Schiavo autopsy finally released... (the new religion thread?)

NachtcGleiskette · Post by **NachtcGleiskette** » Thu Jan 26, 2006 11:14 pm

Originally posted by chicory

There are some songs on the new religious stations in my area that I like. And I think they're love songs, a song being sung by a guy directed at his love interest. But, instead, when the dj/announcer man talks about it he talks about how great a song it is about the love between the singer and Christ. Which just jets a from me.

Heh, that reminds me of the faith+1 episode of South Park....when Cartman says that the way to write a christian song is to take a love song and replace all the "baby's" with "jesus"....and all their songs are about loving Jesus....sexually LOL

Anyway, yeah....what were we talking about?

Angelique · Post by **Angelique** » Thu Jan 26, 2006 11:37 pm

Forty years ago, sexuality was not a polite topic of discussion among much of anyone. It's not the Church that's done a 180.

Garble · Post by **Garble** » Thu Jan 26, 2006 11:38 pm

"To reject this truth or to treat it as 'one theory among others' is to deliberately embrace scientific ignorance and transmit such ignorance to our children."
10,000 clergy sign on to support evolution

This was on fark a few days ago. I thought you guys might appreciate it.

Also this was my response. It's an illustration of why I think the Bible is better to appreciate philosophically than empirically.

God: "First I initiated a massive chemical reaction that would result in a series of proteins and self replicating amino acids. These organic compounds would interact and develop different formations that would reproduce or dissolve depending on their ability to survive in an ever changing environment. Over the course of billions of years, I introduced indirect catalysts to these formations as they became more complicated so as to eventually produce a species with a brain advanced enough to achieve self awareness and perceive abstract concepts."

Mosses: "What?"

God: "...I made you all out of dirt."

chicory · Post by **chicory** » Sat Jan 28, 2006 8:34 pm

Originally posted by Angelique
Forty years ago, sexuality was not a polite topic of discussion among much of anyone. It's not the Church that's done a 180.

But, prior to two thousand years ago (in western europe) it was probably wasn't a taboo topic at all. One thing that Judaism, Christianity, and Islam have in common (at least to a layperson like me) is the rejection of earthy pleasures for spiritual ones. The whole starve the body feed the soul thing. (Actually, that might describe quite a lot of religions...)

I think if the pope is talking about intimacy between men and women he's doing a 180 from the teachings of Augustine? that went something like sex is for procreation only and neither party should enjoy it too much. (And Eros sounds so pagan somehow).

Originally posted by Garble"To reject this truth or to treat it as 'one theory among others' is to deliberately embrace scientific ignorance and transmit such ignorance to our children."

That sounds sane and practical. It's hard to deny the earth goes round the sun, the continents move and species mutate over time when the evidence is so tangible and overwhelming.

If religion exists to help people live their lives (and feel better about whatever afterlife their may be) than it makes sense to me that religion should incorporate science. They're not at war with each other...

Angelique · Post by **Angelique** » Sun Jan 29, 2006 7:05 am

But, prior to two thousand years ago (in western europe) it was probably wasn't a taboo topic at all. One thing that Judaism, Christianity, and Islam have in common (at least to a layperson like me) is the rejection of earthy pleasures for spiritual ones. The whole starve the body feed the soul thing. (Actually, that might describe quite a lot of religions...)

Actually, that's a tenet of Gnosticism. Judaism typically teaches moderation. I am not as well aware of Islam's teachings on the matter. But I do know that Christianity typically came down pretty hard on people saying all physical pleasure is bad or corrupt- typically because those would go so far as to deny that Jesus was ever a human being. The rejection of earthly pleasures is not characteristic of any of these faiths, but rather the belief that these things have their place, as long as it isn't top priority.

The Drastic Spastic · Mon Jan 30, 2006 10:03 am

Originally posted by Saint Kurt

So, for something completely different... Pope Benedict released his first papal encyclical yesterday and it totally surprised everyone. For one thing it was about love and not just any love, erotic love. And then, instead of warning everyone against it like everyone would have expected such a conservative right wing pope to do, he praises it. And finally, people were really impressed with the writing, praising the quality of the prose.

Here is the text of the encyclical: Deus Caritas Est (means "God is Love")

I'm shocked. The Church has finally caught on to the art of spin.

