for instance", like you, my brother is an atheist -- he too enjoys the bating and ridiculing (especially of his religious son -- huh? how did that happen?); but, he does believe in an afterlife. He can have both ideas running without some "authority" figure being in charge or a creator starting the whole thing rolling. Is this a common occurrence among atheists, two what appear (to me) to be incongruent thoughts?
Hard-lined is a bit of a oxymoron I suppose, as is the other terms I've used such as militants and angry (and ones I haven't used such as rabid -- but I digress) -- you are either in or out of atheism. It occurs to me that I have not been thinking straight. No, you haven't had a conversion here; but I've been addressing you as if you were agnostics. My thinking was that there would be some debate or discussion on the topic, instead of realizing there's no way back from your standpoint (and I don't mean in the biblical roast in hell sense); it's not a posture or position, it just is. I apologize to you for wasting your time.
I still maintain, although a few have you have argued against it, that we are "hard-wired" for religion -- and I think it is exactly what Jacques Vallee (as quoted by TO) is saying. Unless your hopes for an atheist utopia can be achieved globally and simultaneously -- albeit a few generations away -- you will be called upon to defend it from other religions (and/or groups) wishing to fill the void by force if necessary. You don't have to look for religious precedence for this -- it's a political reality too.
I know; this is going all over the place (see above*). I am a big Douglas Adams fan; I have purchased more of his books than those of any other author. I even wrote to him once. He didn't get my letter, I didn't know he had died the year before (!). But just a few thoughts on some of the "good" points he made in the second video posted. I can see how he -- without a shred of data, mind -- extrapolated how a belief in god must have come about. We make things, so he must be like us and have made us. Good enough for me -- to a point. I know he was just offering "a" version, but he seemed so certain of himself. I suppose, if it is the case (am not doubting), it would enable anthropologists to date religion, as the indigenous beliefs in other parts of the world differ in their creation myths. So "man-like god" would have been created after those groups that were not tool-geniuses immigrated to the North America from Asia and started the utter nonsense with the wolf and the crow or the ridiculous Polynesian fish hook island-pulling sky.
No conclusion, sorry (again).
tyder001
Paranormal Adept
Although, I respect some of the "atheist" here I still had a certain thought on some of the religious attack and splatter on the wall b.s. I came to think of it as a circle jerk. I know that will make some mad and I'm sorry about that. It's just the thought that went through my mind as one or two or three otherwise reasonable posters just kept on and on with the silly "I can post more bad links than you can" post. 
Actually, I (and I'm sure I'm not the only one) will only follow so many links for so long. I know that I try to post the address to a link or a single story to a link. Because once you get into the link after link after link and smirky video after smirky video it gets kind of tiring. Anyway, religion seems to bring out the fangs around here. I absolutely don't agree (and no posting popes in funny hats and link after link of so called biblical contridictions won't change my mind. But, I absolutely don't think religion is a force for evil. I don't know the religion that so many here are angry about. I don't go to a mega church or kiss the ring of the pope or give millions to a televangilist. I call up a church during work (I'm a social worker) and go and pick up food and clothing that they donate to the poor. I call a local minister to come out and speak to a dying person that they don't know. I talk with a gay couple about their faith and how even though the "church" has for the most part turned it's back on them. They are still at peace knowing a higher power is at their side in time of need. So, no I can't really relate to all the basing and silly cursing by a few otherwise sane folks here. Atheism? You can have it and I'll fight for your right to express it. But, I want roll over and agree with idiotic name calling just because I'm not anti religion. I have only one religion now. I try to treat others the way I would want to be treated.
