|
Post by clusium on Dec 5, 2019 14:33:23 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Dec 5, 2019 14:54:49 GMT
Browsing through the various accounts I got reminded of one of my favorite movies as a child. It was "The Three Worlds Of Gulliver" (based, of course, on Jonathan Swift's novel, and with Ray Harryhausen's effects). And in it the king of Lilliput explains the origin of the war he is in, thusly: "We were happy opening our eggs from the little end until that insane king of that insane country Blefuscu massed a tremendous army and navy to force us to open our eggs from the stupid, idiotic big end!"
|
|
|
Post by Catman on Dec 5, 2019 18:43:12 GMT
Cannot believe they left out the schism between those who believed the hats at Fuchal should be red and those who believed the hats should be blue.
|
|
|
Post by thefleetsin on Dec 5, 2019 18:50:05 GMT
the house began to twitch
rainbows and buttered flies once graced the skies in and around the emerald city.
long before gods of pity tooled the earth and sea. for dorothy could see that there were those among us who would much rather be free than working in the stark minds of men who never tired listening to their wanton pleas.
the house began to twitch as each and every lord and witch woke to realize just how much reality based thinking can be the one and only bitch everyone ends up answering to.
sjw 12/05/19 inspired at this very moment in time as the portal streams beyond the chiselers as they scheme.
from the 'bewitched series' of poems
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Dec 5, 2019 19:57:51 GMT
Cannot believe they left out the schism between those who believed the hats at Fuchal should be red and those who believed the hats should be blue. Is that hats or cats?
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Dec 5, 2019 20:30:27 GMT
Browsing through the various accounts I got reminded of one of my favorite movies as a child. It was "The Three Worlds Of Gulliver" (based, of course, on Jonathan Swift's novel, and with Ray Harryhausen's effects). And in it the king of Lilliput explains the origin of the war he is in, thusly: "We were happy opening our eggs from the little end until that insane king of that insane country Blefuscu massed a tremendous army and navy to force us to open our eggs from the stupid, idiotic big end!"
Yeah, I remember reading that Jonathan Swift's novel was inspired by a dispute between 2 nations that Swift thought was so trivial, right on par on fighting which side of an egg to crack open.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Dec 6, 2019 5:16:07 GMT
Doesn't that prove to you, or at least re-enforce, that religion like beauty is in the eye of the beholder, so what makes you think that Catholicism is right? If so, how can you put such faith in a religion that is only 'preferred' and not ultimate and worthy of blind faith?
Others have preferred religions or even none, again how and why are you a practising Catholic?
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Dec 6, 2019 5:35:39 GMT
Doesn't that prove to you, or at least re-enforce, that religion like beauty is in the eye of the beholder, so what makes you think that Catholicism is right? If so, how can you put such faith in a religion that is only 'preferred' and not ultimate and worthy of blind faith? Others have preferred religions or even none, again how and why are you a practising Catholic? Goz, this may come as quite a shock to you, but, I am well aware that Christianity is divided into numerous denominations & sects, & so are practically all other religions (in particular, the major ones).
|
|
|
Post by goz on Dec 6, 2019 20:34:31 GMT
Doesn't that prove to you, or at least re-enforce, that religion like beauty is in the eye of the beholder, so what makes you think that Catholicism is right? If so, how can you put such faith in a religion that is only 'preferred' and not ultimate and worthy of blind faith? Others have preferred religions or even none, again how and why are you a practising Catholic? Goz, this may come as quite a shock to you, but, I am well aware that Christianity is divided into numerous denominations & sects, & so are practically all other religions (in particular, the major ones). No, you mistake my knowledge of your knowledge. My question is, with this knowledge, why are you so sure that your particular branch of any, is correct? Surely throughout history, many have found fault with many religions and either altered them or formed their own version.