Kidding, sort of. But I haven't paid much attention to anything that's come out of the Vatican, so I could be wrong in assuming this is a complete turn around. And I skipped all that stuff on charity so maybe I missed the part where he condemns the practice of using birth control.

I did enjoy the parts I read, which is the real shocker. Lovely argument. Usually when I come across something that's all "God's love" this, and "[Bible quote]" that, I can't even stand to look at it. I thought it was a Pavlovian response to Bible quotes, but it looks like I had just never found a "God's love" argument that wasn't unbearably stupid. Good job, Pope.

So I thought I would suggest a different (and far more interesting ) topic: Eros or Erotic Love.

I've read tons of stuff on the topic (and even gotten some real life experience) and all I've come up with is that the general concept of erotic love is a mess. No one knows what the hell is going on there. It comes from the soul, it's a chemical reaction, it's God, it's natural, it separates us from animals, it's an evolutionary drive, it's primal, it's biological, it's ultimate enlightenment... who knows? Probably a bit of everything in there.

Pope is definitely right on how trying to make it purely physical is just not healthy. Even if it does come down to chemical reactions, we aren't built/evolved/created to see it that way.

Bamfette · Post by **Bamfette** » Wed Feb 15, 2006 8:15 pm

and someone comes up with the PERFECT response to the whole Danish cartoons mess:

http://boomka.org/blog/?p=1

hehehehe... I think that's just perfect, I love it.

Seriously though, i can't believe it got this far in the first place. i mean, come on... have you seen the cartoons? they're pretty innocuous, with the possible exception of one with Muhammad with a bomb for a turban, but it's not really any more offensive than the 'who would Jesus bomb?' bumperstickers, and many others I

now, i do realize that ANY depiction of Muhammad is considered a sin in Muslim beliefs. but for one, this is HARDLY the first time: http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/

And the part that really confueses me, the artists are not Muslim! why should they feel obligated to follow the rules of a religion they have no belief in? It's certainly polite to respect others beliefs, but i mean come on, the response to these cartoons far outweighs the intent behind them...

but i liked this cartoon, too:

[Edited on 15/2/06 by Bamfette]

Post by **fourpawsonthefloor** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 3:47 am

And just for you that might have missed it - http://www.thebricktestament.com/.

Bible stories done in - yes you guessed it - Lego. I cannot fathom where these people get the time and money to do all of this. But it sure is great!

Paws

Post by **Saint Kurt** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 5:38 am

Thank God for Star Wars lego! Without Ben Kenobi and Anakin they they never would have been able to make the bible.

I had no idea there were so many Jedi back then, did you?

-e

Post by **fourpawsonthefloor** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 9:25 pm

And more religious ha-ha's...let me know if I am taking this too off topic...

A new priest at his first mass was so nervous he could hardly speak. After mass he asked the monsignor how he had done. The monsignor replied, "When I am worried about getting nervous on the pulpit, I put a glass of vodka next to the water glass. If I start to get nervous, I take a sip." So next Sunday he took the monsignor's advice. At the beginning of the sermon, he got nervous and took a drink. He proceeded to talk up a storm. Upon his return to his office after mass, he found the following note on the door:
1. Sip the Vodka, don't gulp.
2. There are 10 commandments, not 12.
3. There are 12 disciples, not 10.
4. Jesus was consecrated, not constipated.
5. Jacob wagered his donkey, he did not bet his ass.
6. We do not refer to Jesus Christ as the late J. C.
7. The Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are not referred to as Daddy, Junior and the Spook.
8. David slew Goliath, he did not kick the shit out of him.
9. When David was hit by a rock and was knocked off his donkey,don't say he was stoned off his ass.
10. We do not refer to the cross as the "Big T."
11. When Jesus broke the bread at the Last Supper he said, "Take this and eat it for it is my body." He did not say "Eat me"
12. The Virgin Mary is not called "Mary with the Cherry,"
13. The recommended grace before a meal is not: Rub-A-Dub-Dub thanks for the grub, yeah God.
14. Next Sunday there will be a taffy pulling contest at St. Peter's, not a peter pulling contest at St. Taffy's.