Actually, I (and I'm sure I'm not the only one) will only follow so many links for so long. I know that I try to post the address to a link or a single story to a link. Because once you get into the link after link after link and smirky video after smirky video it gets kind of tiring. Anyway, religion seems to bring out the fangs around here. I absolutely don't agree (and no posting popes in funny hats and link after link of so called biblical contridictions won't change my mind. But, I absolutely don't think religion is a force for evil. I don't know the religion that so many here are angry about. I don't go to a mega church or kiss the ring of the pope or give millions to a televangilist. I call up a church during work (I'm a social worker) and go and pick up food and clothing that they donate to the poor. I call a local minister to come out and speak to a dying person that they don't know. I talk with a gay couple about their faith and how even though the "church" has for the most part turned it's back on them. They are still at peace knowing a higher power is at their side in time of need. So, no I can't really relate to all the basing and silly cursing by a few otherwise sane folks here. Atheism? You can have it and I'll fight for your right to express it. But, I want roll over and agree with idiotic name calling just because I'm not anti religion. I have only one religion now. I try to treat others the way I would want to be treated.
trainedobserver
Paranormally Disenchanted
The thing for me Steve, and we've talked about this in the past, is that no person can be expected to understand or agree with concepts that have been inadequately explained to them. The theist/atheist argument is a bit one sided in that respect. If someone doesn't believe something that a believer fails to articulate in a meaningful manner to them (such as the nature and identity of their god), are they at fault and subject to criticism as a result? For example, it's like expecting Kim (or anyone else) to understand or agree with the ad hoc Ancient Humans theory I pulled out of the air in another thread.
Everyone is an atheistic toward one god or another, would you not agree? I know of no one personally who believes in all the gods humanity has worshiped. In reality we are all atheists with some of us holding out for one god or another. Would you not agree?
Everyone is an atheistic toward one god or another, would you not agree? I know of no one personally who believes in all the gods humanity has worshiped. In reality we are all atheists with some of us holding out for one god or another. Would you not agree?
Jabbermocky
Paranormal Maven
I thought I would try to introduce a term that would attempt to weed-out the difference between theists and atheists -- in the way I think you are trying to here. To me "theist" is someone who believes in a god or deity and an atheist is someone who does not believe that any "divine power" exists (e.g. sexual/asexual); whereas (again I'm trying to pick through what I think you meant) your argument offers that the term atheist may also apply to someone who is a theist but rejects all other claims. The term I thought-up (?) was protheist (to replace your theist in this application). Well, apparently it was/has been already taken. In my Google search I came across this blog, which I think is worth taking a look at -- I thought it was very interesting anyway (especially the quote from Quinton Smith, apparently a prominent atheist -- he seems ever so nice and inoffensive
): http://protheism.blogspot.ca/
trainedobserver
Paranormally Disenchanted
What do you define as a "divine power." I was puzzling over this just the other day. What is meant by "divine" without using the word god in the definition.
Having passed through the atheist/theist/atheist stages I like to think I have some understanding of the conflicting viewpoints, however I continually find it hard to get agreement on basic terminology from one sect, organization, or believer or another where things like god, spirit, divine, soul, or the true natures or identities of the characters in their pantheons or god-heads are concerned. To me, this is a major stumbling block. I realize even as a believer these concepts were vague and mercurial to me.
Having passed through the atheist/theist/atheist stages I like to think I have some understanding of the conflicting viewpoints, however I continually find it hard to get agreement on basic terminology from one sect, organization, or believer or another where things like god, spirit, divine, soul, or the true natures or identities of the characters in their pantheons or god-heads are concerned. To me, this is a major stumbling block. I realize even as a believer these concepts were vague and mercurial to me.
Kim323
Paranormal Maven
I was waiting for this thread to re-emerge. Only a matter of time. I think Jabbermockey and Tyder are right on, as I've said before. "Circle jerk" describes it perfectly. And Jabbermocky above in his post just is superb also, as he was earlier in this thread where he paid dearly with an onslaught of
"intellectuality" from a poster I actually have some respect for, but who throws in his towel with two specific posters who besmirch the debate with the stuff Tyder specifically alludes to.
There is no debate, ever since the Jesus threads. It's become, as Jabbermocky so described it, "utter hatred" very quickly, very gleefully, and Tyder's comment on this thread about intellectual honesty is so correct.