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Dec 6, 2019 20:40:42 GMT
Goz, this may come as quite a shock to you, but, I am well aware that Christianity is divided into numerous denominations & sects, & so are practically all other religions (in particular, the major ones). No, you mistake my knowledge of your knowledge. My question is, with this knowledge, why are you so sure that your particular branch of any, is correct? Surely throughout history, many have found fault with many religions and either altered them or formed their own version. Because I study world religions, & feel strongest about my own one. However, I respect others choice to believe that their one is the right one. Their choice. My choice.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Dec 6, 2019 21:07:17 GMT
No, you mistake my knowledge of your knowledge. My question is, with this knowledge, why are you so sure that your particular branch of any, is correct? Surely throughout history, many have found fault with many religions and either altered them or formed their own version. Because I study world religions, & feel strongest about my own one. However, I respect others choice to believe that their one is the right one. Their choice. My choice. Can religious people not see that if other people are ALL so intent on the veracity of their own religion, that logically, it is unlikely that it is true? They can't all be true. I agree about choice as that is important, it just amuses me the illogicality of that choice in the case of religion each of which claims to be an absolute truth.
|
|
|
Post by thefleetsin on Dec 6, 2019 23:04:23 GMT
the swaddling clothes on that baby jesus doll
it hit me like a ton of spoon-fed that the swaddling clothes on that baby jesus doll were of a mixed fabric that even the hebrew god had no idea would be conceived and dedicated by a consortium of didactic manufacturers who could quite frankly care less if his baby junk gets covered up by anything even a rasta headdress as long as they'd be able to reinvest the profits made from a centuries-old treasure chest which is way more important than pretending to believe your relatives talked with jesus on the mayflower.
sjw 12/06/19 inspired at this very moment in time by merri's baby. (who happens to be way cuter than jesus)
from the 'baby series' of poems
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Dec 7, 2019 0:20:33 GMT
Because I study world religions, & feel strongest about my own one. However, I respect others choice to believe that their one is the right one. Their choice. My choice. Can religious people not see that if other people are ALL so intent on the veracity of their own religion, that logically, it is unlikely that it is true? They can't all be true. I agree about choice as that is important, it just amuses me the illogicality of that choice in the case of religion each of which claims to be an absolute truth. Nobody said that they can all be true. Indeed, they can all be wrong (atheists included). Everybody is free to follow which ever religion or spirituality that they believe is right, or if none at all, they are free to go along with that too.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Dec 7, 2019 0:28:23 GMT
Can religious people not see that if other people are ALL so intent on the veracity of their own religion, that logically, it is unlikely that it is true? They can't all be true. I agree about choice as that is important, it just amuses me the illogicality of that choice in the case of religion each of which claims to be an absolute truth. Nobody said that they can all be true. Indeed, they can all be wrong (atheists included). Everybody is free to follow which ever religion or spirituality that they believe is right, or if none at all, they are free to go along with that too. Logically this is so. If you, a Catholic and a Muslim BOTH claim that their different God is THE ONLY ONE, then at least one if not both are false claims.
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Dec 7, 2019 0:35:18 GMT
Nobody said that they can all be true. Indeed, they can all be wrong (atheists included). Everybody is free to follow which ever religion or spirituality that they believe is right, or if none at all, they are free to go along with that too. Logically this is so. If you, a Catholic and a Muslim BOTH claim that their different God is THE ONLY ONE, then at least one if not both are false claims. True, but you, as an atheist, believes there is absolutely NO DEITY, & meanwhile, a theist does believe in God or gods, so at least one of them is a false claim.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Dec 7, 2019 0:53:25 GMT
Logically this is so. If you, a Catholic and a Muslim BOTH claim that their different God is THE ONLY ONE, then at least one if not both are false claims. True, but you, as an atheist, believes there is absolutely NO DEITY, & meanwhile, a theist does believe in God or gods, so at least one of them is a false claim. No that is not true. That is a false claim right there. I, as an atheists (let alone the fact that I am an agnostic atheist) have an absence of belief in a deity. I DO NOT believe that there is no deity which is a positive claim. I doubt it butt I don't claim it. There is a very distinct difference. The theist' claim of a belief in Gods therefore comes down to requiring some kind of evidence for such a claim, because it IS a claim whereas the atheist is not making any such claim. Onus and burden of proof lies therefore in the theist, and my whole point in this exchange is that of competing absolute claims from a variation of theists with a variation of god figures, for which it is logically impossible for MORE than one ( or none) to be accurate and a truth.