Post by **HoodedMan** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 11:07 pm

ROFL. I've seen all of those before, but they make me laugh every time I see them!

littlebamf · Post by **littlebamf** » Fri Feb 17, 2006 10:57 pm

I think I've seen a t-shirt with those on.....

Bamfette · Post by **Bamfette** » Wed Mar 08, 2006 2:18 pm

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/st ... 10,00.html

just... wow.... horrifying

*edited to fix link

[Edited on 8/3/06 by Bamfette]

Post by **fourpawsonthefloor** » Wed Mar 08, 2006 5:21 pm

So sad...there are so many henious acts going on like all the baby rapes to "cleanse" men from AIDS. Or the children being abducted to then be trained as soilders and are beaten or killed if they don't obey or can't keep up. Or all the human trafficing going on here even.

All of it is just so horrible.

Paws

Bamfette · Post by **Bamfette** » Wed Mar 08, 2006 7:41 pm

I don't know what saddens me more the ignorance and superstition that allows people to believe something like that will help (even similar sacrafices recently in England, of all places. by Christian churches, no less.), or the sadistic priests who prey upon that ignorance and spread such acts. I have no doubt that the vast majority of these sacrafices would have never come about if not suggested by a priest to a person too superstitious/ignorant/gullible for thier own good.

[Edited on 8/3/06 by Bamfette]

Angelique · Post by **Angelique** » Thu Mar 09, 2006 2:41 am

What bothers me about this report, besides the obvious, is the omission of the fact that Christians, fundamentalist or otherwise, categorically reject things like child sacrifice or spell casting.

Bamfette · Post by **Bamfette** » Thu Mar 09, 2006 12:54 pm

Well, if they identify themselves as Christian, and use the bible as the central text of their faith, yes, they ARE Christians. They are leaving out some rather important bits, such as 'thou shalt not kill' obviously. but just because they chose to ignore different parts of the bible than most other Christians doesn't mean they aren't Christian.... ignoring bits and pieces of the bible as they choose is why there are so many denominations of Christianity...

Post by **Elwing** » Thu Mar 09, 2006 3:28 pm

I have always put off posting in this thread because I feel I have little to add to it. But I came across an article that discribes nicely how I feel about the matter- and may help explain why i get so exasperated at times-
What its like to be an atheist'

Thanks for reading!

NachtcGleiskette · Post by **NachtcGleiskette** » Thu Mar 09, 2006 4:12 pm

Hey, Jill, one of the best things I ever read regarding religion was that loooong ass essay about the woman's road from devouted Christian to Atheist. From a standpoint where I am neither, i thought it was actually a really really unbiased account (unbiased as in she didnt go off on how awful the church is, how horrible religion is, only told it from her perspective exactly as it went down for her...so i guess it had bias, but it was still a fair account IMHO). It wasn't a "YOU SHOULD/SHOULDN'T BELIEVE THIS!" as I find some things are, nor did it seem to have any maliciousness towards people who do have faith, but it was a great great read about her journey that I think anyone could really get something out of...

You don't happen to have that link anymore, do you??

Post by **fourpawsonthefloor** » Thu Mar 09, 2006 5:01 pm

I sympathise with you there Elwing, and others who are atheiest...you should have the right to believe in what you want, without fear of repraisal. I think it is absolutely pathetic that people would look down on others because their belief patterns do not match thier own.

On the other hand it does kind of go both ways too...I've seen militant atheists who get really upset at people who do believe in God, and think that they are just dumb deluded people. That isn't fair either. I get why they are upset about people who are mean to them - or at the injustices perpetuated by some religious organizations, but there are wonderful (or bad) people in every single walk of life - being an atheist doesn't make you open minded, and being a buddist doesn't make you peaceful...it is what you choose for your life that makes you the person that you are, not what label you attach to yourself.

I think what it all wraps down for me as is that the world just needs to calm down and let people believe what they want, provided it does not bring harm (like the child sacrifices, or forcing others to follow one's personal beliefs). So if you believe in santa...that is your right, and if you don't...that is your right too. It is your actions that truly dictate who you are - not who is correct in their belief system.