I have condemned this method of "discourse" over the course of these "religious wars," as I term them, but the emphasis, as Jabbermockey pointed out, HAS been primarily on Jews and Christians, your neighbors down the street, your family members, and your colleagues. Not only the Jews and Christians of past times, but Jews and Christians of current times, and the overwhelming links and overwhelming derision have drowned out anything substantive, because, well, you're religious, and you darn well deserve it. The poster who seems to abet some of what two particular posters do should be above it, and you know, I've often wondered: why isn't this guy, who really isn't contributing the really, really, too inflammatory stuff, but who nevertheless ridicules Christianity, and who takes down Jabbermocky who made a heartfelt and very accurate observation of the tone of the "debate," why isn't he saying, hey, guys, these people ARE PEOPLE, they have FEELINGS, they ARE NOT GUILTY of the crimes of Christianity over centuries, this stuff you accuse them of, well, come on, there is a lot of very real GOOD, even SACRIFICE, in the history of the churches, and on and on. But no, the pileup continued.
I am going to list, in no special order, some of what I've said before about this so-called debate, a debate that should take place as Jabbermocky describes above, but which immediately turned into contempt for Christians and Jews. Just off the top of my head, as is my method, but really and truly, is based on decades of study of the history of Judaism, Christianity, the Reformations in Europe and England, and Greek and Roman history, are some of the things I noticed again and again among those who participated in this pile-on and yes, "circle jerk."
1. Christians and Jews should take what they deserve, because they have a level of proof on this forum equivalent to the level of proof WE, intellectuals that we are, demand of well, let's see, Raelians (spelling?), Billy Meier (spelling?), Talbot, Robbert the Dutch guy, and my Heavens above, on and on and on. Easy, so easy, and sounds so intellectual, and bespeaks an adherence to "rationality," "secular humanism," pure science, burdens of proof, neuroscience, and on and on, stuff, by the way, I have sincere doubts from reading posts from these members that they have read much of what they proclaim at all. But to spout these descriptions, to cloak themselves in those folds, says, we are intellectuals, and by gosh, we're not going to tolerate any baloney.
But to include Christianity and Judaism with those others, and I know, really know, believe me, this bespeaks in reality a level of ignorance of history of the Catholic Church, the histories of the Protestant Reformations in Europe and England, the histories of Christianity in the Eastern part of the Roman Empire, and their histories subsequent to the dissolution of the Western part of the Empire, what the Catholic Church did, the exquisite good, it did for Europe after the slow dissolution of the Roman Empire per se, my Heavens, the level of ignorance is so abysmal it's sad, if it wasn't so cruel with the "spitting" and "splattering" another poster used to describe what some members have done to "further" the "debate."
2. So, as number 1, says, we enter now into this second point: the abandonment of history by these members who have inflamed with their cruelty. As a scholarly endeavor, history as a field, a worthy field, is ridiculed. Little if any actual knowledge of history has been demonstrated, I mean history that THEY THEMSELVES have read, studied, assimilated, etc. History is ridiculed also, and because any knowledge of it is well nigh unknown (from what I have seen!), the internet is mined for absurdities, non sequitur(s), leaps of absurd "judgement," and on and on, and believe, me I could be far more specific as to this "data."
3. Then, as history is abandoned, comes the refuge in what I like to call on the part of these posters the "look what GOD and JESUS themselves, did, either through, what is it, lack of foresight, if he was so smart, Jesus caused the Crusades, and on and on. This shows, again, on another level such a chasm of pure and sheer IGNORANCE of THEOLOGICAL history, and notice, I'm sticking to history on this. So theology, for these members, is an additional target or ridicule and assault with their pseudo-intellectual stuff like, ooohhh, yuk, disgusting, Christians eat the flesh and drink the blood of Jesus, what God would nail his son to a "plank," and my Heavens, on and on.