|
|
|
Post by general313 on Dec 7, 2019 0:58:15 GMT
Nobody said that they can all be true. Indeed, they can all be wrong (atheists included). Everybody is free to follow which ever religion or spirituality that they believe is right, or if none at all, they are free to go along with that too. Logically this is so. If you, a Catholic and a Muslim BOTH claim that their different God is THE ONLY ONE, then at least one if not both are false claims. This is the difficulty when a religion starts claiming to have a monopoly on the truth. That should raise a red flag, and maybe that goes for hard-core atheism too. When one goes down that path it becomes a cudgel for control and manipulation (as we see happening with many Trump supporters). Religion can or could be a benefit to society if it mainly functions as a repository of wisdom on how one ought to live one's life, and form a framework for art, music and literature. We still enjoy those kinds of benefits from the Greek version.
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Dec 7, 2019 1:02:32 GMT
True, but you, as an atheist, believes there is absolutely NO DEITY, & meanwhile, a theist does believe in God or gods, so at least one of them is a false claim. No that is not true. That is a false claim right there. I, as an atheists (let alone the fact that I am an agnostic atheist) have an absence of belief in a deity. I DO NOT believe that there is no deity which is a positive claim. I doubt it butt I don't claim it. There is a very distinct difference. The theist' claim of a belief in Gods therefore comes down to requiring some kind of evidence for such a claim, because it IS a claim whereas the atheist is not making any such claim. Onus and burden of proof lies therefore in the theist, and my whole point in this exchange is that of competing absolute claims from a variation of theists with a variation of god figures, for which it is logically impossible for MORE than one ( or none) to be accurate and a truth. Atheism is the denial in belief in any deity. Theism is the belief that there is a deity.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Dec 7, 2019 1:14:10 GMT
No that is not true. That is a false claim right there. I, as an atheists (let alone the fact that I am an agnostic atheist) have an absence of belief in a deity. I DO NOT believe that there is no deity which is a positive claim. I doubt it butt I don't claim it. There is a very distinct difference. The theist' claim of a belief in Gods therefore comes down to requiring some kind of evidence for such a claim, because it IS a claim whereas the atheist is not making any such claim. Onus and burden of proof lies therefore in the theist, and my whole point in this exchange is that of competing absolute claims from a variation of theists with a variation of god figures, for which it is logically impossible for MORE than one ( or none) to be accurate and a truth. Atheism is the denial in belief in any deity. Theism is the belief that there is a deity. Nope. Substitute the words 'absence of belief' for denial and you are closer.
|
|
The Lost One
Junior Member
@lostkiera
Posts: 2,668
Likes: 1,292
|
Post by The Lost One on Dec 8, 2019 8:51:51 GMT
If you, a Catholic and a Muslim BOTH claim that their different God is THE ONLY ONE Is it a different God? Both religions claim to worship the God of Abraham after all. I do think a lot of theistic religions are striving for the same concept, they just radically disagree on the details. So Brahman, Zeus, Yahweh etc might be seen as radically different descriptions of the same thing (God) rather than mutually exclusive entities. Some religions are quite open to that idea, at least to a degree: Catholic Scholastics were happy to apply Pagan thoughts about the nature of God to Yahweh, Sikhism merged Hinduism and Islam together, Baha'i says all religions have a unity and truth to them, Buddhism and Wicca leave themselves open to combination with other religions etc. Not saying the perennial view is the "more correct" way to view religions than the mutually exclusive one, but it does at least provide an interesting alternative.
|
|