My beliefs don't happen to come from a book (as in the bible). They don't come from others (though I do take the bits and peices of what others say that resonate in my soul - but I just don't take the whole thing lock stock and barrel). They come mainly from my experiences, and my intuition. And the older I get, the more neat stuff that happens to me, and the more spiritual that I get. But I don't think that you have to believe what I do, and I don't think that you'll be "punished" or some other such thing for it. I don't think that you are a bad person for not believing. The point is that we will not truly absolutely know until we kick the bucket...and by then, either way it goes, we'll be beyond caring if we were "right" or "wrong".

Paws

Angelique · Post by **Angelique** » Thu Mar 09, 2006 7:42 pm

Jill, I wouldn't say Christians ignore any part of the Bible. The different denominations come from interpreting certain parts differently or downplaying the importance of some parts, but never from ignoring any part.

At any rate, to quote the Bible, faith without works is dead. In other words, Christian is as Christian does. Murdering a child (against the Bible) in order to cast some spell (very specifically condemned in the Bible) is not Christian.

[Edited on 9/3/06 by Angelique]

Bamfette · Post by **Bamfette** » Thu Mar 09, 2006 8:13 pm

don't ignore any part? do you not eat shellfish (they are an 'abomination')? do you refuse to wear polyester/cotton blend (god told Moses mixed fiber cloth was bad)? are you against crop rotation (ditto)? are you willing to stone a child to death for being disobedient? do you believe you are 'unclean' when mensturating, and that "she shall be put apart seven days: and whosoever toucheth her shall be unclean until the even. (it goes on for a while....) But if she be cleansed of her issue, then she shall number to herself seven days, and after that she shall be clean. And on the eighth day she shall take unto her two turtles, or two young pigeons, and bring them unto the priest, to the door of the tabernacle of the congregation. And the priest shall offer the one for a sin offering, and the other for a burnt offering; and the priest shall make an atonement for her before the LORD for the issue of her uncleanness. (oh look, ritual animal sacrifice...)"?

the list goes on and on and on. slavery, ritual animal (and occasionally human) sacrifice, and just plain weird passages.

if you choose not to follow any of those, you are ignoring parts of the bible. different denominations place different importance on different parts of the bible, yes, right down to completley ignoring things. Most Christians tend to ignore many distasteful things in the old testament, specifically Leviticus. (including ritual sacrifice) But it IS in the bible, even if it's in a section most people don't pay much attention to.

As distasteful as i find the idea of murdering someone as a sacrafice, it isn't without precident in the bible.

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/c ... ifice.html

and El, thanks for the link it was an itnteresting read, right on the mark.

and Lisa, i will look that link up. I think i still have it bookmarked, somewhere... unfortunatley i rarely tidy up my bookmarks so there's a lot to go through

[Edited on 9/3/06 by Bamfette]

Angelique · Post by **Angelique** » Thu Mar 09, 2006 9:20 pm

Jill, just because I don't follow kashrut doesn't mean I am ignoring the Bible, because I technically qualify as non-Jewish, and the Bible has said that non-Jews are not required to follow specifically Jewish regulations.

Post by **Elwing** » Thu Mar 09, 2006 9:51 pm

I would like to add on the so-called "muti" killings in great britain-I am extremely doubtful if this actually exists in Europe. There have been documented killings an mutilations in Africa (see among others http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1899609.stm ), and there has been child abuse and even murder in Britian, but there seems little proof of a structural child-sacrifice ring. There would be more bodies turning up if that were the case. I'm strongly reminded of that satanic abuse panic there was in the 80's- That turned out to be nothing but hot air in the end.

And the bible is defenitely clear on child sacrifice, with Isaac and everything. But sometimes indiginous witch doctor faiths mix with christianity, and this seems to be the unfortunate result of it. There is a connection to witchcraft, and reports seem to come from the same parts of africa that have had reports of penis stealing witches

I knew Mikey was up to no good;)

Bamfette · Post by **Bamfette** » Thu Mar 09, 2006 9:54 pm

not following is the same as ignoring. I don't care if you know what it says, if you (general 'you', not specifically) don't follow it or believe it, you are ignoring it. I can come up with plenty of examples in the new testament, if you wish. it's just that the old testament is more extreme. but there are many passages in the new testament that give the ok to slavery, for instance. but the point remains. even if a sect gets many of its beliefs from the old testament, even the distasteful, brutal passages, they are still Christians.

Lisa, that link: http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=72552

[Edited on 9/3/06 by Bamfette]