4. The sheer onslaught on numbers 1, 2, and 3 above is furthermore even more disingenuously "enhanced" by these self-professed "intellectuals" with the PERSONAL DEMANDS, often very strident, to Christians, to EXPLAIN WHAT THEY PERSONALLY BELIEVE. Now, if this was done in a spirit (bad word itself, ha, ha!) of genuine curiosity, ok, but that is not its intent. Its intent is to extract something more to ridicule, but the debate was NEVER ABOUT the specific beliefs of Christians, much less the ways in which Christians themselves take the basic messages and interpret them themselves. The debate, by me, was apart from just mentioning that yes, I am Christian, wasn't about my beliefs specifically, it was ostensibly about the FACTS of the history of Christianity from Jesus himself to now. But it quickly became a "circle jerk" that became condemnations of everything in the history of the churches that was, indisputably, bad, but none of what it was that churches did that was very demonstrably GOOD, and believe me, that has been enormous. Christianity was very much spread by missionary work, often individual missionary work, that required courage. But I didn't AT ALL portray myself as a missionary on these forums, not at all.
5. Then, of course, there's the demonization of Jews and Christians that bordered, in the case of the Jews, especially, in my opinion, on anti-Semitism. I recommend a film entitled A Film Unfinished, quite extensive footage discovered in archives in East Germany years ago. The Nazis were great recordkeepers indeed, so one of the actual cameraman who filmed contrived scenes in the Warsaw ghetto was interviewed in this documentary about this discovered footage. The Jews were portrayed as dirty, devious, conspiratorial, disgusting, etc., etc. As we all know, the Jews were starving to death, but the Nazis wrote scripts that they forced Jews to act in, scenes of them well dressed and eating in fancy restaurants, scenes of an actual circumcision with the Jews wearing their actual religious clothing, scenes where a purification ceremony was re-enacted showing naked Jews, men and women, entering a pool of water, and on and on and on. My hands were clenching in rage, disgust, and my eyes were actually tearing up. NOW, AND I MAKE THIS CLEAR: I accuse NO MEMBERS of anti-Semitism here. It's just that some of the comments, pictures, videos, cruel remarks, the mocking, the derision, the exultation, I thought exhibited the glee that I, IN MY OPINION, saw in the deliverance of such media, the blaming of so many horrors on Jews and Christians, that TO ME, were beyond the pale, "utter hatred," as Jabbermocky so well put it. It disgusted me, on a personal level, an intellectual level, an historical level, on every level as a human and as a, yes, scholar of religious history as I try to be. Again, I accuse no one, per se, of anti-Semitism, but the glee, the "circle jerk" of threads started just to post stuff on and on and on that alleged all this stuff Christians and Jews did, was disgusting. But, I know, I'm a crybaby that can't stand the heat of this "intellectual scrutiny" so lauded as the standard by which certain members live and with which they dissect, by gosh, this religious stuff that by its very nature, is open to, well, whatever it gets. "I am the teacher, administering the cure." Kim
"intellectuality" from a poster I actually have some respect for, but who throws in his towel with two specific posters who besmirch the debate with the stuff Tyder specifically alludes to.
There is no debate, ever since the Jesus threads. It's become, as Jabbermocky so described it, "utter hatred" very quickly, very gleefully, and Tyder's comment on this thread about intellectual honesty is so correct.
I have condemned this method of "discourse" over the course of these "religious wars," as I term them, but the emphasis, as Jabbermockey pointed out, HAS been primarily on Jews and Christians, your neighbors down the street, your family members, and your colleagues. Not only the Jews and Christians of past times, but Jews and Christians of current times, and the overwhelming links and overwhelming derision have drowned out anything substantive, because, well, you're religious, and you darn well deserve it. The poster who seems to abet some of what two particular posters do should be above it, and you know, I've often wondered: why isn't this guy, who really isn't contributing the really, really, too inflammatory stuff, but who nevertheless ridicules Christianity, and who takes down Jabbermocky who made a heartfelt and very accurate observation of the tone of the "debate," why isn't he saying, hey, guys, these people ARE PEOPLE, they have FEELINGS, they ARE NOT GUILTY of the crimes of Christianity over centuries, this stuff you accuse them of, well, come on, there is a lot of very real GOOD, even SACRIFICE, in the history of the churches, and on and on. But no, the pileup continued.
I am going to list, in no special order, some of what I've said before about this so-called debate, a debate that should take place as Jabbermocky describes above, but which immediately turned into contempt for Christians and Jews. Just off the top of my head, as is my method, but really and truly, is based on decades of study of the history of Judaism, Christianity, the Reformations in Europe and England, and Greek and Roman history, are some of the things I noticed again and again among those who participated in this pile-on and yes, "circle jerk."
1. Christians and Jews should take what they deserve, because they have a level of proof on this forum equivalent to the level of proof WE, intellectuals that we are, demand of well, let's see, Raelians (spelling?), Billy Meier (spelling?), Talbot, Robbert the Dutch guy, and my Heavens above, on and on and on. Easy, so easy, and sounds so intellectual, and bespeaks an adherence to "rationality," "secular humanism," pure science, burdens of proof, neuroscience, and on and on, stuff, by the way, I have sincere doubts from reading posts from these members that they have read much of what they proclaim at all. But to spout these descriptions, to cloak themselves in those folds, says, we are intellectuals, and by gosh, we're not going to tolerate any baloney.
But to include Christianity and Judaism with those others, and I know, really know, believe me, this bespeaks in reality a level of ignorance of history of the Catholic Church, the histories of the Protestant Reformations in Europe and England, the histories of Christianity in the Eastern part of the Roman Empire, and their histories subsequent to the dissolution of the Western part of the Empire, what the Catholic Church did, the exquisite good, it did for Europe after the slow dissolution of the Roman Empire per se, my Heavens, the level of ignorance is so abysmal it's sad, if it wasn't so cruel with the "spitting" and "splattering" another poster used to describe what some members have done to "further" the "debate."
2. So, as number 1, says, we enter now into this second point: the abandonment of history by these members who have inflamed with their cruelty. As a scholarly endeavor, history as a field, a worthy field, is ridiculed. Little if any actual knowledge of history has been demonstrated, I mean history that THEY THEMSELVES have read, studied, assimilated, etc. History is ridiculed also, and because any knowledge of it is well nigh unknown (from what I have seen!), the internet is mined for absurdities, non sequitur(s), leaps of absurd "judgement," and on and on, and believe, me I could be far more specific as to this "data."
3. Then, as history is abandoned, comes the refuge in what I like to call on the part of these posters the "look what GOD and JESUS themselves, did, either through, what is it, lack of foresight, if he was so smart, Jesus caused the Crusades, and on and on. This shows, again, on another level such a chasm of pure and sheer IGNORANCE of THEOLOGICAL history, and notice, I'm sticking to history on this. So theology, for these members, is an additional target or ridicule and assault with their pseudo-intellectual stuff like, ooohhh, yuk, disgusting, Christians eat the flesh and drink the blood of Jesus, what God would nail his son to a "plank," and my Heavens, on and on.
4. The sheer onslaught on numbers 1, 2, and 3 above is furthermore even more disingenuously "enhanced" by these self-professed "intellectuals" with the PERSONAL DEMANDS, often very strident, to Christians, to EXPLAIN WHAT THEY PERSONALLY BELIEVE. Now, if this was done in a spirit (bad word itself, ha, ha!) of genuine curiosity, ok, but that is not its intent. Its intent is to extract something more to ridicule, but the debate was NEVER ABOUT the specific beliefs of Christians, much less the ways in which Christians themselves take the basic messages and interpret them themselves. The debate, by me, was apart from just mentioning that yes, I am Christian, wasn't about my beliefs specifically, it was ostensibly about the FACTS of the history of Christianity from Jesus himself to now. But it quickly became a "circle jerk" that became condemnations of everything in the history of the churches that was, indisputably, bad, but none of what it was that churches did that was very demonstrably GOOD, and believe me, that has been enormous. Christianity was very much spread by missionary work, often individual missionary work, that required courage. But I didn't AT ALL portray myself as a missionary on these forums, not at all.
5. Then, of course, there's the demonization of Jews and Christians that bordered, in the case of the Jews, especially, in my opinion, on anti-Semitism. I recommend a film entitled A Film Unfinished, quite extensive footage discovered in archives in East Germany years ago. The Nazis were great recordkeepers indeed, so one of the actual cameraman who filmed contrived scenes in the Warsaw ghetto was interviewed in this documentary about this discovered footage. The Jews were portrayed as dirty, devious, conspiratorial, disgusting, etc., etc. As we all know, the Jews were starving to death, but the Nazis wrote scripts that they forced Jews to act in, scenes of them well dressed and eating in fancy restaurants, scenes of an actual circumcision with the Jews wearing their actual religious clothing, scenes where a purification ceremony was re-enacted showing naked Jews, men and women, entering a pool of water, and on and on and on. My hands were clenching in rage, disgust, and my eyes were actually tearing up. NOW, AND I MAKE THIS CLEAR: I accuse NO MEMBERS of anti-Semitism here. It's just that some of the comments, pictures, videos, cruel remarks, the mocking, the derision, the exultation, I thought exhibited the glee that I, IN MY OPINION, saw in the deliverance of such media, the blaming of so many horrors on Jews and Christians, that TO ME, were beyond the pale, "utter hatred," as Jabbermocky so well put it. It disgusted me, on a personal level, an intellectual level, an historical level, on every level as a human and as a, yes, scholar of religious history as I try to be. Again, I accuse no one, per se, of anti-Semitism, but the glee, the "circle jerk" of threads started just to post stuff on and on and on that alleged all this stuff Christians and Jews did, was disgusting. But, I know, I'm a crybaby that can't stand the heat of this "intellectual scrutiny" so lauded as the standard by which certain members live and with which they dissect, by gosh, this religious stuff that by its very nature, is open to, well, whatever it gets. "I am the teacher, administering the cure." Kim
Jabbermocky
Paranormal Maven
I was trying to be somewhat vague myself, if you believe in God, Yahweh, a crow and a wolf, a god (damn, couldn't do it -- oh damn, I said damn) ... you get the pitcture...
how about "deity"?
Angel of Ioren
Friendly Skeptic
Kim, you have to be careful of what you say - you come off sounding as pompous and condescending as what you seem to be accusing others of.
We get it - you think religion is great. On the flip side, some of us here think it isn't as important as others feel it is.
Here's an interesting image I found on Reddit:
http://i.imgur.com/bVi1Y.png
We get it - you think religion is great. On the flip side, some of us here think it isn't as important as others feel it is.
Here's an interesting image I found on Reddit:
http://i.imgur.com/bVi1Y.png
Jabbermocky
Paranormal Maven
Electricity was designed by Edison? See, there you go...Edison is a god.
Jabbermocky
Paranormal Maven
Electricity was designed by Edison? See, there you go...Edison is a god.
trainedobserver
Paranormally Disenchanted
But that's just the point, I don't.
Kim, I'm sorry but I don't see where asking someone for an explanation of their beliefs is such an outrageous thing. I personally think all nastiness could be dispensed with if we simply agreed to discuss a basic point of contention and not get personal about it.
One arguable point of contention might be to jump frog the whole supernatural argument itself with, "Is god X worthy of human worship and devotion? If so, why? If not, why not?"
Am I just being too simple minded about it?
Angel of Ioren
Friendly Skeptic
And we have proof Edison existed! So I guess there was a god.
Kim323
Paranormal Maven
Angelo, you are one of the most coyly disingenuous guys I've ever encountered, and that link shows it. I'm just left with, huh?, wow, that was SO deep, and ,well, I guess THAT link pretty well settles it!
My question to you is simply why didn't you rein in all the circle jerk, spitting, and splattering stuff that has been posted on threads full of it?
And, trained, this whole stuff started how long ago with a simple topic posted about Jesus, which ballooned into the disgusting stuff that went on ad nauseam. My question to you is, where along that spectrum, did you say, hey, you two, and we know who they were, hold on and let's get back to the subject?
Angelo, your yes Kim we get it, religion is great, is more of your coyness. I have studiously avoided pushing my specific beliefs, and have stuck to history. If that sounds pedantic, I admit I can be that way, but believe it or not, there are some constants that can be maintained about history, and the history of the church(es), and if that sounds pompous, well, my gosh, I'll give you some more pompousness: the level of ignorance of the most basic history, chronologically, culturally, theologically, and more indeed, from some is horifically on display. And wow, that link is so, well, I guess that shows an intellectual depth that puts the whole "debate" to rest. If that's pomposity to you, well, no doubt it is. I'm not the only one who's found this "debate" to be a, well, other posters in this thread have described it in not so pompous terms. Kim
My question to you is simply why didn't you rein in all the circle jerk, spitting, and splattering stuff that has been posted on threads full of it?
And, trained, this whole stuff started how long ago with a simple topic posted about Jesus, which ballooned into the disgusting stuff that went on ad nauseam. My question to you is, where along that spectrum, did you say, hey, you two, and we know who they were, hold on and let's get back to the subject?
Angelo, your yes Kim we get it, religion is great, is more of your coyness. I have studiously avoided pushing my specific beliefs, and have stuck to history. If that sounds pedantic, I admit I can be that way, but believe it or not, there are some constants that can be maintained about history, and the history of the church(es), and if that sounds pompous, well, my gosh, I'll give you some more pompousness: the level of ignorance of the most basic history, chronologically, culturally, theologically, and more indeed, from some is horifically on display. And wow, that link is so, well, I guess that shows an intellectual depth that puts the whole "debate" to rest. If that's pomposity to you, well, no doubt it is. I'm not the only one who's found this "debate" to be a, well, other posters in this thread have described it in not so pompous terms. Kim
Jabbermocky
Paranormal Maven
Was that rhetorical
?I did add deity as an edit BTW.
You mean, like; Gi’tchie Manito deserves our worship as he made the Ah-ki (the Earth) and we should all do this by giving a pinch of tobacco, or a cigarette (after removing the filter), lightly sprinkled over a fire, as an act of respect. We should all then give praise to Father Sky and Mother Earth as well as Gi’tchie Manito.
Actually, I was trying hamfistidly to bait the atheists here by offering a minority religion as lure for condemnation (as I get the impression that the greatest offense to you is the size and domination of a religion). The interesting thing is that the website I was paraphrasing went on to say this:
The spirits of the Four Directions being the Eagle in the East, the Wolf in the South, Buffalo in the West and Bear in the North, these spirit animals change depending on the Aboriginal nation that you come to converse with. The East holds wisdom, renewal and new beginnings as well as knowledge of self, life in general and of those around us. The South brings change, renewal, birth and rebirth both of each of us as individuals and as part of the whole of creation. In the West sits our strength physical and spiritual, mental and emotional, there in the West also rests wisdom of the spirit, the soul, and of the other world. In the North stamina and endurance and the medicines through which Creator has given to us to heal ourselves of physical ailments and mental, emotional and spiritual wounds. (Aboriginal Teachings)
The cardinal points and their functions are somewhat reminiscent of Masonic lodges.
stonehart
Paranormal Adept
I do find it funny when we get Hitler thrown at us .. well Hitler was a Christian and a devout Roman Catholic .. In fact in "mein kampf" he calls it his Christian duty to stamp out the Jews.
Anyway what we have here is the confusion between religion and power for ideology can be every bit as destructive.
Regardless of what faith any of these people had it makes little difference as they were all control freaks much like the church etc had been for many century's before hand.
Anyway what we have here is the confusion between religion and power for ideology can be every bit as destructive.
Regardless of what faith any of these people had it makes little difference as they were all control freaks much like the church etc had been for many century's before hand.